Talk:Trial of the Sixteen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Neutrality
The neutrality is disputed yet there's no discussion on the talk page? Please elaborate on the reasons for the NPOV alert box. Thanks. :) Krupo 02:53, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Statements such as: "After several months of brutal interrogation and torture they were presented with the forged accusations of:" have no sources or counter claims. I'm not contesting the veracity of the article, but it is completely one-sided. While this may be an acceptable style for a history book - it is not suitable for the Wikipedia. ed g2s • talk 10:38, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
- References are in place. I wouldn't call the article one-sided, though. If it presents the facts, those are the facts. Embarassing for the Soviets? Surely. But explaining away criminal behaviour is not necessary to make an article suitable for Wikipedia, eh? Krupo 18:55, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Ok, how then could the following informations be included:
-
- torture
- false accusations
-
-
- without using the POV language? I don't deny that this might be POV, I simply have no idea as to the way it should be corrected. The sentence could be softened a bit to after several months of torture and interrogation by the NKVD, they were presented with accusations of: and then add that the accusations were mostly false and invented for political reasons. However, that wouldn't add much new info, it would simply make the article longer. Do you have any ideas? [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 13:32, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)
-
- As per your request I added both the Polish sources I used in preparing the article (one is a monography on the trial and the other is mostly a collection of NKVD sources released in the early 1990s) and two English language books that describe the whole matter (Davies is available in most bookshops in the West). Any other requests/suggestions/pleas/needs? [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 17:03, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Curious as to whether the neutrality call has been satisifed or not...? Krupo 02:55, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Ambiguity
I note that a Google search for Trial of the Sixteen yields a whole lot of information about a totally different Trial of the Sixteen: the first of the four great show trials in the Great Purge of 1936-1938. Jpgordon 21:07, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Not surprising. A disambig message would be a good idea, eh? Krupo 02:54, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] International law
There is a comment here that the trial contravened international law. I am dubious as to which law this is supposed to have been. XmarkX 08:28, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
