This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Attack on Prekaz article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The image File:Uck kla logo.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --19:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
In the opening of this article it says that the Jashari brothers were killed together with 60 other albanians, the author does not mention that the Jashari clan was wiped out leaving only a little girl alive.
25 of the victims were women and small children. There is no such thing as an unintentioned massacre of so many noncombatants in a war fought with groundforces. Source: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C06E5D91230F933A25750C0A96E958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
The article is outragously one sided.-- Durim Durimi ( talk) 12:02, 18 January 2009 (UTC) 0
You need to stop reading serbian propaganda. Show me the source of your statements, please.
Is this your typical UCK combatant? http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs1.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs24.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs2.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs3.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs22.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs5.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs10.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs6.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs11.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs13.htm -- Durim Durimi ( talk) 15:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Durim Durimi ( talk • contribs) 15:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
http://www.kosovoliberationarmy.com/
First of all, there is no proof whatsoever about UCK themselves destroying churches. Second of all, those pictures of dead serbs are men of battle ready age. Sure the decapitation was a little to much but you can not compare it with the policies of the serbian state to wipe out the albanians. Get your facts straight and understand what you leaders have done and convinced you of.-- Durim Durimi ( talk) 14:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
http://www.kosovoliberationarmy.com/] had any connections with the military, for God sake they are only innocent civilians children, babies, old people and women, you're trying to ignore it. The description is very detailed with arguments even from USA. The thing that shocked me more than anything I've read on Wikipedia was that you think that decapitation of the Serbian civilians was just "little to much". Policy of the Serbian state to do what? Pure terrorist UCK propaganda Hahahah... what about the fact that even now every year more and more Serbs are expelled, attacked, killed, injured, Serbian villages and churches destroyed in Kosovo-Metohia? What leaders convinced me? What are you talking about? Our leader is an idiot, we have the worst government we could imagine and you tell me they convinced me in something? I can't wait that our leader and government changes... -- Forsena ( talk) 23:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
This is the source i am thinking of using amongst others that i will present later on.
But for now i want to discuss the relyability of the main source on this article. Is a wartime article named "Belgrade's official version of events" really that reliable? The main source of this article was made in the beginning of the Kosovo war. Countrys in war filter their information, and this article does not suggest otherwise.
I suggest that this source should be used with caution. I dont think we should throw it away because it is one of few if not the only article that tells the story of Prekaz from the serbian perspective. We should use a reliable source to compare events and only use the statements wich the two sources agree on.
Are you ready to work with me or not? -- Durim Durimi ( talk) 21:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, speak english. Whats a POV, and how can you see an article named "Belgrades official version of events" as reliable?
The only part of the article that comes from human rights watch is this piece of text: "At dawn of March 5, 1998, the KLA launched another attack on police patrol in Donje Prekaze". This is serious bussiness, you have to search your soul very deeply before you deny what has happened in Prekaz.
Here is an article that gives a little more unbiased view of the events that took place in Prekaz. What do you think about it?
To further proove that your source is in fact biased you have here an article written by BBC two years after your BBC article was published.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/674056.stm
Wikipedia is NOT a a place for serbian propaganda. Are you ready to work with me or not, because i will fix this problem with or without you. --
Durim Durimi (
talk) 11:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I want to discuss about references used in the article:
1. Kosovo killings: Belgrade's official version of events, this article is not a BBC article at all, as you can see in the title of the article where it say: Kosovo killings: Belgrade's official version of events, on the page's footer it says: Source: Tanjug news agency, Belgrade, in English 2156 gmt 11 Mar 98, so it means that it is a literal translation from Tanjug News Agency (a news agency from Belgrade). So does using this article as a source, break the NPOV? Using Serbia's POV to write a NPOV article?
I think that using the NY Times article and the BBC article regarding the event (as Durim Durimi mentioned above), is in fact the most accurate, grounded and that maintains NPOV than Kosovo killings: Belgrade's official version of events (an English translation from the Tanjug news agency).
The very same article ( Kosovo killings: Belgrade's official version of events) is also being used in the article regarding Adem Jashari (as I'm discussing even there about the same concern), it seems that somebody is trying to push his/her POV on these articles.
2. Humans Right Watch, the website is outdated, I don't know what is written on it even that I spent time browsing HRW's site for a while and couldn't find anything.
