Talk:Sea Tigers: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:: Hi Improv, while I appreciate your attempt to improve on the article, I am not certain that some of your edits are working that well. Perhaps if you could explain your reasoning for some of them it would help. It seems we are losing more of the descriptive aspects of the article and since it isn't overly long to begin with we gain nothing by doing so. Just a quick example might be the quote attributed to the LTTE leader; I think is an important insight into the LTTE rational for having a naval component, since they are one of the few if not the only rebel movements to have a substantial and successful naval force.--[[User:Realstarslayer|Realstarslayer]] 21:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC) |
:: Hi Improv, while I appreciate your attempt to improve on the article, I am not certain that some of your edits are working that well. Perhaps if you could explain your reasoning for some of them it would help. It seems we are losing more of the descriptive aspects of the article and since it isn't overly long to begin with we gain nothing by doing so. Just a quick example might be the quote attributed to the LTTE leader; I think is an important insight into the LTTE rational for having a naval component, since they are one of the few if not the only rebel movements to have a substantial and successful naval force.--[[User:Realstarslayer|Realstarslayer]] 21:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC) |
||
:::I am concerned that the longish quote, combined with other parts of the article, were in affect trying to give a sympathetic tone to the article rather than a purely descriptive one. I recognise that this is a delicate line to tread though. I felt the early parts of my edit were primarily to fix grammar/style points, the mention of the sinking of the Chinese ship didn't seem to be verifiable (common agreement is not reliable fact in all cases), and the comments about the "mood" of the Sea Tigers seemed ... really bizarre to include (and speculative). That's why I made the edits as I did. --[[User:Improv|Improv]] 00:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC) |
:::I am concerned that the longish quote, combined with other parts of the article, were in affect trying to give a sympathetic tone to the article rather than a purely descriptive one. I recognise that this is a delicate line to tread though. I felt the early parts of my edit were primarily to fix grammar/style points, the mention of the sinking of the Chinese ship didn't seem to be verifiable (common agreement is not reliable fact in all cases), and the comments about the "mood" of the Sea Tigers seemed ... really bizarre to include (and speculative). That's why I made the edits as I did. --[[User:Improv|Improv]] 00:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC) |
||
:::: Hi again, yes I can agree with you on some of your points, like that about the mood of the ST, it did seem a little out of place. However I believe items like the sinking of the Chinese trawler did have a citation with it. Well I will go over it again and make note here of items that I have concerns with and we can discuss and go forward from there. Regards--[[User:Realstarslayer|Realstarslayer]] 02:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 02:11, 25 July 2006
Political impartiality
Has the political impartiality of this article been tested by someone impartial on this issue? Added by: 210.50.143.20 11:05 6 February
- This article is like any other article on Wikipedia, and its up to anyone with knowledge about the issue to expand it and/or to correct any information that is not correct. Ulflarsen 13:17, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- It would be interesting to know what you might think is partial in the article. King Canute 15:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Changes by user Improv
I find the edits done by Improv confusing and even misleading, one even changed the sentence so it makes no sense. As far as I can see "offense" is something like a joke, it's not equal to "offensive". Mullaitivu is a rather small city, more like a village, and mentioning that makes sense to place Sea Tigers in context. There is common agreement within the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission that Sea Tigers sank the chinese trawler etc. So I would ask you to argue your edits before you execute them. Ulflarsen 23:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- It's meant to be the tactical use of offense, e.g. some people are assigned to offense on a sports team and some to defense. WRT the common agreement, do we have sources reporting that common agreement? Are they reliable? I'm not super attached to my edits though, so if you want to undo part or all of it, I'm not going to complain. I do feel they make the article better though.. I'm taking the rest of the quote I cut in half out, because I don't think it aids the article and I worry that it makes the article feel slanted. Again, if you don't like it, no problem. --Improv 13:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Improv, while I appreciate your attempt to improve on the article, I am not certain that some of your edits are working that well. Perhaps if you could explain your reasoning for some of them it would help. It seems we are losing more of the descriptive aspects of the article and since it isn't overly long to begin with we gain nothing by doing so. Just a quick example might be the quote attributed to the LTTE leader; I think is an important insight into the LTTE rational for having a naval component, since they are one of the few if not the only rebel movements to have a substantial and successful naval force.--Realstarslayer 21:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- I am concerned that the longish quote, combined with other parts of the article, were in affect trying to give a sympathetic tone to the article rather than a purely descriptive one. I recognise that this is a delicate line to tread though. I felt the early parts of my edit were primarily to fix grammar/style points, the mention of the sinking of the Chinese ship didn't seem to be verifiable (common agreement is not reliable fact in all cases), and the comments about the "mood" of the Sea Tigers seemed ... really bizarre to include (and speculative). That's why I made the edits as I did. --Improv 00:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Improv, while I appreciate your attempt to improve on the article, I am not certain that some of your edits are working that well. Perhaps if you could explain your reasoning for some of them it would help. It seems we are losing more of the descriptive aspects of the article and since it isn't overly long to begin with we gain nothing by doing so. Just a quick example might be the quote attributed to the LTTE leader; I think is an important insight into the LTTE rational for having a naval component, since they are one of the few if not the only rebel movements to have a substantial and successful naval force.--Realstarslayer 21:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hi again, yes I can agree with you on some of your points, like that about the mood of the ST, it did seem a little out of place. However I believe items like the sinking of the Chinese trawler did have a citation with it. Well I will go over it again and make note here of items that I have concerns with and we can discuss and go forward from there. Regards--Realstarslayer 02:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC)