User talk:Sasa778

April 2022
Your recent editing history at Račak massacre shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Bbb23 (talk) 13:29, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I am not engaged in edit war but the other user who is constantly forcing subjective opinion and ignoring official reports. If needed I will go thru arbitration process to stop this one-side propaganda. Sasa778 (talk) 13:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Sasa778 if your edit is challenged (as it was - by me) the position is that we go back to the long-term version until the matter is resolved. The balance of sources (I believe) now accept that the Račak massacre occurred, finding one or two from 20 years ago that imply otherwise is not surprising! There is always a time when any allegation is unproven.
 * I could be wrong about this, but either way, the place to resolve the matter is on the talk page, not by edit-warring your own opinion, or that of a smallish minority, that the massacre didn't occur. Pincrete (talk) 16:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * For me, and I believe the rest of wikipedia community, quality of sources precedes sheer quantity of them. I am not claiming that massacre *did not* happened, just quoting the official report made by official EU forensic expert team (EU-FET) that results of their findings are *undetermined*. I don't find valid your stance that it is old report and there by automatically outdated and invalid because this is *the only* official report, first and last, a conclusion of more than 2 years of official research.
 * So I am not edit-warring my own opinion but the findings of EU-FET team responsible for settling this matter. Also, "small minority" argument is not accepted for me because this is completely subjective and, again, not valid argument by itself anyway.
 * I am waiting your response so will not revert back for now. Sasa778 (talk) 10:47, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * if your edit is challenged (as it was - by me) the position is that we go back to the long-term version until the matter is resolved.. That is policy - there is no exception just because you happen to think the old version is wrong.


 * The EU-FET team were not responsible for "settling the matter" - they were responsible for assessing the forensic evidence only. They concluded that forensically, a definitive conclusion was not possible, because of actions taken prior to them being brought in to investigate. They also said that the balance of probability was that these were civilians, and other probabilities - so it wasn't simply a "we cannot conclude anything". We state details of the team's conclusions already. What you are doing is working backwards from one aspect of that conclusion to try to imply something which is, broadly speaking, uncontested AFAIK. That killings occurred, which have come to be referred to as a massacre. The details of those killings DO remain contested. Forensic evidence is frequently non-definitive, but it is not the only kind of evidence and most sources treat the killings as historical fact.


 * There are various routes to settling this, but simply edit warring your preferred version isn't one of them. Your defence boils down to "I know I'm right, so I'm going to do what I like".


 * Any further discussion should take place on the article talk page - where other editors can contribute. Pincrete (talk) 13:40, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * continued on article page. Sasa778 (talk) 14:56, 14 April 2022 (UTC)