Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:44, 30 May 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam at the Reference desk.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

The terms "extremist", "terrorist" and "freedom fighter" should be avoided or used with care. Editors discussing the use of these terms are advised to familiarize themselves with the guideline, and discuss objections at the relevant talkpage, not here. If you feel this article represents an exception, then that discussion properly belongs here.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Sri Lanka High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sri Lanka, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sri Lanka on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sri LankaWikipedia:WikiProject Sri LankaTemplate:WikiProject Sri LankaSri Lanka High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Sri Lanka Reconciliation (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Sri Lanka ReconciliationWikipedia:WikiProject Sri Lanka ReconciliationTemplate:WikiProject Sri Lanka ReconciliationSri Lanka Reconciliation Tamil Eelam (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tamil Eelam, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Tamil EelamWikipedia:WikiProject Tamil EelamTemplate:WikiProject Tamil EelamTamil Eelam Military history: Asian / South Asia This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Asian military history task force South Asian military history task force Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Organizations Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Socialism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

athimanian quote

There is no substantial evidence that the Athimanian quote was referring to a desire to ethnic cleanse all Sinhalese civilians from north and east. Even the LTTE's own official materials and songs at times refers to the Sri Lankan Armed forces often as just 'Sinhalese'. It is an ambiguous statement. One example out of many is here from this LTTE song:

https: //youtu.be/ZO7ID-8QIVM

The lyrics refer to the army soldier as just 'Sinhalavan' (Sinhala man) and that his fort and lion flag will fall following an attack.

The LTTE saw the Sinhalese army as representatives of the Sinhalese people, not as just 'Sri Lankan soldiers'. It's not a mystery why they often used the two terms interchangeably. And it is much easier and quicker to say 'Sinhalese' than the longer winded 'Sri Lankan soldiers' or 'Sinhalese soldiers', especially when literally the only Sinhalese in the main warzones of the north were Sinhalese soldiers.

https: //youtu.be/pbHYTnTGN4o

Here is another LTTE song where the word Sinhala is used to specifically refer to just the armed forces, in this case the Sinhala air force, the lyrics talk about 'sinhala dropping bombs (kundu)'.

These are official ltte songs written by the LTTE lyricists (like Puthuvai Ratnadurai who was captured by the SLA at the end of the war in 2009 and made to disappear). This proves beyond doubt that the word Sinhalese was used by the LTTE at times to refer specifically to the armed forces. I have removed the quote that JohnWiki has placed under the 'ethnic cleansing' section, as there is no proof that it refers specifically to ethnic cleansing. Even the original uthr source that the quote is from makes no reference to ethnic cleansing. It is original research to make an assumption that it refers to ethnic cleansing especially when the original UTHR source makes no claim of it. Oz346 (talk) 10:00, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

To add to this, I'm currently looking for a LTTE press release on the battle of elephant pass (2000) where they directly use the word 'Sinhalese' to refer to the Sri Lankan Army. I should have the document somewhere on a old cd, the URL from which it is from is no longer active since the organisation became defunct. Will look for it to provide further proof. Oz346 (talk) 11:33, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Or they could just be racist and make no distinctions between civilians and soldiers. To them, a Sinhalese is a Sinhalese irrespective of civilian status. You’re ignoring the context of decades of massacres of Sinhalese civilians and the obvious resentment of the Sinhalese population at large, especially Sinhalese in the claimed Tamil Eelam territories. SinhalaLion (talk) 11:47, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Thats your assumption and you cannot prove it. I recommend you read 'A Long Watch: The Capture of Commodore Boyagoda' by a Sri Lankan Navy POW who described his positive and negative experiences at the hands of LTTE guards. Some abused him, whereas some treated him well, and he hoped that those were still alive. Personally, I believe Athimanian quote was referring to ejecting the Sri Lankan army (again I cannot prove that beyond doubt, but i'm basing it on the context which i have seen used in many other statements of theirs in Tamil, referring to their wars with 'Sinhalese', i.e. the Sri Lankan armed forces in the north.) No one is disputing that the LTTE had racist members who were anti-sinhalese. But you cannot make sweeping statements as if they are a monolith, and read the minds of all their members.Oz346 (talk) 11:57, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

