Talk:2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Merge articles?

There's another article, 2019 Sri Lanka Easter church bombings that was started about three minutes before this one. I made a bunch of edits to it but just now found this one, and it seems to be further along. Funcrunch (talk) 05:59, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

@Funcrunch:You can merge [1] into [2] it's developing event and merging now won't effect anyone, without anyone's permission. . (.) 06:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Rsrikanth05 took care of it. (Thanks for copying over my refs.) Funcrunch (talk) 06:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Merged it into this because this was longer and also followed the conventional naming format. Hope nobody's mad at me. Better to focus on one article rather than divide efforts into working on multiple ones. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 06:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Unless there is a plan for a history merge, if anyone is copying content across remember not to create copyvios by failing to fulfill the creative commons attribution requirements. Follow the processes recommended at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Nil Einne (talk) 06:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Noted. Will keep in mind and follow due process in future. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Update

Social medias including Facebook are downed in SL.--AntanO 09:08, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

A blast in Dematagoda reported a short while ago

Another blast has occured in Dematagoda a short while ago. Further details are yet to be informed. HiruRathnayaka (talk) 09:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

True another explosion near Borella. Dematagoda Abishe (talk) 09:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The explosion has been occured near an apartment complex in Dematagoda. HiruRathnayaka (talk) 09:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Use of Tenses in article

Hi All,

I have noticed that there is a large use of the present tense in this article. This is not the common style of writing on Wikipedia. Would someone mind adding a message when opening the editor to remind people that unless specified (i.e. there is an ongoing investigation) the present tense should not be used, despite being a current event.

I am a relatively new user (55~ edits, 180~ days) so I am not sure how to do this,

Thanks, Muffington (talk) 09:16, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Background

@Qasee1230:, please stop removing the background content. It is relevant information of a security threat prior to the attack, regardless if is was them or not. There is a section on Perpetrators stating clearly that it is not yet known who has done it.--Blackknight12 (talk) 09:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your input, for the credibility of this article, I think it is better not to add any assumptions and let it be confirmed by Sri Lanka itself. Best regards. . (talk) 09:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Another bomb blast recorded in Dehiwala

In the Sri Lankan local news, it was reported that another bomb blast has been recorded in Dehiwala just outside Colombo. No proper sources yet? Take a look at this Dehiwala Abishe (talk) 08:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

explosion-near-dehiwala--AntanO 08:49, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The explosion occurred in a function hall near the Dehiwala zoo. That's the 7th attack today. 2 people are reportedly dead and several have injured. HiruRathnayaka (talk) 08:49, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The bomb blast at Dehiwala was not at the Tropical Inn on College street, but was near the Dehiwala Zoo, and is just a small inn - located hereL https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/OYO+107+Tropic+Inn/@6.856981,79.8718744,19.21z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x3ae25b19bc5bcac1:0x361d393ef949a6d3!8m2!3d6.8387648!4d79.8651874 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcwobby (talk • contribs) 11:05, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Article structure

The article's structure needs revamping. Currently the lede and reaction sections are larger than the main body. Editors need to add content to the main body rather than the lede. And editors should stop adding reactions by all and sundry.--Obi2canibe (talk) 11:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes very much needed. Thank you pointing it out.Sherenk1 (talk) 12:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I am pretty certain that while these wicked & terrorist attacks happened during Easter services in these 3 churches, that the Zion Church in Batticaloa wasn't by any chance having a "Mass" at the time. "Evangelical Protestants" despise the Mass, AFAIK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:1A:EE8:0:0:18A1:20B1 (talk) 12:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Further to my above comment, someone please advise me when did #Noakhali secede from #Bangladesh? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:1A:EE8:0:0:18A1:20B1 (talk) 12:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The Tropical Inn Hotel is a hoax

The Tropic Inn Hotel is 3 km from the Zoo - please look at my update on Talk:The Tropical Inn Hotel. IvarT (talk) 13:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Perpetrators

CNN-News18 reported the identities of two of the suicide bombers: Zahran Hashim and Abu Mohammed.[3] This should probably be added to the article. Carl Kenner (talk) 13:22, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

This source, and something called "newshub" were the first to share doctored images along with ridiculously detailed articles, impossibly close to the moment of explosions (less than an hour). These two sources could very well be the cause of the social media blackout, imposed to curb fake news from spreading. 175.157.164.93 (talk) 13:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The blasts happened in the morning, CNN-News18 released the names and videos only i the afternoon. This act did not cause any fake news, just made them the first to break it and gather viewership. isoham (talk) 02:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Reactions

Why are reactions to the event being deleted? They are valid additions and should stay until a spin off article can be created.--Blackknight12 (talk) 09:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Because it is repetitive, mundane rubbish and merely bloats the article. ("The Poobah of Foobah condemns the attack and sends his condolences.") WWGB (talk) 10:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

After any disaster, it is to be expected that prominent people everywhere will sympathise, express shock, etc. I agree that including these obligatory speeches is a waste of space. It would be relevant if anyone expressed a different opinion, or of someone who would be expected to commiserate maintains a pointed silence. Reactions which are actual actions, not waffly speech ("we will send aid ...") are a different matter. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 18:28, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

8th blast reported

https://twitter.com/JimMacKayOnAir/status/1119905173403590656 is this an accurate reference? IsraeliIdan (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Not reliable in any case; a nobody's twitter account? (there were 8 blasts, though) Kingsif (talk) 18:25, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

My two cents from Colombo (the warning letter)

This is also discussed below in the section #Daily Telegraph/AFP. pol098

Just before social media and messaging platforms were blocked, news disguised as "Indian Media" and some others, shared a scanned letter that was later identified as fake by the AG's office. It is also important to note that these excessively detailed posts and "scans" surfaced less than an hour after the bombs, and from multiple different networks, very rapidly. Unfortunately, due to the rapid spread, many smaller news agencies posted new articles based on that, which was also then used by news such as CNN and Telegraph. I don't have time to work on this article at this point, but this is important information that is otherwise not explained in the news articles that are now written by the second. Rehman 11:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I just saw someone added names of some militant information to the article. I am in the city with eyes on all live news, including verifiable government sources. These information is not accurate, and never mentioned on the news. It is the result of those fake news spreading earlier. I suggest NOT posting those information yet, until there is confirmation from the government sources. Adding them now, only helps spread it further. Wait, and add them only absolutely true and obvious. Rehman 11:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Good to see you again Rehman. I haven't been editing Wikipedia lately due to a heavy schedule... so I'm going to ask the WP community: Is it worth mentioning of the NTJ (National Thowheeth Jama’ath)? NTJ, defined by Time, is a "local radical Muslim group" that was apparently made known to the Sri Lankan government as 4 members of the group were arrested in January for having in possession a "haul of explosives and detonators". Just a thought that this should be added, but we can wait for confirmed information. Thanks and very sad to see something like this happening... —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

It should also be noted that Minister Harin has released what appears to be so-called "leaked letter" or at least something similar and blames the Thawheed Jammath as well. I am not sure if the NTJ we are talking about is the same as the Indian NTJ and its branch SLTJ. http://www.colombopage.com/archive_19A/Apr21_1555866043CH.php. - UmdP|

Yeah the letter situation is weird. Earlier I found 2 sources it's fake. One seems to suggest the info came directly from the AG. But I only really found those 2 sources. And this info seems to have been ignored by other sources reporting the letter as genuine. I mean they aren't even saying something like "we've seen reports that it's fake but have independent confirmation it's genuine" or "although there have been reports the AG said it was fake, the AG's office denied they'd said that when we contacted them/couldn't be contacted" or something indicating they were challenging or uncertain about the reports of it being a fake, but instead just don't seem to have noticed such reports (which is troubling, because I'm not a journalist but I did thanks to Rehman's post) or find them so unreliable that they don't think it worth commenting on. Al Jazeera at least seem to have retracted some story [4]. The Week (Indian magazine) sounds like it shouldn't be a terrible source so not sure what gives. Further we also have the PM and possibly other politicans saying they weren't informed of the warnings. This is one of the reasons why trying to be too fast with late breaking news is a headache IMO. Nil Einne (talk) 19:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Looking at the letter as reproduced in the New York Times, it looks suspicious. While I don't speak the language, why does it have a heading in English (convenient for the international press), then text in the local language (to look realistic)? People like to play with rubber stamps, but why use the same stamp twice, with different numbers? Nothing that I can prove is wrong, it just looks fishy to me even without understanding the language. A native speaker could maybe say more - maybe it is usual to out English capital-letter headings on police notices? Pol098 (talk) 19:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Add Hungary condemnation

I was not able to add this due to merge conflict, but here's the citation for anyone who can edit it without problem.

