Talk:2008 United States consulate in Istanbul attack

Other site

I have just created a site for this according the naming covnentions. I suggest we merge the two. You can see it here: 2008 American consulate bombing in Istanbul Lihaas (talk) 22:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Merging

Lihaas I have merged your article with mine, and to tell you, you had the title of the article wrong there was no bombing in the attack!!!!!Thank-you Mertozoro (talk)

yes, my bad, i had that corrected in the article though ;)

Lihaas (talk) 13:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

English, and neutrality

Its obvious from the low-quality english used here that a nationalist agenda (a herm, Turkish agenda, aherm) has is at work. "Exemplary" is very POV, and this article has been written like its a heroic defense of the entire nation.Tourskin (talk) 02:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Crappy English

Reading this article hurts my eyes. Whoever wrote this should take some English classes immeadiately and avoid writing here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matiasab87 (talk • contribs) 02:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Please follow WP:BITE. The English is not very good but please refrain from insulting other editors. We have editors from all over the world and sometimes English is not their first language--and that's why we have copy editors. gren グレン 03:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I edited parts of the "Attack" section earlier, predominately to correct spelling errors, grammar, and verb tense agreement. However, I'm still not really sure about that particular section's verb tense agreement. It seems asinine to worry about this sort of thing in a wikinews article...but it's still really bothering me. What are the opinions of the other editors regarding the verb tense, starting with the phrase "Footage from a security camera..." through the rest of that paragraph? Looking at it now, I would say verb tense should be changed to the preterit because "showed" quickly establishes the past-tense...but I'm really unsure about how one would go about rephrasing the rest of the attack description. 202.216.121.64 (talk) 15:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Removal of sections/blocks of text

I jsut want to create a section to discuss what should be removed (ie- prior attacks and/or editing the intro part). After some sort of consensus that we can clear this up better. (Note- Im not saying stuff should stay or go, just that we need some debate first.) Lihaas (talk) 16:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Attack to consulate?

The attackers didn't attack to United States consulate. They got out and attacked to policemen. That's all. --Dsmurat (talk) 22:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Roll back

I rolled back the recent edit by an editor as that editor has removed a factual statement properly referenced. We, the Wikipedia editors, has not right to change various articles of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. --Bhadani (talk) 16:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What factual and referenced part was removed by the edit? The part about the convention I myself added, so I don't know how it was removed. The part of the obligations from the host state I originally added. The rollback was just a different wording of the same thing. Lihaas (talk) 22:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that the lead paragraph is full of irrelevancies and opinion. Everything after "..more casualties" should go. Your opinion of the performance of the Turkish police is meaningless. PhGustaf (talk) 23:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Then there's not mention of the Vienna convention. I agree its not all worth it, not all of it was what I added either, but i think we should discuss before people just keep taking things off. The last sentence can definately be taken out though. (I guess i'll go ahead with that since I was the one putting it back on) Lihaas (talk) 23:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The Vienna Convention is important, but doesn't belong in the lead. Perhaps you could work it in somewhere lower down. PhGustaf (talk) 23:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I took out some more inappropriate stuff. See WP:OR and WP:NPOV -- you don't get to offer opinions or present analyses. PhGustaf (talk) 00:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I rephrased it to take out analyses, but put in something for perspective as to when it happened. Lihaas (talk) 00:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

No. Please read the introductory pointed out in the welcome message at the top of your talk. Just facts, no perspective. PhGustaf (talk) 00:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

ok, well yes. But then some more stuff should be taken from the intro para to the lower parts now? Probs the last 2 sentences. Lihaas (talk) 00:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for not taking offense. I forget exactly what those were, but one thing you do not want to do is make a comparison between this attack and others, or to imply a lesson to be learned. If you can find a published source that does either of those things, that's excellent, but you're not supposed to introduce your own ideas. Cheers. PhGustaf (talk) 01:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I have made several additions to the article. I cannot find the name of the third police officer who was killed. Would someone be able to help?Cillmore (talk) 16:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Nothing to really get offended about. I just read Wilson's comments, should have quoted it earlier. He did say "quick and effective" almost a paraphrase of what was on before ;)

But anyways, I was just rereading the 1st para and its quite horrible. Too many "its" and fragments. We should move about half the intro into the attack part. Lihaas (talk) 16:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree, when I find the name of the third officer I will look at the English in the intro...if it is not fixed by then.Cillmore (talk) 16:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2008 United States consulate in Istanbul attack. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080803062958/http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5hs9OLHAE4GTI_rAighejQI4aHWdwD91Q9U700 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hs9OLHAE4GTI_rAighejQI4aHWdwD91Q9U700

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

Y 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2008 United States consulate in Istanbul attack. 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.worldinbalance.net/agreements/1961-vienna-diplomaticrelations.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081206022145/http://en.apa.az:80/news.php?id=51854 to http://en.apa.az/news.php?id=51854
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160203140932/http://m.haber5.com/haber/783903 to http://m.haber5.com/haber/783903
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080713114514/http://afp.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5j8sHVfBF3JHvQsP_XDp4S8YLu-yA to http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j8sHVfBF3JHvQsP_XDp4S8YLu-yA
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-12-17-voa29.cfm

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 19:35, 19 September 2016 (UTC)