User talk:Watchdogb/Archive 1

Crimes done by Sri Lankan State

Major crimes attacks against civilians, use of child soldiers(TMVP), acts of ethnic cleansing, torture Attributed assassinations(TNA) Notable attacks prison massacres, assassinations of political opponents have taken place,State Terrorism

- ADD THIS TO THE SRI LANKA PAGE
- IT IS ONLY FAIR B/C YOU GUYS DID THAT TO THE LTTE PAGE

Special Task Force and others

It seems that you and I are interested in similar articles concerning Sri Lanka and I believe that if we could work together and collaborate on such articles, it would save us both alot of effort and time than doing things individually.

I hope that we will contribute collectively soon, feel free to contact me at any time, thankyou

--Sharz 04:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello Watchdogb, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our Introduction contains a lot of helpful material for new users - please check it out! If you need general help, check out Wikipedia:Questions or place {{helpme}} on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

I noticed that you showed an interest in Sri Lanka related articles. Please take a look at WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation, a bipartisan effort to improve collaboration on and coverage of the Sri Lankan Civil War. Among other things, we collected a number of recommendations for getting your point across while keeping out of trouble. We're here to help! In any event, we invite you to leave us a message on our talk page.

Happy editing! — Sebastian 21:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your questions on WT:SLR. Thank you again for asking there. I just wanted to address your concern that people might mistake you for trying to sabotage anything here. You don't need to be concerned about your questions - they were valid and helpful, you were clearly trying to bring up things that do not meet our standards. But it's always good to look at how to earn other editor's trust. There is a relatively easy way to quickly attain that: writing edit summaries. At least for me, that's a great sign that someone is really trying to help Wikipedia. (If you're like me and tend to forget that I recommend this nice feature, which I'm using myself: You can set your user preferences to "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary".) See you around! — Sebastian 01:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

[[1]] per discussion RaveenS 13:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Padahuthurai bombing

your link does not work! I'd apprecitae it if you can put it(SLMM) back correctly ASAP.--Iwazaki 04:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 03:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help?

You posted the help tag on your page. How might I help you? Vassyana 18:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your Block

Hey,

I read through your conflict with a wiki admin regarding the 3RR thing and all that and I have to say, you need to take a step back. The block may have been wrongful...ir may not have been, but I have to tell you that you will gain nothing from pursueing a conflict with Wiki Admins and others just trying to regulate the site. I've been blocked for 24 regarding 3RR before, over a SL article too. Don't sweat it.

--Sharz 08:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My 2 cents

These articles are supposed to last a life time so no need to sweat over one or 2 edits today. Just relax, take the chill pill and always follow the rules. Also SLR is not binding, it is binding only for members like me, lahiru, sharz and neurolive not others. So come back after the block and let's go forward constructively. ThanksRaveenS 16:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your response required in achieving consensus

Hi please respond here --> Talk:Assassinations_and_murders_attributed_to_the_LTTE#Consensus_to_redirect ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗ^Talk 06:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accusations

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Human_rights_in_Sri_Lanka&action=history If you look at the edit summary, you are refered to as Elalan, I have decided to take a stance of Zero Tolerance towards Iwazaki's numerous discresions concerning NPA and WP:CIVIL. I believe this has breach WP:NPA in the fact that it has mis-represented you as a sockpuppet of User:Elalan. If you choose to follow it up, it is totally up to you, I am just informing you that you can, as you are a relatively new user, that there are rules and regulations concerning this. --Sharz 04:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes take it to ANI and see what a Admin will let you know about it. It a seriosu violation to accuse people in Wikipedia without evidenceRaveenS 13:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gory picture in Sri Lankan Civil War

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Sri Lankan Civil War, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. Krankman 11:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Sri Lankan Civil War.

For the Mediation Committee, ^demon^{[omg plz]}

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 08:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC).

