Talk:Samashki massacre

message: Rampage is bad, mkay. How about mass murder? --HanzoHattori 21:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it is now attributed, it should reflect what the source says.  Dreadstar † 21:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the article looks better now as well.  As long as the sources are properly attributed (like they are now, "According to the xxy report" etc.), I don't see any real issues. bfigura 21:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Memorial attributed statement

message: Some of the destruction in the village could well have occurred during street fighting — the destruction of homes from direct hits by tank fire and grenade launchers (see photograph), metal gates and fences pounded with shell fragments, and bullet traces on the walls of houses and on fallen gates. This damage and destruction, however, affected few houses and was concentrated in several sectors of the village. (Destruction in the main part of the village bore the marks of premeditated arson.) This corresponds to soldiers’ and OMON testimony that only a few houses were destroyed or damaged during fighting, and that only a part of the storming groups met resistance in the village.8 Indeed, this is why the majority of villagers who, during the operation were near houses located in areas where there was no fighting, maintained that no military activities at all took place in the village.
Why the hell everyone calls me "HTH"? --HanzoHattori 20:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... I didn't intend to. HTH is english net slang for "Hope this helps". bfigura 21:06, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One Custerwest called me "HTH" constantly. --HanzoHattori 21:08, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Apologies for any confusion then.  Regarding the issue Dreadstar raised: part of the issue (at least to me) seems to be the trustworthiness of the source. It's not that I don't think the source isn't credible, it's that I don't know. Perhaps the best way would be to actually cite the original sources documented on Memorial's website, rather than the report itself. bfigura 21:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  They conducted the investigation (been there, interviewd survivors, did the photos and videos, etc). HRW quotes them. US Congress listened to them. THIS is the original source. --HanzoHattori 21:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotation

message: I would like to provide third opinion you were asking about. This massacre is a well known incident. It seems to be properly described and justified by sources in this article. Honestly, I do not see any reason for POV tag.Biophys 21:24, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not know what you mean, but I have never edited this article.Biophys 01:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've retracted my objection in view of this. Dreadstar † 01:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I just wanted to tell that "Samashki massacre" article is not POV in my personal opinion, and I am not acting on someones behalf. I am familiar enough with this subject to have an opinion.Biophys 02:03, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV tag

message: The Danish Institute for International Studies, DIIS, has the pleasure of inviting you to a seminar with Anatoly S. Kulikov, Member of the Duma and former Russian Minister of the Interior, who will be speaking on
Countering Terrorism:
The Russian and the International Dimension
No comment, I guess. --HanzoHattori 08:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I was looking on Kulikov and found this as the first  

message: I noticed User:Paukrus added an NPOV tag to this page without indicating what he or she is disputing about this article. So I removed the tag, it shouldn't be replaced without explanation here. --Ace of Swords 23:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Btw, Paukrus, the obvious source is the Observer Mission (of Human Rights and Public Organizations in the Conflict Zone in Chechnya). Don't spam-tag without thinking - especially since the source is indicated IN THE TEXT ITSELF ("the Memorial compiled the incomplete list" etc.). --HanzoHattori 22:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV tag again 

message: "While I have the greatest respect for Memorial and its efforts to meticulously research and publish its findings, its publication on Samashki is not perfect. There are errors of time and person and place. Without elaborating, suffice it to say that while Memorial accepts that the Russian command used the presence of outlander Chechen fighters from Shamil Basayev's Abkhazia Battalion attacking an armored train and sabotaging repair of tracks as the excuse to encircle and then attack the town, in fact all those fighters were local. I know because I was with them taking pictures. Memorial was not. They were not nameless Mujaheeds-they were Hussein and Ussam and Seylah and Sultan and Ali." --84.234.60.154 (talk) 10:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.demokratizatsiya.org/Dem%20Archives/DEM%2006-01%20goltz.pdf Grey Fox (talk) 23:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goltz says there were only local fighters all the time 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2005/04/07/3686.shtml
*:Triggered by \bkavkazcenter\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 18:54, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Nearly entirely removing an infobox is not "making it less confusing" (WP:NPOV is also an issue to be considered here - the Russians claim that they were fired at: whether this is true or not, it is not our place to make the judgement, we must simply report both sides (ideally using independent sources) without bias). RandomCanadian (talk | contribs)  21:11, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sextus Caedicius (talk) 21:05, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

text: I think the best way to word this would be either "Local fighters" or "Chechen fighters". The destruction of of vehicles is stated by both the Russians and Memorial, so this should be included. Also, per NPOV, given that there are conflicting estimates, probably both should be included  see eg. Gaza War (2008–2009) where the numbers from all involved parties as well as indepdendent organisations (IDF, Hamas, PCHR, B'Tselem)  with an appropriate disclaimer, as was present. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  21:41, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:   The Russian casualties should indeed stay, but I don't think the claim of 120 wounded + 150 captured should be in the infobox, as it was an obvious lie to cover up for the massacre itself by saying the dead civilians were rebel fighters. This information is however mentioned in the article itself, where different generals' claims conflicted with eacho ther (as is also mentioned in the article itself). So it will spare people from getting a false impression on first glance. I can agree to renaming the "self-defense fighters" to "Local fighters" Deni Mataev (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, no problem with that. Case closed. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  21:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  About recent edits