To add to this, this quote is from the Vanni region in the northern province, which is 99% Tamil speaking. The LTTE were fighting on the Jaffna front at the time and were not committing 'decades of massacres of Sinhalese civilians' in that region, for precisely the reason that there were next to no Sinhalese there. LTTE killings of Sinhala civilians took place primarily in the south or around the multiethnic eastern province. If you want to be honest and look at context, you need to look at the region that the LTTE commander is from, and who he is speaking to (namely the Tamil civilians in the LTTE held north, who have had next to no interaction with Sinhala civilians in their lives, but who suffered greatly at the hands of the Sinhalese armed forces who they detested and wanted out of their homelands.) There is regional variation in the attitudes of the LTTE and Tamil civilians depending on their local environment and experiences. You cannot project the attitude of say an eastern province LTTE member to the north and vice versa. Its not as simple as that.Oz346 (talk) 12:09, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Regional variations… all I can say is that I’ve come across Tamils from the north who have had little to no interaction with Sinhalese and still hate Sinhalese with all their hearts. I could easily imagine these people supporting or even engaging in anti-Sinhalese violence if given the opportunity. Let’s also not forget that settlements like Weli Oya were in the north. The Anuradhapura massacre was orchestrated and carried out by the northern LTTE. Massacres may have predominantly taken place in or near the east due to the larger Sinhalese presence, but the Northern LTTE looked on, gave impunity to, and even glorified the perpetrators (e.g., Newton, Karuna, Pulendran). So no, I don’t believe the north is off the hook.

But the bigger issue is that citing songs is a flawed comparison. Sometimes one needs to make verbal sacrifices to maintain the flow of the song. So sure, maybe in the songs, they got sloppy and just used “Sinhalese” for the sake of rhythm. But Athimanian was not singing. Unless he was delivering a poem, he was very capable of saying “Sinhalese army” or “Sinhalese soldiers”.

In the end, we’re both making assumptions, but you’re making even more assumptions than JohnWiki and I are. You have to prove that Athimanian meant something that he hadn’t said, despite him having full liberty of diction.

I could give you a quote of an LTTE member confessing to not making distinctions between armed and unarmed Sinhalese settlers when massacring them, but then you’ll just say I can’t project one LTTE member to another. But then again, that’s what you’re doing, projecting what you believe to be the actual meaning of “Sinhalese” in those songs to Athimanian’s speech. SinhalaLion (talk) 12:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

I’d also like to add that Athimanian mentioned the East in that statement, so it’s very likely that Sinhalese civilians were referenced in his statement. SinhalaLion (talk) 12:59, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

"Let’s also not forget that settlements like Weli Oya were in the north." Manal Aru is a border village, and its a tiny % of the northern Tamil population, the bulk of which did not interact with Sinhala civilians. So its a very weak point.

"But the bigger issue is that citing songs is a flawed comparison." I will find the LTTE press release on the battle of elephant pass where they refer to the army as simply 'Sinhalese'. Bear with me.

"In the end, we’re both making assumptions"

Exactly, so one cannot paste this under the ethnic cleansing section under an assumption. It is ambiguous.

