Talk:Anti-balaka

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anti-balaka article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Africa: Central African Republic Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Central African Republic portal This article is supported by WikiProject Central African Republic.

Military history: African / Post-Cold War C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	African military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

POV

Given that the Seleka persecuted non-Muslims with anti-apostasy laws, one needs to be unbiased in assessing the nature of the situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astrohoundy (talk • contribs) 15:54, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would still be orginal research which is not accepted here. AcidSnow (talk) 08:27, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Djotodia's declaration of Sharia Law to the government of Saudi Arabia threatened the executions of millions of Christians for apostasy is not original research or point of view. It is well-established from cited sources that apostasy-trials are an integral part of Sharia Law. Either cite evidence to refute the evidence cited here, or risk being blocked.Astrohoundy (talk) 19:20, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"not original research", you must be joking since Wikipedia is not research. I will give you one more warning before I report you for your disruptive edits and your original research. Anyways, I doubt I will be blocked for doing nothing wrong. AcidSnow (talk) 20:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like synthesis which is simple enough to solve. You need a source stating Djotodia's declaration threatened the executions of millions of Christians for apostasy. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:50, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

Hey 88.224.114.238, can you please come to the talk page so we can understand why you want this removed? AcidSnow (talk) 21:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ideology: Christian Radicalism?

The link to this article (http://nyulocal.com/national/2014/02/19/ethno-religious-cleansing-plagues-the-central-african-republic/) calling the anti-balaka radical Christians does not provide enough of a ideological link to the group to any fundamental doctrine of Christianity. The article seems to be calling them radical in their actions, not radical in their Christianity.

Regardless, more investigation needs to be taken into their ideology before such a link can be made. Although evidence seems to suggest the anti-balaka are non-organised vigilantes rather than a group or groups geared towards establishing "Radical Christianity".

86.157.181.194 (talk) 21:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

Please ensure that what is written is actually in the source. This is a minimum requirement for sourced statements.

In the context of this article, almost everything should be sourced.

For example, in the lead there was a statement that the Anti-balaka were targeting women in anti-witchcraft kidnappings. The source does not say "women", it mentions "13 people from 45-70" and "a man". The source does go on to discuss women locked up by the government for witchcraft. This has no direct relevance to the statement.

Further the source also says (referring to it's source') "The report identifies three leaders of the anti-balaka faction in Nana-Mambere present" at some of the "alleged torture sessions" - and that they have not been able to contact these three. So we need to be careful about saying that it is Anti-balaka, per se.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 15:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

An addition to the above. Since it appears Congolese soldiers working for the UN were guilty of war crimes, we need to be very careful of UN sources. This doesn't mean that they can't be used, but they should be carefully examined. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 16:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Context

There is a good backgrounder" here. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]