Talk:War crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Added Image Box

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c7/Channel4-d.jpg

I am calling for discussion of the potential addition of this image to the article. Additionally I invite you to discuss, rather then editing my own talk posts which is quite rude and against Wikipedia Talk Policy. Thank you. Neutralaccounting (talk) 02:27, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Inclusion of the image is essential for the page concerned and the image is an irreplaceable one by any means of its nature.Hillcountries (talk) 13:43, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Channel 4 video [| sri-lankas-killing-fields]

Hi, Is the [| video of Channel 4, Sri Lanka's Killing Fields by Channel 4] mentioned already?

The video is discussed by many like [| Channel 4 page], [| uk.ibtimes.com], [| The Telegraph, U.K.], [| The Independent, U.K.] and surely there are many more. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 17:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Not yet. It should be included as it contained a lot of previously unbroadcast video of alleged war crimes. A new section should be started under the Evidence section.--obi2canibetalk contr 10:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
From my side I can say that the video is much different from earlier ones, very disturbing and more exhaustive than many others. I think this part will need well-thought approach. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 19:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

CREDIBLE ALLEGATIONS/CREDIBLE EVIDENCE are just opinion -- DON"T LEAD THE ARTICLE WITH IT

You can mention it in the paragraph following but not in the opening. When there are actual convictions you can move it to the front. Samjay? BlueLotusLK (talk) 05:15, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Credible Allegations and Credible Evidence are used in the UN Panel Report based on various facts. You don't need the Conviction....which follows sooner or later.HudsonBreeze (talk) 07:39, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what the UN report says in the lead as it is only a preliminary report calling for an actual investigation. You can mention what they find in their section. BlueLotusLK (talk)
We can at that time change the article as "War Crime during the Sri Lankan Civil War".HudsonBreeze (talk) 09:54, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

The UN report does not say "credible evidence" anywhere

A lot of people interpreted it wrongly. Thus do not add that term. BlueLotusLK (talk) 20:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Both the terms "Credible Allegation" and the term "Credible Evidence" are there.HudsonBreeze (talk) 02:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Okay, you are right mostly. I shan't argue these minor technical points. BlueLotusLK (talk) 07:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion

Why not have multiple articles? Simply split the article into "Alleged War Crimes by (ENTITY) during the Sri Lankan Civil War" type articles. You can then have one article that documents the allegations against the Sri Lankan forces, one for the Tamil Tigers and articles for each other significant group. This would avoid allegations of bias in the articles themselves as each would reflect the sourcable information on each groups alleged activities. This article could then just summarise the information contained in the other articles. Exxolon (talk) 19:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Would that be a violation of WP:POVFORK? Personally, I would rather see the article split into different sections based on the different phases of the Civil War, as the individual articles would then present a more balance view to a casual reader, rather than have crimes committed by one party alone. But there was a suggestion above to move this article to "War Crimes during Eelam War IV" (Eelam War IV was the last phase of the Civil War, which ran from 2006 to 2009, and all of the material in this article covers that period), but that move was opposed.
If we do split it by accused party, as long as the main article gives equal precedence to allegations against all parties, I would be perfectly fine with that. --snowolfD4 ( talk / @ ) 23:57, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Edit: Actually, scratch the first bit. Reading WP:SPINOFF seems to suggest a "Alleged War Crimes by XXX" would be fine. I would still prefer chronological spinoffs, but if the consensus is to separate by party, I'm okay with it. --snowolfD4 ( talk / @ ) 00:01, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I recommend for individual articles on War Crime. Sri Lankan Government's War Crime is worst than all in the decades long conflict. Sri Lankan Government did a "War Without Witnesses".Hillcountries (talk) 01:00, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure how much my views matter here, but there is a scope in the page itself to present war crimes by both sides according to me. As far as how much - it reflects reality, else please explain how it is that Lankan war crimes are much more while you yourself can not point out these many war crimes by LTTE. I wonder why. Where are Tamil reporters in Sri Lanka, can you explain that? ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 06:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Who can't point out the many war crimes of the LTTE? Any Sri Lankan can. Suicide bombing, ethnic cleansing, using child soldiers, shooting civilians, shooting captured combatants, using civilians as human shields, etc. etc. the list goes on. Where are Tamil reporters? Everywhere. There are Tamil reporters in Colombo.. There's Tamil papers in Jaffna. BlueLotusLK (talk) 23:47, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
A Shri Lankan can also point out war crimes of LTTE and the army both, not just LTTE. About reporters, here is annual report of Reporters Without Borders, presenting sorry picture of reporters. More on reporting in Sri Lanka 1, 2. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 17:58, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Allegations Vs Evidence

