Talk:Balcombe Street siege

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Northern Ireland

	Northern Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Northern IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Northern IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Northern IrelandNorthern Ireland-related
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Irish republicanism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish republicanism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Irish republicanism and Irish nationalism related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Irish republicanismWikipedia:WikiProject Irish republicanismTemplate:WikiProject Irish republicanismIrish republicanism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: British / European

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

Am I naive?

Is it really true that:

the guys who actually killed so many people leading up to the seige are now free?
the guys who were wrongly convicted of some of those deaths remained in prison for another 12 years?

- simon

Yes it's true, and they were greeted as heroes at a Sinn Fein conference receiving a standing ovation [1]. (The real killers that is). Jooler

And we don't negotiate with terrorists!! simon

you do, you know. You've been doin it since the 1600s

Rv Cite

One died in jail, and the rest were eventually released after it emerged that police had beaten confessions out of them and suppressed information that would have proved their innocence.

This may be true (I was under teh impression it was true) but it belongs on the Guildford Four and you haven't added a cite. Could you explain why you reverted its removal? Rex the first ^{talk | contribs} 02:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You think it irrelevant? Jooler 03:39, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not irrelevant just that it doesn't seem to be about Balcombe Street Siege but about the Guildford Four. Also I couldn't find a part in the Guildford Four article about the confessions being beaten out of them and lastly you have not put a reference. I hope that explains why I removed it, sorry if it casued offence. Rex the first ^{talk | contribs} 03:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The continued inclusion of a reference to the Guildford Four impacts the impartiality of the article. It can be easily seen as a transparent attempt to humanize convicted criminals, particularly as it clearly does not add to this article main thread. Further question: why are the edits so very careful to tiptoe around never referring to this group as a terrorist cell? (which, by definition, they were) is there some unwritten rule on this matter wrt NI?

WP:WTA and WP:NPOV. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 07:20, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SAS

This is the sort of thing that's worrying:
"The men surrendered once the 22 SAS deployment was publicised."

This sentence was in an earlier version of the article and is supported by the BBC refs. However it's now changed to an uncited and different:
"The men surrendered after several days of negotiations with the Metropolitan Police during which time SAS teams had been deployed"

Rich Farmbrough, 00:32 8 December 2007 (GMT).