"I’d also like to add that Athimanian mentioned the East in that statement, so it’s very likely that Sinhalese civilians were referenced in his statement"

North-east is Tamil Eelam in the mind of Tamil nationalists, it is one homeland. I disagree that it is very likely he is referring to Sinhala civilians. You can do a survey of northern Tamils (I am one) and see what they believe that statement means to them. I guarantee you that the vast majority will believe it refers to ejecting the Sinhalese armed forces whose occupying presence the majority detest with all their hearts. Not to some imaginary ethnic cleansing of a non existent northern sinhala population in the core jaffna and vanni regions. As i stress before, most northern tamils (the audience of athimanian's speech, who i'm sure he wanted to recruit from to battle the sinhala army) do not have any day to day interaction with sinhala civilians, in fact most are incredibly ignorant of the regions outside of the north. Oz346 (talk) 13:15, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

I won’t deny your perception of Tamil opinion, but I know Tamils (both northern and eastern) who seem to be okay with telling Sinhalese settlers or their descendants to pack up their bags and go to the South. Most Sinhalese in the North-East are there on some kind of settlement scheme, so whether they make up a single or double-digit percentage would be irrelevant for these people; if the Sinhalese are settlers, they need to go. SinhalaLion (talk) 13:31, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

inclined to agree with Oz346.Further who is Athimanian? He is not notable LTTE leader to mention his comment.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:49, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Athimanian was the head of the LTTE’s education unit in the Vanni. He is a notable figure in the LTTE. Also is there a rule saying that only comments of notable LTTE leaders can be included in the article? JohnWiki159 (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Athimanian was the head of the LTTE’s education unit in the Vanni and he is not a military leader of the LTTE for his views to be given weight.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:20, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Regarding UTHR

@Oz346 As I said in my edit summary, UTHR reports have been used by internationally recognized human rights organization such as amnesty and Human Rights Watch. UTHR has also been awarded for their reporting on both sides. https://www.hrw.org/news/2007/05/04/sri-lanka-and-burundi-human-rights-defenders-win-2007-martin-ennals-award. I know you have also used UTHR as sources in editing articles related to Human Rights Violations of the state. Also, we can't expect a neutral opinion regarding Sri lanka from Prof. Peter Schalk when he is already an Advisory Committee member of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam. JohnWiki159 (talk) 11:17, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Its not only Schalk who calls the UTHR anti-LTTE. Dr. Brian Senewiratne who wrote the foreword for their book 'broken palmyra' said this about them in 2001:

"Back in the 1980s, it was an outstanding group that exposed the atrocities committed on the Tamil people. So much so that when they invited me to write a Foreword to their book ‘The Broken Palmyra’, I readily agreed.

Since then, a lot of water has flowed under the bridge. For a start, the group has fallen apart and for all intents and purposes now consists of a single individual. From being the impartial and credible Human Rights group it was, the UTHR(J) has changed to simply being virulently anti-LTTE. Do they know that their Reports are being used by the President and the barbaric Armed Forces to cover-up the gross violations of human rights that are occurring? Have they protested at her recent statement? If not, why not? Do they realize that this could well increase the appalling activity of the Armed Forces?

A Human Rights group has the function of documenting the violation of Human Rights across the entire spectrum i.e. the Government and the Tamil Militants (The LTTE, EPDP, EPRLF, TELO, PLOTE etc.). It cannot give the impression (which the Reports from this group recently have done) of being virulently anti-LTTE because it damages their reputation and credibility. The damage is enhanced when their Reports are praised by the leader of a Government under whose barbaric regime, a decimation of Jaffna, the land and it’s people, has reached new heights. It would worry me as much if some Tamil (or for that matter, Sinhalese or Muslim) group who have been guilty of serious human rights violations says that they are “very appreciative” of comments made in these Reports to their activities."

https://briansenewiratne.blogspot.com/2001/11/what-can-tamils-expect-from-2001.html