I reinstated the term "Credible Evidence". "GroundViews" article is only an analytical one[1], but it is mentioned in the main stream media like "The New York Times"[2] and "The Telegraph"[3] as "Evidence".Hillcountries (talk) 13:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

NYT article says A United Nations panel investigating allegations of war crimes by Sri Lankan troops at the end of the bloody battle against Tamil rebels in May 2009 found credible evidence.... Telegraph article says The panel of inquiry report, which was commissioned by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, found there was credible evidence of war crimes.... Now ask yourself, where in the panel report it states that they found credible evidence? Be rational, it only states they found credible allegations. So it's evident that news media has misquoted the panel report. Wikipedia should not do the same! So I'll revert your edit. Astronomyinertia (talk) 16:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Those both articles says very clearly UN Panel/UN Panel Report finds "Credible evidence".We can't promote some investigative article's opinions into Wikipedia.Reverting back.Hillcountries (talk) 01:35, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I am sure that the UN Panel found credible evidence considering that the panel was not formed to find out only allegations. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 07:17, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
This is incredible. Channel4 from the UK has thoroughly investigated these events and have more witnesses and documentation of war crimes including the execution of prisoners, rape and murder of civilians, and bombing of civilians by the Sri Lanka military. These are not mere verbal allegations but thorough documentation by a verifiable and highly respectable external source. [[4]] Neutralaccounting (talk) 01:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
What is the through investigation done by Channel 4? They just aired a bunch of amateur videos sent to them by Tamils like you. Furthermore none if shows rape and no evidence is presented of the Sri Lankan army being responsible for the shelling. BlueLotusLK (talk) 23:49, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

They remain Allegations as long as there is no criminal conviction. Get that, buddy? The opinion of individuals does not factor into this. BlueLotusLK (talk) 00:22, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

There can be Evidence even without Conviction....which follows sooner or later.HudsonBreeze (talk) 07:34, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
There is no consensus on the "evidence" which splits along partisan lines. Tamils say one thing, etc. BlueLotusLK (talk) 07:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
UN Panel used the term "Evidence" and based on the Channel 4 "Sri Lanka's Killing Fields" ther are international NGOs voiced "There are evidence". There is no partisan line to deny the War Crime Evidence, maybe from the sides who wanted a "War without Witness" and their silent supporters.HudsonBreeze (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
LOL, you seem to act as if the conviction is just imminent. Stop using slogans like a lobbyist. Constantly repeating something doesn't make it true! Understand? Stop using stupid cliches like "war without witness."

Evidence I see since the conclusion of the war -- there's complete peace even in the North. YOur evidence seemingly only exists when the LTTE is around. And the evidence you have is amateur unverified videos and unreliable testimonies.. Evidence to the contrary can be easily offered. BlueLotusLK (talk) 10:23, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, Conviction is imminent. There are no slogans, I am using here. They are verifiable facts. If my acts are like a lobbyist, you seems some one you have committed the war crime or trying to help some War Criminals to escape from the future War Crime Investigation. "War without Witness" is not a stupid cliche, if you are with the sense of "Humane".
Do you think at the expense so many thousands of deaths, more than 40,000, there is a real peace in North? At least physically guns might have been silenced, but that doesn't mean there is a real peace in the minds of Tamils there.
If the Sri Lankan Government would have allowed International media in the last phase of the war, you would be getting crystal clear videos, thanks to the Sri Lankan Government, we have ended up if with trophy videos from the Sri Lankan soldiers and other amateur videos, still they stand as "Credible Evidence" on War Crime.HudsonBreeze (talk) 10:55, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Keep waiting. The world doesn't care. Only LTTE people continue to be arrested. You can whine all you want about "wars without witnesses" etc. You as a foreign anti-Sri Lankan have no idea of what it's like in the North. "credible evidence" my foot. Shooting LTTE soldiers is not a war crime despite how you try to make it so. Neither is clearing dead LTTE combatants from the war field. This is the only thing shown in the videos. BlueLotusLK (talk) 19:05, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Where does it say that shooting LTTE combatants is not a war crime. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 18:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
If the World doesn't care leading International humanitarian organizations like "Amnesty International", "Human Rights Watch" and "International Crisis Group" won't constantly voice for the International Investigation on War Crime in Sri Lanka. Even the leading media of the World won't give importance on the Alleged War Crime in Sri Lanka.HudsonBreeze (talk) 02:01, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I said some things I shouldn't have here. I"m sorry. Let's not have this discussion. The Sri Lankan army has done bad things. Sorry for being so callous. BlueLotusLK (talk) 07:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

