Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kattankudi mosque massacre (2nd nom)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was Keep ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Kattankudi mosque massacre

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This page should be deleted since there is not enough proper or reliable sources as confirmed by multiple users. Much of the article relies on known unreliable sources such as MCNS and spur. Also the use of graphic and gory images only serves to heighten emotions and doesn't serve to be informative. In addition, the article fails notability, with only 6-13 hits at most on google ,. Sinhala freedom 16:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * On Google Searches please search without quotes like this

thats the correct way to search. Në&#359;&#924;&#466;&#324;&#287;er Peace Talks 03:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=Kattankudy+mosque+massacre&btnG=Search&meta=
 * http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=Kattankudi+mosque+massacre&btnG=Search&meta=


 * I respectfully disagree, we are specifically interested as the name suggests, "Kattankudi mosque massacre", what you suggest will net in unrelated google hits and there are many other mosque massacres that have occurred from other parts of the globe. Sinhala freedom 18:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep The nominator removed the categorization by saying "seems removal of category is fine to me" and he/she removed all the references by giving the same misleading edit summary here are the diffs, removed categorization here and removed all the references without proper justification here. This is a very notable incident in the Sri Lankan conflict and sure deserves an article in wikipedia. There is no basis in saying MCNS and spur are unreliable sources. Në&#359;&#924;&#466;&#324;&#287;er  Peace Talks 13:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well I am not the only one who is saying it. Please see the article talk page. Blog and unfounded sources can't be used to hold up an article. The whole event is sounding more like fiction to me.   Sinhala freedom 13:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Removed all references without proper justification?? Please refer to the talk page before throwing alegations on editors. Remember to AGF rather than accusations. Also please read WP:RS. You need third-party resouces and not MCNS. Cheers ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε†αLҝ 13:58, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * YES the references were removed without a proper edit summary. The edit summary was "seems removal of category is fine to me" when whats being removed is all the references. Në&#359;&#924;&#466;&#324;&#287;er  Peace Talks 14:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

General Comment I do not want to waste anymore time discussing here who did the right thing or wrong thing, the article has been nominated for deletion, if the references are really unreliable as you guys are saying, let the wiki process take its course and the fellow editors will decide whether the article should stay or go. Thanks Në&#359;&#924;&#466;&#324;&#287;er  Peace Talks 14:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete This just another POV fork which is linked to other POV fork articles in this mudslinging battle on Wikipedia. The referenced sources do not even relate to this article. It looks like the editor just slapped them on the page to give a little legitimacy. Even then, this is a very weak article. Wiki Raja 23:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per comments here.--Addhoc 11:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * While there are two reliable sources to indicate the incident occurred (there was none before), this hardly makes the article noteworthy and hence the incident perhaps deserves a sentence somewhere in the Sri Lankan civil war article or elsewhere but not a standalone full article. This is confirmed, as I had shown, with the 6-13 google hits referencing this incident.  As others have said, WP is not a collection of newspaper articles either.  Sinhala freedom 18:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong delete So far only two news articles have been shown and the rest DO NOT comply WP:RS nor WP:Verify. This deems to stay here, where it is already mentioned. Otherwise this entry does not comply notability as a seperate article. I would like to point out that Wikipedia is not a collection of news reports on someone or something that has been in the news for a brief period. Cheers ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε†αLҝ 13:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per User:Wikiality123. If more RS is provided I will change my vote. As it stands now I am on the delete side. There must be more citations for something as big as this massacre of 110 people. Though this information should be put on Terrorist attack attributed to LTTE and say that Sri Lankan Police suspect the LTTE. Watchdogb 01:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong and Speedy Keep.. What!!! Police Suspect LTTE did that ?!! When even the LTTE it self did not deny this!!! And with all the ample evidences to prove the positive ? Bad faith nomination and clear indication of WP:Duplicity by the nominator. Also, SPUR  is a reliable source and people who question that should kindly bring  evidences for that. What kind of evidences the nominator is asking here ? May be a direct quote from that school drop out?? The whole incident in well depicted in the books written by Rohan Gunaratne and i ll bring them as soon as i can get hold of them. Iwazaki  会話. 討論 07:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Can you explain how is SPUR a third-party in this issue as per the norms of WP:RS? Cheers ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε†αLҝ 08:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Please take a look at the site and go through WP:RS..and I am sure You wont ask the same question, again, later. Iwazaki  会話. 討論 11:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * My question was Is SPUR third-party in this issue? The answer is simple that its not. Cheers ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε†αLҝ</i> 09:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * BTW please do not call fellow editors school drop outs. Just to remind you that you have breached WP:CIVIL and hence the code of conduct. Cheers <b style="color:orange;">ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 08:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I ll be more than glad,if not thrilled, if you can show me where I have called the editor like that ? The person I was referring to is a school drop-out and I think even in his BIO he proudly say that. If you still can't comprehend this, then I would appreciate if you stop saying nonsense about my code of conduct.cheerio  Iwazaki  会話. 討論 11:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I am sure Iwazaki wasn't referring to any editor as a school drop out, but the real perpetrator of the massacre, lets not haste our selves into unwise conclusions here, please assume good faith Në&#359;&#924;&#466;&#324;&#287;er  Peace Talks 08:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Indeed am always pro AGF. The sentence preceeding to the school drop out was directed at an editor. It is upto Sinhala freedom to persue it further if he choses to. But what I'm more concerned is about how is SPUR third-party and in spite of me asking this many times no one has come forward to explain the rational. Cheers <b style="color:orange;">ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 09:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I have addressed the both issues above and really look forward to your comments regarding those.Of course you can always ignore the code you brought here and address the SPUR issue. I am sure by now, You know, since you are heavily involved in SL related articles, who is that drop-out guy. Iwazaki  会話. 討論 11:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * User Iwazaki has violated WP:NPA (dare I say it again). Wouldn't it be more productive to stick to the subject at hand rather than speculating about other users political antics.  Sinhala freedom 14:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Or should I dare to say you                                                  Don't be a dick??. Or should I use a real warning regarding your degrading of my ethnic group ? I am sure Wikipedia has rules and regulations regarding this ? meantime, should I tell you again not to be a ........ Thanks Iwazaki  会話. 討論 15:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't understand why the arguments from you have gotten emotional here. It is clearly unprovoked and I sincerely hope you can calm down and come back for a fruitful discussion afterwards. I'll wait. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinhala freedom (talk • contribs)


