Talk:2000 Chittisinghpura massacre

Amnesty International Source

The Amnesty International article is dated 15 June 2000, when details were unclear. Since then it has become clear that the perpetrators were militants. The Indian Express article (dated May 19, 2006) reports that Clinton wrongly said that the killings were done by Hindu militants. It doesn't help to cite an outdated source in the article when newer ones exist. --vi5in^[talk] 04:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no mention of subsequent killings by security forces

[1],[2]. Doldrums 14:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suhail Malik confessed to participating in this crime

I have added info about Suhail Malik of sialkot pakistan who confessed to Barry Bearak of New York Times Wikireader41 (talk) 00:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh News Express

@Gotitbro:: Re. the source you removed[3] complaining about "unknown Sikh News", a quick Google search for Sikh News Express returns a well maintained website[4], a frequently updated fb page[5] as well as an entry in the registry held by the Office of Registrar of Newspapers for India[6]. So, SNE clearly is a legally operating newspaper in India. I am not aware of any red lights re. its reputation - could you explain why you believe it should not be used as a source for Wikipedia, especially when the information I proposed to add can be cross-checked with a video recording?

Also, re. your complaint that Countercurrents is not "neutral"[7], I suggest you read WP:BIASEDSOURCE. Regards, — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:30, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You promptly removed a well known (India Today) source citing its unreliability. I am not sure how a source as poor as an online article with no byline, no known credibility which further cites a video from an obscure organization qualifies better than that. And no, having websites and being registered does not make them WP:RS. If the information in the video is credible at all then major or well known publications would have an article on it. If not then it does not merit inclusion here. Pinging @Kautilya3: who is familiar with this topic. Gotitbro (talk) 20:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What I did was right, because editorials are not reliable sources on facts – please read WP:RSEDITORIAL. Additionally, it was only a refspam, as mentions of army uniforms were contained in other sources, too.

The interview was in Punjabi, focused on Punjab matters, and the Chittisinghpora incident was mentioned only en passant. I guess this is why it was not really picked up by English language media.

Anyway, my point was to balance the sources so as to illustrate that the identity of perpetrators is still debatable and many RSs do not subscribe to the offical narrative. I know it is of little use for WP, but I was in Jammu as it happened, spoke to direct witnesses very soon after and, as a consequence, like with many things J&K, I am far from buying the official version. — kashmīrī ^TALK 23:58, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]