Hungary <ref>{{cite web |title=A külügyminisztérium elítéli a támadásokat [The Ministry of Foreign Affairs Condemns the Attacks]] |url=https://magyarnemzet.hu/belfold/a-kulugyminiszterium-eliteli-a-tamadasokat-6807635/ |website=[[Magyar Nemzet]] |publisher=Magyar Nemzet |accessdate=21 April 2019}}</ref>

Added HungaryManabimasu (talk) 16:39, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Sri Lanka Easter bombings

Let's redirect the article to "2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings". A better and widely known name for the article. --- Haritha (talk) 13:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I agree on your point here since the attacks also happened during Easter Sunday. Plus if your going to say easter, then you might be reffering to the season and not the sunday itself. --- User:TheFilipinoEditor —Preceding undated comment added 15:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Who did it?

The way the article is currently written reeks of original research and speculation. 71.218.108.117 (talk) 16:08, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

We really don't have any clue yet so far, but sources are pointing to religious extremists. See Wickremesinghe's comments. --—Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:36, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

To add to the article: extremists from which religion? 173.88.241.33 (talk) 20:02, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Islam by the looks of it. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 21:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

What are you basing that on? Your confirmation bias? Why do people immediately jump to racist conspiracy theories whenever mass killings occur? 71.218.108.117 (talk) 23:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Islam is not a race. Why do people make irrational comments on a portal for information sharing? isoham (talk) 02:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@ISoham: National Tawheed Jamaah, a Sri Lankan based Muslim extremist group is alleged to have conducted this massacre. Later the Islamic State (ISIS) has claimed responsibility of this attack revealing that it was revenge of the Christchurch mosque shootings. Even it was revealed that ISIS has celebrated this massacre by posting an image and check it below in the second reference and it is in Tamil. Abishe (talk) 02:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6945501/Did-ISIS-help-plot-carnage-Sri-Lankan-bombings-bear-hallmarks-terror-group.html

https://news.lankasri.com/srilanka/03/202502

Protestant or Catholic?

We’re the victims Catholic or Protestant? It seems that only Catholics were targeted in the attacks and not Protestants. 71.218.108.117 (talk) 16:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

There was an attack in Batticaloa in a church that is not Catholic.Manabimasu (talk) 16:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

It was Christians, something like 80% of Sri Lankan Christians are Catholic, but of the three churches one was Protestant, so it's just *all*. Kingsif (talk) 18:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Racist and islamophobic edits and comments

Can we all just agree to not be racist or islamophobic for once? Why is waiting for the facts so difficult for some people? 71.218.108.117 (talk) 16:39, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Daily Telegraph/AFP

Having watched the edit war over the Daily Telegraph/AFP claim, if I put aside that several edits seem to have well exceeded WP:3RR I've noticed 2 things. First for a lot of that edit war, the edit was effectively unsourced yet no one seems to have noticed. The edit added a bunch of numbers as refs, but the numbers of the references for most of these edits don't correlate to anything supporting the claims [5]. Second, that problem aside, again no one seems to have considered the sourcing issues itself. While it's true that the original ref which I found here [6] the Daily Telegraph [7] does make the claim, it's complicated by the fact that according to other reports, the AG has said there is a fake letter going around [8]. Are these reports on the AG's denial wrong? Is the AG wrong? Has the AFP seen other content or has evaluated the AG's claims and still believe the letter is authentic? I don't think we have sufficient sourcing to really answer any of these questions. In these sort of late breaking news situations, we have to be very careful as even normal RS are prone to jump the gun so for contentious claims, it's often better to wait for a number of sources to report it and deal with such issues. Nil Einne (talk) 17:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

This is also discussed above in the section #My two cents from Colombo (the warning letter). Pol098 (talk) 22:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

This article needs to discuss more about Muslims

The conflict between the Sinhalese and Muslims eclipses anything found between Tamils and Sinhalese, and this is not forgetting that the Tamils themselves have long standing conflicts with the Muslim community too. It is very unlikely to be by Tamils due to the Christians in the leadership, and Sinhalese have not known hatred of Christians too.

Furthermore, the AFP have reported that it is likely to have been a Muslim group. I know one of the other editors tried to add a text about this which I will later copy onto here, and I think such similar text should be added to this article. I do not think the views of a Muslim who is not even from Sri Lanka should dictate what goes on this page. The text is not Islamophobic at all.

Wikipedia is about reporting the facts, not about creating the facts. Athiestsupporter (talk) 17:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

There has been no immediate claim of responsibility, local police have arrested seven people residing in the Dematagoda suburb in connection to the attacks, further at least The Guardian (UK) reported that the Defense Minister stated the culprits were religious extremists[30][31][32][33][34][35]

The Telegraph (UK) reported that Agence France Press, the major French news agency, had obtained leaked documents from the office of the Sri Lankan police chief, warning about a terrorist attack on churches by National Thowheeth Jama'ath (NTJ), based on information shared by foreign security agencies.[36] NTJ is a racial Islamist group which rose to fame in recent years due to acts of violence against Buddhists in Sri Lanka.[37]

The above text was involved in an edit war and I personally support its inclusion. Athiestsupporter (talk) 17:09, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

"NTJ is a racial Islamist group" Islam is not a race; perhaps you meant to say, it's a radical islamic group.isoham (talk) 02:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I've already commented above on the problems with this material. Nil Einne (talk) 17:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

It would be really great if all the anti-Muslim bigotry and conspiracy theories would just stop. 71.218.108.117 (talk) 17:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

In response to the removal of the content, that fact that this has been reported by reputable outlets, several outlets, means that the content should stay as being "reported by". Athiestsupporter (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

What "outlets"? You're only providing a single one. Nil Einne (talk)

(edit conflict) I can already tell this article is going to be a host of edit wars. It hasn't even been a few days and we are already observing this. Anyways, your comment of "Sinhalese have not known hatred of Christians too" can be tested against by "Local Christian groups have said they faced increasing intimidation from some extremist Buddhist monks in recent years" from Reuters. Also, we need to wait until it is confirmed who the perpetrators are. Why are you in such a rush? We have time... Wikipedia is not the place for speculation, it's stating confirmed, well-sourced information. Please don't make comments that do not hold any water. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:41, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I'd like to remind editors per WP:BURDEN, it's their responsibility to find sources supporting any claims they are adding to the article. It's not the responsibility of others to "Google it". Nil Einne (talk) 18:02, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Also per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, RT is enerally unreliable for controversial topics. Nil Einne (talk) 18:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for that. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I just noticed Athiestsupporter was blocked as a sock. Nil Einne (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

now confirmed Muslim group committed this attack --Mr Debater (talk) 18:04, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Please provide good sourcing then it can be added to the article. Or simply add it yourself with the multiple reliable sources needed reporting this confirmation. Nil Einne (talk) 18:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Mr Debater seems to be another sockpuppet of "Argumentdebate". No point in me participating in this thread. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Added about the narrow escape of Raadhika Sarathkumar

Raadhika Sarathkumar narrowly escaped from a bomb explosion which happened at Cinnamon Grand Hotel where she was present after wrapping up shooting for a film.

Not needed, part of the string of "OMG I was close to tragedy, cry for me" that's appearing; a British politician also narrowly missed being at the hotel at the time, but we're not going to mention that, either. Kingsif (talk) 18:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Why cant we admit that Islamic terrorists committed this attack

there is massive proof but people keep trying to hide the fact the Islamic terrorists committed this attack --Mr Debater (talk) 17:58, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

What proof? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.15.35.178 (talk) 18:08, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

(EC) It's likely in a few days things will be a lot clearer. In the mean time, we need to be careful in not mentioning poorly supported information, remembering our goal is to be an encyclopaedia and not a news source. Nil Einne (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Tropic Inn Hotel or Tropical Inn Hotel?

Different sources give different spellings for the hotel which was bombed in Dehiwala this afternoon. This source depicts it is Tropic Inn Hotel and this reference states that it is Tropical Inn Hotel. A user redirected the article from Tropical Inn to Tropic Inn Hotel. Abishe (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.zomato.com/colombo/tropic-inn-restaurant-mount-lavinia-colombo

https://www.latestly.com/world/two-more-blasts-in-sri-lanka-explosions-in-dehiwala-and-dematagoda-over-190-dead-in-8-bomb-blasts-in-one-day-in-country-782948.html

• Most English-language RS are just referring to it as "a guest house", possibly because they don't have a good source for the name. We could probably do the same. Kingsif (talk) 18:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

If someone from Sri Lanka Can confirm name and location as well as photograph, please add it. Tropic Inn Hotel or Tropical Inn Hotel is supposedly a new hotel in the area so this can be the wrong name and location.Manabimasu (talk) 23:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The bombing occurred at The Tropical Inn, not The Tropic Inn, which has a disclaimer on its website.[9] WWGB (talk) 05:11, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Motive cannot be known regardless of source.

the motive for these attacks cannot be stated with any accuracy until there is more investigation. I strenuously object to the removal of the word "suspected" from the infobox ... and ascribing a motive to the attacks within 24 hours. I intend to replace the word. I'll leave a reasonable amount of time for discussion, but I am going to do it today. User:Pedant (talk) 18:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

• I already commented that out, completely agree. Kingsif (talk) 18:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Exactly my reason for putting suspected. Glad to see the motive has been removed now. 130.15.35.178 (talk) 18:50, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Islamic Leadership subsection

Why does one specific religion get a subsection? I get why Christian leaders have a subsection, but no other non-christian faith has one except islam. This may imply to readers there is a relationship between this attack and islam (something that has not been verified).

