Talk:Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam/Archive 8

message: I've taken the initiative to add the  tag to this article, after noticing some terrible grammar in the bottom half of the article. I do plan on coming back soon to fix it up, though if somebody else would like to do it, go right ahead. --Hojimachongtalk 23:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah agreed, and I'm currently going through the article, and post a message when I'm done. If there are no further objections then, I'll remove the tag. --snowolfD4(  talk /  @ ) 17:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyediting tag 

message: According WP:Vandalism following are examples of Vandalism 
Blanking, Excessive lengthening, Spam, Vandalbots, Silly vandalism 
Sneaky vandalism, Userspace vandalism, Image vandalism, Abuse of tags 
Page-move vandalism, Link vandalism, Avoidant vandalism, Modifying users' comments, Improper use of dispute tags, Talk page vandalism, Malicious account creation, Deleted page re-creation, Hidden vandalism. 
Adding well sourced material is not vandalismsee here. Removing such content without discussion and calling it vandalism in is not appropriate.  
Personally I don’t give a dam as to how this article looks and reads but I will give my 2 cents. It fails neutrality all the way through, poorly written and simply one sided and it is a useless piece of information on Wikipedia as it stands now. Not a single person reading it would say, wow what a great piece of information, well written and useful. 
Those editors who may care about Wikipedia’s reputation rather than their own prejudices should take it to neutrality check then peer review and see what others thing about it.  Try to make it a good article that will stand the test of time.Taprobanus 13:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well since you didn't provide the diff of the sharz's edit I assume this is the one that you talking about. If you go through the history of the article you will notice on 19:58, May 1, 2007 Snowolfd4 removed the Chencholai Airstrike and the Kerawalapitiya airstrike sections, asking what do these have to do with LTTE human rights issues?. But in a childish manner sharz re added the section saying re-added Chencholai Airstrike + Kerwalpitiya, maybe accidentally deleted. He just didn't restored the section but without any proper justification he revert whole intermediate revisions as you done, here. Anyway, as I know he's exist in here since 6 January 2006 and he knows how to navigate through the history pages and read the edit summaries. This is not the fist time that he worked in behind the curtain manner and that makes me to act without assuming the good faith. Thanks. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 14:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

text: One thing more. The edit summary of my reversion is an automated one. I hope you know about that. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 14:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, that good argument I agree Taprobanus 15:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excluding another one of your personal attacks on me, I do admit error, I read the article erronously and didn't see Recent Events as a sub-section of the Human Rights section of the article. My bad. --Sharz 07:27, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anywayz, I appreciate that you accepted the mistake you made, but regarding the personal attack, as you have referred to it, anyone could understand what I meant by saying childish with the bolded text above. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 05:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well in the specific case I can see what your talking about, though if not slightly dubious. --Sharz 06:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey kid, just forget it  --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 10:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalsim claim and status of this article

message: I think allegations about a certain group, unless proven to an utmost certainty by multiple sources. For example all the sites discussing the LTTE's involvement in the drug trade are in themselves tertiary sources. The Mackenzie Institute isn't reliable since the author of these articles has been known for bias. In addition CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Services) has clearly stated in Commentary 77 that there is no certain connection between the LTTE and the drug trade. Another section regarding usage of women in prostitution has no validity whatsoever. 
The manner in which multiple sections (ie allegations, PoWs, attacks etc) have been added show a clear attempt by editors to skew the view of those uneducated about the situation against the LTTE. Quite literally this comes down to simply the waging of the political war between the LTTE and the GoSL back here onto Wikipedia which is quite unfortunate because now anytime I read Wikipedia I will be twice as vigilant in regards to the accuracy of the information.
If anything I request any higher position Wikiholics to intervene and go about a rehaul of this page and in the process freeze any edits to require approval.
:Your comment is very much to the point, it has however been very difficult to change the article, even trying to add a POV tag has been reverted. I have stated the issues I have with the current article in my previous comments here in the discussion page and as I have been reverted a number of times I am not doing more editing on the article. I have however posted a comment to the Village pump and I have also offered a bounty of 100 USD to the Bounty board, the amount will be given to Wikimedia Foundation if the article is serious improved before the end of May. 
:Regarding the bounty, there is no need to be familiar with the subject to work with the article and help Wikipedia improving the article while arranging that Wikimedia Foundation gets 100 USD, all that is needed is time and the knowledge of what we mean by good and reliable sources. Ulflarsen 06:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allegations 

