Talk:Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Apparent de-proscription of LTTE in EU

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

There is some misunderstanding about the recent judgement by the Court of Justice of the European Union with regard to the LTTE. Many are reading this as meaning that the LTTE is no longer classified as a terrorist organisation in the EU. This is not correct. As the judgement states in paragraph 226, "The Court stresses that those annulments...do not imply any substantive assessment of the question of the classification of the LTTE as a terrorist group". The judgement only annuls the sanctions/restrictions on the LTTE and associated individuals - "The General Court hereby annuls...specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism...in so far as those measures concern the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)".--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 14:39, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

obi2canibe So does that mean all the media reports about this situation was a hoax?--Chamith (talk) 14:48, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

It's not a hoax, it's a case of someone getting the wrong end of the stick and others copying them. The problem with media reports in the electronic era is that they all copy each other without checking the facts which means that if one source gets something wrong, others get it wrong also. Only big, international organisations who have experienced journalists in the field, such as the BBC, bother to check their facts before publishing them. Most online news outlets don't have such resources so they copy each other's stories.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 15:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Active Region

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Implies the area of military Operation which is Sri Lanka.Timid Lion (talk) 08:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Falk Rune Rovik and Sources

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Falk Rune Rovik is a former convicted Criminal .BBC Sinhala has clearly denied the charges made by him in a Sri Lankan newspaper Norway dismisses allegations [1] This is quoted as a Sources and the Aftenposten [2] also denies it Ex-convict causing trouble.Both deny the story. The Times of India source only says that western intelligence agencies were investigating the close and growing links between the ltte and osama bin laden's shadowy al-qaida network at the very time the terrorist atrocities in america took place.It does not say there is a link Timid Lion (talk) 01:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Section move to relevant article

Latest comment: 9 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion

The various aspects discussed under the section - Links to other designated terrorist organisations mainly points to the non-existence of any link with major terrorist organizations. Much of such alleged links and other speculated networks have been covered in the Affiliates to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and I have accordingly moved the information there and as such removed from the primary article.--CuCl₂ ^(chat ^spy ^acquaint) 19:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply Dear friend, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you. Yes, This sections needs a revise, which I have already planned and gathered sources. I'll finish it soon. However a concise version of "links to other designated terrorist organisations" should be in the main article.second, i removed the section on annulment as they have been re-designated as a terrorist organisation by EU. Nishadhi (talk) 02:28, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply The section on annulment refers to sanctions and restrictions, not on proscription, so no excuse there on that one. As for the Links, there is commentary instead of content, like a check box for some POV. Putting such information in the main article when there is already another article Affiliates to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam dealing with such commentary, is nonsense POV. You having planned revisions to the article does not explain why that information must be given emphasis in the main article. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Thank you.--CuCl₂ ^(chat ^spy ^acquaint) 07:40, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply Dear friend, again, I disagree with you.

I have added the references to the Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/521 of 26 March 2015. Read it and you'll understand why you are wrong. A ban includes financial sanctions and restrictions.
An article related to a global terrorist organization such as LTTE needs a section on Affiliates. Even when there is a separate article, still there should be a summarized section in the main article. Thanks. Nishadhi (talk) 08:25, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment It is a clear POV wording Links to other designated terrorist organisations, it is something like Wikipedia is naming or endorsing the title. But titles and subtitles like United States State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, List of organisations outlawed in Australia for terrorism...etc., are OK since they highlight the countries involved. I think it should be covered (all the LTTEs possible links) under Affiliates to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.Lapmaster (talk) 10:50, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply to User Nishadhi

There is no mention of financial sanctions or restrictions in the source. Stating without sources that sanctions and restrictions lifted in 2014 have been reimposed, amounts to WP:Original Research. I have clearly drawn a line between proscription/ban and these.
LTTE is banned only by 32 states(out of 180+ entities) and was known to have military operations in Sri Lanka. Peacock terms like 'Global terrorist organization' is not going to justify your case. Sri Lankan state has been heavily accused by UN, Amnesty Int. and other major HR organizations as state terrorists. If you want to go about reinstating the section here, would you accept adding something like Links to other state terrorists in SL-based main articles as well? Thank you.--CuCl₂ ^(chat ^spy ^acquaint) 06:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply Its obvious that you are committed to your decision. Would you like to take a third opinion? Nishadhi (talk) 14:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply Be glad to. Especially since you will never answer to the point and then at some point of time only accuse the editors or entities involved. Our levels of commitment are more or less the same going by the page edit history. The only obvious thing is the lack of justification behind your edits and your talent at misdirection to push your POV through. Thanks.--CuCl₂ ^(chat ^spy ^acquaint) 15:56, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply I'm sorry if haven't answer to the point. I'll try to improve on that. Meanwhile I decided to link the first dispute (One regarding the sanctions) in a new section for the sake of clarity. Please enter your point of view below, then we can go ahead and take a third opinion. With regard to the second dispute (one regarding the links to other terrorists) I decided to go ahead with my improvements and then to get outside opinion. No point in trying to re-insert a section which even i think needs improvement. I'll work on that during the weekend. Thanks. Nishadhi (talk) 16:05, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Weasel Words.