SLR member

Hello Watchdog, You are a proud SLR member now, please begin contributing in our effort to create content without disruptive dispute (positive dispute is alays creative and good) by using all what Wikipedia provides, rules, mediation, peer reviews etc. There is one article to be created and sent to peer review and on to good article status. It is Welikade prison massacre , all the citations you need are in the talk page. Take a crack at it if you have time. Thanks Taprobanus 13:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New conflict resolution action items on SLR

see here Thanks Taprobanus 15:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Sri Lankan Civil War

Hello Watchdogb,

Firstly, my apologies for the delay in progress on this case, as explained at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Sri Lankan Civil War.

I am writing to you because, as a party to this case, your input is required before mediation can begin, to do with an offer by an experienced non-Committee member to mediate. Please see the Parties' agreement to WJBscribe's offer section and provide your input, so that this case can progress. Voting will remain open for seven days, and further elaboration is provided at that link.

For the Mediation Committee, Daniel Bryant 08:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please respond here as soon as possible. Daniel 06:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 2007

Please do not remove maintenance notices from articles, as you did to Sri Lanka Tamils (native), if the suggested changes are still needed. If you believe that the problems outlined in the maintenance template do not apply to the article, it may be best to discuss the issue on the talk page. Removing maintenance templates without good cause may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. snowolfD4^{( talk / @ )} 19:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 things.

Removing {{fact}} tags without citing sources is Vandalism.
Removing POV external links and unreliable citations is not.

Understand that. --snowolfD4^{( talk / @ )} 21:27, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is a violation of WP:DTTR here by User:Snowolfd4 and who is he to decide what is WP:RS source or not, where is the concensus. If I were you then, I will report him to ANI for falsely warning you and using wikipedia as abattleground to censor you Taprobanus 22:19, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chemmani mass grave

See here This is a good candidate to go to mediation. We have all the time on the world , dont have to rush it. I have two problems with a the article. One is it's title. I dont agree with the weasel title, it is not correct. It is not about a allegation, it is about a mass grave then the category. For both can we start a straw poll and then take it to mediation. I am busy, so i am looking for some help on this. Thanks Taprobanus 22:19, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

also look for 3RR violations on that article that rea reportable Taprobanus 22:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is protected now, people have to discuss to reach concensus if not agree to the mediation that you opened. If not we go for WP:RFA that is binding arbitration as a last step. Good work, relax and enjoy your Victoria Day, viva Canada :-))Taprobanus 13:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why me?

Doggy you have added me to the Involved parties section on Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Allegations of mass graves at Chemmani. It's good, but why? --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie} 13:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude I luv that name Doggy :)) yeah, if u think Lahiru wants to remove himself, he should and I would include User:Shunpiker and the guy who provided the third opinion User:Snuppy and suggested a mediation long time ago as involved parties. Just my opinionb. Thanks Taprobanus 14:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

* I appreciate the invitation, but I don't think I could reasonably be considered an involved party. I offered a Third Opinion precisely because I was an outside, uninvolved party to the dispute; one side thought the answer was reasonable and the other clearly did not, preferring instead to bury a rather self-evident truth under a layer of semantics. If the mediator would like my input, I will gladly provide it, but I respectfully decline the title of "involved party". Snuppy 01:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Allegations of mass graves at Chemmani.

For the Mediation Committee, ^demon^{[omg plz]}

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 16:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC).

A request:(

I think the article I created called Assasinations attriburted to the LTTE should be put for AFD because it has become a POV fork of Notable assasinations during the Sri lankan civil war article. Also I think the Terrorist attack attributed to the LTTE should also be put for AFD becuase it is a POV fork of Notable attacks by the LTTE. Just my thoughts Taprobanus 19:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: State Terrorism in Sri Lanka

As I mentioned in my comment on the AFD, the article relies on connecting the dots to make a case. At the moment, I doubt that it will be allowed to stay because of the controversial title of the article; while it may be appropriate for an essay, it is hardly encyclopaedic.

