| Revision as of 04:50, 15 September 2006 editYellowMonkey (talk | contribs)86,443 edits →Protected: edit warring again← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:19, 15 September 2006 edit undoTony Sidaway (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers81,722 edits Temporary injunction noticeNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {| class="messagebox standard-talk" | |||
| |- | |||
| | style="padding-right: 10px;" | ] | |||
| || This article and other articles related to ] are subject to a temporary injunction in the ]. Parties named in the case may be banned from editing it by any uninvolved administrator for disruptive edits. This does not curtail normal administrator powers to deal with disruption. This notice may be removed by any editor when the case is closed. | |||
| |} | |||
| I'll keep this brief: it is simply not right to insert "allegedly" into the article when the views expressed are the mainstream and widely accepted opinion - and the views expressed in the article ARE the mainstream and widely accepted opinion. ] 22:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC) | I'll keep this brief: it is simply not right to insert "allegedly" into the article when the views expressed are the mainstream and widely accepted opinion - and the views expressed in the article ARE the mainstream and widely accepted opinion. ] 22:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:19, 15 September 2006
|
This article and other articles related to Kosovo are subject to a temporary injunction in the Kosovo arbitration case. Parties named in the case may be banned from editing it by any uninvolved administrator for disruptive edits. This does not curtail normal administrator powers to deal with disruption. This notice may be removed by any editor when the case is closed. |
I'll keep this brief: it is simply not right to insert "allegedly" into the article when the views expressed are the mainstream and widely accepted opinion - and the views expressed in the article ARE the mainstream and widely accepted opinion. Live Forever 22:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Of course it's widely accepted, noone dares to say that the US was wrong and that it started a military operation because of a lie (just like in Iraq). There is not a single serious scientific analysis that proves that Serbs are to blame, the theory is based on "hmm.. bosnians died, Serbs did it", and thats all. --serbiana - talk 22:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
No; no it isn't, and the article clearly shows that through well-referenced facts. The newest scientific evidence presented to the ICTY was enough to have a Serb general convicted beyond reasonable doubt in the 94' massacre, while the 95' massacre was never even seriously in doubt. The claim that the Bosnian government was responsible basically rests on 1.) media speculation, 2.) early calculations which were later proved faulty - not enough to qualify it as a legitimate argument. Live Forever 22:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
OK, but the photo you posted is not from that massacre, it is from a different one. If you are posting wrong photos, how can I believe what you're saying is true? --serbiana - talk 22:55, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
- Well, the picture I took was the one on the Serbian wikipedia where it said it was of the second Markale massacre. Was there an original mistake on the Sr. wiki? Live Forever 05:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Thats right. The thing that interests me is, how come you copy a picture from Serbian Misplaced Pages, assuming its the right one, but you don't believe anything thats written there? --serbiana - talk 05:55, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Good Article nomination has failed
The Good article nomination for Markale massacres has failed, for the following reason:
- Style issues, really - the article is long enough to need a lead section and table of contents. Suggest sectioning into 'First massacre', 'Second massacre' and 'Subsequent events'. Otherwise it's all great. Worldtraveller 17:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Good Article nomination has passed
Minor notes
- Directly cite the dead and injured numbers at the beginning.
Otherwise, good job.--SeizureDog 14:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Protected
Due to edit warring.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
- The point of unprotection is not to let you edit war again. You've already done your two reverts like I said at Talk:Srebrenica massacre and blocks will be enforced in future. Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 04:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Fact or Fiction
- Anatomy of a Massacre by David Binder, Foreign Policy #97, Winter 1994-95
- Serbs 'Not Guilty' of Massacre by Hugh McManners, The Sunday Times, October 1, 1995
- Bosnia's Bombers by David Binder, The Nation, October 2, 1995
- Senior official admits to secret U.N. report on Sarajevo massacre Deutsche Presse-Agentur, June 6, 1996
- Who was responsible for the market place massacres in Sarajevo? - There is doubt about who is the responsible party of the Markale massacre. It is Bosnian government. But in introduction it was written Republika Serpska. There are many facts that show Bosnian government responsibility.--Medule 20:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I'm glad that you've at least finally come to the talk page. Unfortunately, your "facts" and argument have more holes than swiss cheese. I'll offer a lengthlier response later today. Live Forever 20:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)