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Seems like weasel words in the section on ethnic cleansing "Many agree TamilNet is a LTTE mouthpiece"

I'm not terribly experienced in this, I just noticed it. Perhaps "Some see the website TamilNet as a front for the LTTE" or "(namehere) and other scholars see TamilNet as a front for the LTTE)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.198.210.219 (talk) 13:23, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Annulled anti-terrorism sanctions and several other restrictions – re-imposed? Or not?

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Phrase in dispute: “Later, in March 2015, EU reimposed the sanctions and restrictions. ^[1]^[2]^[3]”

Nishadhi's view - This statement is correct

My argument is that the sanctions and restrictions were reimposed. Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/521 of 26 March 2015 lists LTTE as an sanctioned entity[3] (no 15 under group and entities), subjected to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP[4] articles 2, 3, 4, elaborate the restrictions. Thanks. Nishadhi (talk) 15:53, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply Right then, please include the pdf source substantiating the Articles 2,3 etc. with the phrase, there's no way to affirm it otherwise. Thanks.--CuCl₂ ^(chat ^spy ^acquaint) 17:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply I have already given the link. Nishadhi (talk) 03:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

UPDATE INFORMATION

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

- - - PLEASE UPDATE INFORMATION

http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/eu-sanctions-against-ltte-struck-down/article6508741.ece

http://www.asianage.com/international/eu-court-annuls-ltte-sanctions-512

http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=37436 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.146.137 (talk) 01:59, 19 October 2014

Requesting the Womens police image to be removed because their families are still alive. They have paid with their lives their is no need to vilify them continuously. Willing to concede to any other image with the police division.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.150.61 (talk) 20:24, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

? Original research

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

"C. V. Vigneswaran, the Chief Minister of the Northern Province condemned the state of security in Tamil areas administered by Government forces, which according to him has been rampantly deteriorating since the end of the Civil War. Ref Retired Tamil Justice compares between own and occupied rule in Jaffna

As far as i can see the above statement is not supported by the given reference. So I shifted it to the talk page. If i have made a mistake, pls feel free to re add the information. Thanks. Nishadhi (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Nishadhi (talk) 11:11, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 14 July 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago11 comments10 people in discussion

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. The dominance of the abbreviation LTTE over either name in frequency counts suggests that the common phrase Tamil Tigers is understood as an abbreviation of the full name. Google hits are not a RS for these debates. News sources known for their writing use the full name to introduce the topic, then move on to the short form in the bulk of the text, which we here can do as well. — kwami (talk) 18:37, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Actually Kwami, I've never heard any of the major networks or even NPR refer to this group other than Tamil Tigers. I think they may refer to it once in a while in print articles. Per Common Name, I would have supported the move request. :-) HammerFilmFan (talk) 22:01, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

(non-admin closure)

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam → Tamil Tigers – According to WP:COMMONNAME, article's title should be the most commonly used name, which is "Tamil Tigers". Plain Google search returns 397,000 hits for "Tamil Tigers" and 380,000 hits for "Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam". Google News search returns 4,930 results for "Tamil Tigers" and 3,820 results for "Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam". Google Books search returns 1,370 results for "Tamil Tigers" and 1,070 results for "Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam". --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 00:41, 22 July 2015 (UTC) Vanjagenije (talk) 10:59, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Weak oppose - Although Tamil Tigers may be more common than Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, LTTE is even more common Google 722,000 results; Google News 24,100 results; and Google Books 5,830 results. WP:ACRONYMTITLE states that acronyms should be used when the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and if readers somewhat familiar with the subject are likely to only recognize the name by its acronym. This is not the case with Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. The differences between Tamil Tigers and Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, in terms of Google results, aren't that great so Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam seems the most appropriate title.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 16:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Obi2canibe: So, you basically agree that "Tamil Tigers" is more common than "Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam"? Vanjagenije (talk) 16:51, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Please read my entire comment, rather than focusing on one point.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 16:53, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Support per nom -- 67.70.32.20 (talk) 05:03, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Support per WP:UCN and – The nominator's case is well made. Being frank, I've never heard this organisation called anything other than the "Tamil Tigers" in anglophone sources. The search results he provides are very clear. The proposed title is the most natural to an anglophone reader, and should hence be the title of this article. RGloucester — ☎ 02:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Support. By far the commonest name in English-language sources. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:51, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Oppose per Obi. "LTTE" appears to be more commonly used; under these circumstances we should default to the official name of the organization rather than an appelation or acronym. —innotata 20:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Support per WP:UCN Rubbish computer 17:04, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 34 external links on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Reduce

Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

Expulsion of Muslims from the Northern province by LTTE,2008–2009 SLA Northern offensive and Northern Theater of Eelam War IV are separate hence reduced excess content.122.174.48.191 (talk) 12:17, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Please get consensus for such large scale removal.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 14:34, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The articles Expulsion of Muslims from the Northern province by LTTE,2008–2009 SLA Northern offensive and Northern Theater of Eelam War IV are linked there and are separate articles and further this article is WP:TOOLONG is already there are articles about them .We cannot have everything in this page these 2 sections were too long hence reduced the content. 182.65.74.203 (talk) 04:37, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Anyone can condense and it.182.65.74.203 (talk) 04:41, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the article is too long but you have removed entire sections instead of leaving a summary as required by WP:SUMMARY. It is easy to delete content, anyone can do it. A good editor would spend some time condensing the content into a summary.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 10:00, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

