Talk:2012 Homs offensive/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article title

1. its not a proper noun, 2. its alleged and unconfirmed as its only reported by opposition activisits iwithout any verifiability. Alleged Homs bombardment or [[Alleged Homs shelling[[ is more appropriate.Lihaas (talk) 06:45, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Lihaas, no offense but you had better take a look at Wikipedia policies, because in two years of Wikipedia editing i didn't ever see such move request. If the bombardment was claimed by one side and denied by the other, we simply title the article as bombardment, and mention the two sides views without bias. You are welcome to add the regime point of view to the article if you want, but if you don't have any real reasons to tag the article as POV, i am gonna remove the tag --aad_Dira (talk) 07:34, 5 February 2012 (UTC).
on the contrary WP guidelines also require NPOV and verifiability. if it is claimed by one side and it did not happen (or occurred in a diffferent manner from truth) the article title is obviously CANNOT reflect what is only suspected and never happened. Since you say i should review guideline s at WP, which guideliens would you like me to look at?
the regimes points AND the oppositions points will be added and the tag cannot be appropriately removed without clear consensus to do so regardless of an opinion for what constitutes a "real reason". that said until the events are known and confirmed, and not ALLEGED, the article doesnt reflect reality for encyclopaedic content. it can go on a weblog then as media sensationalism. Yellow press.Lihaas (talk) 08:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
So, do you think that what is right according to the neutrality policy is to rename the article Alleged Homs bombardment? I will not tire myself dicussing this point, so please do you have any other reasons to tag the article as POV or should i remove the tag simply? Maybe the purpose of this action is simply to prevent the view of the massacre news on the main page... --aad_Dira (talk) 08:28, 5 February 2012 (UTC).
Agree with user Dira, we report as it is stated in the sources, and do not push our own points of view of the situation. Neutrality is key here. EkoGraf (talk) 14:26, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
We dont report because this is not a news agency and it is not a personal weblog to provide insidous pov as the above user explicitly said.Lihaas (talk) 06:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

POV

This inserts a pov.

  1. no source on the page cites the Shahiba
  2. i added due caveat at SOHR, but we can work on other wording if its pov. Howebver, bear in mind theri words are NOT gospel truth.
  3. No figure was independently verified, govt/ooposition/foreign
and in that vein, there is no affirmation that the fighting was from bombardment only CLAIMS. the only thing we know was that there was violence and there were deaths which has been said by ALL sides.
furthermore, we can add the Syrian govt's claim that the rfighting was to sideline/distract from the UN vote...but i dont have the source as it was fromtv.Lihaas (talk) 06:29, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
  1. I don't know what are you talking about, because Shahiba word does not exist in the article.
  2. Yes, and the article says that the opposition claimed, and that man claimed, what do you need more?
  3. Please indicate a specific parts of the article that is unneutral to be corrected.

--aad_Dira (talk) 06:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC).

reported by AJE, which is much more reliable source than lihaas-removing "alleged" nonsense

We're not going to Wikilawyer this. AlJazeera is reporting this, it's fact. Enough with the wheedling.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

"Large opposition casualties: 5 FSA fighters killed"

Hello? (Cited from the infobox.) --194.145.185.229 (talk) 16:13, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Future date?

The beginning of the article states "As of 30 March 2012, the bombardment is still continuing.[18]" March 30 hasn't come yet, it is in the future. How can that be?

The opposition are also the protesters, not just the FSA. EkoGraf (talk) 13:42, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I am against putting numbers in the casualties box right now, as it will basically be guess work. XantheTerra (talk) 06:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

More appropriate title

It is quiet unprescedented to call an event "bombardment", usually it is "shelling" or "bombing". Anyway it seems that the artillery and air bombardment is not the only attack type, as tanks enter the city and other army units are also brought as part of the large-scale offensive. Also the sources name the entire event as "Homs offensive" [1],[2],[3] - hence maybe "2012 Homs offensive" may be a better title, thoughts?Greyshark09 (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

We name it as its populary known in the world. At the moment thats "bombardment". Its not up to us to say if its gramaticly wrong or not. Also, to correct you, there has been no air bombardment yet. Since the start of the uprising the Syrian air force hasn't conducted any air-strikes. They are still in reserve. EkoGraf (talk) 03:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Total Death toll as of 28 February ?

Ive noticed the Total part of the article seems to only go as far as 13 Feb. What is the various and LCC total deathtolls for Homs between 3rd and 28th ? anybody know yet ? if so please update the page as i cant seem to find the info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.149.120 (talk) 21:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Links

>> Civilian evacuations from besieged Homs begin>> UN vows to press on with Homs aid delivery>> Aid convoy to Syria's Homs comes under attack[>http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/02/hundreds-evacuated-from-homs-syria-20142923728740285.html >> Hundreds evacuated from Homs in Syria]>> Homs mission 'a success' as Syria talks stall(Lihaas (talk) 17:10, 7 February 2014 (UTC)).

Page title

It still ongoing. SO best to say that in the date in the title.Lihaas (talk) 06:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 12 external links on 2012 Homs offensive. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on 2012 Homs offensive. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on 2012 Homs offensive. 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) 21:38, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2012_Homs_offensive/Archive_1&oldid=1029310702"