Also why is the reaction of Hamas listed? Given they are defacto in charge of Gaza, they should be covered by the worldwide condolences from countries and their leaders. Hezbollah may be religious but hardly counts as "islamic leadership". They are military/political force. 130.15.35.178 (talk) 19:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

There was a brief Jewish section that got removed; if you think the reactions are no more notable than other world leaders, then the section can be dissolved and the reactions moved. Though I think in general, it shows religious solidarity, faiths supporting each other through attacks blatantly against only one (there is a sentence mentioning that, too). Kingsif (talk) 19:41, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Great. Unfortunately I can't do that myself. 130.15.35.178 (talk) 19:42, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I agree about solidarity, which is why the comments by Yousef al-Othaimeen should be placed in the "international reaction" subsection. I think the Gaza reaction should go with the other world leaders and the hezbollah response should be removed or put under international reaction as well.130.15.35.178 (talk) 19:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The "brief Jewish section" derives from an error by me; I included an Israeli (not religious Jewish) offer of aid, but accidentally put it in the "Christian" section instead of just "International". Someone sensibly changed this, but "Jewish" was not the right heading, so I moved it to where I'd intended. Pol098 (talk) 19:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Excellent work Kingsif 130.15.35.178 (talk) 19:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Just trying to keep the article clean Kingsif (talk) 19:56, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Target: Foreigners or hotel guests?

Can someone add if it was hotel guests or foreigners who were attacked in the hotel bombings? Please show link of target being foreigners. Hotel guests is a better description because people in hotels can be natives as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manabimasu (talk • contribs) 23:25, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The hotels are luxurious 5-star beach hotels, at least one part of a well-known international chain. These are hotels for rich foreigners. But that's OR; how about you check out the sources that say "foreign tourists" were the target. Kingsif (talk) 23:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I think hotels are a miscommunication. Hotels in Indian subcontinent is the equivalent of a restaurant to eat. According to CBS, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci8dK4_d-QE&t=120 the tourists were not intended but the Christians eating at the hotels. Hotels is necessarily not just a place to stay and lodge but to exclusively eat. Also would like to see sources.Manabimasu (talk) 23:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

That alternative definition of hotels is also OR, but these are not Indian hotels, anyway, they are international-chain-brand luxury hotels that you can't just go to the restaurant of. Sources do refer to breakfast time, but possibly because the restaurants at big hotels are massive and will be where the most people are during mealtime—only in one hotel, the others were in the lobby, not where people eat. Also, why would anyone assume that "oh, this hotel's restaurant probably has more Christians than any other religion in it"? That's bizarre; but a common way terrorists try to attract attention is by killing tourists, as it gets lots of countries directly involved. Will you accept the New York Times as a source? [10] "Minutes later a second suicide blast shattered the Sunday brunch tranquillity at the Shangri-La Hotel's Table One Restaurant, a favorite of foreign tourists." Kingsif (talk) 00:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Motive for hotel attack is unknown but could be to gain international attention. That is a possibility. Attack on Churches is surely persecution but until a group claims responsibility or the investigation on part by police is complete the motive for hotel attack is up for debate.Manabimasu (talk) 00:17, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, and out of the two assumptions, your "unidentifiable local Christians might have paid a lot of money to be amongst the hundreds of foreign tourists eating breakfast there instead of being at Easter Sunday mass that's also happening right now" and "history shows that bombing rich foreigners gets us global attention", we're probably better sticking with the latter, which actually makes a semblance of sense. Attack on Churches on Easter Sunday is definitely religiously motivated, but it's hard to see that in the hotel bombings unless the terrorists associate Western capitalism with Christianity. Kingsif (talk) 00:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2019

Refer to this article: https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/sri-lanka-bomb-blasts-187-dead-in-serial-blasts-on-easter-sunday-curfew-declared-latest-updates-1506830-2019-04-21 The number of Indians killed is 4, the current article states 3. Please correct this. Thanks! Wikicop33 (talk) 23:44, 21 April 2019 (UTC) Any other sources? Manabimasu (talk) 00:11, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Would need a RS, preferably one that also has the correct number of total dead. Currently a no from me. Kingsif (talk) 00:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Article has since been updated with more recent reports. Kingsif (talk) 02:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

national tawheed Jamaah condamned false reporting on their facebook page

The Tawheed Jamaah has condemned the attacked and said this

We urge media outlets to show restraint from reckless reporting, and we would like to remind broadcasters that careless reporting has led to many negative consequences including communal disharmony and thus request journalists to uphold ethical journalism and prevent sensational reporting.

this is their official website http://www.tntj.net/ and from there I got their facebook page but I dont know how to use facebook I couldnt provide the link to the specific post but its 10 hours ago. Can we use their official facebook page as a source to cite their condemnation? --SharabSalam (talk) 00:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

To be fair, most reliable news outlets aren't mentioning them, since nothing in anyway official has been said. They're being quite good. We might be able to use the Facebook page if 1. no better sources appear AND 2. it's deemed relevant enough to be included. Kingsif (talk) 00:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@SharabSalam: Be aware: there was a claim posted on the article for NTJ that tnjt.net and the facebook group may, or may not be the same groups. Link. I can't check from my connection to say one way or another. Might be worth the effort for other editors to investigate it. Sawta (talk) 12:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I'd say that anything which speculates as to who did this attack should be purged from this page until actual facts can be established. It seems that conspiracy theorists want muslims to have committed these attacks so badly they can't see straight. What are people so allergic to empiricism these days? 71.218.108.117 (talk) 00:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Eiffel Tower turns off its lights to pay tribute for Sri Lanka massacre

Eiffel Tower turned its lights off as of 12.00 am midnight according to French local time inorder to pay condolescences to the victims of the church bomb explosions. Is it applicable to be added to the content of the article? Abishe (talk) 01:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

http://www.adaderana.lk/news.php?nid=54517

Bizzle26 (talk) 01:33, 22 April 2019 (UTC)/u/Bizzle26: Hey there, I think with time, as is custom with other attacks of this scale and nature, it would be appropriate to create a separate page along the lines of "international responses/reactions to the 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings." This page could take the form of a table/chart with each country/nationality and then a descriptive column of what that state's foreign ministry, political leadership, and/or local institutions/monuments did to honour the victims of the attack.

For the time being I think given the enormity of int'l responses we could group them into categories like lights turned off or displaying the colours of the sri lankan flag on buildings, foreign ministries heigtening the risk level of their travel advisories, and lastly, condolence-based remarks honouring victims persecuted because of their religion.

Prime Minister joining several reliable sources saying advance warning was authentic

• https://www.thisisinsider.com/sri-lankan-police-issued-alert-10-days-before-suicide-bomber-attack-2019-4
• http://www.colombopage.com/archive_19A/Apr21_1555866043CH.php [note that this includes the letter that had been called a forgery on social media]
• https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/04/sri-lanka-gov-alerted-attacks-bombings-190421165822214.html
• https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/21/sri-lanka-explosions-casualties-churches-hotels-targeted-easter/
• https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/south-asia/sri-lanka-police-chief-had-warned-of-suicide-attack-threat-before-blasts
• https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/sri-lanka-blasts-sri-lanka-top-cop-had-warned-of-bombers-targeting-churches-10-days-ago-2026290

A preponderance of reliable sources, including the government Intelligence Telecommunications Minister and Police Chief, have thus implicated the National Thowheeth Jama'ath. EllenCT (talk) 01:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Perpetrators? gradually it points to NTJ

• Harin tweets intelligence memo warning of a planned attack
• harin

--AntanO 02:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Added Dailymirror.lk source. EllenCT (talk) 02:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Many sources point to particular religious extremist

eg: ISIS supporters celebrate Sri Lanka bomb attacks as payback for New Zealand mosque massacre and Syria strikes--AntanO 02:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

That's the sort of thing we should wait on further analysis and secondary reporting to include. As a general rule of thumb, any reports of celebration of misfortune aren't encyclopedic in nature unless they are the subject of the kind of analysis you usually find in peer reviewed sociology or at the very least, statecraft foreign policy reporting. The last thing you want to do is have the appearance of Wikipedia's voice used for deliberate amplification of tensions. EllenCT (talk) 02:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

The Sun is a sensationalist islamophobic tabloid that should not be used on Wikipedia. Kingsif (talk) 02:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 April 2019 1

I would like to edit, as I have noticed false information regarding the death toll and injuries. Gamingboy6422 (talk) 01:53, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

What edits would you like to made, and please provide sources. Kingsif (talk) 02:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: No request, no response. 03:08, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Donald Trump counts it wrong on the Sri Lankan massacre

OMG, US President Donald Trump has tweeted about the incident in Sri Lanka which happened on 21 April 2019 on the eve of Easter Sunday, stating that 138 million people have died instead of 138 but mentioned more than 600 injured. It is an hoax and Sri Lanka just have a population around 20-21 million not more than that. Donald Trump has made a mess with a wrong tweet. He should have been more concerned before tweeting. Abishe (talk) 02:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/sri-lanka-blasts-sri-lanka-bomb-blasts-donald-trump-tweets-wrong-figure-for-number-of-dead-2026339

...good to know? Kingsif (talk) 02:17, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

There are bulk of news related to this incident and do not bring all here. --AntanO 02:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Is there any reason to put the paragraph on international responses in the footnotes?