The section Defeat in the North now is condensed and with details of the War and both Mahinda Rajapaksa and LTTE statements with links to 2008–2009 SLA Northern offensive and Northern Theater of Eelam War IV. The section Ethnic cleansing is also condensed with a link to Expulsion of Muslims from the Northern province by LTTE.The material I removed belongs to the other pages not here in the LTTE organization page.The 2 sections had very minute details which I removed.It has the cover the organization and cover the conflict only briefly here.It appears fine to me.182.65.86.173 (talk) 13:57, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 15:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:34, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:11, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. 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/20071024141206/http://www.eelamweb.com/leader/ to http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items07/250407-5.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 14:28, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 20:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Edits by possible single purpose account re: terrorism

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Rajeevangopalakrishnan wants to completely remove and replace [5][6] the section of the lede which states that the LTTE has been classed as a terrorist group by 32 countries with material stating that the EU has or is considering removing that designation. 1) the EU doesn't bear on all 32 countries in question so deleting the terrorism material entirely appears tendentious and 2) the editor appears determined to phrase the EU information in the most favorable possible light, apparently out of line with the actual sources. It may be appropriate to add some reference to the EU possibly considering (although even that would seem to be an overstatement) removing the designation, but replacing the portion about terrorist status entirely with this new material is inappropriate. The single apparent purpose of the editor's account is concerning. —DIY Editor (talk) 01:55, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

@Rajeevangopalakrishnan: I agree with DIY Editor's statement above. The fact that the LTTE is still on the list needs to stay. One sentence (and a ref) stating the EU Court is recommending they be removed from the list would be acceptable. Any more would be wp:UNDUE. The lawyer stating this would not be notable as lawyers can be paid to say many things. Please do not remove the LTTE's terrorist status again. When the LTTE is removed from a notable list (such as the EU) that could be added. I would imagine that the LTTE will remain on Sri Lanka's terror list for a long time regardless of removal from other lists. Jim1138 (talk) 03:28, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Good call by both of you. Rajeevangopalakrishnan is welcome to add that the EU is reviewing the designation but there is no justification in removing the content.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 16:52, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Addition of second "terrorist" label in lede

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A second "terrorist" label has been introduced in the lede by @Spacecowboy420:, in the first paragraph. The lede already mentions that the LTTE have been labelled as a "terrorist" organistion so the second terrorist label is a violation of WP:NPOV. Although WP:BRD requires that Spacecowboy420 start the discussion, he has refused, and reverted me twice.

If we look at similar articles we see that they either do not mention "terrorist" in the lede or only once:

Provisional Irish Republican Army: Lede does not mention that they were a "terrorist" organisation even they were banned as such.
Kurdistan Workers' Party: Lede only mentions that they were a "terrorist" organisation only once, in the fifth and final paragraph.
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant: Lede only mentions that they were a "terrorist" organisation only once.
Al-Qaeda: Lede only mentions that they were a "terrorist" organisation only once.
Hamas: Lede only mentions that they were a "terrorist" organisation only once.

--Obi2canibe (talk) 11:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 06:28, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://transcurrents.com/tamiliana/archives/399
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071221192746/http://www.defence.lk/new.asp?fname=20071219_05 to http://www.defence.lk/new.asp?fname=20071219_05
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ltteps.org/?view=2095&folder=17
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110615103423/http://www.lankanewspapers.com/news/2011/6/67843.html to http://www.lankanewspapers.com/news/2011/6/67843.html

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 12:44, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Criminal activities section

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Is WP:undue they claim one incident in 30 years and further section needs to be surmised.Galesburg999 (talk) 22:27, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 19:23, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Edit in the introductory section

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I made this edit [7]. but an user has undone it without giving a reason. so I reverted it and made it again. [8]

Reason for edit:

"warfare" has a defined meaning which is different from "terrorist activities". And the phrase "in warfare" is not in the original source material as it implies that it only used for attacks against the other waring faction. in this case Sri Lanka military. In reality LTTE used females suicide attacks against civilians as well. So I changed it because 1) It is not in the source material given. 2) It changes the meaning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.7.44 (talk) 19:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Clean up of the article

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I have working on basing the article according to Wikipedia's quality standards, and this is requiring a cleanup of various sorts.

Moving excessive details to relevant article wherever appropriate: such as the group's financing activities and instances of fraud Affiliates_to_the_Liberation_Tigers_of_Tamil_Eelam which records the information at large. Basing the article on the lines of similar movements/organizations, more sub-articles can accommodate the content/political commentary herein.

This is done in accordance with the inclusion criteria set under Wikipedia:Notability (events). Refer to the same for further clarification of my point.

Allyresurrected (talk) 06:42, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

YOU'RE the making the big changes, so YOU'RE the one who goes to the talk page and explains why instead of automatically reverting. Status quo unless there's a good reason otherwise.

So what's the 18K you cut out, and why? --Calton | Talk 05:21, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Calton, the content had been merged with Affiliates to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam which details information relevant to the financing of the organization and also with prosecution of criminal activity attributed to the outfit.

Thus, the basis of cutting down here on the main page. You'll notice that there's been blanket reverts on my edits on successive occasions though.

Now, I have commenced a new page w.r.t. this Criminal charges leveled against the LTTE as opposed to the earlier change and revert. Allyresurrected (talk) 05:55, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Strength

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Nowhere in this article does it say how many Tigers there were, not even any guesstimates. Why is that?Degen Earthfast (talk) 19:42, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it should be mentioned. There aren't accurate figures due to over/under stating by both sides of the conflict for propaganda purposes. But there are independent sources which provide estimates e.g. University of Maryland.--Obi2canibe (talk) 14:06, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 July 2020

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please remove the comma in the phrase "between 5 July 1987, and 20 November 2008." 2601:5C6:8081:35C0:2D52:B20F:ECF0:C4F4 (talk) 23:15, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Done –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 00:18, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Possible new official website

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello everyone, this website seems to be supporting LTTE: http://www.eelamview.com/ . Is this an official website or just a symphatizer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.230.224.105 (talk) 21:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Looks like a sympathizer made page intended to glorify the LTTE and defame Sri Lanka. Could not find reliable content or any official affiliation to the LTTE. R5bckv (talk) 08:22, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I-help-people-learnbackup (talk) 17:09, 15 February 2021 (UTC)Please change the link "http://www.defence.lk/pps/LTTEinbrief.pdf" to "https://web.archive.org/web/20071012005118/http://www.defence.lk/pps/LTTEinbrief.pdf" Thanks.

Done Vahurzpu (talk) 20:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Missing subjects on the articles

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I thick the editor of this article is just some one read a newspaper and wrote it in wikipedia. This article really gives a bad picture about sinhalese, its like sinhalese had killed the tamils. But the reality is not that Prabakaran wanted an independent country inside sri lanka. So, he gathered innocent tamils and washed their brains made them ready for a cruel war. Most of the terrorists was not with the aim of an Elam, they were threatened and forced to fight against sri lankan army and innocent people. When Prabakaran had used the terrorists as possible he gives up about that one and kill him then inform the others that Sinhalese killed them. Those terrorists had killed people in the most cruel way that no one can do. They had killed children by holding their legs and hitting their heads on the ground till their brain smashes, stabbed pregnant mothers until until their blood becomes a sea and destroyed peoples properties even of tamils properties. I think you should know more. $ahas Wathsara (talk) 04:28, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

    This is not a Sinhalese government propaganda page. The article is written with an abundance of proof. Your comment about this article only looks like you have read the SL government propaganda and commented. Better you create a webpage like your Sinhalese fellows who are doing the same job as yourself. Lastly, I would like to remain you that the world knows about the Sri Lankan Army's notorious rape and the genocide on innocent Tamil people. பெரும்பாண்டியன்2|(talk) 04:28, 2 Sept 2021 (UTC)

popular support of LTTE among Sri Lankan Tamils population being removed from intro

Latest comment: 2 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

@Materialscientist: Users UMDP and JohnWiki159 are removing a referenced source which demonstrates the overwhelming support that the LTTE had among Sri Lankan Tamils during their existence. This is an important point. It is also supported by the overwhelming mandate the Tamil National Alliance received during elections in this same time period, which stated explicitly in their manifesto that they regarded the LTTE as the sole representatives of the Sri Lankan Tamil people. Could a non-Sri Lankan editor intervene, because I do not think it is objective of all to just have references to LTTE detractors in the introduction and ignore references to their supporters. It's as if this wikipedia page has become an one sided propaganda page/polemic dedicated to proving the 'LTTE are terrorists' which is not in keeping with Wikipedia policies of refraining from controversial terms and non-objective viewpoints.Oz346 (talk) 11:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

@UMDP: Can you please explain why its not relevant to the wiki lead. so let me get this straight the views of people outside the country (outside governments) are worthy of inclusion in the intro, but the core population who lived under the LTTE, who overwhelmingly supported the LTTE, and who made up the LTTE, (who the LTTE claimed to be fighting for). Basically the population most relevant to the LTTE, their views are not relevant to the introduction? Oz346 (talk) 12:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

First I did not remove referenced content. The source does not say the opinion you are claiming here or the content you added to the lead. The source says that out of the around 80 Tamils questioned majority agreed with it but does not say the majority of Tamils supported the LTTE. The statement that 89% percent of all Tamils support the LTTE is your own opinion, thus it is also WP:SYNTH as you reached your own conclusion. It doesn't mean you are right or wrong, it means it should not be in the WP:LEAD but in its own section and its best to always mention the sample size for WP:NPOV. -UmdP 12:26, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Even with the disclaimer of sample size (its 89 not 80 btw), it is still relevant for the introduction, as its an important piece of information regarding the core population relevant to the LTTE. It is also supported by the TNA electoral performance which won overwhelming amount of Tamil votes in the north and east in 2004 on a platform of the LTTE being the sole representatives of Sri Lankan Tamils. On what grounds do you say that this survey info should not be in the lead? Oz346 (talk) 12:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