External links

Links normally to be avoided

  1. Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)

In reference to above, I have re-added the articles on websites/blogs because they qualify under ......except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.HudsonBreeze (talk) 04:43, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:LEAD

The LEAD needs a lot of work, but most important is to avoid WP:WEASEL words (which is top priority)! ~ AdvertAdam talk 06:55, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Copyright violation

Distributor108 spotted a possible copyright violation in the article. The first paragraph in the Background section definitely matches the second paragraph here. The bottom of that page, however, says that it pulled some information from Wikipedia, specifically the Sri Lankan IDP camps article. I looked there and the same paragraph is there as well in the background section, plus the intro paragraph in both is the same. I suspect what happened is the travel-insurance-information.info page grabs WP information and creates that page. I don't know which WP is the "original", but I think that para was copied from one WP article to the other. The other site uses our articles to build search result pages to generate traffic using our data.

Or the short version, I don't think there's a copyright violation as the other site is pulling from Wikipedia and specifically mentions the Sri Lankan IDP camps article and CC-BY-SA. Ravensfire (talk) 17:29, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Just to reinforce my thoughts, the first version of the IDP camp article has the two paragraphs, so I think it's save to say that's the original. Ravensfire (talk) 17:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
You're absolutely correct Ravensfire - I created both articles and the IDP article came first. I created the text in my own words on the IDP article and then when I created the war crimes article I used the same text. The insurance website has copied from the IDP article.--obi2canibetalk contr 14:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Critics sections

These sections seem overly long. I propose that they be consolidated into a single section that gives an overview of what's been said rather than trying to convey all the most notable individuals who've commented on the matter. —Zujine|talk 17:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Given that there has not been any response to my proposal, I will start trying to clean this up. —Zujine|talk 14:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


War crimes is a serious accusation

War crimes is a serious accusation and hence as the article deals with the only the final stages of the 26 year war and hence renamed it.No one says or there is no investigation for the entire civil war.Investigations by the Sri Lankan Government are from 2002 and UN panel much later.Lankancats (talk) 08:14, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

This has been discussed before. The reason why much of this article is about the final stages is that it is difficult to find sources which described events prior to 2008 as war crime. This does not mean war crimes weren't committed before 2008. Indeed, if you look at specific incidents during the civil war all the way back to 1983 some could be described as war crimes. BTW, the LLRC did not investigate war crimes. I'm moving the page back, please don't re-name the page again without discussing.--obi2canibetalk contr 16:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
The article deals only with the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War not before.War crimes is a serious accusation.Please add if you have WP:RS sources which say that War crimes took place all along since 1983.We can add to the article page of specific incident or event of War crimes which took place during the Sri Lankan Civil War since 1983.Please let it stay like this and We can say war crimes took place only if we have WP:RS sources for before 2008Lankancats (talk) 11:43, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Feel inclined to agree with user Lankancats as per WP:Redflag we will keep the title to the final stages as the article covers only it as for now.We can add events of earlier War crimes to the respective articles only if Reliable Sources can be found.Feel the Final stages need a separate article.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:35, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, I'll leave this for now.--obi2canibetalk contr 14:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Move title to War crimes during the Final Stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War

The UN admitted failure and its not alleged any more as its fact. So I suggest moving it to War crimes during the Final Stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 04:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

No: This till remains only as allegations as no formal investigation or judicial activity has taken place. Cossde (talk) 03:43, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes: There are enough evidence that War Crimes happened in Sri Lanka. Even UN admits Sri Lanka civil war failure.Sudar123 (talk) 04:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Comment: Whilst I would naturally support this move, this a controversial subject and it is unlikely that there will be consensus. So rather than wasting our time on yet another discussion why don't be put our time to better use by adding content to Wikipedia about what happened/is happening in Sri Lanka?--obi2canibetalk contr 16:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Comment: Enough arguing and discussions have taken place and we need less of that and more constructive edits. I think we should stay away from edits like these for a while.--Blackknight12 (talk) 19:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Inclusion of a section for SL Army report.