Manual of Style recommends against single-sentence paragraphs at MOS:PARA, and most of our current events articles don't put the list of reacting countries in footnotes; e.g. Lahore church bombings#International reaction and 2019 Pulwama attack#International community. Is there any reason to put them in the footnote? EllenCT (talk) 02:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Because it is a long list and the standard is to put it in a footnote? Like, all other articles with very long lists of national condolences do it. If they're short and/or not receiving lots of edits like the ones you mention, sure. But not with this many. It's a worse MOS sin that a single-sentence paragraph, of which there are many examples across Wikipedia. Kingsif (talk) 02:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

This is the first time I've ever seen it done. I gave some examples with longer lists. I wonder if you have any examples of such use of footnotes? EllenCT (talk) 02:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Without checking, I can assure you that the Notre-Dame de Paris fire does it. Because it's the standard. Kingsif (talk) 02:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

In your examples, one has six reactions that are actually organised into a bulleted list with expansion and detail; the other has 15 countries arranged into a prose paragraph. Both are different and better style than simply forming a paragraph out of a couple dozen country names in a list with nothing else. Kingsif (talk) 02:44, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

A van used by attackers seized, a noticeable evidence

In Wellawatte, a region located in Colombo-06 there was an evidence claimed regarding the transportation mode used by bombers. Police officials have claimed a van which is believed to be used by the attackers was seized and further a temporary shelter in Panadura where the attackers resided has also been identified but the details are yet to be clarified. About 7 people have been arrested including few women suspects and this info can be included in the article with proper sources. Abishe (talk) 02:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.newsfirst.lk/2019/04/21/van-used-to-transport-attackers-arrested/

RS? (not that link) Kingsif (talk) 02:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Linking to the "Church (Building)" article

Kingsif destroyed my edit linking "church" to the "Church (Building)" article, disagreeing with my reason that it was ethocentric to assume that readers knew that "church" meant a Christian place of worship, providing information that it was an anti-Christian attack. I invite Kingsif or others to make their case that the link is not worthwhile. Majesty of the Commons (talk) 03:00, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm guessing you missed where I pinged you? And also the memo that saying someone "destroyed" your edit when they just removed it for a legitimate reason is a bit WP:UNCIVIL? Kingsif (talk) 03:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Majesty of the Commons: See above where I opened discussion and pinged you already Kingsif (talk) 03:07, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Destruction of correct information should be done with good cause, and usually due process. On an encyclopedia of unlimited size, the only good reason is clarity. I've had too many of my carefully-prepared edits thoughtlessly removed by people who seem to delight in destruction. I apologise for my frustration. Majesty of the Commons (talk) 03:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Eh, it's alright, I'm a bit frustrated too, based on the fact it is, honestly, completely unnecessary and (if I may be bold) actually insulting to non-Christians that you think it's necessary. Kingsif (talk) 03:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Another politician's relative died during the bombings

It was earlier reported that a relative of UK politician Tulip Siddiq died during the explosions. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/breaking-sri-lanka-bombings-labour-14444019 But the information which was added by someone in the article was later removed because of its less importance. Another politician's relative also reported to have died today in an hospital and it was the grandson of Bangladeshi politician Sheikh Selim. I think this is also not that important to be included under the section of header Victims but I don't know whether this casualty is included or not in the number of deaths. (so far recorded as 215) Abishe (talk) 03:08, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2019/04/21/sheikh-selim-s-son-in-law-grandson-injured-in-sri-lanka-bomb-blast

That will be the same person, all are part of the very powerful Sheikh–Wazed family, a Bangladeshi political dynasty. But no, apparently not important. He will be included in the number of deaths, especially if the family knew hours ago. Kingsif (talk) 03:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I think he should be included, he could well be a politician - but also, like, American politicians' relatives would be included if caught up in this, why not a Bangladeshi one? Kingsif (talk) 03:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

See WP:NOTINHERITED, relatives of ANY politician have no particular notability. WWGB (talk) 03:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

If Barron Trump was even near Sri Lanka it would be international headlines, and you know it. Kingsif (talk) 03:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 April 2019 2

There has been a chruch attacked in the outskirts of Jaffna and a mosque in Puttalam. 43.250.240.100 (talk) 03:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Sources? But that sounds interesting enough to look for myself... and nothing comes up. Kingsif (talk) 03:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. B dash (talk) 09:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Qatar / Bahrain / UAE

Have all released statements condemning the attack

TRT source

https://www.trtworld.com/asia/world-leaders-react-to-sri-lanka-terror-attacks-26048

Bloomberg source

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-21/urgent-the-latest-6-blasts-target-churches-hotels-in-sri-lanka

Also, perhaps the UN should not be grouped with the other countries? Maybe have them in the main article

'The United Nations and leaders of numerous countries …' or something

Requested move 22 April 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Closed. Given the proposed title's ambiguity (of which the move requester was unaware), this change obviously isn't feasible. —David Levy 10:33, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

---

2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings → Sri Lanka Easter bombings – (Policies: WP:CONCISE, WP:COMMONNAME; Guideline: WP:NOYEAR) This is the only article on Wikipedia about the bombings of Sri Lanka on Easter. Therefore, this could be renamed to Sri Lanka Easter bombings until a second notable bombing event in Sri Lanka happens in the future to adhere to the title's conciseness.

For example, see
(Talk) 2017 Manchester Arena bombing → Manchester Arena bombing
(Talk) 2018 YouTube headquarters shooting → YouTube headquarters shooting
(Talk) 2018 China–United States trade war → China–United States trade war (2018–present) → China–United States trade war
(Talk) 2019 Utrecht shooting → Utrecht tram shooting
(Talk) 2019 Boeing 737 MAX groundings → Boeing 737 MAX groundings

— Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 06:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. The Easter Sunday Raid was also an Easter Sunday bombing in Sri Lanka (then known as Ceylon). Including the year here avoids ambiguity. WWGB (talk) 07:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Good point, we will need to discuss this further. —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per WWGB. VibeScepter (talk) (contributions) 07:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per WWGB. The Easter Sunday Raids occurred during WWII when the Japanese bombed Sri Lanka in attempt to drive the British out of Asian waters in South Asia and Southeast Asia. The Easter Sunday Raids are also known as the "Battle of Ceylon". Sri Lankan sources such as this one and this one refer to it as the "Battle of Ceylon". So maybe the title of "Easter Sunday Raids" article can be changed to "Battle of Ceylon" but then again, Google searches for both terms appear to yield a similar amount of results for both names with "Easter Sunday Raids" appearing to yield a bit more. (101.189.24.39 (talk) 09:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC))
• Oppose WWGB's arguments are wholly convincing. ——SerialNumber54129 09:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per WWGB. There is precedent for such a title, see e.g. Palm Sunday church bombings, but the proposed title is too ambiguous. wumbolo ^^^ 09:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment: Apparently, @Mootros: moved the page. Don’t know if he didn’t notice the warning, or if he didn’t read the talk page, but I’ll move it back. The RfC doesn’t look like it’s in favour of the move anyways. Oshawott 12 ==()== Talk to me! 10:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry to didn't see this RfC. Mootros (talk) 10:27, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment WP guidelines state Wikipedia:Article_titles#Precision_and_disambiguation that titles should be precise and concise. I was not aware that in 1942 on Easter Sunday there was an air raid on Sri Lanka. This clearly justifies this proposed name. Good work and sorry again. Mootros (talk) 10:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

That's the shortest-lived requested move discussion I've seen. —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 10:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Usually, I would support the removal of a superfluous year. I just happened to find the earlier article. Good try anyway. Regards, WWGB (talk) 10:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the little lesson in trickery history. ;) —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 10:49, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Bombs found in Kotahena

Bombs were found in a van which has been parked for two days in front of a church in Kotahena. An explosion has occurred while the bomb disposal units were disposing the bomb. HiruRathnayaka (talk) 11:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

A bomb which was discovered in a van near the Kochikade church was exploded while defusing and no casualties reported. A deadly CCTV footage has also been revealed by an Indian media regarding the bomb blast of the van. Abishe (talk) 11:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/sri-lanka-bomb-blasts-on-easter-daylive-updates-april-22-2019/article26908682.ece

https://newsin.asia/another-minor-explosion-reported-in-colombo/

The bomb has been exploded purposely by the special task forces as a method of disposing it. The people were removed from the area by the police before the explosion. HiruRathnayaka (talk) 11:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Founder of NTJ and Mastermind behind the attacks

The founder of the NTJ as well as the mastermind behind the attacks have been identified as Zahran Hashim

http://www.colombopage.com/NEW_LPC/NewsFiles19/Apr22_1555899996.php https://m.jpost.com/International/Who-is-Moulvi-Zahran-Hashim-mastermind-of-one-of-the-Sri-Lanka-attacks-587544/amp

- UmdP 11:16, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It is not ethnocentric to know that "church" is a simple and widely-understood term

It has equivalences in hundreds of languages, many of which reflect the English. If we're not going to define "bomb", we needn't define "church". All Christians know what a mosque, a synagogue, a gurdwara are, let's not pretend other religions are stupid. Kingsif (talk) 02:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Majesty of the Commons: Seriously, it's ridiculous over-PC to try to claim church is an "ethnocentric" word. Kingsif (talk) 02:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I wanted to use "religocentric", but it doesn't look to be a word often used in the sense I wanted.