If you have anything to add, please discuss in here, otherwise I'm going to restructure the article and make it neutral, thank you.--
kedadi (
talk) 23:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
No one mentioned the attack on Serb border guards by Albanians........ no one mentioned that this happened before the Prekaz attack ( Verbatimdat ( talk) 21:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC))
Info is sourced and detail. I will agree on its removal if you can give me some good counter-source... Otherwise, it is just IDONTLIKEIT... -- WhiteWriter speaks 15:57, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
(unintend)They're not connected i.e the Panda Bar attack can't be considered the aftermath of Prekaz.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
What is the cause of this rampant abuse of the human rights report? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.145.1 ( talk) 19:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
2)HRW says According to the Serbian police, the attack on Donji Prekaz was in response to KLA attacks on nearby police patrols i.e source misinterpretation.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:36, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
I didn't give the issue much thought before Majuru moved it back but there seem to be no sources that use Attack on Prekaze unlike Attack on Prekaz. Btw any other move will be viewed as BRD i.e. ANI.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:16, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
I've reverted the IP, but if you really must know The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Warfare p. 496 states that 38 militants were involved and all were killed in a military engagement in the village, alongside civilians. 23 editor ( talk) 03:04, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Attack on Prekaz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
We had some plagiarism here, but I put quotation marks for further attribution. The source clearly places an emphasis on Amnesty International's statements. Removing it as POV actually seems more like projection. The passage continues: "Testimonies collected by human rights groups and journalists indicate several cases of extra-judicial executions and unlawful killings from excessive force." El_C 22:53, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
This article is about attack, and not memorial that was built years after that. Also, galleries should be deleted per WP:IG and WP:NOTGALLERY. I left one image in the body. Just to mention, this page is on my watchlist years before your newest account appeared. Also, admin @ Ivanvector: reverted this gallery because it was blocked sockpuppet edit. So, per all of that, i have removed gallery from this article. Its also a bit inappropriate anyway to have gallery in such an article. -- Ąnαșταη ( ταlκ) 19:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
In this article's "aftermath" section, should there be:
Please comment below. Do not add or remove the gallery until this discussion concludes. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 14:06, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
|
The section "Operation" finished with the sentence:
"In response, the UN security council turned to Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter without authorizing the final measure of the chapter which was military intervention. Mortars fired on houses, and snipers shot those who fled."
It is obvious that the last part - Mortars fired on houses, and snipers shot those who fled - does not belong here, but probably two paragraphs higher, just before or around "In the ensuing violence..." But I'm not exactly sure where it should be and I feel also that for such a sentence there should be a source. The HRW report quoted as source 8 has lots of testimonies, but doesn't speak exactly about snipers, for example. But it could be used to give a better description of the violence which ensued. Ilyacadiz ( talk) 15:03, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Attack on Prekaz article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The image File:Uck kla logo.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --19:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
In the opening of this article it says that the Jashari brothers were killed together with 60 other albanians, the author does not mention that the Jashari clan was wiped out leaving only a little girl alive.
25 of the victims were women and small children. There is no such thing as an unintentioned massacre of so many noncombatants in a war fought with groundforces. Source: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C06E5D91230F933A25750C0A96E958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
The article is outragously one sided.-- Durim Durimi ( talk) 12:02, 18 January 2009 (UTC) 0
You need to stop reading serbian propaganda. Show me the source of your statements, please.
Is this your typical UCK combatant? http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs1.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs24.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs2.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs3.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs22.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs5.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs10.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs6.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs11.htm
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/Kosovo/Kosovo-Photographs13.htm -- Durim Durimi ( talk) 15:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Durim Durimi ( talk • contribs) 15:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
http://www.kosovoliberationarmy.com/
First of all, there is no proof whatsoever about UCK themselves destroying churches. Second of all, those pictures of dead serbs are men of battle ready age. Sure the decapitation was a little to much but you can not compare it with the policies of the serbian state to wipe out the albanians. Get your facts straight and understand what you leaders have done and convinced you of.-- Durim Durimi ( talk) 14:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
http://www.kosovoliberationarmy.com/] had any connections with the military, for God sake they are only innocent civilians children, babies, old people and women, you're trying to ignore it. The description is very detailed with arguments even from USA. The thing that shocked me more than anything I've read on Wikipedia was that you think that decapitation of the Serbian civilians was just "little to much". Policy of the Serbian state to do what? Pure terrorist UCK propaganda Hahahah... what about the fact that even now every year more and more Serbs are expelled, attacked, killed, injured, Serbian villages and churches destroyed in Kosovo-Metohia? What leaders convinced me? What are you talking about? Our leader is an idiot, we have the worst government we could imagine and you tell me they convinced me in something? I can't wait that our leader and government changes... -- Forsena ( talk) 23:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
This is the source i am thinking of using amongst others that i will present later on.
But for now i want to discuss the relyability of the main source on this article. Is a wartime article named "Belgrade's official version of events" really that reliable? The main source of this article was made in the beginning of the Kosovo war. Countrys in war filter their information, and this article does not suggest otherwise.
I suggest that this source should be used with caution. I dont think we should throw it away because it is one of few if not the only article that tells the story of Prekaz from the serbian perspective. We should use a reliable source to compare events and only use the statements wich the two sources agree on.
