Jump to content

Talk:Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

PARTY WEBSITES ARE DEAD LINKS THAT DO NOT WORK

THE LINKS WILL NOW BE REMOVED —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.102.57 (talk) 17:48, 17 October 2008 (UTC) Karuna faction overruns Pillayan's office REPORTED BY TAMILNET AND (BBC NEWS SINHALA)RADIO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.102.57 (talk) 17:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Break up within TMVP should be added as well as TMVP claims that the group is together under Sri Lanka —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.102.57 (talk) 18:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miltary Head of Batticaloa district

[edit]

Changed from LTTE leader to Miltary Head of Batticaloa district

This was the official title of Karuna while he was in LTTE.

LTTE has wings, or sections for each one of its activitis. In this sence the second level leaders are the onesin charge of each of the wings.

Then it has third level leaders who are heads of each of the wings at the district level.

In 2004 Karuna was the head of Military wing in for Batticaloa distrct. He was one of eight district level military heads.

It is wrong to say Karuna fights for East, beacause east includes Trincomalee. Karuna says that he is for Batticaloa, even theough he was chased out of Batticaloa by Jeyanthan Regiment which is from Batticaloa.

Hello, 82.35.188.198. Did you think no one will notice your act of vandalism. I reported it to an admin. You'd better watch out.
In case anyone doesn't know what I'm taking about 82.35.188.198 sabotaged the link to the TamilEela Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal party webpage and replaced it with a link to the LTTE linked Tamilnet.com. I corrected it. It should be www.tmvp.org
BTW He has also previously sabotaged the link to the Sri Lankan Government website on the Sri Lanka page by directing it to the LTTE (terrorist) linked website www.tamilnation.com --snowolfd4 17:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WRONG INFORMATION

"The TMVP is an unregistered political party in Sri Lanka. The party has discarded the "tiger" emblem, the armed struggle for a separate state and decided in 2007 to use the 'fish' as its election symbol, capitalizing on the fame of the 'Batticaloa singing fish'. " Did you think no one will notice your act of vandalism. I will change the information.

--CORRECT INFORMATION---

TMVP won local elections in the east as stated by the BBC and Tamilnet. The groups logo has changed but still contain the tiger. TMVP is an ally of Rajapaksa's government. TMVP candidates won under United People’s Freedom Alliance banner.

The largest tamil party Tamil National Alliance totally boycotting these polls. United National party (UNP) also boycotted the polls. Both groups claim unfair elections took place. TNA claimed it wasn't safe for them to operate in the east because the TMVP group was armed. TMVP threatened TNA MP's and also captured alive family members of TNA MP prior to the elections.

      • STOP act of vandalism my linking Sri Lankan State terrorism websites.*********

Disputed

[edit]

This article presents only one-sided criticisms of the TMVP, and contains absolutely no references of their responses to these allegations. It also presents various unproven allegations by "human rights groups" as hard fact, which compromises the accurqacy of the article. Some of the sources used are also questionable, as per WP:REDFLAG extraordinary clams require "high-quality reliable sources". For example the sentence in the UTHR report "We learnt from religious leaders that..." has been related as a proven fact in the article.

Other errors include in the opening paragraph,

"Tamileela Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal (TMVP) (Tamil: தமிழீழ மக்கள் விடுதலைப்புலிகள், English: Tamileela Peoples Liberation Tigers) is an unregistered political party and paramilitary group..."

which is just plain, not correct. --snowolfD4 ( talk / @ ) 18:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also senteces like

"TMVP also actively participated in killing on INGO workers."

are just ridiculous and unbecomming of a Wikipedia article. --snowolfD4 ( talk / @ ) 19:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The error in lead, that TMVP is an unregistered political party, is corrected. If you dispute that they are claimed to be a paramilitary organization all there needs to be is references - I am willing to provide this.
The so called unproven allegations by human rights organization is credibly cited. All that needs to be done to fix it is to say that these are allegations.