There are billions of people unfamiliar with the Christian religion who either wouldn't immediately connect the word "church" to an anti-Christian attack, or are not familiar with the variety of buildings that can be a church, and would be interested to read further. I know I would be interested to read, and easily browse to, an article about mosques after a mosque attack. I think the link is both useful and harmless and should stay.

Majesty of the Commons (talk) 03:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

1/3 of the world are Christians. Most of the rest have heard about it. Linking is for unfamiliar terms and not for "read some more" - that's what google is for, feel free to try it! Note that I also "wouldn't immediately connect the word "church" to an anti-Christian attack", because that's not a context they're usually found in, but it doesn't take a genius to work that one out from this article literally saying that people deliberately went to detonate bombs in churches to attack Christians. People may not be smart, but they are nowhere near as ignorant as you seem to believe. Ethnocentric would be assuming everyone knew about Canterbury Cathedral - one of the most important Protestant churches, but a specific building in one country nonetheless - and hence it is linked in the article. Come off it. Kingsif (talk) 03:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I follow links for terms with which I am familiar to "read some more" all the time. Yes, linking every second word would be distracting overkill, but I see many Christians and non-Christians wanting to follow a "Church (Building)" link, so a slight blue colour is worth it. Majesty of the Commons (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It comes down to the fact that "common" terms are not linked, people go around removing them, so why bother adding it. Links I've added that have been removed as "common terms" include things like mini-fridge and Colombia. One's a thing that doesn't exist in most places, the other is a country most people can't even spell right, but they're still "common", go figure, we can speculate the criteria but I assure you that "church (building)" would be one of the first things to pass it. Great for you following links you know, but google exists if you don't know something without one. Kingsif (talk) 03:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Not to mention the fact that "church" is used in different senses in the article - the type of building (of which there is a lovely picture right at the top! in case anyone didn't know! not like they're in every city in the world!), and as a communion, and as a religious unity (i.e. the church). So to link one of the meanings at the top without writing a long distinguishing paragraph would surely confuse people who genuinely don't know what a church is (perhaps one of the few remote tribes that missionaries haven't tried to convert yet?) I'm finding this quite funny but also relatively annoying. Kingsif (talk) 03:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

The word I linked was used in the sense to which I linked.

You preempted the discussion by reverting the edit!

I'm done with Wikipedia.

Majesty of the Commons (talk) 03:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

In order: sarcasm (but with hints of being serious; if you think someone doesn't know what a church is they are going to be running with the building definition even when the Pope uses it otherwise); I thought that was a separate instance, hence the edit reason, as in "ridiculous you'd link it twice!"; I don't know how much you like it here, but it's a good outlet, you should stay (even I dislike some of the guidelines, I know) Kingsif (talk) 03:53, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Pretty sure most people know what a church is, but also pretty sure they know what a Buddhist or Islamist is, too. Perhaps whatever exception those two generic terms get works for churches, as well. Or perhaps the capital letters just tricked someone into thinking they were proper nouns. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Spelling of perpetrator group's name

The article is saying the perpetrator is ...'Thowfeek'... but almost every source around the world is using a variation of 'Thowheed'. This is also the spelling used by the India based group TNTJ (not sure if they are affiliated)

al Jazeera (Qatar) https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/04/sri-lanka-bombings-latest-updates-190421092621543.html

NYTimes (USA) https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/world/asia/ntj-sri-lanka-national-thowheeth-jamaath.html

Xinhua Net (China) http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-04/22/c_137998569.htm

Business Times (Singapore) https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/government-economy/sri-lanka-blames-national-thowheed-jamath-for-deadly-blasts

The Guardian (UK) https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2019/apr/22/sri-lanka-attacks-bombings-live-news

Wall Street Journal (USA) https://www.wsj.com/articles/sri-lanka-makes-arrests-in-easter-bombing-attacks-11555918580

Bloomberg (USA) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-22/sri-lanka-searches-for-answers-after-easter-blasts-kill-hundreds

Hindustan Times (India) https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/sri-lanka-blames-local-militant-group-national-thowheed-jamath-for-blasts-that-killed-290/story-IKnse8fiNnfE4ngsbJ0uUM.html

RT (Russia) https://www.rt.com/news/457200-sri-lanka-local-militant-group/

---

ALso, maybe someone can add that the president is about to appoint a committee to investigate

https://www.news.lk/news/political-current-affairs/item/25086-president-to-appoint-a-special-committee-to-investigate-the-attacks

Yeah, that alternate spelling came out of multiple 2:30pm Monday press conference reports, so I'm changing it back to 'Thowheed,' which is what they call themselves. The announcement of the formation of a committee is a little too WP:RECENTIST and content-free to be encyclopedic. I'm sure they will make it in here when they publish something. EllenCT (talk) 10:11, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Update: That was a different group I linked to, sorry. It's cleared up now. EllenCT (talk) 18:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 April 2019 1

Japan 112.135.80.64 (talk) 12:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

 Done: Thanks for the info (Edit). —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 14:20, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

87 detonators were found in Colombo Fort Bus Station as a result of raid and Sri Lanka declares state of emergency from 22 April 2019 midnight

Police officials confirmed that about 87 detonators were found at Central Colombo bus station in Pettah on 22 April 2019 afternoon. Due to the high tensions following the bombings, Sri Lanka have officially reimposed a new curfew from 8pm night and further a state of emergency has also been declared from 22 April 2019 midnight onwards. Abishe (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/sri-lanka-police-find-87-bomb-detonators-at-bus-station/articleshow/68990604.cms

All 5 or 6 of the Indian casualties are believed to be political workers from Karnataka

Indian political workers who are from Karnataka of JDS party were on a holiday trip to Sri Lanka while completed three phases of political campaigning for the ongoing Indian general elections in Karnataka, stayed in one of the three luxury hotels which were targeted and bombed with leaving all five of them dead.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/2-jd-s-members-among-indians-killed-in-sri-lanka-blasts/articleshow/68986519.cms

Real Madrid mourns the massacre with one minute silence before start of the match

On 21 April 2019, before the start of play between hosts Real Madrid and Athletic Bilbao in the ongoing Laliga league in Spain at the Santiago Bernabéu Stadium a minute silence was maintained at the stadium as a tribute to Sri Lankan victims who were killed in the multiple bomb attacks. Can this be posted under international response? Abishe (talk) 13:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.realmadrid.com/en/news/2019/04/minutes-silence-at-the-santiago-bernabeu

http://www.adaderana.lk/sports/8058/real-madrid-hold-a-minutes-silence-for-sri-lankan-victims

https://sport.detik.com/sepakbola/gila-bola/d-4519834/real-madrid-dan-psg-beri-tribute-untuk-korban-bom-paskah-sri-lanka

No. It has no direct importance to the attack. WWGB (talk) 14:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 April 2019 2

Eiffel Tower goes dark to honor the victims Inosuperman (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

References

It is not "notable", and there are similar events. Have a look under "Reactions". --AntanO 17:58, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Islamic terrorism is not a motive, let alone THE motive

A motive is why someone does a thing. Islamic terrorism is a thing some Muslims do to push an agenda, often pertaining to Islam. When we know that agenda, we'll have our motive. Putting "Islamic terrorism" in in the meanwhile is just meaningless (like telling your wife you cheated on her because Christian adultery) and makes Wikipedia look partially illiterate. Put it in the Type field if it needs to be somewhere in the infobox; at least that makes sense, true or false. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Regardless of the technical point you were making on the infobox, the facts are clear enough at this point. Stop being a politically-correct apologist for mass murder and let's call a spade a spade.

Islamic terrorism, Islamist terrorism or radical Islamic terrorism is defined as any terrorist act, set of acts or campaign committed by groups or individuals who profess Islamic or Islamist motivations or goals. Islamic terrorists justify their violent tactics through their own interpretation of the Quran and Hadith. The motivation for Islamic terrorism in part comes from the idea of Islamic supremacy which is encapsulated in the formula, "Islam is exalted and nothing is exalted above it."