Its not at all a surprise that Rajan Hoole would be anti-LTTE considering that his life was threatened by them. Oz346 (talk) 20:05, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Dr. Brian Senevirathne is among the Senators appointed by the appointed by the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam. http://tgte.ca/senate/. Can't expect a neutral opinion regarding this from him too. I have provided the opinion of International Human Rights Organizations. You are saying "Its not at all a surprise that Rajan Hoole would be anti-LTTE considering that his life was threatened by them". In the same way, I could say "Its not at all a surprise that Prof. Peter Schalk would be pro-LTTE considering that he is a Advisory Committee member of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam". JohnWiki159 (talk) 12:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok I've added schalk's background which will indicate to readers his potential bias. I don't think all these details should be censored outright, they can be qualified and still mentioned. Oz346 (talk) 13:37, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok. I agree with this. At the same time, it should be noted that in the same way you added shcalks's perception to invalidate UTHR's claim, another person can add another claim to invalidate schalk's perception. This will go on like a cycle. JohnWiki159 (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Women's participation

Mam1220 amd Krv1325 A very larges section about Women's participation gives a WP:Undue weight.I am inclined to agree with Oz346. Saturnrises (talk) 21:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Good point about undue weight. I think the topic deserves its own page, actually. So it could be shortened to one main paragraph on the LTTE page, with a link to its own page. Mam1220 (talk) 17:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@Krv1325:, @Mam1220: Oz346 (talk) 22:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Explusion of other ethnic groups title

@Cossde:, the 1987 Eastern province massacres have not been described as 'ethnic cleansing' by any reliable sources. Ethnic cleansing is a contested concept that emerged in the 1990s without a legal definition under international criminal law. The cited source for the 1987 Trincomalee expulsion of Sinhalese doesn’t mention ethnic cleansing. See for example the article on the expulsion of northern Muslims, which has had far more references mentioning ethnic cleansing, yet even its title remains the more objective "expulsion of...".Oz346 (talk) 17:40, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

@Oz346: the subject page Expulsion of Muslims from the Northern Province of Sri Lanka deals with the LTTE's systemactic attempts to anaged in ethnic cleansing, it has the relavant RS. I sugges you read it.Cossde (talk) 13:21, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

I am not referring to the expulsion of Muslims, that is a strawman argument. I am referring to the 1987 Eastern province massacres, no reliable sources have described those incidents as ethnic cleansing, so it can not just be put under an ethnic cleansing section without reliable sources supporting that contention. Oz346 (talk) 14:31, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

@Cossde Ethnic cleansing and expulsion are not "one and the same" as you stated. Expulsions can happen without the goal of ethnic cleansing, which seems to refer to "the attempt to create ethnically homogeneous geographic areas".

It's a controversial term which is why even the recently cited Human Rights Watch report puts "ethnic cleansing" alone in quote marks unlike other crimes.

On its controversy, Encyclopedia Britannica states:

"Ethnic cleansing as a concept has generated considerable controversy. Some critics see little difference between it and genocide. Defenders, however, argue that ethnic cleansing and genocide can be distinguished by the intent of the perpetrator: whereas the primary goal of genocide is the destruction of an ethnic, racial, or religious group, the main purpose of ethnic cleansing is the establishment of ethnically homogeneous lands, which may be achieved by any of a number of methods including genocide."

See source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethnic-cleansing

Please engage in consensus building before you publish your interpretations. Petextrodon (talk) 23:04, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

@Cossde @Oz346

NOTE as per WP:Consensus: “Editors who ignore talk page discussions yet continue to edit in or revert disputed material, or who stonewall discussions, may be guilty of disruptive editing and incur sanctions.”

I’m fine with the title “accusations of ethnic cleansing” (although it’s unclear if it meets WP:NDESC and looks too WP:POVNAMING based on WP:TRIVIALMENTION for such a strong charge), as long as the 1987 Trincomalee bits are removed. Since the cited source for the 1987 case doesn’t refer to it as “ethnic cleansing”, it should be moved here as per WP:IRRELEVANT. Is this acceptable?