I already explained above. WP:LEAD] isn't for every opinion poll, its not relevant to that and you can't add selected polls to the lead for WP:POVPUSH. There is a section for that and add them there. I am not going to debate opinions or WP:SYNTH. -UmdP 12:51, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

its not just a mere opinion poll, and if there is any POV pushing its by people trying to cover up the overwhelming support the LTTE had among the Tamils masses, which is not just supported by this poll, but also be the electoral performances of the TNA:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Tamil_National_Alliance_2004_parliamentary_election_results

On what grounds do you have to reject the following passage from the lead:

The LTTE was supported by major sections of the Tamil community.^[4] A survey carried out in 2002 from a sample of 89 Sri Lankan Tamils found that 89% regarded the LTTE as their sole representatives.^[5] Oz346 (talk) 13:12, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Same reasons above. Repeating the same question isn't going to change how ridiculous it is to add a opinion poll of 89 to a WP:LEAD. Don't see any issue with the first sentence. Also claiming that all votes for TNA are due to supporting LTTE is your opinion, its barely even WP:SYNTH -UmdP 13:21, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

The TNA explicitly campaigned on that platform in their manifesto and received a mandate from the overwhelming majority of Tamils in the north and east:

https://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=11695

Anyway I'm not asking to add the TNA info, but just to make a point that it's not a fringe view whatsoever that the majority of Tamils accepted them as their sole representatives at the time. You say adding the poll info is ridiculous, but I will wait for an independent, neutral opinion to arbitrate because I disagree.Oz346 (talk) 13:40, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

References

^ "LTTE Ban In EU Remains". The Sunday Leader. Retrieved 3 May 2015.
^ "EU reimposes ban on LTTE: SL". The Daily Mirror. Retrieved 3 May 2015.
^ "Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/521 of 26 March 2015 updating and amending the list of persons, groups and entities subject to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism, and repealing Decision 2014/483/CFSP". Access to European Union law. Retrieved 3 May 2015.
^ Wilson, A. J. (2000). Sri Lankan Tamil Nationalism: Its Origins and Development in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. Sydney: C. Hurst & Co. Publishers. pp. 24, 131–132. ISBN 978-1-85065-338-7. OCLC 237448732.
^ An Opinion Poll On Peace, Peace Confidence Index (PCI), TOP-LINE RESULTS. Social Indicator, November 2002, page 29

Semi-protected edit request on 10 July 2022

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change: Defeat in the North Main articles: 2008–2009 SLA Northern offensive and Northern Theater of Eelam War IV Sporadic fighting had been happening in the North for months, but the intensity of the clashes increased after September 2007. Gradually, the defence lines of the LTTE began to fall. The advancing military confined the LTTE into rapidly diminishing areas in the North. Prabhakaran was seriously injured during air strikes carried out by the Sri Lanka Air Force on a bunker complex in Jayanthinagar on 26 November 2007.[115][dubious – discuss] Earlier, on 2 November 2007, S. P. Thamilselvan, who was the head of the rebels' political wing, was killed during another government air raid.[116] On 2 January 2008, the Sri Lankan government officially abandoned the ceasefire agreement. By 2 August 2008, LTTE lost the Mannar District following the fall of Vellankulam town. Troops captured Pooneryn and Mankulam during the final months of 2008.

On 2 January 2009, the President of Sri Lanka, Mahinda Rajapaksa, announced that the Sri Lankan troops had captured Kilinochchi, the city which the LTTE had used for over a decade as its de facto administrative capital.[117][118][119] On the same day, President Rajapaksa called upon LTTE to surrender.[101] It was stated that the loss of Kilinochchi had caused substantial damage to the LTTE's public image,[118] and that the LTTE was likely to collapse under military pressure on multiple fronts.[120] As of 8 January 2009, the LTTE abandoned its positions on the Jaffna peninsula to make a last stand in the jungles of Mullaitivu, their last main base.[121] The Jaffna Peninsula was captured by the Sri Lankan Army by 14 January.[122] On 25 January 2009, SLA troops "completely captured" Mullaitivu town, the last major LTTE stronghold.[123]

President Mahinda Rajapaksa declared military victory over the Tamil Tigers on 16 May 2009, after 26 years of conflict.[124] The rebels offered to lay down their weapons in return for a guarantee of safety.[125] On 17 May 2009, LTTE's head of the Department of International Relations, Selvarasa Pathmanathan conceded defeat, saying in an email statement, "this battle has reached its bitter end".

Into: On 2 January 2009, the President of Sri Lanka, Mahinda Rajapaksa, announced that the Sri Lankan troops had captured Kilinochchi, the city which the LTTE had used for over a decade as its de facto administrative capital.[117][118][119] On the same day, President Rajapaksa called upon LTTE to surrender.[101] It was stated that the loss of Kilinochchi had caused substantial damage to the LTTE's public image,[118] and that the LTTE was likely to collapse under military pressure on multiple fronts. However, a report by the British television news program, Channel 4 News revealed the factors that led to the fall of the Kilinochchi. The government told UN officials that they must leave the city because it could no longer ensure their safety. Tamils trooped to the UN office on September 15, 2008 to plead for the organization to stay. Former UN Spokesman in Sri Lanka Gordon Weiss that the objective of the government was not really to ensure the safety of UN officials, but to remove any international witness in Kilinochchi so that there would be no official account of the atrocities that are about to be committed. The plea, however, fell on deaf ears and the UN left. Benjamin Dix, a former UN staffer in the Kilinochchi office, considered the decision as an “abandonment of the people” and the “worst nightmare of [his] life.” With no presence of international witness in the city, government forces attacked Kilinochchi and it eventually fell on January 2, 2009.