Darkest Tree Talk 00:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it's defined as an act. That's what I meant by "thing". If the people who committed this terrorist act (did this thing) professed a motivation or goal, that motivation or goal is the motive. Has nothing to do with political correctness. I wouldn't say a car is fueled by automobile, either. "Islamic supremacism" could work, if that's verifiable. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

• Agree with InedibleHulk. It's still too early in the investigation to put a motive until reliable sources confirm it as such. Wikipedia is not a platform to promote or prevent terrorism, nor is it a news outlet, it is an encyclopedia to document this event from a historical perspective from a neutral point of view. If this incident has been widely discussed or perceived as Islamic terrorism, you can create a section in the article to reflect that point of view and provide WP:RS--Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 07:27, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

All redirects

If anyone has any redirects please put them down? What do you think about adding Redirects to the article?Manabimasu (talk) 23:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

There are a number of redirects currently. Killiondude (talk) 04:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 April 2019 3

Remove 1 from victims from the Netherlands and put 3 there instead.https://nos.nl/artikel/2281611-nog-twee-nederlandse-doden-in-sri-lanka.html (Dutch).

Maxmoney2 (talk) 18:27, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Any source? --AntanO 18:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Anyone knows Dutch and check it? --AntanO 19:08, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps WP:DUTCH can help out? JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Title says: 2 more dead Dutchmen in Sri Lanka. First parapgraph: the attacks in Sri Lanka took the lives of two more Dutchmen. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced this in the Hague. Thereby the number of Dutch victims in Sri Lanka rised to three. So it's correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.43.148 (talk) 20:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Could someone who knows Dutch create a ref so the table can be updated? Kingsif (talk) 20:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

 Already done Source was correct, by the way. MrClog (talk) 20:15, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

23 April 2019, a day of mourning is declared

The funerals of more than 290 innocent civilians are carried underway following the declaration of the Day of mourning. Is this included in the article? FSri Lankan flag lowered to half mast. 112.134.70.5 (talk) 05:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-48019189

• Added. Thanks for the information Minussquareofa (talk) 07:44, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Netherlands victim count 3

Please update. Here's a citation from Volkskrant. The relevant passage from the article is this:

Bij de aanslagen in Sri Lanka zondag zijn nog twee Nederlanders om het leven gekomen. Het gaat om een vrouw van 48 en een meisje van 12. Dit heeft het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken laten weten. Zondag werd al bekend dat een 54-jarige Nederlandse vrouw stierf bij de aanslag waarbij zo’n 290 mensen stierven.

In the attacks in Sri Lanka... further two Dutchmen lost their lives. They were a 48 year old woman and a girl of age 12. This was announced by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It had become known on Sunday that a 54 year old Dutch woman died in the attacks... So the total count is 3 (three).

<ref>{{cite web |title=Nog twee Nederlandse slachtoffers onder doden Sri Lanka |url=https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/nog-twee-nederlandse-slachtoffers-onder-doden-sri-lanka-onderzoek-stadsvijvers-even-schadelijk-voor-klimaat-als-duizenden-auto-s~b5c0c841/ |website=[[Volkskrant]] |publisher=Volkskrant |accessdate=23 April 2019}}</ref>

• Added. Thanks Minussquareofa (talk) 12:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Title

I was wondering if 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings should be renamed to 2019 Sri Lanka Easter Sunday bombings? Govvy (talk) 19:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Long enough already with the year and two-word country. First you want Sunday, next someone wants "church and hotel", someone always wants "terrorist". Save it for the lead, I say. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:44, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

A bombing occurred on Easter Monday Manabimasu (talk) 23:49, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

9th explosion

An explosion occurred while police were trying to diffuse the bomb. Where does this go because it happened on Monday but is after the “Aftermath” subsection.Manabimasu (talk) 23:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Sri Lankan cricketers survived from the bombings with minor damages

Sri Lankan all rounder Dasun Shanaka who is from Negombo had a brief meeting with ESPN Cricinfo and told them that he was fortunate to have survived from the bombing which took place at a church in Negombo where he didn't attend the mass event due to exhaustion with his mother facing minor injuries and his grandmother hit on her head with shrapnel. Another young Sri Lankan cricketer Hasitha Boyagoda also narrowly escaped with minor injuries after having breakfast at Shangri-La Hotel. May be this thing might not be quite important.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/26580009/never-forget-scene-dasun-shanaka-revisits-sri-lanka-easter-sunday-horror

https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ani/dasun-shanaka-revisits-easter-sunday-horror-119042300148_1.html

ISIS Claims

ISIS Claims Responsibility for Attacks

images A

images B

--AntanO 11:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Mistake in identifying St. Sebastian's Church?

Is it possible that the St. Sebastian's Church, 207 Sea St, Negombo, identified in this article as one of the targets of the Easter bombings, is the wrong one? 50.200.92.150 (talk) 13:07, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Is it possible that the St. Sebastian's Church, 207 Sea St, Negombo, identified in this article as one of the targets of the Easter bombings, is the wrong one? I think those horrible pictures, which we can see on the Internet, show St. Sebastian's Church, Katuwapitiya Rd, Negombo. Please check... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.241.241.247 (talk) 05:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the correction.

For editors who wonder about this, news photos show this church, not this one. I was the person who mistakenly linked them in the first place. YoPienso (talk) 13:36, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

So, could I ask that somebody please remove the blue link to St. Sebastian's Church, Negombo from the article and add a hidden note in the text to stop others trying to relink it back to that wrong article, please? Or redlink it to the correct one if an article doesn't yet exist on it? The status of that church as "Not active, damaged by explosion" sounds like it, too, needs removing. Courtesy ping to Yopienso. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

I already removed the blue link, as well as the picture of and link to the church in the photo montage. (Check the article history for the diffs.) I don't know how to add a hidden note. YoPienso (talk) 14:46, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Yopienso:, I refer you to this page - Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Invisible_comments. Add whatever hidden note necessary you need to add. I will not add any. I will leave it up to you.Manabimasu (talk) 16:35, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. MrClog (talk) 20:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC).

Confusion is due to same church name, I appreciate the time and effort spent by all wiki editors (including Yopienso). One of the editors please remove the 2 incorrect links in the article, thanks. If someone is going to create an article for the attacked church, it can be named "St. Sebastian's Church, Katuwapitiya, Negombo". .@Photnart. (talk) 03:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

A note to all participants

General sanctions apply to the page already, given the claim by ISIL, irregardless of whether a template is present or not. The sanctions apply to any topic related to ISIL, broadly construed, and thus includes this article as well, due to the claim. The claim has been documented by accepted reliable sources and should be treated accordingly. I've added an editnotice and GS template to inform editors of the same. --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

My understanding of the AC/DS policies is that you, being a non-admin, are not authorized to decide whether an article does fall under a part. DS regime or shall be subject to 1RR. If I recall correctly, at the behest of Awiley et al, I was also designing an esit filter to prevent these non-admin insertions, before it fizzed off. Obviously, you remain free to take any properly alerted user to AE for miscellaneous misbehavior around the particular DS locus. ∯WBG^converse 14:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

This is not AC/DS, this is GS. 1RR already applies to this particular GS, unlike most AC/DS where 1RR is applied as an sanction placed by an adminstrator on the article. Further noting, I am not sanctioning any editors, simply informing them via templates that sanctions apply. Unless you have seen a guideline which states explicitly non-admins are disallowed from adding these templates, if you may be so kind as to revert your reverts. --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:53, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

QEDK, this was the discussion for AC/DS.

Am ambivalent about GS; let me dig a bit and if I don't see anything relevant, I will revert myself. ∯WBG^converse 14:54, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Winged Blades of Godric: My understanding has always been AC/DS talk page notices are placeable by any user (given that sanctions can be enforced by an administrator anyway, if the editor in question was aware) - an edit notice is only for an adminstrator to place, as they are the ones who can apply sanctions (here, I added them as 1RR applies to this GS already). Either way, if you do find something contrary to my understanding or per my understanding, do let me know. --qedk (t 桜 c) 15:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

QEDK, re-pings won't work unless (re)signed in the same edit:-( At any case, feel free to add back the t/p template and the edit-notice though I object of the entire article being made subject to a blanket 1RR courtesy three lines. ∯WBG^converse 18:46, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

(EC) I wonder if people are confusing different things here. Only admins may impose page restrictions under the discretionary sanctions regime. See Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions#Page restrictions or one of the templates e.g. Template:Ds/editnotice. If an admin hasn't imposed page restrictions, a template on page restrictions clearly can't be placed. The defunct civility restriction was part of the page restrictions regime (and template) and therefore could only be placed by an admin.

AFAIK, the general talk notice Template:Ds/talk notice can be placed by anyone. See e.g. this discussion Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive293#Talk page ARB sanc notice update. Remember the notices are just informing people of an already authorised regime. I.E. The page is either under the scope of DS or it isn't, the existence of the template doesn't actually influence whether the page is covered. It may affect whether people can be sanctioned, but that's because it's seen as unfair to sanction people who weren't aware of the requirements. It isn't because extra steps are needed to authorise sanctions or because we're tying to limit the pages covered to ones where admins feel it matters.

