Talk:Pulendran

Other citations

Are available here and here for thsoe who want tio improve this article. Taprobanus (talk) 05:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Enough info

This artilce has enough information already, please do not delete.-Iross1000 (talk) 21:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC).

Pedia does not work that way, especially bio stubs get nuked unless they have proper citations, read up on the rules very carefully, so that you can argue with appropriate reasons. the relevant rules are WP:BIO & WP:NOTABILITYTaprobanus (talk) 00:00, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Cite from Asian Times

On April 17, Tamil militants, about 40 to 60 in number, stationed themselves along a stretch of jungle highway between the cities of Trincomalee and Habarana. Disguised as government troops, they stopped three buses, two trucks and a van with altogether 200 passengers. Later, reports emerged that 127 bodies had been found on the spot. All the victims were reported to be Sinhalese. Later reports emerged that those who perished in that attack were Sri Lankan soldiers and their families returning from leave after celebrating Buddhist New Year festivals in Colombo.

Cite from Rediff

Lalit also kept telling Jayewardene that an example should be made of Pulendran as he was the leader of the LTTE squad which had killed 126 bus commuters at Habarana and Kithulotowa in April 1987. Orders were issued to the Sri Lankan brigadier commanding the Palaly base, Jayaratne, to send to Colombo these cadres for whom a special plane was being sent.

Taprobanus (talk) 22:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

NPOV / Bus attack

There is no legitimate dispute that Pulendran was behind the bus attack. If there is no reliable source saying that the government's account is false, readers should not be misled into thinking that there is a controversy about it. See WP:WEIGHT. THF (talk) 15:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

None of these sources to begin with are high quality academic sources. They are simply net magazines whose accounts have to be attributed because who knows about Asitimes and Rediff's fact checking capability? Read WP:Verify. Then there is no controversy in saying so far the only accusation comes from the government. There is a civil war going on and there are two parties to any conflict. One parties view does not become in an encyclopedic project's un-attributed facts. They are attributed facts. If he was charged in a legal court and convicted then we call him criminally responsible. If not it is he says she says.

For a self proclaimed lawyer this should be very easy to understand. Presumed innocence still works in civilized countries may be not in Timbaktu or Kangaroo court. Wikipedia is not a free for all Kangaroo court. For how WP:SLR project creates articles read Madhu church shelling. It may be too tempting for one side to say that the other did it but that's not what we do in Wikipedia. This is not a battle ground. Stay calm and stop accusing people of POV pushing, cabal activity and meat puppets. Within the last two days number of these infractions have build up for no apprent reason. Taprobanus (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Again, your argument contradicts WP:WEIGHT, which you fail to address. Multiple reliable sources attribute the attack to Pulendran; zero attribute the attack to anyone else; zero say Pulendran didn't do it, or even that he denied the attack. The Tamil Tigers murder Sinhalese all the time--why falsely claim there is a controversy on this occasion? THF (talk) 16:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I also note that the claim that there is a controversy over whether Pulendran was responsible for the massacre violates WP:NOR, since the dispute is entirely the invention of Wikipedia editors, rather than reliable sources. THF (talk) 16:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Controversy is in your mind, not mine I am simply sticking to the citations and not doing WP:Original Research to make conclusions which are not in any of the cites. Taprobanus (talk) 16:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

This cite flatly says Pulendran did it. Clutterbuck and the Asia Times also attributes to attack to LTTE. No cite says Pulendran wasn't involved; no cite says that Pulendran denied the attack. Your implicit claim that the government may have invented the story is original research. THF (talk) 16:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Now you are WP:SYN, I have no idea about Clutterbuck but assuming good faith even Clutterbuck and Asian times only attribute to the LTTE not Pulendran. Now UTHR is not a first grade reliable source. We in SLR always alltribute it because we have no evidence of their fact checking. So all what you can say GOSL and UTHR accuse Pulendran of leading it not that he led it. Look at how I used UTHR in Jaffna hospital massacre. UTHR is not Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch. It is a few people organization and they have retracted number of their accusations number of times. In summary what we have is government accusation and a UTHR agreement about Pulendran , all other sources simply say LTTE did it. Only unattributed fact is LTTE did it but that Pulendran led is attributed. I have never said that the govenment invented it. You are now accusing me of what I never ever wrote. Please prove it or retract it.Taprobanus (talk) 17:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)