Talk:Vejce ambush

	North Macedonia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North Macedonia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Balkan / European / Post-Cold War

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 articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
	European military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

mujahideen involvement[edit]

the mujahideen took a role in this massacre according to the sources http://realitymacedoniaarchives.blogspot.de/2001/10/nla-mujahedeens-commited-vejce.html http://realitymacedoniaarchives.blogspot.de/2001/10/nla-mujahedeens-commited-vejce.html those where the ones in english the rest are in macedonian Locallocallocal (talk) 10:54, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Al Qaeda involvement[edit]

Here are sources saying that Al Qaeda is involved http://realitymacedoniaarchives.blogspot.de/2001/10/nla-mujahedeens-commited-vejce.htmlhttp://realitymacedoniaarchives.blogspot.de/2001/10/nla-mujahedeens-commited-vejce.html https://web.archive.org/web/20141219194812/http://www.sitel.com.mk/mudzhahedini-vo-makedonija-dojdoa-se-borea-zaminaa-sega-se-tuka-nivnite-uchenici-0 the rest are in Macedonian Based guyy (talk) 21:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please assure that we are using reliable sources and look to justify how a source is reliable prior to adding it to an article. The article history challenges some of the citations usability. There is a process identified on that page to where to undertake conversations about the crdibility of a source if that is required. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:33, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: due to this concerns and the editing history, I have returned the article to the status quo, and encourage contributors to have the conversation here about what is reasonable to be added, or changes, to the existing article. Reminding contributors that the articles are presented with the consensus of the community on what is published. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Look I had put 8 sources for the Al Qaeda involvement in the ambush/massacre soo I think that we should put them also as ally of NLA because not all sources are Macedonian they are mix of Macedonian, English, Serbian and Croatian soo again I think that we should put Al Qaeda as an NLA ally Based guyy (talk) 12:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also I found another English source proving Al Qaeda involvement https://web.archive.org/web/20140311045956/http://wwwgoo.gl.ca/articles/DOM204A.html Based guyy (talk) 12:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And also the sources are not dead or not functional they are functional soo i don't see that we shouldn't put Al Qaeda as their ally Based guyy (talk) 12:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Based guyy I'd recommend immediately self-reverting. The claim that Al Qaeda (let alone Bin Laden) was involved is WP:EXTRAORDINARY. None of the sources that you add are actually reliable. Academic sources are required for such extraordinary claims. There was a RfC on the 2001 insurgency in Macedonia (see Talk:2001 insurgency in Macedonia#RfC: Mujahideen in the 2001 insurgency in Macedonia) and the consensus is to treat mujahideen involvement as a claim. This should apply here as well since the Vejce ambush is within the scope of the 2001 insurgency. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I will self-revert only the sources where they say that Bin Laden was involved in the ambush Based guyy (talk) 14:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Return the article to the status quo. I'll be honest with you. There's no way you can get consensus for inclusion with the sources that you are presenting. Mujahideen involvement is clearly a Macedonian claim, disputed by reliable sources. All the sources you are citing are either Macedonian or Serbian sources which take their claim from Macedonian sources. I'm familiar with Nigel's source, but that doesn't change the fact that mujahideen involvement is disputed by multiple reliable sources. Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, we should only summarize key facts that appear in the article. Disputed information is not to be included in the infobox or stated as a fact in wikivoice. StephenMacky1 (talk) 20:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here I had returned the page back to status quo Based guyy (talk) 20:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It should be called vejce ambush only[edit]

In the article we have the wording "massacre" used. I copy the meaning about massacre: "the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty"

by that definition the "usually helpless" is simply not fulfilled here. We talk about a military ambush on military units who had weapons themselves. That's why it was internationally never called a massacre. The narrative the Macedonian government tried to tell was of course it was a massacre by calling it like that. But it is by definition an ambush and nothing else. In my eyes it is lacking objectivity if we use "or Vejce massacre" because it is simply not a massacre. ECasio (talk) 00:48, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]