Some of the sources used are also questionable, as per WP:REDFLAG extraordinary clams require "high-quality reliable sources". For example the sentence in the UTHR report "We learnt from religious leaders that..." has been related as a proven fact in the article

UTHR is a reliable source. We can remove the sentence in question but nothing else is an extraordinary claim. Claims made by UTHR are reliable. Last sentence can be removed provided that it is not backed by RS. Watchdogb (talk) 23:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Both challenged sentences have been reworded or removed. Now let's move on to the other problems. The human rights groups claim are made by respected and well know international human rights organizations like the Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International . These are clearly considered as reliable sources and therefore can be used to cite in wikipedia. If you dispute that human rights organizations are not relaible sources, then you need to prove that or in the very least provide reason to show that they are not. If this cannot be done, then they will be used as any other WP:RS to cite claims. Nonetheless almost every claim that is made by human rights group is explicitly attributed to the organization. So please discuss what exactly is wrong with these claims and why human rights claims cannot be made by human rights organizations- that too with explicit attribution. Watchdogb (talk) 15:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The claim about "We learnt from religious leaders that..." is a mistake. UTHR only claims that they learned from the religious leaders that these kids were conscripted by Karuna group. The latter sentence is what is covered in this article and the UTHR did not claim that they learned these facts from religious leaders. So that claim is backed by RS. As a sign of good gesture I will add that these claims were made by UTHR. Watchdogb (talk) 15:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The out of date tag is not justified here. Simply saying that the article has claims made long time ago is not a good argument. This is encyclopedia and not a news site and therefore it will contain history and past news. The current version of the article has all the new development so it is not out of date. Watchdogb (talk) 16:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The concern raised that this article's human rights section does not have the TMVP side of the story is correct. That, however, does not mean that this article's neutrality is violated. There is not a single WP:RS, or any other source, that covers what TMVP says about all of the human rights violations that are attributed to them. It is even rare to find any type of comment from TMVP on general human rights violation such as child soldiers. It is because of this inability to find sources for TMVP side of the story that each allegation, made by reliable human rights organization, is explicitly attributed. It is evident that even the user who tagged this article cannot find claims made by TMVP because after actively editing this article they insisted on adding the tags rather than taking care of their own concern. So this tag is not justified and the argument put forth for the tag is not reasonable (as it asks for violation of wikipedia rules). Watchdogb (talk) 16:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the out-of-date tag because its well updated now. Cheers.Pectoretalk 23:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

[edit]

I removed 2 paragraphs from the intro. First, the part that says the TMVP works with the SLA is redundant, as it is already made clear in 2 other places in the intro, "Initially a paramilitary group that helped the Sri Lankan Government fight the Tamil Tigers" and "Members of the TMVP continue to carry arms under the auspices of the Sri Lankan government".

Second, the intro is a concise summery of the remainder of the article. Just as all their achievements/good deeds should not be listed in the intro, neither should all the allegations against them. Saying they have been accused of violating human rights should be sufficient, as there is an entire section covering the topic later in the article. --snowolfD4 ( talk / @ ) 10:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the "Members of the TMVP continue to carry arms under the auspices of the Sri Lankan government" has been removed what do you propose we do ? Watchdogb (talk) 15:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will reinstate the older section of the LEAD since the above comment has become irrelevant because of the removal of above ""Members of the TMVP continue to carry arms under the auspices of the Sri Lankan government". Watchdogb (talk) 15:19, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with snowolf in this regard. Watchdog's version of the lead is cumbersome, unsourced, and full of nasty tags. "My" version of the introduction was sourced and efficiently dealt with the issues of the TMVP while upholding WP:LEAD.Pectoretalk 23:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice guys. Let's edit shall we ? Watchdogb (talk) 17:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal. 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:

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) 23:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tamil_Makkal_Viduthalai_Pulikal&oldid=1210623523"