This also applies to 1RR notices for restrictions imposed by arbcom e.g. Template:ArbCom Arab-Israeli editnotice and note that the recent motion [11] explicitly said the "community is encouraged to place". Again the restriction automatically exists on any page in scope, it doesn't need to be authorised by any admin so the template likewise can be added by anyone to any page in scope.

I assume the same applies to the community general sanctions for Syria and ISIS since they seem to be structured in the same way. The template Template:SCW&ISIL sanctions says admins can add the edit notice template Template:Editnotice SCW 1RR. (I assume this refers to the fact only admins, page movers and template editors can create WP:editnotices.) It seems unnecessary to mention admins there, if they are the only ones intended to place any of the templates.

Nil Einne (talk) 19:17, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

The article is already subject to 1RR is the thing. The scope of the GS already includes this, even without me placing the template. Me adding the template was simply a courtesy, so to say. Nil Einne has explained the rest. --qedk (t 桜 c) 20:17, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Is any other international terrorist groups like LTTE and ISIS behind these attacks

Some sources including the BBC revealed that the National Thoweeth Jama'ath might have been funded and assisted by international terror organizations including the Islamic State. This info could be a hint for the rest of the content. The defeated LTTE group is also alleged to have involved in this attack. 112.134.70.5 (talk) 05:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-48012085

https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2019/04/23/sri-lanka-bombings-easter-terrorism

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2019-04-22/sri-lanka-to-seek-help-tracking-international-links-to-attacks EllenCT (talk) 06:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Islamic State has confirmed their involvement, so yes. Another evil, genocidal attack against people for what they are. 2001:8003:AD3C:200:10EE:B2F4:508A:4ECA (talk) 09:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

In their heyday, ISIS pretty much claimed responsibility for any attack which fit into their narrative, even though many of these were at best "inspired" by ISIS and committed by lone wolves with no real connection or communication other than watching some videos and perhaps some pledge allegiance. I mean there was the January 2015 Île-de-France attacks where some of the attackers were connected to Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and one pledged allegiance to ISIS even though for quite a while these organisations have pretty much hated each other. Of course this is quite far from a lone wolf attack but then again ISIS also claims it was revenge for Christchurch even though the nature of the attacks suggest it's not plausible it was organised in just over a month. (And there are also allegations of warnings about 2 weeks ago.) For these reasons and more, random claims of responsibility from ISIS tend to get little attention. Nil Einne (talk) 11:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Looking at this some more, I can't actually find sourcing mentioning someone in ISIS has said it was linked to Christchurch either I'm just missing it or I just got confused with the Sri Lankan minister thing. It also looks like ISIS is starting to provide more details suggesting there may really be a connection. This is the sort of thing that sources pay far more attention to than simply random claims of responsibility. Possibly that, and the destruction of a lot of their structure is one reason why they didn't claim responsibility within hours as they used to do for a lot of random attacks in the past. Nil Einne (talk) 15:29, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

holiest day of year

I realize the Vox article says "Easter Sunday is one of Christianity's holiest days" but if you do a web search for "Christianity's holiest day of the year" you will find lots of sights that support "Easter Sunday is Christianity's holiest day", not just one of them. I suggest this revision be made.--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 19:20, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Bombing timeline

Is the timeline necessary because the timestamps are given in the info box? Also, Is 14:40 military time 1:40?Any thoughts?50.200.92.150 (talk) 19:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Ref 106

On accessing this webpage from ref. 106 [12] you are forced to accept wide-ranging cookie deployment before being able to access the contents (this may just be for UK-based or EU-based IP addresses - not sure). Should we be using sources such as this? Silas Stoat (talk) 19:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

This is exceedingly common on news sites. And it's not a new thing, just that sites never used to tell you about it in the past. If editors are concerned for their privacy they're free to take measures like using Tor to reduce such concerns. Nil Einne (talk) 05:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Hatnote 1

I'm proposing to change

For the attack during World War II, see Easter Sunday Raid.

to

"Sri Lanka Easter massacre" redirects here. For the attack during World War II, see Easter Sunday Raid.

. —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 20:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

To add more background to this, Sri Lanka Easter bombings is currently a disambiguation page, but Sri Lanka Easter massacre is a redirect to 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings. —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 20:20, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Could just say "This page is about the 2019 bombings" and hopefully they'll find their way to the dab Sri Lanka Easter bombings. Kingsif (talk) 20:20, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Hatnote 2

Do we really need a hatnote about an attack that occurred during World War II when the article title makes clear this is about a 2019 incident? Someone has sneaked it in again after my removal.—NØ 20:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

How did we create two sections with the exact same name at the same minute? (⊙▽⊙") —Wei4Green | 唯绿远大 (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Religious leaders' reactions

As two Roman Catholic church were attacked, it seems appropriate that the Pope's comments are included. As the Zion Church is evangelical, I did add some remarks from the World Evangelical Alliance and their Sri Lankan member, the National Christian Evangelical Alliance of Sri Lanka (NCEASL). However, these were pretty rapidly reduced to a one-word summary. That said, I cannot find any proof that the Zion Church is formally affiliated with NCEASL although they are theologically similar. What seems less justifiable is the inclusion of remarks from the World Council of Churches. Evangelicals tend to be cool about the WCC and I certainly cannot find any evidence of a connection with the Zion Church, even indirectly. Additionally, the Roman Catholic church is not a member of the WCC. With both of these observations in mind, I ask why are we keeping the WCC comments but excluding others? Greenshed (talk) 21:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Because we weren't sure what the WCC was, thanks for clarifying, it should be pushed out - we can't have all reactions, only relevant ones. Kingsif (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

See also under Political fallout

Is it really necessary to have “See also: 2018 Sri Lankan constitutional crisis” under Political Fallout subsection when it is already under Background? Would like an elaboration on necessity and how it relates to political fallout after the bombings.Manabimasu (talk) 04:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

It really should be in the background section, however, the background doesn't mention anything about the rift between the President and Prime Minister which is alleged to have played a part in the outcome of the incident. I think this issue should be expanded more in the background section. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 05:08, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Archiving

Please read this quickly, before it's archived! I started a new section; about an hour and a half later it's archived! What is the point of that? Is there a problem with auto-archiving or something? Silas Stoat (talk) 22:09, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Aye, a bit sad to see so many dusty old posts from April 23 on April 23 (EST, anyway). I wonder how many of those people actually expected feedback. Too late for them, I suppose, but the future could last a little longer. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:16, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Not a problem with archiving but a human set setting [13] although I don't know why. The archiving time was set to 1 hour. This is an active page, but IMO it's way way excessive. I've reduced it to 24 hours. [14] @WWGB: was this a mistake or is there some reason why you feel this page needs a 1 hour archive time? I appreciate a lot of manual archiving is going on but 1 hour seems excessive to me. Note that the archive template uses days per Template:Archives if no unit is specified, I've changed it to hours to reduce any possible confusion. (It's just what is displayed and otherwise means nothing.) User:ClueBot III uses hours: This parameter must be set to the number of hours a thread can go without a reply before it should be archived. (emphasis not mine). Don't confuse ClueBot with User:MiszaBot/config which AFAIK needs a unit. Nil Einne (talk) 05:16, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I've also added back any sections archived by Cluebot in their latest run which were IMO prematurely archived. [15] I did not add back 3 sections as they had comments like answered or added at the end, so I assumed the issue had been dealt with. I also didn't bother to check precisely where each thread belongs, so it's possible they're slightly out of order. (I added them all back to one place, except for the last one which I re-ordered so it wouldn't appear before another numbered section with the same subject.) This means that any references to the section above/below and other such comments may be out of place or confusing. This was the first time any bot had archived so any other archivals are editor selector. Nil Einne (talk) 05:33, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

P.S. I should clarify I didn't check the time stamps on each thread. It's possible some of them would have been archived even with the 24 hour limit. The page currently only has 15 threads. I didn't check the size but I only added back about 7k bytes. It will grow before the next archival run assuming no manual archiving but IMO it's not a big deal or significantly limiting accessibility. We should remember on very active pages it's always a balance between archiving so much that issues are missed or get discussed multiple times, and archiving so little it's difficult for people to use them page (both technically and because it's unwieldy). Nil Einne (talk) 05:40, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

P.P.S. Since ClueBot uses revision histories and not time stamps, I'm not entirely sure how it handles threads added back. I assume at worse these threads will require manual archiving, more likely maybe they'll be delayed 24 hours from when I added them back or will just be treated like any other thread. Nil Einne (talk) 05:44, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Nil Einne:Many thanks for looking at it. Silas Stoat (talk) 08:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Failed Defusal

Is there any more information to be given as to if anyone was injured in the failed defusal attempt? It seems Inconcise.