On a side note, there’s good reason to suggest the primary goal of LTTE in expelling the Sinhalese settlers in Trincomalee was to counter government’s stated policy of undermining Eelam territorial claim, rather than creating an ethnically pure Tamil province, which is contradicted by LTTE leadership's official statements from the 1980s to the 2000s. But it’s for experts who specialize in this field to decide whether it amounted to “ethnic cleansing”. Petextrodon (talk) 23:58, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Also the reference referring to the civilian death toll caused by the LTTE does describe it as a small proportion. Finally that che Guevara comparison is in the reference. why do you not check the references before making edits? That should be a basic first step before making controversial edits. Oz346 (talk) 17:45, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

and please refrain from personal attacks, accusing me of "whitewashing". Oz346 (talk) 17:55, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Your personal ojbectives of "whitewashing" the LTTE and tanishing Sri Lanka seems very clear in the edits you have been doing. Take these edits for example. You purpously added the text "a small proportion" for a number of deaths in their thousands to lessen the number or justify the number beening small or relative. Where as you are more than happy to keep an single article from a regional magazine in the header to claim links to a revlutionalry ideloligy of man that every stooped to such dispicalble tactics. If this is not "whitewashing" what is? Please your words don't fool us for we saw with our eyes what that the blood and bodies on the ground due to their handy work.Cossde (talk)

and please discuss before making any reverts, Misplaced Pages works on consensus building, especially regarding controversial topics. Thanks Oz346 (talk) 18:21, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Good suggestion, you could have done that in the first place.Cossde (talk) 13:21, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

The reference clearly states that the civilians death toll due to the LTTE was a small proportion of the overall civilian death toll. You are being completely obstructive by refusing to read the actual reference which I have pointed out twice. This is now the third separate time I am telling you to read the reference. It is not my own personal opinion. Secondly, you should refrain from your personal attacks and keep to the facts. Oz346 (talk) 14:27, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

I am quoting verbatim from the reference which you have constantly disregarded and falsely accused me of white washing and putting my own personal opinion into the text. This is disruptive behaviour, I should not have to tell you 3 TIMES that it is in the reference cited and for you to constantly ignore it:

"In relative terms, and in the course of a long and bloody civil war, the number of civilians killed by terrorist acts attributed to the LTTE was somewhat modest compared with estimates of the overall civilian death toll."

Hawdon, James; Ryan, John; Lucht, Marc (6 August 2014). The Causes and Consequences of Group Violence: From Bullies to Terrorists. ISBN 9780739188972.

I am re-adding the text you have deleted now. You have seen my replies (I know this because you have done other edits on other pages since) but never answered them. Oz346 (talk) 08:24, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Modest definition:

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/modest Oz346 (talk) 08:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

What is the objective of comparing the LTTE killings and deathtol? To show the killings are low? Is it to justyfy that the LTTE is the lesser of two evils? Or to indicate the number killed by the LTTE? I say YOU want to "whitewash" the LTTE by putting the number in relative terms and take out the wegiht of the fact that they killed thousands. It is an insult to the dead.Cossde (talk) 12:11, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

also I have previously shown the FBI notice to be unreliable with poor fact checking, foe example, it's claimed death toll contradicts it's other publications. it is not directly related to the proscription either. Oz346 (talk) 06:41, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Regarding FBI source poor fact checking and unreliability:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_34#FBI_Press_Release_and_Potential_Clash_of_Numbers

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Talk:Sri_Lankan_Civil_War/Archive_4 Oz346 (talk) 06:52, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

I can say the same about Karen Parker.Cossde (talk) 13:21, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Can you? Can you please point out a factual inaccuracy in the Karen Parker reference? Because the FBI notice has an incorrect death toll figure which contradicts their own publications and conflates the entire civilians death toll (due to all parties) with just the LTTE. Oz346 (talk) 14:22, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Who is Parker? An indivedual! who seem to have a diffrent opinion on the LTTE and uses an argument of its convencional warfare cablaiblity as means to claim its an armed force. Yet Parker forgets how it got there by enageing in terrrorit acitivities. In fact by saying the LTTE kills civilians, Parker justifies the kiling of civilians by armed forces. Where as the FBI artcile is used to cite not the figures here but share its anaylisis.Cossde (talk) 12:06, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

I have added a secondary scholarly source directly dealing with the U.S. proscription. FBI’s primary source notice is redundant and it doesn’t deal with the proscription of foreign groups. Its role is to crackdown on the domestic activities of groups that the state department proscribes. So when you cite the FBI notice, it makes it look like the FBI’s 2008 claims were the reasons why the state department had proscribed the LTTE in 1997. It is original research to connect FBI’s claims to the terrorist designation since the notice itself doesn’t explicitly connect LTTE’s terrorist designation to its claims of "among the most dangerous and deadly extremist outfits in the world".

