![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 15, 2011. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | You can help expand this article with text translated from
the corresponding article in Serbian. Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
sadly moslty nationalist and hating people write down these wiki articles that reffer to war times on ex-yugoslavia lands. The račak "massacre" article... totally un-neutral. That incident has been solved years ago already, as an KLA setup. Even the investigators from those times revealed those people were actually Albanian guerilla fighters killed in action, after which their bodies were planted on the field (as they were massacred), but the bullet hit marks reveal the true secret... only that secret wasnt to be used in the war time it had to wait until USA would get their base on Kosovo, then they would admit anything eventough their whole excuse for bombing was that same set-up massacre (prepared together with KLA members). ( Правичност ( talk) 02:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC))
The source says:
A major turning point took place on January 15, 1999, when forty-five ethnic Albanians were killed in the village of Racak. Although the attack was possibly provoked by a KLA ambush that killed three Serbian policeman a few days before, government forces responded by shooting at civilians, torturing detainees, and committing summary executions.
That's not equivocal. Adding weasel words like "alleged" is a bad move. bobrayner ( talk) 18:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Antidiskriminator, where do you feel the neutrality problems are? bobrayner ( talk) 22:19, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
I've added 'Yugoslav' to a number of segments which formerly stated 'Serb'. Obviously not everywhere, not where people have quoted things nor where it is certainly the case that it had been a Serbian measure rather than national. The word 'Serb' was over-presented on the article including where authorities denied access to William Walker. That much is plausible until you look at the source
[1] which not only adequately mentions 'Yugoslav' within article (not headline), it states "border guards" which was a national entity. It is very hard to sift through every "perpetrator" listing to know whether it was Yugoslav or Serb because among those tried for the incident include Serb authority figures such as Sreten Lukić and Yugoslav national figures such as Defence Minister Ojdanić, needless to say Milošević.
Janjušević (
talk) 19:21, 15 November 2013 (UTC) Struck out comments by sockpuppet.
bobrayner (
talk)
22:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
The point listed above is valid. "She said that before she joined them, a Yugoslav forensic team had performed autopsies on 16 bodies". [2]. -- 185.10.140.19 ( talk) 14:48, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Copying conversation from user page [ [3]]
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being
blocked from editing—especially if you violate the
three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three
reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Bbb23 (
talk)
13:29, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
I am not engaged in edit war but the other user who is constantly forcing subjective opinion and ignoring official reports. If needed I will go thru arbitration process to stop this one-side propaganda. Sasa778 ( talk) 13:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
if your edit is challenged (as it was - by me) the position is that we go back to the long-term version until the matter is resolved.. That is policy - there is no exception just because you happen to think the old version is wrong.
"settling the matter"- they were responsible for assessing the forensic evidence only. They concluded that forensically, a definitive conclusion was not possible, because of actions taken prior to them being brought in to investigate. They also said that the balance of probability was that these were civilians, and other probabilities - so it wasn't simply a "we cannot conclude anything". We state details of the team's conclusions already. What you are doing is working backwards from one aspect of that conclusion to try to imply something which is, broadly speaking, uncontested AFAIK. That killings occurred, which have come to be referred to as a massacre. The details of those killings DO remain contested. Forensic evidence is frequently non-definitive, but it is not the only kind of evidence and most sources treat the killings as historical fact.
"The details of those killings DO remain contested" - so why you are claiming in the article definitive statement that this is a massacre?
"That killings occurred, which have come to be referred to as a massacre. " is not correct because massacre is defined in wikipedia as "the killing of multiple individuals and is considered to be morally unacceptable, especially when perpetrated by a group of political actors against defenseless victims.". The EU-FET te am did not concluded they were "defenseless victims" so the possibility they were armed KLA fighters remains.
"Forensic evidence is frequently non-definitive, but it is not the only kind of evidence and most sources treat the killings as historical fact" - most sources do not have scientific background but only propaganda. You cannot claim it is "historical fact" by only counting sheer number of (one-sided) sources.
I see your only strategy here is to put this article in limbo by claiming "the position is that we go back to the long-term version until the matter is resolved" and never to actually resolve it. From my stance, you are edit-warring this article by not having real arguments and only making discussion just for sake of it.
You are misrepresenting the purpose of the EU forensic team and ignoring 9/10 of its conclusions. Take this to an RfC or similar. Your chances of getting this changed based on a selective misinterpretation of what the EU forensic report says, ignoring what the balance of other sources say and two recent tweets by Lavrov are about zero IMO. You are entitled to believe anything you want, but WP simply records what the balance of WP:RS say and that is that most, if not all of those killed were civilians. If a few were KLA members or supporters - which has never been reliably established either way - that does not alter the fundamental character of the event.
