User talk:Kai9045
Blackwater page
[edit]I have left comments regarding the recent changes on the talk page. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 00:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. I am in the train now and will answer you on the articles talk page once i get to the office. I am looking forward to a constructive discussion there. Kai9045 (talk) 00:08, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
I added my 2c. You should make sure to sign ALL comments you post so there is no confusion as to what lines are yours. --RichardMills65 (talk) 04:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- I would encourage you to have discussion, but perhaps newer sources are in order. More recent findings indicate that the convoy was under fire at the time of the incident, despite initially widely publicized reports(someone jumped the gun) that they were not. --RichardMills65 (talk) 07:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- So, did you register just to pick on this single issue? Because the sources you are using are all subjective. The state department probe actually has the results of an investigation, not just an interview. How do you explain that? Do you believe bias interviews over an actual investigation? --RichardMills65 (talk) 18:56, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- I would encourage you to have discussion, but perhaps newer sources are in order. More recent findings indicate that the convoy was under fire at the time of the incident, despite initially widely publicized reports(someone jumped the gun) that they were not. --RichardMills65 (talk) 07:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion
[edit]Hello, Kai9045. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
The edits you made updating the information on the court cases were good improvements to the article. It seems based on your other edits and talk page comments that you are trying to paint the incident as a massacre. If multiple reliable sources haven't called it that, then we shouldn't give readers the impression that it was. I'm only trying to keep the article neutral. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 00:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
- Your impression is wrong. I am only trying to keep the article neutral and to add information that is verified. More than enough reliable sources have called it massacre. Kai9045 (talk) 00:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)