By the way, the introductory section leaves much to be desired; see WP:LEAD for suggestions on how to improve the section. --Aarktica 14:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sarvaggna is corect in removing the pictures, we need to find the correct copy right information and add it to the pictures instead of reverting them. Taprobanus 20:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		for your tireless work on Sri Lanka realted articles Taprobanus 21:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Headless Nick said Tamilnet can be used with its verfiable conte not the otherway around. His comments were about Tamilcanadian ...19:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Kent_and_Dollar_Farm_massacres

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you.

~~Please stop reverting without discussing in the talk page.Make your points at the talk page first.~~

~~Please take a good look at the article instead of doing favours for others and reverting like no tomorrow.Similar warnings will be given to your suspected Sock Puppeteer and Sock puppets.~~Iwazaki ^{会話。討論} 13:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same could be said about yours vandalism Iwazaki. PS do not violate DTTR Watchdogb 16:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To violate it's not a policy or a guideline. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie} 21:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And your point is to show that you are stocking me right ? Watchdogb 13:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Think about this

lot of work to be done Just to let you that you can remove bogus warnings from non admins. Thanks

My RfA ...

Hi. Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was successful and I am now an admin. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic Cleansing

Question, hi i was wondering where Alleged Ethnic Clensing by GoSL should be added, even Reuters [2] BBC [3] questions if it is ethnic cleansing so there are enough RS to add it and i dont want edit wars from hardliners. Thanks. --12345ka 10:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there is sources from neutral site you should add them to State terrorism when it becomes unprotected. It would be a good Idea to finish the writing (on your sandbox/your computer) for now and once the State terrorism article becomes unprotcted you can just past it on there. Keep up the good work Watchdogb 13:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see this for a neutral title and see this for sources20:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Beautiful. Should I stub this or are you going to get on this, Taprobanus ? Also now we have something new to make the "allegation of state terrorism" into "state terrorism " what do you think ? Watchdogb 21:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can take over but be careful dont just stub it make it a neutral artickle with reliable source as much as possible so if there are AFD's it will survive. I am looking for the younger generation to take over this article creation process for a while :))))22:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I made a stub. I gave proper reference and I also said what the Police have claimed [I can't believe it ]. Watchdogb 00:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good job 14:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Can you add this to the SLC menu things. Right beside the expulsion of Muslim from Jaffna ? Watchdogb 14:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind I have done it :) Watchdogb 14:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I am discussing the reverts in Raveens user page please join. ŇëŧΜǒńğëŗ^{Peace Talks} 18:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your compromise, may you have more such compromises in your wikipedia career:)))my point is let us also be sensitive to what the locals believe how ever out landish it may look to us from the safety of the West. Like Netmonger, Britain, US and any other sane person is saying, the situation back home is totally out of control. What ever we write here has no big value except may be in the minds of the idiots who are reading it in Colombo and may react accordingly.

From top to bottom in Sri Lanka now we have no coherent power in charge. They have totally lost control. They are kidnapping Muslims for money and holding Sinhalese women who come from abroad for money. So what started as a counter terrorism measure such as the Dirty War tactics has totally got out of control unfortunately for the country.

When the President goes to the Red Cross workers funeral and laments about it, showing how helpless he himself has become in the situation. I don’t think any president wants to be in such silly situation where a democratic country looks like a banana republic like El Salvador during its dirty war situation. But SL depends on foreign money to survive, slowly but surely, it is going to dry up if they cannot control the situation making the situation ripe for a Rwanda type genocide. Let pray that such a situation does not occur. I only hope for peace with dignity for all. Thanks and wish you agreat carrer as wikipedian :)))Taprobanus 19:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yiou contribution [here]Taprobanus 19:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/AMG Chemmani

Hello Watchdogb,

Firstly, my apologies for the delay in progress on this case, as explained at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/AMG Chemmani.

I am writing to you because, as a party to this case, your input is required before mediation can begin, to do with an offer by an experienced non-Committee member to mediate. Please see the Parties' agreement to Tariqabjotu's offer section and provide your input, so that this case can progress. Voting will remain open for seven days, and further elaboration is provided at that link.

