Talk:Mawanella riots

January 2014

Its actually not a massacre I think its a series of riots so the name of the article should be changed to Mawanella riots.Rameshnta909 (talk) 13:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

The article is not written in a nuetral point of view. This is a riot involving two communities and the article is written in a view of only one. So I am inserting the template. plz don't revert before discussing the issue.Rameshnta909 (talk) 13:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

There are still bare URL's as references, they need to be expanded.Rameshnta909 (talk) 13:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, from the sources presented so far; I'am given to understand the incident was a massacre of two Muslim civilians who were shot and killed. If you think, Sinhalese were also killed or affected in the incident, then please add sources backing up the same. It is clearly not the same as the 1915 riots which saw Sinhalese people were affected in isolated events of armed Muslim attacks.

If you think that the article is not neutral, please substantiate with sources, regarding what you feel of it.

As for Bare URLs, Bare URLs don't mean poor sourcing. It is just not formatted with relevant details, you can just expand them with the Reflinks tool if you choose to. Regards--CuCl₂ ^{(chat spy acquaint)} 13:48, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

@CuCl₂Thank u for considering my views regarding the issues.

I am not a Sri Lankan so I dont know much about who killed who, and this incident happens many years back. Actually we should change the tone of this article. It is written in a way like someone who experienced the riot explaining it to media. Maybe the riot is one sided but the tone of the article should be nuetral.

For eg: Sinhalese thugs looted muslim shops, sinhalese thugs drag the man outside, Sinhalese burned the quran etc. To state eye witness accounts in the reports we can use the word allegedly or similar words. We cannot blatantly accuse a community of something. there are lot of usages like that in the article.

As far as the information from the article is concerned it seems a riot to me. Massacre means killing of people alone. But there is large scale looting and burning of shops etc. So it is definitely a riot. The name should be changed.

I just want you to help me in expanding the URL's. I never said they are not credible.Rameshnta909 (talk) 16:20, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

First regarding the content and tone, it is depicted the same way as it had been put across by the sources in the article. Please refer to this report on WSWS

The article throws light on the incident being not a merely spontaneous affair, but how chronologically the Muslims of that town are targeted in the events that follow. It has been illustrated without doubt that the conflict was between two communities as a whole, and not about a random cashier and a bunch of hooligans. Muslim property was systematically targeted and lynched with the assistance of the Police. Both people killed were exclusively Muslims.

As for the name, you have definitely got a point there. Do take a note that apart from the killings, the looting and burning was only restricted to the town and didn't emerge into a country-wide riots. --CuCl₂ ^{(chat spy acquaint)} 12:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

@CuCl₂ thankz for responding to my suggestions. I appreciate your initiative to better the article.

Since you support my view of a name change. I am changing the article's name.

ofcorz the article is written according to the sources. But sometimes news reports are also a bit biased when reporting an incident. So we should change the tone and content of the article to meet Wikipedia's standards. I will try to make some edits to change the tone of the article and I expect you to review the changes regularly.Rameshnta909 (talk) 13:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome anytime. Your contributions towards these kind of articles would really help a lot. Please take care only regarding the verifiability as well as NPOV of the content, reliable sources are absolutely must-do for these kinds of articles.Best regards.--CuCl₂ ^{(chat spy acquaint)} 14:13, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mawanella riots. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140115140722/http://www.dlib.pdn.ac.lk:8080/jspui/bitstream/123456789/2369/1/K.T.%20Silva%20-%202001.pdf to http://www.dlib.pdn.ac.lk:8080/jspui/bitstream/123456789/2369/1/K.T.%20Silva%20-%202001.pdf

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: 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) 17:37, 22 January 2018 (UTC)