Talk:Batang Kali massacre
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of Batang Kali massacre be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
POV
editI've removed the following sentence from the original article:
- Till today the British government has not made any official unreserved apology to the victims and family members that has been mistreated during the massacre.
I find this unecessarily POV, but I think we can reincorporate it into the document if we can answer the following issues:
- Who says that an apology it's deserved? When did they say it?
- Has the British government said anything about the incident, and any responses to groups demanding for an apology for the incident? — T-Boy: (complain bitterly) (laugh contemptuously) 08:30, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Firstly your statement above is also not written from a neutral point of view. Perhaps the sentence above wasn't written well. Take a look at the following documents.
- www.petitiononline.com/19481212/petition.html for the petition letter
- The Star article regarding the above issue
It is impossible to put the link on WP since it triggers the spam filtration. Diagramma Della Verita (talk) 16:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- Petitiononline is not link worthy for a good reason, since they're hardly notable. The Star article is better, why don't you cite that properly in the article? Annie D (talk) 00:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
editI've just made some edits for style and tense. I tried not to change meaning. I also started tagging unsourced comments but there is a lot things so I didn't want to cover the article in tags. Can any one produce some sources? reports on investigation in 1949 or newspaper articles to firm up this article? Grible (talk) 21:55, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Opinion
editSeeing as there are still no sources for most of the articles content and any new edits seem to take the form of a list of fairly inflammatory or at least POV statements I'm going to risk my neck and tag the article for neutrality. Grible (talk) 20:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Background?
editIt would be nice to see some background about what lead to this incident. Kevink707 (talk) 02:43, 18 April 2012 (UTC)