message: I am posting here in response to FayssalF’s request for some neutral commentary on this article and the issues being raised here.  For what it’s worth, my real-life job includes analysis of international defense and security affairs.  As such, I am generally familiar with the Sri Lankan conflict; however, I do not plan to participate in the active, substantive editing of this article now or in the near future (due to priorities on my limited time), but will limit my participation to addressing specific issues currently at conflict. 
1)  The only criminal activity reported in the article that is new to me is the report concerning forced prostitution.  Certainly there have been any number of accusations of rape by members of the LTTE in Sri Lanka, but I have not come across reports of organized prostitution among their fundraising activities.  If the only source for this (apparently The Mackenzie Institute) says it is “unsubstantiated gossip” or “impossible to confirm”, then we should take them at their word, respect their responsible representation of the reliability of the information, and not publish it in Wikipedia.  We can afford to wait until two independent sources can be found which document actual instances.
2)  I am only vaguely familiar with The Mackenzie Institute, but most of the criticism I am aware of regarding their reporting lies in the area of domestic Canadian issues and less for their reporting on terrorism.  From the material of theirs that I’ve scanned through today, I have to say it more often reads like a blog than anything else, although their overall treatment of the LTTE in “Other People’s Wars” seems to be a reasonable treatment of general reporting on the LTTE, and it appears to be an overview prepared from a wide variety of sources, although it’s unfortunate that Mr. Thompson neglects to identify them or provide a bibliography.  I cannot out-of-hand condemn it as unreliable.  Nonetheless, I would recommend the simple, courteous solution of providing a second, independent source wherever an editor has a problem with this one.  (Cf. such usage in the “Other crimes” subsection regarding counterfeiting and satellite piracy, as well as for the well-documented issue of the impression of child soldiers.)
3)  One editor has observed that “all the sites discussing the LTTE's involvement in the drug trade are in themselves tertiary sources” and that “CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Services) has clearly stated in Commentary 77 that there is no certain connection between the LTTE and the drug trade.”  I would point out that the CSIS Commentary is dated “Winter 1999” and thus significantly out of date.  The LTTE’s involvement in the illicit drug trade has since become well-established.  If the sources currently being used actually are tertiary ones, I’d recommend they be replaced with secondary sources, which are readily available.  (Although not freely available, Jane's World Insurgency And Terrorism has an article, “Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)”, dated 26 March 2007, which provides an excellent overview of what is currently known about the LTTE and its activities.)
Hopefully, these comments will enable the editors of this article to resume making forward progress with this article. If there are other specific questions I can address, please post them here. Askari Mark (Talk) 00:47, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After carefully monitoring & reviewing the section 2 of the main article, sub section Government,there's no independent, verifiablel sources as to prove that the LTTE have CUSTOMS,FINANCIAL SYSTEMS OR JUDICIAL SYSTEM. The sources listed under footnotes 15,16,17 are not proof of the existance of such systems. The Judicial System footnote is a website & does not even work. Further even if it does work,these are just websites run by LTTE affiliated parties & not independent. We should remove these three sections since they are just part of propaganda, not facts. This is a serious vilation of WIKIPEDIA rules.SamanBandara 23:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While the governmental and political subsections certainly could do with some improvement in writing, further sourcing, and replacement of dead links, none of this means that the LTTE doesn't have some sort of quasi-government – else how could they control the local populace and raise/extort money from them? That it isn't a freely elected and representative government doesn't mean it isn't a "government" of some sort. A fix could be as simple as applying wording such as "the LTTE claims to maintain functioning customs, finance and judicial systems" or some wording to that effect. Askari Mark (Talk) 02:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independent comments on the issues raised in the current debate 

message: As the last bounty on 100 USD did not manage to improve the article I am now offering a new bounty . The Wikimedia Foundation will receive 1.000 USD from me if the article reach featured within July 31 this year. I hope this will lead to the article being improved so we can have a balanced and informative article about the LTTE. Ulflarsen 08:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1.000 USD to the foundation for making the article on LTTE featured 