As for Karen Parker, she stated other governments should stay neutral in civil wars, though she didn't explicitly deal with the proscriptions by governments specifically. Both can be removed. Petextrodon (talk) 23:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

@Cossde @Oz346

NOTE as per WP:Consensus: “Editors who ignore talk page discussions yet continue to edit in or revert disputed material, or who stonewall discussions, may be guilty of disruptive editing and incur sanctions.”

I would like to address a point the other editor made: “the FBI artcile is used to cite not the figures here but share its anaylisis.”

If the analysis isn’t based on facts and figures cited in the same notice, what is it then based on? “amongst the most dangerous and deadly” description could only refer to the kill count. By the way, the notice wasn’t meant as an “analysis”. It was just a notice warning people to be vigilant of LTTE fundraising activities which explains the sensationalism. As another editor already noted in that 2009 noticeboard: “it's essentially a pep talk to make police aware of LTTE.”

Since neither FBI nor Karen Parker explicitly connect their statements to the proscriptions by governments, citing them here is WP:OR and/or WP:IRRELEVANT, therefore should be removed. Is this acceptable? Petextrodon (talk) 23:59, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

@Cossde Hello, could you address my points directly? Also sign your replies next time. Petextrodon (talk) 10:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

@Petextrodon, thank you for reminding my typo in the signature. Its fixed. I don't HAVE TO address you. If you want you can take off Karen Parker's statement. To begin with its a personal opinion at the end of statements by Governments. Therefore, event if its there it has little to no worth. As appose to a government agency that has been hunting down terrorists since J. Edgar Hoover.Cossde (talk) 10:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

the FBI notice does not fit the criteria for RS and has clear evidence of poor fact checking with false information and figures, that contradict it's other publications as well as other reliable sources such as ICG which quote the figures from the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission.

Not to mention it's clear sensationalist language.

"Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, or that rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against institutions, persons living or dead, as well as more ill-defined entities. The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited."

Misplaced Pages own policies on the reliable sources article I've quoted above clearly indicate that it unsuitable to be used to make contentious claims against 3rd parties. It should be removed. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopaedia that needs to have quality control. Not to regurgitate unreliable sources with proven evidence of poor fact checking and sensationalism. Oz346 (talk) 06:35, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

It is also undue weight to include it, as one of the agencies of the US government has already been used to rationalize the proscription (which has far more relevance). Oz346 (talk) 07:08, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

The use of FBI as a source has been debated in the past. Something to do with their view of the LTTE links to terrorism dont seem to sit well with those who want to whitewash them. FBI meets WP the criteria for RS. If you look at the list of approved RS for Sri Lankan Civil War topics such as the Tamil Net and News media, get figures wrong at times and does a lot of sensationalize. So if we are to drop an official FBI article, lets by all means drop Tamil Net. Cossde (talk) 09:11, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class Sri Lanka articles
• High-importance Sri Lanka articles
• WikiProject Sri Lanka articles
• C-Class military history articles
• C-Class Asian military history articles
• Asian military history task force articles
• C-Class South Asian military history articles
• South Asian military history task force articles
• B-Class organization articles
• Mid-importance organization articles
• WikiProject Organizations articles
• B-Class socialism articles
• Low-importance socialism articles
• WikiProject Socialism articles
• B-Class politics articles
• High-importance politics articles
• WikiProject Politics articles