User talk:Realstarslayer

Can the LTTE be described as a "political" organisation?

Hi,

For the user Realstarslayer, though you do not have a problem in making changes to other peoples topics it matters to them. Besides, it is clearly disrespecting other editors. In this case, there were two violations.

Sub headings were completely deleted.
They were clearly replaced by inappropriate subheadings substantially changing their meaning.

Changing anyone’s comments are not allowed and you can not argue on this!!

I suggest you reveiw the [Vandalism]policy again. - Ron - 05:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you point out to me exactly where I have done any of the items you claim that I have, please give me links to any history or diff, where I have made changes either without approval or without noting said changes in discussion? Get your facts right before preaching about rules to me. Furthermore discuss this in the appropriate page where I have apparently done these things you claim. Also I notice that you have not contributed even a single letter to any of the pages you are discussing here, however you take the time to attack myself and I see user Vadakkan as well, it seems you just have an axe to grind, so as Vadakkan said go right ahead and report me to whomever you wish.--Realstarslayer 15:25, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The link you added is to the CFA, and it is as official as any other version. The CFA is in english, and except from the written agreement signed by the parties the content is just the same on the one you linked to. Ulflarsen 14:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, its my typo that is causing the confusion I meant to type 'thought' but left out the t thus changing the entire meaning of my comment =) Also I'm not sure if there is a way to edit the 'edit comments'.--Realstarslayer 16:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need your input

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/State_terrorism_in_Syria we dont need to delete it but modify it. Thanks for your supportHuracane 20:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LTTE

Hi Realstarslayer , The changes I added in have been discussed on the talk page over last few days. Please see the last half section of the page Ruchiraw 01:10, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ruchiraw, please see my comments on the article's discussion page, while I appreciate that you make note of all your changes in the discussion, please give it some time so that others can actually discuss the changes before implementing them. Thanks.--Realstarslayer 04:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is quite POV.

The LTTE itself rejects this characterisation, and in turn accuses the Sri Lankan government of genocide and state-sponsored terrorism against the Tamil minority.

Then we could have a sentence saying

The Sri Lankan government in turn accuses the LTTE of genocide,using pregnant suicide bombers, sending children into battle, indiscriminate political assasinations, gun running, drug trafficking , organised crime , massacring settlers, etc:-

Do you see my point . If we have a litany of claims , instead of facts we could spend pages on claims, See foll. para from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Fairness_of_tone

Disagreements over whether something is approached the Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) way can usually be avoided through the practice of good research. Facts (as defined in the A simple formulation section above) are not Points Of View (POV, here used in the meaning of "opposite of NPOV") in and of themselves. A good way to help building a neutral point of view is to find a reputable source for the piece of information you want to add to Wikipedia, and then cite that source. This is an easy way to characterize a side of a debate without excluding that the debate has other sides. The trick is to find the best and most reputable sources you can. Try the library for good books and journal articles, and look for the most reliable online resources. A little bit of ground work can save a lot of time in trying to justify a point later.

Can you as a fact find a country or UN agency which has backed the LTTE's claims . The balls in ur court now to find it . Else I will add the fact that no country has supported the LTTEs claims

Ruchiraw 14:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How is that POV when it is clearly stated that this is what the LTTE claims and not that it is a fact, and this is a counter to the POV of the GoSL that the LTTE are terrorists again the claim of the GoSL and not a fact. I am not sure why you are not getting this point, anyhow please continue discussing on the main page not here so that others can participate too. Thanks.--Realstarslayer 15:36,

30 July 2006 (UTC)

Mediation request

I have spent pages justifying my additions. Why dont you agree to mediate if you feel they are falseRuchiraw 16:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello

I saw youyr comment [1] can you please link this as part of the Ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka page, as I try to keep away from such large projects. Thanks

Hi RaveenS, I think it is already linked there? Unless I am misunderstanding you. Cheers.--Realstarslayer 14:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I meant as part of the article, it may be but like how the burning of Jaffna library is part of the articleRaveenS 01:18, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I get you now, I have added a section for that now in the main article, take a look when you have a chance and tweak it if you see fit. Thanks.--Realstarslayer 02:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good, now I have created a series of articles on notable massacres, I have included/linked them in Jaffna and Baticlao articles, I will also link them into the Black July article in a new section but can you take care of Ethnic conflict one. The reason I try to keep way from that it prevents me from creating more content and I am in the mood to create of late :-))) and I dont want the flow to stop. Thanks for your help. RaveenS

Oh I just saw your discussion on [2]

Thanks AFD support

It is in RaveenS 15:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

also continue discussion on Tyrons entries

Ruchiraw's Tactic

Hi Realstarslayer,

This is precisely Ruchiraw's tactic. He is trying to get people who have a balanced view on things from editing this article by annoying, deliberate vandalism and other nefarious activity. To fall for this tactic would be tragic.

Trincomanb 19:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi trincomanb, I realise he has 'won' but I really don't have the time or energy anymore to fight his obvious POV edits I work full time and I am working on an MBA plus I have a family, one can only try so much to get a NPOV consensus but if the otherside doesn't even want to try then I cannot spend anymore time and effort and get frustrated over this. I have put it up for RfC so maybe others will take some interest in the article and can salvage it, meanwhile I will help where I can on other articles. Cheers --Realstarslayer 19:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't think anyone has "won". When an article is as low quality as the introduction currently is, nobody's going to take its contents seriously. Nobody's won, and the only loser is Wikipedia, which is stuck with yet another abyssmal article. At the moment, it's heading towards suggesting that the LTTE eats babies and the Sri Lankan government are a bunch of paedophiles. I abandoned the article when the present round of edits started to get out of hand, and I can quite understand your doing the same. Any work on this article under present conditions is just a waste of time. There's plenty of more productive stuff we can do here. -- Arvind 22:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arvind, as you say no one gains here, as it is the article fails to inform anyone about anything, and just a while back I thought we had it well balanced and we could have gone forward to improve on it, instead it has become such a waste. Oh well we'll see what time brings us, if some common sense reigns over there again we can try again, otherwise as you say there are lots of other articles that need work. Cheers --Realstarslayer 22:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I've been bold and asked for the article to be protected. Hopefully, that will make people willing to seek consensus or send the dispute into mediation. -- Arvind 23:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's been protected now. I've suggested a way forward on the Talk page - take a look if you feel like contributing. -- Arvind 23:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts Arvind, we'll see what happens, as I said if some common sense returns I am not averse to contributing again.--Realstarslayer 00:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lets set some base rules here. Are we going to mention claims made by GoSL or LTTE. Either yes or no. Why only admit claims made by the LTTE and ignore comments by the UN, Amnesty, HRW, US, EU , Canada, India, Australia , Singapore etc:-. This is the fundamental point to reach consensus on and it must be justifiable. Ruchiraw 03:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded at the main article.--Realstarslayer 03:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for restoring the end of the page. Addhoc 16:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Narnia

Hello, I noticed that you edited an article related to, or expressed interest in The Chronicles of Narnia. I thought you may be interested in knowing that there is a WikiProject working to improve articles about Narnia, your help would be greatly appreciated. Please consider joining the WikiProject Narnia. Thank you! Bornagain4 18:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will take a look and help where I can.--Realstarslayer 13:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another AFD[3]

Your opinion please. Thanks RaveenS

Took a look, need to read it more thoroughly before making a comment. Regards--Realstarslayer

13:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC).

I know it is tough as an Amertican resident :-( any way look at this Prison_massacres_in_Sri_Lanka all are linked