  • Proposal- The Sri Lanka Army report which covers alleged war crimes during the final stages of the war has been released, a new sectioned should be opened to represent this source.[5][6] Eng.Bandara (talk) 20:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merger

  • I propose This Article should be merged with Human_rights_in_Sri_Lanka, as it is more suitable there. It will provide appropriate due weight to each section in the history of human rights in sri lanka, and provide the reader with a more comprehensive coverage of Human rights in Sri lanka. Similar to what has to be done with Human_rights_in_the_United_States Eng.Bandara (talk) 21:37, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Please don't vandalise the page. Either you are adding deletion prod(within 15 minutes after creating your account) or adding merger tag. Your motive is clearly vandalising the page. I will report you at ANI if you vandalise the page without proper explanation here on the talk page.HudsonBreeze (talk) 18:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the response, However I'd advice you to review the WP WP:AGF Assume good faith policy. Eng.Bandara (talk) 00:11, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Don't misuse WP:AGF here. Please explain here before you re-add the merger tag again why you add on the first place deletion prod. Please explain here why you jumped at this article after 15 minutes of creating your account. If you can't provide the reasons, we will discuss next time everything at ANI.HudsonBreeze (talk) 02:10, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Just a note to everyone involved Eng.Bandara has been indef blocked as a sock Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Distributor108.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:34, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alleged war crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Alleged war crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:19, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Alleged war crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:56, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Alleged war crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:02, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Alleged?

Who is the human fiend here who has used the word 'alleged' in the heading? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:D481:A562:CC48:D31B:3CF7:3F79 (talk) 06:02, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Review of death toll citations in Infobox

The Article's Infobox states: "Deaths 40,000[1][2] - 140,000[3][4]"

When we examine the cited documents, we find they don't support the text in the Infobox:

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20121113033803/http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2011/s3260535.htm

No mention of "40,000".

[2] https://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Sri_Lanka/POE_Report_Full.pdf

"The United Nations Country Team is one source of information; in a document that was never released publicly, it estimated a total figure of 7,721 killed and 18,479 injured from August 2008 up to 13 May 2009, after which it became too difficult to count."

"Some have developed estimates based on the statistics of the injured and dead collected by the doctors, which were collated by the hospitals and the District Disaster Management Unit. One estimate is that there were approximately 40,000 surgical procedures and 5,000 amputations performed during the final phase. Depending on the ratio of injuries to deaths, estimated at various times to be 1:2 or 1:3, this could point to a much higher casualty figure. Others have put the estimate at 75,000, a figure obtained by subtracting the number of people who emerged from the conflict zone (approximately 290,000) from the estimate of the number thought to have been in the conflict zone (approximately 330,000 in the NFZ from January, plus approximately the 35,000, who emerged from the LTTE-held areas before that time)."

"A number of credible sources have estimated that there could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths"

[3] https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-asia/sri-lanka/sri-lankas-dead-and-missing-need-accounting

"There are, first of all, the casualty figures gathered by the UN and humanitarian staff trapped in the fighting, which recorded 7,721 civilians killed and 18,479 injured between August 2008 and 13 May 2009, after which information collection became too difficult. These numbers were not estimates, but actual counts based on eyewitness sightings verified by two additional sources. The vast majority of those included in the UN count were killed between late January and late April 2009, before the escalation in fighting in the final three weeks."

"A U.S. embassy cable on 18 May 2009, the day the government declared the war over, said a UN contact thought the LTTE’s claims of 25,000 civilians wounded or killed in the last few days were exaggerated, but that based on a 10 May shelter analysis and estimates of 70,000 to 80,000 people in the “no-fire zone” before the final assault, the number unaccounted for could be as high as 7,000 to 17,000. The UN contact also reportedly said the UN doubted the LTTE’s claims on the night of 17 May that it still had 1,000 to 2,000 cadres."

"There is also information from the government’s own officials working in the north suggesting that as many as 70,000 or even 140,000 civilians who were surveyed in the warzone just before or during the final months of fighting never made it to the government internment camps at the end of the war."

[4] https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/737299?ln=en

'The Panel of Experts stated that "[a] number of credible sources have estimated that there could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths". Some Government sources state the number was well below 10,000. Other sources have referred to credible information indicating that over 70,000 people are unaccounted for.'

