Talk:Vaharai Bombing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Clean up
Reuters claims that escaping "survivors" said that LTTE fired arty. However, it only gave reference to one single person. Since Reuters were vague I am adding that only one person claimed this. On the other hand, Human Rights Watch claimed that they talked to 12 people who said that LTTE was not even around and did not fire anything at the Army. HRW also added 2 more eyewitness account who also claimed that they heard no guns arty being fired by LTTE. I took off minority view from lead paragraph and rephrased it in the body. Watchdogb 21:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- The entire HRW report is dubious and its accuracy has been questioned. Also, if HRW interviewed survivors after the incident, why were there no report published at the time which included the interviews? Reuters is universally regarded as a reliable news source, and their report hasn't been questioned. --snowolfD4 ( talk / @ ) 20:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- The Lead is based only on the government version although it says it is a disputed event Taprobanus 22:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Snowolf, you don't decide if a report by a leading HR organization is dubious. It is VERY RS. If you don't like it then prove against it by providing RS. Until then it remains this way Watchdogb 02:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- If a source is considered reliable, it should not be ignored simply because a user or two believes otherwise regarding a particular report. Reliable sources should always be included when relevant. If there are two conflicting reports, it is our responsibility to present both reports, although it is not our job to try to prove one over the other. Lexicon (talk) 11:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- HRW is clearly a WP:RS source. Thansk Taprobanus 12:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- If a source is considered reliable, it should not be ignored simply because a user or two believes otherwise regarding a particular report. Reliable sources should always be included when relevant. If there are two conflicting reports, it is our responsibility to present both reports, although it is not our job to try to prove one over the other. Lexicon (talk) 11:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I am taking off the NPOV tags. There is nothing that is POV about this article. If you want it there please discuss what is disputed Watchdogb 12:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
[edit] UN silence?
The following quote is from Wikipedia:Peer review/Vaharai Bombing/archive1: Attracted considerable international attention because the UN security council choose to chastise Israel over its collateral damage in Lebanon which killed about 40 people at the same time but ignored the similar incident in Sri Lanka. If the UN's silence "attracted considerable international attention", this should be noted in the article. Chesdovi 09:41, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

