Talk:Tabassum movement

Trying to preserve edits by Russian Rocky
Please have a look at. Thanks to MediaWiki, this hopefully shows the changes that you made, without obscuration by shifting references into the main text. I may have made an error in terms of the two NYT references: ref name="NYT_7Zabul_beheadings" versus ref name="NYT_Tabassum_protest". I'll have a look now to see if I can sort this out...

The reason for having the function "View history", buttons to select versions, and a button "Compare selected revisions" is to help work out what changes were made.

My apologies if any significant changes were accidentally removed; that was unintentional. (Shifting the references into the main content is another issue, but let's first sort out the actual changes to the content.) Boud (talk) 22:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

The swaps between ref name="NYT_7Zabul_beheadings" versus ref name="NYT_Tabassum_protest" in are consistent with. I haven't yet checked if they make sense in terms of content (to see if we agree or disagree). Boud (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

(These errors in .) Maybe someone independent like might wish to make these four swaps between "NYT_Tabassum_protest" and "NYT_7Zabul_beheadings" in the content so that the sources once again match the content. Boud (talk) 22:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Using "NYT_7Zabul_beheadings" to justify One of the victims was Shukria Tabassum, a nine-year-old girl is invalid, but using "NYT_Tabassum_protest" is valid because it says The victims who were beheaded included a 9-year-old girl and .... Boud (talk) 22:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Using "NYT_7Zabul_beheadings" to justify In reaction, on 11 November 2015, 2,000 is invalid, but using "NYT_Tabassum_protest" is valid because it says in the Afghan capital on Wednesday, thousands of protesters carried the coffins. Boud (talk) 22:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) The same goes for Ghani appeared on television ... and The 11 November protest was self-managed .... Both are justified by "NYT_Tabassum_protest" but not by "NYT_7Zabul_beheadings".


 * ✅, but doesn't preclude the possibility of further ref additions/changes. Dl2000 (talk) 04:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)


 * You've restored only the article's main text and copy-pasted your old refs with broken and dead links: 1) The New Humanitarian's link is broken and leads to Siobhán O’Grady's article "The Plot to Sideline Gambia’s First Female Presidential Candidate"; 2) "UNAMA condemns murder of seven civilians in Zabul" is a press release; 3) "Youth Protest Movements in Afghanistan: Seeking Voice and Agency" is a report; 4) "The 'Zabul Seven' Protests: Who speaks for the victims?" is a dead link, "url-status=live" should be switched to "url-status=dead"; 5) United States Institute of Peace's blog is called "The Olive Branch", not "USIP"; etc.
 * Because you as a major contributor to this article don't allow other editors to touch your "bibliography" in Reflist under the threat of edit war, I've restored the original references with fixed links using the so-called "bibliography" format (all refs are in Reflist).
 * You can check my edit (if you do check other editors' edits). Also, I've transferred your "bibliography" of empty templates from Reflist to this discussion (below):


 * {{void|templates:

{{cite web | last1 = | first1 = | last2= | first2= | authorlink = | language = | title= |trans-title = | work = | publisher = | website= |date = | url = |format = | doi = | access-date = 2021... |archive-url= |archive-date= 2021... |url-status=live }}


 * P.S.: Is it really necessary to store empty templates in the article's main space instead of your own user space or I'm being a Majoritarianist again?--Russian Rocky (talk) 06:12, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no threat of an edit war. Another editor has checked the edits independently of you and I and we appeared to have converged. Thanks. :) Boud (talk) 08:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * If there is no threat of an edit war, then stop slandering me on your talk page. I made no "errors in matching content to sources", which you claim have been corrected "after [you] pointed them out".--Russian Rocky (talk) 18:38, 3 February 2023 (UTC)


 * {{s|I will be happy for other editors, whether or any uninvolved editors, to look at the four numbered points I made above, and look at {{oldid|Tabassum movement|1137177532|label=oldid 1137177532 of Tabassum movement, edit by Russian Rocky at 06:09, 3 February 2023}} and decide if the content matches the sources or not, and choose to fix them if they are wrong.}} Boud (talk) 21:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC) Looks like my four points were correct, but in fact the content was sourced correctly too. And it seems OK now. Boud (talk) 21:32, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Strikethrough above for clarification. Boud (talk) 14:01, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

{{outdent}}The good news is that work to improve modularisation is continuing :). Open the article South Pole Telescope in editing mode (whole article or section) and you will see that it is nice and readable without being overwhelmed by long lists of bibliographic technical details in the text body. If you support or oppose the WikiCite project and have reasons why, then feel free to contribute constructively at WikiCite/Shared Citations with your reasons for/against. Thanks! Boud (talk) 14:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}