This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Volnovakha bus attack 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 |
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 C-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 |
It is not relevant information, date on screen - 12 January, while the event took place in the evening of the 13th. Regardless of the motives, it does not matter, this screenshot does not apply to an event, not to mention the fact that such groups are administrated by fans, and not official. Mistery Spectre ( talk) 12:36, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
"The investigation included comprehensive crater analysis of two specific blast craters, including the crater located 10 metres from the side of the passenger bus. In the SMM’s assessment all craters examined were caused by rockets fired from a north-north-eastern direction." [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.223.14.167 ( talk) 21:11, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
I see, Mr.
Leftcry does not used to use discussion pages for solving disputable issues. However, I try again explain all my reasons on disputable issue for a possible consensus. My first collision with Mr.
Leftcry took place in that article -
List of terrorist incidents, 2015 - on the same issue that above. However, Mr.
Leftcry neither answer on my reasons nor present his own, but simply denied my version with similar edit summary as it was in the first case. So there weren't any discussion of disputable issues, and because of that I have to undo the edits made by Mr.
Leftcry. Hope that this time Mr.
Leftcry will visit this page because that will be better to solve issues here than starting edit holywar in the article.
Repeating my reasons from that article's discussion page here to display the full picture:
"Removing incident in Ukraine as categorizing it as a terrorist incident is POV pushing since this event is a part of the war in Ukraine and labeling either of the sides of that war as "terrorists" is not neutral" – Leftcry
Returning incident in Ukraine, according to the following.
Firstly, by definition of terrorism, which we can find in the UK's Terrorism Act 2000, terrorism is an action, that involves:
1a) the use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public and
1b) the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause;
2) serious violence against a person;
3) serious damage to property;
4) endangers a person's life, other than that of the person committing the action;
5) creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public.In case of the bus attack, what we have is that:
1a-b) we don't know, if that action was designed to intimidate public with some special motives like political or ideological ones, however, this action intimidates public as a consequence;
2) serious violence against persons occurred as a consequence;
3) serious damage to property occurred as a consequence;
4) this action not only endangered persons' lifes, but
5) had a real damage to the health and safety of persons.
In this way, the incident is a terrorist one by definition.
Secondly, all the sides of War in Donbass - and Ukraine, and DPR - recognised this incident as a terrorist one:
Ukraine's Prosecutor's Office opened a criminal proceedings under Article 258 (terrorist act)
as well as DPR's Prosecutor's Office opened criminal proceedings on the fact of a terrorist attack by unidentified personsSo, terror is terror. Regardless of who committed this action, that is a terrorist action and side of the war, which is guilty, partly or entirely, but is a terrorist one. Naming guilty side in this way is neutral if that will be proved. But for now we can leave as it is: "suspected" or "suspected by Ukraine" for more precision.
Perfect Reason ( talk) 13:40, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Now, new edit summaries of Mr. Leftcry are these:
"Undid revision 642907982 by Perfect Reason (talk) Again, labeling either of the sides of the war in Ukraine as "terrorists" is POV pushing. This incident resulted because of war" – in List of terrorist incidents, 2015
"Calling either of the sides "terrorists" is POV pushing, this is an event that resulted because of war and it should be left at that"- the next summaries is from this article
Answering, by only noting that the action is a terrorist we can't label anybody with term "terrorists" because we only have deal with definition of the action's character. When we mention any possible assailants, we underline its possibility because the investigation is ongoing. It is not a POV pushing. The other case is if we wrote straightforward in the article who committed it, but we wouldn't do that. Next, about "resulted because of war". That can not prevent the action from being an act of terrorism. Otherwise, terrorism actions, committed during war in Iraq and Syria, couldn't be terrorism actions too. But they are, because, despite the fact that many of them were committed with military tools and by them, they led to civilians' death and intimidation. Just as with the incident, we discussing now.
"It's known as such in other parts of ukraine,"
False. I marked it before and repeat here that Ukrainian and DPR's Goverments both recognised the terrorist characted of the incident [3] [4].
"The fact is that it was an attack by either Novorossiya or Ukraine, however labeling either of those side as "terrorists" is POV pushing, therefor this is labelled as an event of the war in Donbass"
I underline that that noting the terrorist character of the action can't at all led to indisputable label each of sides as "terrorists".
"Locally in the Donetsk Oblast (almost half of which is controlled by Novorossiya) the title for this incident is disputed. "Terrorist act" is what it was labeled by the Ukrainian Government."