For the Mediation Committee, Daniel 04:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The mediation process, starting with opening statements, has begun on Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/AMG Chemmani. If you do not have the page watchlisted, I would recommend you add it to your watchlist when you get the chance. I probably won't be notifying each involved editor at every step, and the talk page should be quite active over the course of the mediation. Thanks again for waiting. -- tariqabjotu 22:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

more references

[4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] with direct quote for Ethnic cleansing from Center for Policy Alternatives, AHRC

Karnataka realted edits

The concerned Troll is not a Kannadiga but a Tamil pretending to be a Kannadiga. By involving ourselves in Karnataka related edits we simply create animosity where none exits. It is a strategy to gain friends by the troll and don’t fall for it. Taprobanus 18:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks Watchdogb 18:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for moving my note. I must have been really tired when I posted it to the user page rather than the user talk page! -- Shunpiker 15:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Watchdogb 16:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfM for AMG Chemmani

I'm doing another update for those currently involved in the request for mediation. There are currently three compromises on the table at the moment; your comments on them would be appreciated. You are also welcome to add a compromise of your own and/or continue commenting on the starting points. -- tariqabjotu 05:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm providing yet another update on the mediation. A few of the editors recently involved on the mediation page appear to have come to an agreement on one of the compromises. Thus, especially as the pace of the mediation has slowed, I have posted a possible resolution that echoes the sentiment of the quick agreement. Please post a statement of agreement or disagreement to the resolution as soon as you are able, preferably within the next five (or seven) days. If after a reasonable period of time there is a general consensus on the resolution, the request for mediation may be closed (even if a few of the parties have not posted their statements). -- tariqabjotu 17:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Canada Day

Have a great weekend Taprobanus 21:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Lankan Civil War

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Sri Lankan Civil War

I was holding off further discussion in this mediation until the outcome of the deletion debate on Commons. Given that the image that was the subject of the dispute has now been deleted due to copyright issues, is there any reason to keep this mediation open? If none of the parties express a wish to continue with the process, I will close the mediation in a few days. WjBscribe 01:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Massacre aticles

Dont worry about them, I am on a major rewrite spree so no need to provoke anything but when you have time we can add more articles :)))Taprobanus 13:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Like today ? Definately :) Watchdogb 13:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of acts labelled as state terrorism sorted by state. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Nat Tang ^{ta | co | em} 23:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prawn farm massacre

I know it is so easy to get confused with these bloody massacre after massacre sometimes with the same bloody name!!!! which country has that reputation :((( but the UNHCR report is for the 1991 incident not the 1987 one :(( Taprobanus 21:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really ? Ok I will take that off then. My appologies. Watchdogb 21:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey look on the bright side... We have another citation for the 1991 massacre :)Watchdogb 21:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 24 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Prawn farm massacre, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Yomangani ^talk 15:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They seem to have stopped removing it for the moment. This was a particular poor way of dealing the perceived bias of your source by User:Iwazaki: removing the citation alone is worse leaving it as it is (even if the source is unreliable), as this leaves the unreliable information in the article without attribution. Yomangani ^talk 17:14, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Prawn farm massacre

Hi. I've replied to your comment here. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 17:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block

I've asked Blnguyen to consider unblocking you, but you may have to ride out the remainder of the block, as I won't lift it without his agreement. Citations in the lead are under heated discussion which is perhaps why you may see different versions of the MoS over a short period, but there are many high quality articles that do not use citations in the lead. In my opinion {{fact}} tags are not particularly helpful unless the article does not have active authors or the "fact" was added by somebody who is not active (and the current editors are unable to contact them or ascertain the sources of the information). For other cases, discussion on the talk page should be more fruitful. Make it clear to the author you are in dispute with exactly what you are disputing. From a brief look through, it seems that the statement to which you added the {{fact}} tag is supported in the body of the article by the surrounding statements, so if you believe it is incorrect, you should ask for verification of the supporting material. Yomangani ^talk 11:05, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Watchdogb for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie} 18:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

War by other means: the ltte's strategy of institutionalising power sharing in the context of transition from war to peace - a response to Muttukrishna Sarvananthan