Talk:War crimes during the final stages of the Sri Lankan civil war

Intro

@Oz346, can you please show which part of the article covers UN Secretary-General actions post getting his report? Cossde (talk) 05:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

RS: ITJP

@Petextrodon: can you please prove ITJP is a WP:RS. Cossde (talk) 06:16, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

@Cossde the burden of proof is on you since you're the one who claimed it was unreliable. If ITJP is good enough to be cited by mainstream news outlets and scholars, then it's good enough for Wikipedia. Besides, it's not cited as a fact, but only as an estimate of an explicitly attributed NGO which is well within Wiki guideline. -- Petextrodon (talk) 19:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

@Petextrodon, as the editor who added/restored content its your burden of proof per WP:BURDEN prove that ITJP fits the WP:RS requirement. It would save all our time and have a constructive discussion, if you can provide specific responses like Pharaoh of the Wizards and generic answers that doesn't help. Cossde (talk) 04:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Yasmin Sooka who was a member of the Report of the Secretary-General's Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka is the Executive Director of The International Truth and Justice Project .It is quoted by the BBC here ,here ,here .Department of justice here CNN here ,here ,here.Do think ITJP is WP:RS.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

@Pharaoh of the Wizards, the quotations provided by you indicate that these RS have used ITJP as a primary source. Can you please share RS that have quoted ITJP on the number of Tamil civilians killed. Cossde (talk) 04:07, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

As Petextrodon and Pharaoh already mention, it's been cited repeatedly by other RS, both in mainstream news outlets and scholarship. The organisation is also directed by Yasmin Sooka (one of the UN panel experts and human rights lawyer). It is therefore reputable and acceptable to be cited with explicit attribution, as it has been done here. Oz346 (talk) 08:06, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

@Oz346, then you will have no problem, sharing citations of other RS of the number Tamil civilians killed. And putting this matter to rest. Cossde (talk) 11:36, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

There's no Wikipedia policy saying that every detail in every human rights group report needs to be individually cited by other RS in order to be included (and that a detail which has already been cited with explicit attribution). Please keep to Wikipedia policies. Oz346 (talk) 12:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

@Oz346, are you saying that ITJP figurs have not been cited by mainstream news outlets? If not please share the citations. After all this whole discusion start due to it.Cossde (talk) 14:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

And while we are on the topic of RS, why is a well known bogus report from the Sri lankan government apologist LLRC being cited on this page?

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa37/008/2011/en/

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2010/09/sril-s01.html

The commission has been heavily criticised by international human rights groups, the UN Panel of Experts and others due its limited mandate, alleged lack of independence and its failure to meet minimum international standards or offer protection to witnesses.[4][7] These critics believed that the Sri Lankan government was using the commission as a tool to prevent an independent international investigation of alleged abuses.[8] As a consequence of this Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Crisis Group refused to appear before the commission.[9]

If you think reputable human rights and UN panel expert Yasmin Sooka's ITJP reports needs to be removed, than the bogus clown LLRC report needs to be banished to hell by that metric. Oz346 (talk) 13:46, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

@Oz346, "bogus clown LLRC" is that WP:NPOV? Cossde (talk) 14:28, 7 December 2023 (UTC)