Talk:Operation Woodrose

bias
This article is terrible. It is clearly written from a Sikh point of view, when articles should be neutral, it is unclear about when this took place, and it does not cite any sources. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I will agree that this article seems written from a certain point of view. However, the sources provided seem reputable and althouh I do not have access to all of them, I think the allegations for the most part seem logical. Regardless, I have nominated this article for a POV check. Vedant (talk) 16:32, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

sorry to say it but it is true as hell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.227.162.46 (talk) 09:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I did feel that there is a "certain point of view" with his article. It does not feel like an earnest report let alone an encyclopedia article. But do I believe it? Yes, parts of it but not all. The operation did have faces of genocide and utmost cruelty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.83.185 (talk) 11:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I tried checking some of the books listed in the references... and none of them appear to have a shred of what is written in the article. it appears that someone wrote this, then liberally peppered the text with non relevant references that cannot be checked on the web. Please suggest action. Tigerassault (talk) 16:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah-ha! check this out http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Woodrose&direction=next&oldid=319563578

the article was written out by someone with a very POV style. Then, when threatened with deletion, the article was peppered with citations most of them referring to books which do not say anything of the type mentioned in the article.Tigerassault (talk) 16:29, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 01:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)