Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
:As you the article at 00:21 on 30 September 2010, and as it was so quaintly described "shepherded it" for all these months, don't you remember which parts if any you copied? If you do then why don't you start by listing those pieces you copied from other sources? You have said that you want to cooperate in this task, so how about starting to cooperate, rather than casting doubts on the good faith of another editor? -- ] (]) 01:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
:As you the article at 00:21 on 30 September 2010, and as it was so quaintly described "shepherded it" for all these months, don't you remember which parts if any you copied? If you do then why don't you start by listing those pieces you copied from other sources? You have said that you want to cooperate in this task, so how about starting to cooperate, rather than casting doubts on the good faith of another editor? -- ] (]) 01:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
::There are examples of removal of copyright violations in the history of the article. The whole of the article is presumed to be a copyright violation: the presumption arises because of your history and is confirmed by the examples. I will not, for a 130kb article, "indicate to the community which specific sentences believe are copyvio". --] (]) 01:57, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
::There are examples of removal of copyright violations in the history of the article. The whole of the article is presumed to be a copyright violation: the presumption arises because of your history and is confirmed by the examples. I will not, for a 130kb article, "indicate to the community which specific sentences believe are copyvio". --] (]) 01:57, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
:::After all that effort, Mkativerata, I trust that your work product won’t have the effect of changing the balance and tone of the article to please you. Groking the mix at it appears Epeefleche is indicating that you tend to water down points in articles that are critical of Islamic extremists. It will be interesting to see whether the sunshine of public inspection will avoid such an outcome here on this article. The proof will be in the pudding when you’ve finished with this. To Epeefleche: when he’s done, if you find he made major changes to the balance of the article were effected via heavy use of the key, just revise the excised text so it is no longer a “very close paraphrasing” (or even a “close paraphrasing”) and repair the article. Misplaced Pages exists not to please Mkativerata nor you, but to best serve the interests of its readership with properly balanced and fair articles that mirror the balance of the RSs. ] (]) 02:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Revision as of 02:32, 23 November 2011
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Targeted killing article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Misplaced Pages. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
A fact from Targeted killing appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 October 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that 2.5-inch-long "nano-drones" now being developed for targeted killing will, like little killer bees, be able to follow their target, even entering a room through an open window?
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Targeted killing article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The examples section seems a bit malorganized. The US and Israel sections each begin with a full screen of other issues describing how targets are chosen and such, before getting to the "Notable killings" lists. I'd like to see the other info separated from the Examples section and put into a new section, with perhaps a one-sentence intro before the killed list begins for each country. What do others think? Thundermaker (talk) 13:48, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I think it is good as is. As with articles, lists, etc., it is wp's approach to have leads that put lists in context, where possible. This does that well.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Berg-Khazh Musaev?
This might be a case of targeted killing: Berg-Khazh Musaev (Берг-Хаж Мусаев) and two other Chechens were gunned down in Istanbul. Berg-Khazh Musaev is said to be Doku Umarov's right hand man.
Thanks. To add it, IMHO we would need an RS identifying it as a targeted killing (as we can't make such a judgment ourselves, as editors).--Epeefleche (talk) 21:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Recent edits/deletions
I've restored the more logical paragraph split. It puts common concepts in common paras. I've also restored the reference, now in quotes and further edited, which is certainly not a copyvio (the original complaint of the deleter). It need not be "necessary"-- his more recent complaint. Futher, it was in the DYK, on the front page of wp, and went through the wp DYK vetting process as such. I am also restoring "w/out landing"--the deleter deleted that without explanation.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:53, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
I split a paragraph in the Lead because the first sentence described the operation of Predator drones, as they currently function, while the rest of the paragraph was devoted to "nano-drones" which are not yet used in the field. Therefore, the split went along the lines of what is currently used versus what is projected to be used.
The whole "killer bee" analogy is not applicable; it was made during an interview to hype the idea, and so does not belong in an encyclopedia entry. Actual killer bees do not target a single individual, nor do they navigate obstacles in pursuit of that individual (as per the "even through windows" qualifying phrase). As the article is about "targeted killing", the topic of research & development for one method does not really belong in the Lead section at all. The whole nano-drone reference should be removed from the Lead (but not the article) until such time as they are actually employed in the field. Boneyard90 (talk) 07:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Whatever. You two battle it out to make the article read better and be more informative. But it is not “plagiarizing”, as you suggested here with this edit, nor a copyright violation to adopt a two-word term for something. If it were, the Fred Hoyle would have died rich for coining the term “Big Bang.” Fortunately, Hoyle died 20 days before he could witness the 9/11 attack on the twin towers. I agree that nano-drone should be out of the leded; until it is employed in the field, it is undo weight. Greg L (talk) 15:17, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
I think the term Big Bang counts as "public domain". Anyway, we're building consensus here. Shall I edit the lead section, or would Epeefleche care to do the honor? Boneyard90 (talk) 05:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
I will give it a try in a couple of days, if there are not further comments. (If I don't get to it in a couple of days, feel free to do so Bone). Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:32, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't see the copyvio that is claimed as warranted deletion of this article. Would it be possible for you to indicate to the community which specific sentences you believe are copyvio? That way, the community can consider and examine your assertion--and if you are correct in the eyes of any editor (or even if the editor does not think you are correct), that would afford the community an opportunity to address what you feel are copyvio concerns.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:50, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Why have you qualified the section header with the word "claim"?
As you wrote and then created the article at 00:21 on 30 September 2010, and as it was so quaintly described "shepherded it" for all these months, don't you remember which parts if any you copied? If you do then why don't you start by listing those pieces you copied from other sources? You have said that you want to cooperate in this task, so how about starting to cooperate, rather than casting doubts on the good faith of another editor? -- PBS (talk) 01:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
There are examples of removal of copyright violations in the history of the article. The whole of the article is presumed to be a copyright violation: the presumption arises because of your history and is confirmed by the examples. I will not, for a 130kb article, "indicate to the community which specific sentences believe are copyvio". --Mkativerata (talk) 01:57, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
After all that effort, Mkativerata, I trust that your work product won’t have the effect of changing the balance and tone of the article to please you. Groking the mix at the ANI against you, it appears Epeefleche is indicating that you tend to water down points in articles that are critical of Islamic extremists. It will be interesting to see whether the sunshine of public inspection will avoid such an outcome here on this article. The proof will be in the pudding when you’ve finished with this. To Epeefleche: when he’s done, if you find he made major changes to the balance of the article were effected via heavy use of the key, just revise the excised text so it is no longer a “very close paraphrasing” (or even a “close paraphrasing”) and repair the article. Misplaced Pages exists not to please Mkativerata nor you, but to best serve the interests of its readership with properly balanced and fair articles that mirror the balance of the RSs. Greg L (talk) 02:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Referencing and citation: criterion not met
Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