False again, DPR's Goverment labeled it in this way too
[5].
Perfect Reason (
talk) 21:54, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston ( talk) 17:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Buhas bus attack →
Volnovakha bus attack – More common name.
95.132.175.249 (
talk) 03:32, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Support No wonder I haven't come across this article until now. What an obscure name. This makes it nearly impossible to find the article. The Ukrainian media has constantly referred to this only under the title "Volonovakha terrorist attack", or something to that effect. The Ukrainian and Russian Wikipedia articles also have a similar title. -- Bogu Slav 07:52, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I understand that this is genuinely all being done in good faith but, sadly, this is not likely to be the last terrible event. Tomorrow something else will usurp it and, by the time any proper investigations are carried out (if they can/will be carried out) you won't be able to find any conclusions for love nor money. Read this as meaning WP:NOTTEMPORARY.
Please understand that we are now drowning in articles about political parties that don't exist, POV pushers writing their own version of events using minor changes to the WP:TITLEs of articles (AKA duplicating pre-existing article content at least somewhere in the body of their articles, but simply giving it their own spin). We have so much in the way of unsourced and badly sourced content that I can't keep up with the overlaps, original research and biased sources (the majority of which are not in English, and some of which I ran cite checks on today only to discover that those Russian and Ukrainian sources simply don't actually say what it's claimed they say).
Could we please stay focussed on fewer articles which are of a genuinely encyclopaedic nature? Again, I'm invoking fundamental policies of WP:NOTNEWS, staying clear of WP:RECENTISM. -- Iryna Harpy ( talk) 03:24, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
No where in the source is there any proof of the separatist taking responsiblity for this /info/en/?search=Volnovakha_bus_attack#cite_note-5
This article is not complete without Ukraine staged interview [eng subs] Ukrainian media about Volnovakha tragedy: what was shown on TV and how it was filmed [private YouTube channel link removed] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigipoika ( talk • contribs) 14:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Volnovakha bus attack. 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}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
"At the same time, NewsFront published a video of some militant leader boasting about a successful attack on Hranitne from Telmanove." I have no ability to check the reliability of the sources given, nor that these sources support the text in the article. I have added citation needed/failed verification tags, and would like someone with knowledge of Russian to help. Anon423 ( talk) 01:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Volnovakha bus attack 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 |
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 C-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 |
It is not relevant information, date on screen - 12 January, while the event took place in the evening of the 13th. Regardless of the motives, it does not matter, this screenshot does not apply to an event, not to mention the fact that such groups are administrated by fans, and not official. Mistery Spectre ( talk) 12:36, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
"The investigation included comprehensive crater analysis of two specific blast craters, including the crater located 10 metres from the side of the passenger bus. In the SMM’s assessment all craters examined were caused by rockets fired from a north-north-eastern direction." [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.223.14.167 ( talk) 21:11, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
I see, Mr.
Leftcry does not used to use discussion pages for solving disputable issues. However, I try again explain all my reasons on disputable issue for a possible consensus. My first collision with Mr.
Leftcry took place in that article -
List of terrorist incidents, 2015 - on the same issue that above. However, Mr.
Leftcry neither answer on my reasons nor present his own, but simply denied my version with similar edit summary as it was in the first case. So there weren't any discussion of disputable issues, and because of that I have to undo the edits made by Mr.
Leftcry. Hope that this time Mr.
Leftcry will visit this page because that will be better to solve issues here than starting edit holywar in the article.
Repeating my reasons from that article's discussion page here to display the full picture:
"Removing incident in Ukraine as categorizing it as a terrorist incident is POV pushing since this event is a part of the war in Ukraine and labeling either of the sides of that war as "terrorists" is not neutral" – Leftcry
Returning incident in Ukraine, according to the following.
Firstly, by definition of terrorism, which we can find in the UK's Terrorism Act 2000, terrorism is an action, that involves:
1a) the use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public and
1b) the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause;
2) serious violence against a person;
3) serious damage to property;
4) endangers a person's life, other than that of the person committing the action;
5) creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public.In case of the bus attack, what we have is that:
1a-b) we don't know, if that action was designed to intimidate public with some special motives like political or ideological ones, however, this action intimidates public as a consequence;
2) serious violence against persons occurred as a consequence;
3) serious damage to property occurred as a consequence;
4) this action not only endangered persons' lifes, but
5) had a real damage to the health and safety of persons.
In this way, the incident is a terrorist one by definition.