(talk) 13:58, April 24, 2019 (UTC)

Just created Savoy Cinema, Colombo after the bombings

On 24 April 2019, a suspicious motorbike was exploded by Sri Lankan police officials under control with no damages and no casualties were reported which was found near the Savoy Theatre during the raids. The particular suspected vehicle was found during the raids across the country following the Easter bombings on 21 April 2019 which killed nearly 300 people. It may not be needed to add up to the article but it is the latest information available. Abishe (talk) 08:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Perpetrators<->Victims

Are the perpetrators in the victims list? Should perpetrators be in the victims list? Thoughts? Comments?Manabimasu (talk) 14:38, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

You can't be serious 108.39.199.14 (talk) 22:57, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

The definition of "Victim" is "a person harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action." It does not provide a reference as to whether if you were the cause of the incident to exclude from being defined as a "Victim". Certainly, the group that perpetrators belonging to would consider them to be "victims". The judicial system will have a different definition of victim, however keeping in line with WP:NPOV policy, to avoid confusion with the reader I think that they could be included as part victims separately specifying that they were the perpetrators. Although I do think using the term "deaths" rather than victims would be more appropriate and concise. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 00:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Casualties chart accuracy?

What does Uk/US casualties even mean in the chart? Where are the American casualties? Is there not more than 2 dead “US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement that several US citizens were among those killed.”Manabimasu (talk) 23:17, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Uk/US casualties means dual nationals, it may be appropriate to add a note under the table to define what is meant by it. If there are more than 2, add it with WP:RS source. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 00:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Protection level

Why isn't this article semi protected but the Christchurch mosque shootings article protected? Religious bias on Wikipedia?

97.90.47.253 (talk) 04:22, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

We don't protect articles as a political or religious statement, but as a response to disruptive editing only. El_C 04:24, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Christchurch mosque shootings

How could these bombings be perceived as revenge for the Christchurch massacre, which had nothing to do with Christianity or hotel guests/staff? Jim Michael (talk) 06:55, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Multiple verifiably WP:RS sources have confirmed that state the minister for defence has said that he believes this incident was in retaliation for the Christchurch incident, which meets notability. --Eng. M.Bandara-Talk 08:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

True, but the article should explain why he thinks that. Jim Michael (talk) 12:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Also, check with NZ's PM comment that denied such claim, and the group prepared attack before Christchurch shooting. Refer Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka's comment.--AntanO 14:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

References

infobox motive - speculation/conjecture

per WP:INFOBOX the purpose of infoboxes is to summarise non-contentious and non-controversial information that has a clear meaning - not to speculate.

The "Motive" section of an infobox is not meant for speculation. The phrase "Retaliation for Christchurch mosque shootings" is dubious, given that the event was planned as far back as January - this is covered in the lead section's last paragraph - see the nzherald reference https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12224350 "Sri Lanka: Nearly 300 dead, Kiwi security expert says attacks unlikely to be linked to Christchurch"

Also note that some of these sources are from the 22nd of April, before ISIS claimed responsibility on the 23rd. -- Callinus (talk) 07:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

ISIS didn't claim responsibility, Amaq claimed ISIS inspired these guys to do the usual thing killers do. Just like almost every time a headline has said "ISIS claims responsibility" since September 2014. Smokey Bear's Twitter page could pull the same trick every time a American prevented a forest fire "in any manner or way however it may be" since August 1944, but the United States Forest Service has more important things to do with its time. The troll behind Amaq quite clearly does not.

Anyway, I agree that the dust should settle a bit more before our infobox seems sure. But I'll credit whomever added it with attributing the opinion rather than repeating it as fact. And at least it is a motive, albeit a disputed one, unlike the "Islamic terrorism" it replaced. We're making progress, and so are the inquiries. No harm in not jumping the gun. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

call for burqa ban in Sri Lanka following the terror attack

A Sri Lankan MP and professor Ashu Marasinghe called for both burqa and niqab to be banned from the country which are worn by muslim women in wake of the terror attack during a local parliamentary session. I added this to the article as it is one of the important breaking news with a retaliation on Sri Lankan Muslims continue. Abishe (talk) 09:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

It' better to remove as it a call, not official law. --AntanO 14:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Why no article for St. Sebastian's Church which was targeted?

When I read the article and went through the information I was shocked that the important article was red linked. The St. Sebastian's Church deserves an article but I personally feel authors would have felt guilty conscious to create for such worship sites. Even I attempted to create but couldn't proceed. Somebody please create for it. I saw that almost every affected sites have articles here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.65.109 (talk) 16:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Someone has made link to St. Sebastian's Church, Negombo. It is wrong. There are 5 St. Sebastian's Churches in Negombo. Katuwapitiya, Wellaweediya, Jayabima, Kandhawala and Sarakkuwa. St. Sebastian's Church, Negombo is in Wellaweediya. Katuwapitiya church suffered in recent bombing. Ref St.Sebastian's Church in Negombo --AntanO 17:47, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

St. Sebastian's Church, Katuwapitiya --AntanO 18:10, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Not sure there's much point to a standalone article if this bombing is the only notable thing to ever happen there. I understand a church is a building, not people, but the general idea of WP:BLP1E might still apply. If you opened the door, you'd see all the people. But we see the same people here already (or at least their same numbers). I somebody notable consecrated it, was married there or is buried there, that could help it stand out as its own thing. As might its architectural dimensions or charity work. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@AntanO: Thanks for creating this article and it's good to create such one. But there are other issues as well. It is necessary to create a disambiguation page under St. Sebastian's Church, Negombo for clarity and to avoid from further confusions. Shall we redirect the St. Sebastian's Church, Negombo to St. Sebastian's Church, Wellaweediya to avoid misinterpretations. Because initially when the article regarding the bomb explosions was created, St. Sebastian's Church, Negombo was wrongly linked and few editors of other language wikis misinterpreted the actual name of the church and mistakenly translated some of the facts from the article existing in English Wikipedia. We need to inform them. I saw Spanish wiki and Vietnamese wiki before mentioning these issues here. Abishe (talk) 03:40, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

@Abishe: Agree with your point. --AntanO 06:00, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

UPDATE:Zahran Hashim is not a suicide bomber

The Daily Mirror has quoted intelligence sources stating Zahran is likely not dead. Further his family with the exception of his sister who distanced her self from him had disappeared before the attacks. This also give more information on his background and radicalization activities. Can someone pls update the article on this. Thanks.

http://www.dailymirror.lk/liveblog/165648/From-the-Den-of-the-Mastermind

- UmdP 02:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Exact timing of detonations inconsistent

Currently, in the "attack" section, there are inconsistencies for the exact timings of the detonations. In particular, in the table, Shangri-La's detonation is mentioned as 8:45am, but under "Hotels" it is listed as 8:57am. I did a quick Google search to find out whether the exact timings are listed anywhere but couldn't find anything. Would be good to have precise timings for all explosions from a reliable source. Maybe the government has published something? Surely, there must be good timestamps somewhere from seismograms or similar nearby the sites. Micronor (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Since no one reacted, I adjusted the table to conform with the information given in the same section. Micronor (talk) 14:48, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

15 killed in latest raids in Sri Lanka's Ampara

About 15 probably all Muslims related to the ISIS including 6 children were apparently killed in gun shootout between police and suspected gangs in Sainthamaruthu. I don't know how to add this information because there are so many headings and titles. Please somebody help.

https://www.trtworld.com/asia/bodies-of-15-found-after-gun-battle-on-sri-lanka-s-eastern-coast-26063 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.67.95 (talk) 06:46, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Now I added it in the opening paragraph. Don't discriminate me because of my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.67.95 (talk) 06:52, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

The house which was raided in Ampara near Jummah mosque was a Tsunami foundation house built after 2004 and it is where the shooting took place yesterday at night. Here is the picture of the mosque targeted. Suicide bombers who planned to attack were also killed by the dedicated armed forces and police.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-48074702

Can we also add the fact that each and every houses are raided throughout the country according to the latest point by President.

Every house in the country was raided? I think not. WWGB (talk) 07:24, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Sri Lankan Muslim politicians behind the massacre

Sri Lankan Muslim politicians are suspected to be behind this attack. Sri Lankan minister Rishad Bathiudeen's brother was arrested in connection with the bombings and the minister denies the links and connections. Even Mujibur Rahman is also questioned regarding his alleged participation.

http://www.colombopage.com/archive_19A/Apr26_1556295205CH.php

https://sputniknews.com/asia/201904261074490867-brother-sri-lanka-minister-questioned-blasts/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.67.95 (talk) 07:18, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

I was highly tempted to remove this as a WP:BLP vio and have no prejudice to someone doing so. Sputnik News is barely a reliable source for anything per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, and especially not for BLP related matters. I have no idea about Colombo Page but your statement is nonsense anyway. The possible involvement of someone's brother in no way provides evidence for the involvement of the person themselves. I have no idea who the second person is since they don't seem to be mentioned in either of your sources and your link goes to an article on a Bangladeshi politician who died in 1975. Nil Einne (talk) 12:02, 27 April 2019 (UTC)