However, the Channel 4 News procured footages and interviews that showed rampant human rights violation committed by the government. A hospital in Puthukkudiyiruppu was shelled by government forces despite a red cross mark on its roof. A witness shared that between 10 and 15 people were killed during the attack. He also believes that the attack was intentional, although government dismissed the claim and called its activity a “humanitarian rescue mission.” Survivors also told Channel 4 News that the military employed a strategic scheduling of attacks. It usually fired a first shot, then it is followed by another shelling around 30 minutes later to catch people trying to rescue those hit by the first shelling off-guard. In January 2009, the government designated a “No Fire Zone” in Valaignarmadam and a temporary hospital was also set up in Putumattalan. Despite this designation, the government still shelled areas and killed thousands of civilians. Only one doctor attended the hospital. Because of the shelling, the hospital was further moved to Mullivaikal. According to Vany Kumar, a British-Tamil biomedical specialist in London who was visiting a relative when the military confrontation took place, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) visited the hospital to obtain its coordinates. In war situations, it is the practice of the Red Cross to get the coordinates of the hospital and send the same to both the combatants so they can avoid attacks on the area. Kumar and other witnesses interviewed by Channel 4 News shared that hospitals were constantly shelled, prompting it to ask the Red Cross to stop sending the coordinates to the government. Because of the shelling and the scarcity of medical supply, the hospital was shut down and more than 100,000 people were abandoned. The government declared military victory against the Tamil Tigers on May 18, 2009 and a ceremony was held. However, elsewhere in the northern region, other forces were committing war crimes. Mobile phone footages secured by Channel 4 News show Sri Lankan soldiers shooting naked, blindfolded and bound Tamil prisoners straight to the head. Naked women were also shown and evidence point to sexual violence prior to murder. The Sri Lankan government denied the footages, although the United Nations itself already authenticated the videos. The government also said that some high-ranking officials of the Tamil Tigers surrendered, but a Sinhalese government critic provided Channel 4 News photos of two high-ranking civilian officials of Tamil Tigers killed despite their voluntary surrender. The source told that these officials communicated their intent to surrender to President Mahinda Rajapaksa himself and that such offer was accepted. On the agreed date of the surrender, the source revealed that the two officials were carrying a white flag, but the Sri Lankan soldiers shot them. Channel 4 News revealed photos of the dead body of these two civilian officials. Critical Kosar (talk) 01:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC) Request to make substantive changes

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.Fbifriday (talk) 07:46, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

athimanian quote

Latest comment: 1 year ago12 comments4 people in discussion

There is no substantial evidence that the Athimanian quote was referring to a desire to ethnic cleanse all Sinhalese civilians from north and east. Even the LTTE's own official materials and songs at times refers to the Sri Lankan Armed forces often as just 'Sinhalese'. It is an ambiguous statement. One example out of many is here from this LTTE song:

https: //youtu.be/ZO7ID-8QIVM

The lyrics refer to the army soldier as just 'Sinhalavan' (Sinhala man) and that his fort and lion flag will fall following an attack.

The LTTE saw the Sinhalese army as representatives of the Sinhalese people, not as just 'Sri Lankan soldiers'. It's not a mystery why they often used the two terms interchangeably. And it is much easier and quicker to say 'Sinhalese' than the longer winded 'Sri Lankan soldiers' or 'Sinhalese soldiers', especially when literally the only Sinhalese in the main warzones of the north were Sinhalese soldiers.

https: //youtu.be/pbHYTnTGN4o

Here is another LTTE song where the word Sinhala is used to specifically refer to just the armed forces, in this case the Sinhala air force, the lyrics talk about 'sinhala dropping bombs (kundu)'.

These are official ltte songs written by the LTTE lyricists (like Puthuvai Ratnadurai who was captured by the SLA at the end of the war in 2009 and made to disappear). This proves beyond doubt that the word Sinhalese was used by the LTTE at times to refer specifically to the armed forces. I have removed the quote that JohnWiki has placed under the 'ethnic cleansing' section, as there is no proof that it refers specifically to ethnic cleansing. Even the original uthr source that the quote is from makes no reference to ethnic cleansing. It is original research to make an assumption that it refers to ethnic cleansing especially when the original UTHR source makes no claim of it. Oz346 (talk) 10:00, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