Secondly, all the sides of War in Donbass - and Ukraine, and DPR - recognised this incident as a terrorist one:
Ukraine's Prosecutor's Office opened a criminal proceedings under Article 258 (terrorist act)
as well as DPR's Prosecutor's Office opened criminal proceedings on the fact of a terrorist attack by unidentified personsSo, terror is terror. Regardless of who committed this action, that is a terrorist action and side of the war, which is guilty, partly or entirely, but is a terrorist one. Naming guilty side in this way is neutral if that will be proved. But for now we can leave as it is: "suspected" or "suspected by Ukraine" for more precision.
Perfect Reason ( talk) 13:40, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Now, new edit summaries of Mr. Leftcry are these:
"Undid revision 642907982 by Perfect Reason (talk) Again, labeling either of the sides of the war in Ukraine as "terrorists" is POV pushing. This incident resulted because of war" – in List of terrorist incidents, 2015
"Calling either of the sides "terrorists" is POV pushing, this is an event that resulted because of war and it should be left at that"- the next summaries is from this article
Answering, by only noting that the action is a terrorist we can't label anybody with term "terrorists" because we only have deal with definition of the action's character. When we mention any possible assailants, we underline its possibility because the investigation is ongoing. It is not a POV pushing. The other case is if we wrote straightforward in the article who committed it, but we wouldn't do that. Next, about "resulted because of war". That can not prevent the action from being an act of terrorism. Otherwise, terrorism actions, committed during war in Iraq and Syria, couldn't be terrorism actions too. But they are, because, despite the fact that many of them were committed with military tools and by them, they led to civilians' death and intimidation. Just as with the incident, we discussing now.
"It's known as such in other parts of ukraine,"
False. I marked it before and repeat here that Ukrainian and DPR's Goverments both recognised the terrorist characted of the incident [3] [4].
"The fact is that it was an attack by either Novorossiya or Ukraine, however labeling either of those side as "terrorists" is POV pushing, therefor this is labelled as an event of the war in Donbass"
I underline that that noting the terrorist character of the action can't at all led to indisputable label each of sides as "terrorists".
"Locally in the Donetsk Oblast (almost half of which is controlled by Novorossiya) the title for this incident is disputed. "Terrorist act" is what it was labeled by the Ukrainian Government."
False again, DPR's Goverment labeled it in this way too
[5].
Perfect Reason (
talk) 21:54, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston ( talk) 17:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Buhas bus attack →
Volnovakha bus attack – More common name.
95.132.175.249 (
talk) 03:32, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Support No wonder I haven't come across this article until now. What an obscure name. This makes it nearly impossible to find the article. The Ukrainian media has constantly referred to this only under the title "Volonovakha terrorist attack", or something to that effect. The Ukrainian and Russian Wikipedia articles also have a similar title. -- Bogu Slav 07:52, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I understand that this is genuinely all being done in good faith but, sadly, this is not likely to be the last terrible event. Tomorrow something else will usurp it and, by the time any proper investigations are carried out (if they can/will be carried out) you won't be able to find any conclusions for love nor money. Read this as meaning WP:NOTTEMPORARY.
Please understand that we are now drowning in articles about political parties that don't exist, POV pushers writing their own version of events using minor changes to the WP:TITLEs of articles (AKA duplicating pre-existing article content at least somewhere in the body of their articles, but simply giving it their own spin). We have so much in the way of unsourced and badly sourced content that I can't keep up with the overlaps, original research and biased sources (the majority of which are not in English, and some of which I ran cite checks on today only to discover that those Russian and Ukrainian sources simply don't actually say what it's claimed they say).
Could we please stay focussed on fewer articles which are of a genuinely encyclopaedic nature? Again, I'm invoking fundamental policies of WP:NOTNEWS, staying clear of WP:RECENTISM. -- Iryna Harpy ( talk) 03:24, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
No where in the source is there any proof of the separatist taking responsiblity for this /info/en/?search=Volnovakha_bus_attack#cite_note-5
This article is not complete without Ukraine staged interview [eng subs] Ukrainian media about Volnovakha tragedy: what was shown on TV and how it was filmed [private YouTube channel link removed] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigipoika ( talk • contribs) 14:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Volnovakha bus attack. 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}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
"At the same time, NewsFront published a video of some militant leader boasting about a successful attack on Hranitne from Telmanove." I have no ability to check the reliability of the sources given, nor that these sources support the text in the article. I have added citation needed/failed verification tags, and would like someone with knowledge of Russian to help. Anon423 ( talk) 01:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)