Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
Renamed user U1krw4txwPvuEp3lqV382vOcqa7 (talk | contribs) coment |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
*[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Looks good. The tags and the some similar edits were more of a conduct dispute [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Salvio_giuliano#Please... and have been dealt with]. --<span style="text-shadow:#396 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">[[User:TopGun|<b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b>]] ([[User talk:TopGun|<b style="color:#000">talk</b>]])</span> 13:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC) |
*[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Looks good. The tags and the some similar edits were more of a conduct dispute [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Salvio_giuliano#Please... and have been dealt with]. --<span style="text-shadow:#396 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">[[User:TopGun|<b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b>]] ([[User talk:TopGun|<b style="color:#000">talk</b>]])</span> 13:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC) |
||
*[[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] a clear case of POV pushing and using cherry picked [[WP:SPS]] sources to back up the claims. The article is still in disputes and needs to be addressed before we highlight a POV article on the main page--''<span style="text-shadow:0px 0px .3em LightSkyBlue;">[[User:DBigXray|D<font color="#DA500B">Big</font>]][[User talk:DBigXray|X<font color="#10AD00">ray</font>]]</span>'' 13:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC) |
|||
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
Revision as of 13:46, 17 July 2012
India and state terrorism
- ... that during the early period of the Sri Lankan Civil War, India officially armed, supported, trained and funded the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam against Sri Lanka for various geostrategic reasons?
Created/expanded by Mar4d (talk), Smsarmad (talk). Nominated by Mar4d (talk) at 04:27, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- I don't often respond this way but I do not think an article with POV and possible improper self-citation tags should be linked to from the Main Page. Those must be addressed. Otherwise, things look good. Daniel Case (talk) 18:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Looks good. The tags and the some similar edits were more of a conduct dispute and have been dealt with. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- a clear case of POV pushing and using cherry picked WP:SPS sources to back up the claims. The article is still in disputes and needs to be addressed before we highlight a POV article on the main page--DBigXray 13:46, 17 July 2012 (UTC)