To add to this, I'm currently looking for a LTTE press release on the battle of elephant pass (2000) where they directly use the word 'Sinhalese' to refer to the Sri Lankan Army. I should have the document somewhere on a old cd, the URL from which it is from is no longer active since the organisation became defunct. Will look for it to provide further proof. Oz346 (talk) 11:33, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Or they could just be racist and make no distinctions between civilians and soldiers. To them, a Sinhalese is a Sinhalese irrespective of civilian status. You’re ignoring the context of decades of massacres of Sinhalese civilians and the obvious resentment of the Sinhalese population at large, especially Sinhalese in the claimed Tamil Eelam territories. SinhalaLion (talk) 11:47, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Thats your assumption and you cannot prove it. I recommend you read 'A Long Watch: The Capture of Commodore Boyagoda' by a Sri Lankan Navy POW who described his positive and negative experiences at the hands of LTTE guards. Some abused him, whereas some treated him well, and he hoped that those were still alive. Personally, I believe Athimanian quote was referring to ejecting the Sri Lankan army (again I cannot prove that beyond doubt, but i'm basing it on the context which i have seen used in many other statements of theirs in Tamil, referring to their wars with 'Sinhalese', i.e. the Sri Lankan armed forces in the north.) No one is disputing that the LTTE had racist members who were anti-sinhalese. But you cannot make sweeping statements as if they are a monolith, and read the minds of all their members.Oz346 (talk) 11:57, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

To add to this, this quote is from the Vanni region in the northern province, which is 99% Tamil speaking. The LTTE were fighting on the Jaffna front at the time and were not committing 'decades of massacres of Sinhalese civilians' in that region, for precisely the reason that there were next to no Sinhalese there. LTTE killings of Sinhala civilians took place primarily in the south or around the multiethnic eastern province. If you want to be honest and look at context, you need to look at the region that the LTTE commander is from, and who he is speaking to (namely the Tamil civilians in the LTTE held north, who have had next to no interaction with Sinhala civilians in their lives, but who suffered greatly at the hands of the Sinhalese armed forces who they detested and wanted out of their homelands.) There is regional variation in the attitudes of the LTTE and Tamil civilians depending on their local environment and experiences. You cannot project the attitude of say an eastern province LTTE member to the north and vice versa. Its not as simple as that.Oz346 (talk) 12:09, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Regional variations… all I can say is that I’ve come across Tamils from the north who have had little to no interaction with Sinhalese and still hate Sinhalese with all their hearts. I could easily imagine these people supporting or even engaging in anti-Sinhalese violence if given the opportunity. Let’s also not forget that settlements like Weli Oya were in the north. The Anuradhapura massacre was orchestrated and carried out by the northern LTTE. Massacres may have predominantly taken place in or near the east due to the larger Sinhalese presence, but the Northern LTTE looked on, gave impunity to, and even glorified the perpetrators (e.g., Newton, Karuna, Pulendran). So no, I don’t believe the north is off the hook.

But the bigger issue is that citing songs is a flawed comparison. Sometimes one needs to make verbal sacrifices to maintain the flow of the song. So sure, maybe in the songs, they got sloppy and just used “Sinhalese” for the sake of rhythm. But Athimanian was not singing. Unless he was delivering a poem, he was very capable of saying “Sinhalese army” or “Sinhalese soldiers”.

In the end, we’re both making assumptions, but you’re making even more assumptions than JohnWiki and I are. You have to prove that Athimanian meant something that he hadn’t said, despite him having full liberty of diction.

I could give you a quote of an LTTE member confessing to not making distinctions between armed and unarmed Sinhalese settlers when massacring them, but then you’ll just say I can’t project one LTTE member to another. But then again, that’s what you’re doing, projecting what you believe to be the actual meaning of “Sinhalese” in those songs to Athimanian’s speech. SinhalaLion (talk) 12:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

I’d also like to add that Athimanian mentioned the East in that statement, so it’s very likely that Sinhalese civilians were referenced in his statement. SinhalaLion (talk) 12:59, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

"Let’s also not forget that settlements like Weli Oya were in the north." Manal Aru is a border village, and its a tiny % of the northern Tamil population, the bulk of which did not interact with Sinhala civilians. So its a very weak point.

"But the bigger issue is that citing songs is a flawed comparison." I will find the LTTE press release on the battle of elephant pass where they refer to the army as simply 'Sinhalese'. Bear with me.

"In the end, we’re both making assumptions"

Exactly, so one cannot paste this under the ethnic cleansing section under an assumption. It is ambiguous.

"I’d also like to add that Athimanian mentioned the East in that statement, so it’s very likely that Sinhalese civilians were referenced in his statement"

North-east is Tamil Eelam in the mind of Tamil nationalists, it is one homeland. I disagree that it is very likely he is referring to Sinhala civilians. You can do a survey of northern Tamils (I am one) and see what they believe that statement means to them. I guarantee you that the vast majority will believe it refers to ejecting the Sinhalese armed forces whose occupying presence the majority detest with all their hearts. Not to some imaginary ethnic cleansing of a non existent northern sinhala population in the core jaffna and vanni regions. As i stress before, most northern tamils (the audience of athimanian's speech, who i'm sure he wanted to recruit from to battle the sinhala army) do not have any day to day interaction with sinhala civilians, in fact most are incredibly ignorant of the regions outside of the north. Oz346 (talk) 13:15, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

