Talk:2015–2016 Montenegrin crisis
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Alleged coup attempt
editAlleged coup attempt. The neutrality of this section is disputed. There's a lot of news and fake news and propaganda. Russian. Russian. Russian. Wikipedia reflects the facts. Wikipedia does not support the information and propaganda war without facts and evidence.TaaniOk (talk) 12:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- I don't understand what you're saying. Ethanbas (talk) 22:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Montenegro attempted coup is non notability. All info included in target article 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis#Alleged coup attempt. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Your edits are unfounded. Your edits have been abolished Onel5969. Follow the rules notability. There is an article 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis#Alleged coup attempt. Be bold 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis#Alleged coup attempt. "Alleged coup attempt" violates neutral point of view policy. News unproven (The Guardian...). No other point of view (opposition, Russia, reliability score news).TaaniOk (talk) 22:31, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Be constructive. Be coherent. I'm assuming English isn't your first language. If you want to argue, at least express your thoughts clearly and coherently. LordAtlas (talk) 00:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- The section says people were arrested, charges lodged. These are plain facts, as reported by mainstream media. No problem.Axxxion (talk) 15:16, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
- Be constructive. Be coherent. I'm assuming English isn't your first language. If you want to argue, at least express your thoughts clearly and coherently. LordAtlas (talk) 00:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Montenegro attempted coup is non notability. All info included in target article 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis#Alleged coup attempt. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Your edits are unfounded. Your edits have been abolished Onel5969. Follow the rules notability. There is an article 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis#Alleged coup attempt. Be bold 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis#Alleged coup attempt. "Alleged coup attempt" violates neutral point of view policy. News unproven (The Guardian...). No other point of view (opposition, Russia, reliability score news).TaaniOk (talk) 22:31, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Separate article for coup attempt
editAs far as I'm concerned, there should be a separate article for the coup attempt; it's unfortunate that WP is ruled by political advocates and bureaucrats (not an insult; it's what I see). Ethanbas (talk) 16:26, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Separate article for coup attempt, attempt X
editSeriously... someone needs to restart the separate article. This is CLEARLY notable. The little section on this page is pathetic. Ethanbas (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Result
editСonsensus -> сonsensus. Non-consensus. Please complete this article 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis#Alleged coup attempt. Neutrality and non-propaganda please. TaaniOk (talk) 00:51, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Separate article for coup plot.--Zoupan 23:03, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Blocked sock:Ajdebre.
- TaaniOk, what are you doing? This article should not have a military infobox with unreferenced material about a non-military event that is a sub-topic.--Zoupan 23:12, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, Infobox removed.
- But a duplicate of a deleted article (redirect) does not do well (Separate article for "coup plot"). This is bypassing the rules. This circumvents consensus. Please complete this article 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis#Alleged coup attempt.--TaaniOk (talk) 23:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
We have 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis and we have Montenegrin coup plot. 2015–16 Montenegrin crisis should include a section on Montenegrin coup plot, a summary of that article, without an infobox. Your first sentence does not make any sense. There is concensus to have them separate. There is no bypassing of rules or circumventing concensus.--Zoupan 23:37, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Blocked sock:Ajdebre.
- TaaniOk, what are you doing? This article should not have a military infobox with unreferenced material about a non-military event that is a sub-topic.--Zoupan 23:12, 14 February 2018 (UTC)