--Jayingeneva (talk) 17:29, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

I clearly seen the numbers 40000, 75000 and 140000 in the quoted text above. You are trying your best to cover up the slaughter. I repeat, this is Wikipedia, not a Sri Lankan government propaganda site. You cannot censor things here like in Sri Lanka (where they kill journalists for speaking out). Oz346 (talk) 18:57, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
@Oz346: Are you defending edit 994625293 by IP Address 2601:600:10d:7f31:6165:9a72:c19f:d921? Or are you defending your own edit 986856920 where instead of updating the minimum estimate, you "censor" it by erasing it? Your reply suggests that you do not comprehend WP:Verifiability. Wikipedia has rules that users need to follow in order for it to function. You already proved in WP:DRN that you are happy to break Wikipedia rules.
The first citation does not mention death estimates, so it is an obvious invalid citation. The second citation states, "estimated a total figure of 7,721 killed and 18,479 injured from August 2008 up to 13 May 2009" and "A number of credible sources have estimated that there could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths". The term "as many as 40,000" does not mean '40,000 or more'. Again, an invalid citation. The third citation states the following, "recorded 7,721 civilians killed and 18,479 injured between August 2008 and 13 May 2009", "the LTTE’s claims of 25,000 civilians wounded or killed in the last few days were exaggerated" and "as many as 70,000 or even 140,000 civilians" are unaccounted for. The death estimates are well below 140,000, so an invalid citation. The fourth citation explicitly refers to "as many as 40,000 civilian deaths" and "credible information indicating that over 70,000 people are unaccounted for". Again, an invalid citation. The cited UN documents make a clear distinction between deaths and unaccounted. Please stop conflating the two. You claim a higher number of deaths than the LTTE apparently did! --Jayingeneva (talk) 21:19, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
For the silent readers reading this, please be mindful that the Sri Lankan government is engaging in a well coordinated cover up of the atrocities it committed in 2009. It has gone to the extent of hiring lobbyists around the world.
Jayingeneva before accusing others of conflating things, you need to look at yourself. In regards to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=War_crimes_during_the_final_stages_of_the_Sri_Lankan_Civil_War&diff=prev&oldid=986856920
That is NOT a minimum estimate, that is an incomplete estimate from April 2009 before the war even fully concluded (before the climax of death in May 2009). It just shows how much you are willing to distort in order to pull the wool over people's eyes.
I repeat this is not Sri Lanka, this is Wikipedia, and neutral editors will not buy this nonsense.Oz346 (talk) 16:13, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
@Oz346: That explains your constant incivility and invective! Unfortunately, your presumptions are incorrect.
It seems you did not comprehend what I wrote above, please re-read it: 'Or are you defending your own edit 986856920 where instead of updating the minimum estimate, you "censor" it by erasing it? Your reply suggests that you do not comprehend WP:Verifiability. Wikipedia has rules that users need to follow in order for it to function. You already proved in WP:DRN that you are happy to break Wikipedia rules.' --Jayingeneva (talk) 22:51, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

@Oz346: Do you have a rebuttal with WP:RS to support your claims? It's been nearly one month. --Jayingeneva (talk) 21:43, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 02 May 2019

'

Alleged war crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War → Alleged war crimes in Sri Lanka (April to May 2009)

The current name is just waaaaaay too long, and this gets the same idea across in less words.

Requested move 11 January 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

War crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan Civil War → War crimes in the Sri Lankan Civil War – Although much of the discussion of war crimes relates to the last months of the war, in fact war crimes were committed throughout the war (for example, the use of child soldiers by the LTTE). Some of this article's content, notably the Permanent Peoples' Tribunal section, already discusses war crimes that were committed earlier in the war, so the change in title would better fit the article's current scope. Use of "in" is consistent with other articles such as War crimes in the Tigray War or War crimes in the Kosovo War (t · c) buidhe 13:33, 11 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 02:55, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

the problem with this suggestion is that the last stage in the war was unique in the sheer scale of atrocities committed, it reached a climax which was significantly different from the crimes committed before it. There is a reason why the UN report only covered this period alone and in isolation. In order to cover the whole period of war, it would be best to have another separate article, but with a subsection linking it to this page. Oz346 (talk) 14:14, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Fully agree with Oz346 there was human rights violations during the 26 year Sri Lankan Civil War not war crimes. War crimes are unique to the last months of the War. That is the what United Nations report covered. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:49, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
It's not true that the war was not characterized by war crimes prior to its final months. I gave an example above: use of child soldiers, which is well documented, is a war crime. (t · c) buidhe 10:15, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
@Pharaoh of the Wizards: Forgive me if this is a bit pedantic, but war crimes were most definitely committed in Sri Lanka prior to 2009. There might not have been a scorched earth policy enacted before the final months of the war, but the things that occurred throughout the nearly three decades of war went above and beyond human rights violations. Kurtis (talk) 08:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
@Buidhe: Correct, but the reason we have a separate article dealing with the war crimes committed in 2009 is because the violence during those final few months reached a pinnacle that was hitherto unseen in Sri Lanka. Between the beginning of January and the end of May, up to 40,000 people lost their lives in the violence. More than a thousand people were dying every single day. Kurtis (talk) 08:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:War_crimes_during_the_final_stages_of_the_Sri_Lankan_Civil_War/Archive_2&oldid=1144582393"