I won’t deny your perception of Tamil opinion, but I know Tamils (both northern and eastern) who seem to be okay with telling Sinhalese settlers or their descendants to pack up their bags and go to the South. Most Sinhalese in the North-East are there on some kind of settlement scheme, so whether they make up a single or double-digit percentage would be irrelevant for these people; if the Sinhalese are settlers, they need to go. SinhalaLion (talk) 13:31, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

inclined to agree with Oz346.Further who is Athimanian? He is not notable LTTE leader to mention his comment.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:49, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Athimanian was the head of the LTTE’s education unit in the Vanni. He is a notable figure in the LTTE. Also is there a rule saying that only comments of notable LTTE leaders can be included in the article? JohnWiki159 (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Athimanian was the head of the LTTE’s education unit in the Vanni and he is not a military leader of the LTTE for his views to be given weight.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:20, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Regarding UTHR

Latest comment: 1 year ago5 comments2 people in discussion

@Oz346 As I said in my edit summary, UTHR reports have been used by internationally recognized human rights organization such as amnesty and Human Rights Watch. UTHR has also been awarded for their reporting on both sides. https://www.hrw.org/news/2007/05/04/sri-lanka-and-burundi-human-rights-defenders-win-2007-martin-ennals-award. I know you have also used UTHR as sources in editing articles related to Human Rights Violations of the state. Also, we can't expect a neutral opinion regarding Sri lanka from Prof. Peter Schalk when he is already an Advisory Committee member of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam. JohnWiki159 (talk) 11:17, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Its not only Schalk who calls the UTHR anti-LTTE. Dr. Brian Senewiratne who wrote the foreword for their book 'broken palmyra' said this about them in 2001:

"Back in the 1980s, it was an outstanding group that exposed the atrocities committed on the Tamil people. So much so that when they invited me to write a Foreword to their book ‘The Broken Palmyra’, I readily agreed.

Since then, a lot of water has flowed under the bridge. For a start, the group has fallen apart and for all intents and purposes now consists of a single individual. From being the impartial and credible Human Rights group it was, the UTHR(J) has changed to simply being virulently anti-LTTE. Do they know that their Reports are being used by the President and the barbaric Armed Forces to cover-up the gross violations of human rights that are occurring? Have they protested at her recent statement? If not, why not? Do they realize that this could well increase the appalling activity of the Armed Forces?

A Human Rights group has the function of documenting the violation of Human Rights across the entire spectrum i.e. the Government and the Tamil Militants (The LTTE, EPDP, EPRLF, TELO, PLOTE etc.). It cannot give the impression (which the Reports from this group recently have done) of being virulently anti-LTTE because it damages their reputation and credibility. The damage is enhanced when their Reports are praised by the leader of a Government under whose barbaric regime, a decimation of Jaffna, the land and it’s people, has reached new heights. It would worry me as much if some Tamil (or for that matter, Sinhalese or Muslim) group who have been guilty of serious human rights violations says that they are “very appreciative” of comments made in these Reports to their activities."

https://briansenewiratne.blogspot.com/2001/11/what-can-tamils-expect-from-2001.html

Its not at all a surprise that Rajan Hoole would be anti-LTTE considering that his life was threatened by them. Oz346 (talk) 20:05, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Dr. Brian Senevirathne is among the Senators appointed by the appointed by the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam. http://tgte.ca/senate/. Can't expect a neutral opinion regarding this from him too. I have provided the opinion of International Human Rights Organizations. You are saying "Its not at all a surprise that Rajan Hoole would be anti-LTTE considering that his life was threatened by them". In the same way, I could say "Its not at all a surprise that Prof. Peter Schalk would be pro-LTTE considering that he is a Advisory Committee member of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam". JohnWiki159 (talk) 12:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok I've added schalk's background which will indicate to readers his potential bias. I don't think all these details should be censored outright, they can be qualified and still mentioned. Oz346 (talk) 13:37, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok. I agree with this. At the same time, it should be noted that in the same way you added shcalks's perception to invalidate UTHR's claim, another person can add another claim to invalidate schalk's perception. This will go on like a cycle. JohnWiki159 (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Women's participation

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Mam1220 amd Krv1325 A very larges section about Women's participation gives a WP:Undue weight.I am inclined to agree with Oz346. Saturnrises (talk) 21:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Good point about undue weight. I think the topic deserves its own page, actually. So it could be shortened to one main paragraph on the LTTE page, with a link to its own page. Mam1220 (talk) 17:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

@Krv1325:, @Mam1220: Oz346 (talk) 22:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

[1] "LTTE Ban In EU Remains". The Sunday Leader. Retrieved 3 May 2015.

[2] "EU reimposes ban on LTTE: SL". The Daily Mirror. Retrieved 3 May 2015.

[3] "Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/521 of 26 March 2015 updating and amending the list of persons, groups and entities subject to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism, and repealing Decision 2014/483/CFSP". Access to European Union law. Retrieved 3 May 2015.

[wilson-4] Wilson, A. J. (2000). Sri Lankan Tamil Nationalism: Its Origins and Development in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. Sydney: C. Hurst & Co. Publishers. pp. 24, 131–132. ISBN 978-1-85065-338-7. OCLC 237448732.

[5] An Opinion Poll On Peace, Peace Confidence Index (PCI), TOP-LINE RESULTS. Social Indicator, November 2002, page 29

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]