@ Pincrete: Hello. The link you post leads to an article about a country created in 2008, which definitely did not exist in 1999. Also, no province is ever added, only a state within a country. — Ruach Chayim ( talk) 18:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 15, 2011. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | You can help expand this article with text translated from
the corresponding article in Serbian. Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
sadly moslty nationalist and hating people write down these wiki articles that reffer to war times on ex-yugoslavia lands. The račak "massacre" article... totally un-neutral. That incident has been solved years ago already, as an KLA setup. Even the investigators from those times revealed those people were actually Albanian guerilla fighters killed in action, after which their bodies were planted on the field (as they were massacred), but the bullet hit marks reveal the true secret... only that secret wasnt to be used in the war time it had to wait until USA would get their base on Kosovo, then they would admit anything eventough their whole excuse for bombing was that same set-up massacre (prepared together with KLA members). ( Правичност ( talk) 02:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC))
The source says:
A major turning point took place on January 15, 1999, when forty-five ethnic Albanians were killed in the village of Racak. Although the attack was possibly provoked by a KLA ambush that killed three Serbian policeman a few days before, government forces responded by shooting at civilians, torturing detainees, and committing summary executions.
That's not equivocal. Adding weasel words like "alleged" is a bad move. bobrayner ( talk) 18:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Antidiskriminator, where do you feel the neutrality problems are? bobrayner ( talk) 22:19, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
I've added 'Yugoslav' to a number of segments which formerly stated 'Serb'. Obviously not everywhere, not where people have quoted things nor where it is certainly the case that it had been a Serbian measure rather than national. The word 'Serb' was over-presented on the article including where authorities denied access to William Walker. That much is plausible until you look at the source
[1] which not only adequately mentions 'Yugoslav' within article (not headline), it states "border guards" which was a national entity. It is very hard to sift through every "perpetrator" listing to know whether it was Yugoslav or Serb because among those tried for the incident include Serb authority figures such as Sreten Lukić and Yugoslav national figures such as Defence Minister Ojdanić, needless to say Milošević.
Janjušević (
talk) 19:21, 15 November 2013 (UTC) Struck out comments by sockpuppet.
bobrayner (
talk)
22:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
The point listed above is valid. "She said that before she joined them, a Yugoslav forensic team had performed autopsies on 16 bodies". [2]. -- 185.10.140.19 ( talk) 14:48, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Copying conversation from user page [ [3]]
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being
blocked from editing—especially if you violate the
three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three
reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Bbb23 (
talk)
13:29, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
I am not engaged in edit war but the other user who is constantly forcing subjective opinion and ignoring official reports. If needed I will go thru arbitration process to stop this one-side propaganda. Sasa778 ( talk) 13:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
if your edit is challenged (as it was - by me) the position is that we go back to the long-term version until the matter is resolved.. That is policy - there is no exception just because you happen to think the old version is wrong.
"settling the matter"- they were responsible for assessing the forensic evidence only. They concluded that forensically, a definitive conclusion was not possible, because of actions taken prior to them being brought in to investigate. They also said that the balance of probability was that these were civilians, and other probabilities - so it wasn't simply a "we cannot conclude anything". We state details of the team's conclusions already. What you are doing is working backwards from one aspect of that conclusion to try to imply something which is, broadly speaking, uncontested AFAIK. That killings occurred, which have come to be referred to as a massacre. The details of those killings DO remain contested. Forensic evidence is frequently non-definitive, but it is not the only kind of evidence and most sources treat the killings as historical fact.
"The details of those killings DO remain contested" - so why you are claiming in the article definitive statement that this is a massacre?
"That killings occurred, which have come to be referred to as a massacre. " is not correct because massacre is defined in wikipedia as "the killing of multiple individuals and is considered to be morally unacceptable, especially when perpetrated by a group of political actors against defenseless victims.". The EU-FET te am did not concluded they were "defenseless victims" so the possibility they were armed KLA fighters remains.
"Forensic evidence is frequently non-definitive, but it is not the only kind of evidence and most sources treat the killings as historical fact" - most sources do not have scientific background but only propaganda. You cannot claim it is "historical fact" by only counting sheer number of (one-sided) sources.
I see your only strategy here is to put this article in limbo by claiming "the position is that we go back to the long-term version until the matter is resolved" and never to actually resolve it. From my stance, you are edit-warring this article by not having real arguments and only making discussion just for sake of it.
You are misrepresenting the purpose of the EU forensic team and ignoring 9/10 of its conclusions. Take this to an RfC or similar. Your chances of getting this changed based on a selective misinterpretation of what the EU forensic report says, ignoring what the balance of other sources say and two recent tweets by Lavrov are about zero IMO. You are entitled to believe anything you want, but WP simply records what the balance of WP:RS say and that is that most, if not all of those killed were civilians. If a few were KLA members or supporters - which has never been reliably established either way - that does not alter the fundamental character of the event.
@ Pincrete: Hello. The link you post leads to an article about a country created in 2008, which definitely did not exist in 1999. Also, no province is ever added, only a state within a country. — Ruach Chayim ( talk) 18:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)