 * Good point by Iwazaki. We can't have have citations from websites run by school drop-outs or other uneducated thugs. But that's a moot point now. There are enough citations from reliable international media in this article.-- snowolf D4  (  talk  /  @   ) 16:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * At a time when school drop-outs run very successful businesses, have become world famous directors, and have been former presidents of Sri Lanka, I wouldn't be so naive enough to dismiss anyone based on their educational qualifications.  After all  it was an 'educated' Oxford grad who helped create our countries mess in the first place.  Sinhala freedom 22:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep Another bad faith nom without having a bit of an idea about the sources and the history of the incident. Anyway now all the issues have been sort-out by the Snowolfd4. Keep it up buddy. -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie  14:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Again a violation of WP:NPA assuming a user is acting in bad faith. While there are more sources for the incident now. Verifiability (less so now) and notability is still a concern.  Till I can verify some of the sources from the archives, how can I accept some of the figures quoted.  Anyway the article fails notability.  Sinhala freedom 14:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Excuse me, instead of giving bogus WP:NPA's expecting some friends might hear your ranting, please engage in a constructive discussions. So far we have shown here, that
 * 1 You were wrong with your google hit search
 * 2 You have shown nothing to disprove the notability . Could you please for the sake of Wikipedia bring at least one good argument? Or should I depicted your arguments in a table ? Iwazaki  会話. 討論 15:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Iwazaki my friend, everyone can make statements as you just did. But please care to answer the issues I have higlighted with the google hits on top of the page. I trust you somehow skipped the statement in this nest of discussions comments.  Sinhala freedom 15:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * So now you are accusing me for violating WP:NPA? If someone violating WP:NPA I know that you know where to go. And I know that some good people who have some good level of common sense and pretty good understanding about the policies are hanging around there too. Then they will decide that whether I violated the policy or not by saying Another bad faith nom. I would like to mention this one too, you are violating WP:NPA by accusing me of violating WP:NPA!!! Regarding the sources matter, goto the Reliable_sources/Noticeboard and ask from them whether we can use paper archives as sources. -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie  16:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong, speedy keep. There are enough notable contemporary sources to verify this incident. To name a few currently used in the article,
 * Xinhua, 147 Muslims Massacred by Tamil "Tigers" in Sri Lanka, Colombo, August 4, 1990
 * The New York Times, Tamils Kill 110 Muslims at 2 Sri Lankan Mosques, August 5, 1990
 * The Times, Tamils kill 116 Muslims, August 13, 1990
 * Associated Press, Tamil Rebels Order Muslims to Leave City, June 17, 1995
 * BBC News, Army to protect threatened eastern Muslim town, June 24, 1995
 * There is also enough news stories from later dates covering the incident, proving it was notable event, and not just in the news for a few days.
 * Human Rights Watch, Human Rights In Sri Lanka An Update, March 21, 1991
 * Associated Press, Tamil Rebels Order Muslims to Leave City, June 17, 1995'
 * BBC News, Army to protect threatened eastern Muslim town, June 24, 1995
 * Daily News, Mosque Massacres Revisited, August 12, 2000
 * Reuters, Trapped in conflict, Sri Lanka Muslims mull action, July 3, 2006
 * The motives of the nominator are also greatly doubtful. When I went through news archives and provided sources for the incident in a separate page, he tried to get them deleted so that no editor could use them to verify the article. -- snowolf D4  (  talk  /  @   ) 16:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * This user is synthesizing and fabricating his own set of facts. Please do continue to makeup tales and other stories to suit your POV and add unverifiable details to the articles claim them to non-existant archives. Your blanking of content on Sri Lanka makes it abundantly clear how trustworthy or POV loaded your contents are.  Where did I ask for the stuff to be deleted.  I had merely questioned the legality of the contents on wikipedia.  As you had explicitly made clear it was a copyright violation.  I had merely checked that with an admin. You have breached WP:AGF. Sinhala freedom 20:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey hey hey!! You are speaking like a big shot about WP:NPA and you breached it right now and right here. I asked from you to ask from the Reliable_sources/Noticeboard about the paper archives. Or you can goto a library and ask for the paper archives. For the copy vio issue, hope you have to read what admin Haemo told in his talkpage. DO not accuse others for your inability. Mind that! Thank you -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie  06:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Not only that,