message: This article is quite biased against the LTTE, Wikipedia's integrity is at stake, and its critical that Wikipedia users don't read this article unaware of the bias. So a POV tag is required until the article is corrected.
trotsky17 17:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then please make specific, constructive proposals for changing it into a less biased form – and be sure to cite reliable sources to support anything bound to be contentious.  For this purpose, please keep in mind that citing neutral sources is preferred to citing pro-LTTE sources. As far as your POV tag, placing it above a section that is the result of formal mediation, is generally seen as disruptive, so please don't expect it to remain. Please make constructive suggestions here instead. Askari Mark (Talk) 02:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is still using www.svik.org as a source - that alone qualify for a POV tag. It is a one man organisation, run by a man convicted of murder in Norway. I have mentioned this a number of times but still the link is there in the article. And there is much more. User Trotsky17 is right, and I do hope by offering a bounty of 1.000 USD for making it featured that the article finally will be improved. The least there should be is a POV tag to warn readers. Ulflarsen 06:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also listed this article at the Request for comment page as the logical next step to have the article balanced. Ulflarsen 07:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm not that familiar with the material here, but perhaps you could bring up some statements or paragraphs you find particularly egregious so we can start a discussion?  --Haemo 07:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is really no need to know the subject, a keen eye for checking sources is what is needed. I have written quite a bit in this discussion page regarding the lacking balance and use of bad sources and/or use of sources for more than they are worth. The worst example is www.svik.org, a one man organisation run by a man convicted of murder in Norway . Ulflarsen 08:12, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you had taken the time to read other editors comments instead of simply going on your lengthy tirades against us, you'll have realized that I said long ago I have no objections to removing the SVIK paper as a source. That will have saved a lot of people a lot of time, but what can I say...  --snowolfD4(  talk /  @ ) 19:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not place the link to www.svik.org in the article so I am not the one to remove it. Besides, I have been reverted so many times on this article that I am not going to edit it again. What I do is trying to make others interested in it so we can have a balanced article. Ulflarsen 20:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tag 

message: Hey guys, isn't it better to have a dedicated section for stating facts about LTTE's international presense? Although LTTE is mainly active in south asian region, it is quite an obvious fact that they're active in other parts of the globe such as Canada, Europe and Australia. There have been claims of collecting funds (or ransom), gathering intelligence, collecting weapons (such as the submarine design attempt), spreading propaganda, organizing various riots. Norway is also heavily accused of having and supporting high LTTE activity.
Surely there's no reason for other countries to ban LTTE, if there's no such activity, which is indeed a threat for their national security. What do you think fellows?
Light Years 13:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  LTTE International presense 

message: This article brings collective shame and humiliation to Wikipedia.  The intro must be completely bulldozed.  Mediation efforts between who... this is not relevant as to the contents of the article.  Political animal 03:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can start with rewriting the introduction and then posting it here for discussion. If you give arguments for your changes (backed up with reliable sources) that would be most helpful as well. In my view there are however other parts of the article that is in more urgent need of a rewrite, see my previous posting on this discussion page. Ulflarsen 04:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

text: 'The intro must be completely bulldozed'.... Didn't I hear extremism? Light Years 15:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article has been hijacked by extremists 

message: As I have got feedback that seems to misunderstand my position regarding the situation in Sri Lanka, I would like to state that I am:
* Supporting a peaceful solution within the current borders of Sri Lanka
* Supporting a federal solution as can be seen in India, the USA, Germany and many other countries
* Believing a solution can not be reached by a military campaign against the LTTE
* Viewing the LTTE as the true result of violent supression of the tamil minority by the sinhalese factions in power
* Believing that the LTTE needs major reform of its undemocratic rule and lack of respect for human rights
* Viewing the GoSL as being close to a "failed state"; running an undeclared war, blatant lack of respect for human rights, discrimination against a huge minority
As I have been reverted a number of times I do not want to make more edits on this article, but I will keep on working for having a balanced article with good sources. Ulflarsen 18:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My view regarding the situation in Sri Lanka