Are you ready to work with me or not? -- Durim Durimi ( talk) 21:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, speak english. Whats a POV, and how can you see an article named "Belgrades official version of events" as reliable?
The only part of the article that comes from human rights watch is this piece of text: "At dawn of March 5, 1998, the KLA launched another attack on police patrol in Donje Prekaze". This is serious bussiness, you have to search your soul very deeply before you deny what has happened in Prekaz.
Here is an article that gives a little more unbiased view of the events that took place in Prekaz. What do you think about it?
To further proove that your source is in fact biased you have here an article written by BBC two years after your BBC article was published.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/674056.stm
Wikipedia is NOT a a place for serbian propaganda. Are you ready to work with me or not, because i will fix this problem with or without you. --
Durim Durimi (
talk) 11:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I want to discuss about references used in the article:
1. Kosovo killings: Belgrade's official version of events, this article is not a BBC article at all, as you can see in the title of the article where it say: Kosovo killings: Belgrade's official version of events, on the page's footer it says: Source: Tanjug news agency, Belgrade, in English 2156 gmt 11 Mar 98, so it means that it is a literal translation from Tanjug News Agency (a news agency from Belgrade). So does using this article as a source, break the NPOV? Using Serbia's POV to write a NPOV article?
I think that using the NY Times article and the BBC article regarding the event (as Durim Durimi mentioned above), is in fact the most accurate, grounded and that maintains NPOV than Kosovo killings: Belgrade's official version of events (an English translation from the Tanjug news agency).
The very same article ( Kosovo killings: Belgrade's official version of events) is also being used in the article regarding Adem Jashari (as I'm discussing even there about the same concern), it seems that somebody is trying to push his/her POV on these articles.
2. Humans Right Watch, the website is outdated, I don't know what is written on it even that I spent time browsing HRW's site for a while and couldn't find anything.
If you have anything to add, please discuss in here, otherwise I'm going to restructure the article and make it neutral, thank you.--
kedadi (
talk) 23:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
No one mentioned the attack on Serb border guards by Albanians........ no one mentioned that this happened before the Prekaz attack ( Verbatimdat ( talk) 21:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC))
Info is sourced and detail. I will agree on its removal if you can give me some good counter-source... Otherwise, it is just IDONTLIKEIT... -- WhiteWriter speaks 15:57, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
(unintend)They're not connected i.e the Panda Bar attack can't be considered the aftermath of Prekaz.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
What is the cause of this rampant abuse of the human rights report? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.145.1 ( talk) 19:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
2)HRW says According to the Serbian police, the attack on Donji Prekaz was in response to KLA attacks on nearby police patrols i.e source misinterpretation.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 17:36, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
I didn't give the issue much thought before Majuru moved it back but there seem to be no sources that use Attack on Prekaze unlike Attack on Prekaz. Btw any other move will be viewed as BRD i.e. ANI.-- — ZjarriRrethues — talk 19:16, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
I've reverted the IP, but if you really must know The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Warfare p. 496 states that 38 militants were involved and all were killed in a military engagement in the village, alongside civilians. 23 editor ( talk) 03:04, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Attack on Prekaz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
We had some plagiarism here, but I put quotation marks for further attribution. The source clearly places an emphasis on Amnesty International's statements. Removing it as POV actually seems more like projection. The passage continues: "Testimonies collected by human rights groups and journalists indicate several cases of extra-judicial executions and unlawful killings from excessive force." El_C 22:53, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
This article is about attack, and not memorial that was built years after that. Also, galleries should be deleted per WP:IG and WP:NOTGALLERY. I left one image in the body. Just to mention, this page is on my watchlist years before your newest account appeared. Also, admin @ Ivanvector: reverted this gallery because it was blocked sockpuppet edit. So, per all of that, i have removed gallery from this article. Its also a bit inappropriate anyway to have gallery in such an article. -- Ąnαșταη ( ταlκ) 19:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
In this article's "aftermath" section, should there be:
Please comment below. Do not add or remove the gallery until this discussion concludes. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 14:06, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
|
The section "Operation" finished with the sentence:
"In response, the UN security council turned to Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter without authorizing the final measure of the chapter which was military intervention. Mortars fired on houses, and snipers shot those who fled."
It is obvious that the last part - Mortars fired on houses, and snipers shot those who fled - does not belong here, but probably two paragraphs higher, just before or around "In the ensuing violence..." But I'm not exactly sure where it should be and I feel also that for such a sentence there should be a source. The HRW report quoted as source 8 has lots of testimonies, but doesn't speak exactly about snipers, for example. But it could be used to give a better description of the violence which ensued. Ilyacadiz ( talk) 15:03, 14 August 2022 (UTC)