 * ReliefWeb, Trapped in conflict, Sri Lanka Muslims mull action 03 Jul 2006
 * Refugee Status Appeals Authority, REFUGEE APPEAL NO. 74796 19 April 2006
 * The New York Times, Trapped in conflict, Sri Lanka Muslims mull action July 3, 2006
 * Chicago Sun-Times, 110 slain in Sri Lanka mosques Tamil rebels gun down worshippers at 2 sites August 5, 1990
 * Stanford Journal of Human Rights Sri Lanka Limbo
 * Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance
 * So now you are asking from us to have citations from comedy sites like http://www.stoperrorism.com also? -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie  17:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Just because these incidents are on a few newspaper cutouts or human rights bulletins, doesn't make the incident notable. per WP:NOT, its not collection of newspaper cutouts. Btw, you have referenced the same article many times hoping to show a greater number of articles ? You have missed the point entirely.  Sinhala freedom 20:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Reapeted? ah you might be talking about the snowolf's Reuters, Trapped in conflict, Sri Lanka Muslims mull action, July 3, 2006 and ReliefWeb, Trapped in conflict, Sri Lanka Muslims mull action 03 Jul 2006. Yeah one of them were repeated its true. Hope you never heard that after the preparation of the news by the news agencies they were published by the newspapers. Sorry that it was not repeated in Eelam news and Eelanatham but these were published in ReliefWeb and by the http://news.oneindia.in. I think you missed everything, entirely. As I told you before, if you have any doubts regarding our news paper links, goto the Reliable_sources/Noticeboard and ask from them. No use of crying here. Cheers -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie  05:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. An archive search brings up plenty of published sources, including New York Times, The Boston Globe, San Jose Mercury News, Austin American-Statesman, Dayton Daily News, The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News and St. Louis Post-Dispatch. As for the WP:NOT argument, the incident also find mentions in several books and scholarly papers -- you'll need to search with the alternative spelling "Kattankudy" . The article could do with some changes, though -- currently it suggests that the attack was certainly carried out by LTTE; while it is known that the attackers were Tamils, according to this book, LTTE denied the responsibility for the massacre. utcursch | talk 06:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ahem! -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie  06:45, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Atmaram, I think the point I'm trying to make here is pretty simple. You would agree that not every event reported in the news for a brief time can be a standalone article on wikipedia. The later mentions do not give enough coverage like you would have on famous incidents,. I hope you see the point. Cheers <b style="color:orange;">ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 11:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * One Hundred and forty seven innocent Sri Lankan un-armed civilians were killed by those armed rascals! and it was covered by the most reputed media bodies. So you are talking that this incident isn't notable? What I have to say is, as Iwazaki said above, could you please for the sake of Wikipedia bring at least one good argument? hmm..? -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie  11:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε, Even in that case, deletion or a one-line mention is not a suitable solution. I've observed that all the deletion debates involving Sri Lanka/LTTE turn into a "Strong Keep"/"Strong Delete" war between the same set of editors. At worst, somebody should have suggested a merge to Kattankudy (under a new History section) or Expulsion of Muslims from the Northern province by LTTE. An incident involving killing of over 100 people is certainly notable. utcursch | talk 11:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think Utcursch comments are very reasonable and I can buy them. He has pointed to some books with references so, I think my issues have been largely addressed. Merger idea with the Sri Lankan civil war maybe an option as well. As you point out somewhere there is an unacceptable POV problem with the article now, hope you can intervene to fix it.  I am also willing to recall my deletion nomination at this point, provided there is some help in enforcing NPOV by an admin and clean up whats there now.  Sinhala freedom 12:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Atmaram and Lahiru, I dont think we decide on standalone articles based on emotions, but on media coverage. Please look into the examples I have given earlier on which the media follow-ups are centered on particular incidents and not as we see in Kattanduki massacre where it gets mentioned along with others. Atmaram if you didnt notice I wanted this to stayhere and I would agree if you want to include this with all the graphical details you want to under Expulsion of Muslims from Northern province by LTTE- I would appreciate that too. But as a standlone, nopes! Cheers <b style="color:orange;">ώiki Ѕαи Яоzε</b><i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 11:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.