Talk:Assassination of Mohamad Chatah

Lebanon Low‑importance

	Lebanon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lebanon-related articles 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.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Low-importance).

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS

The article Assassination of Mohamad Chatah, along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:

Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Remedy instructions and exemptions

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any restrictions (excluding 1RR/reverting violations) and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Violations of revert restrictions should be reported to the administrators' edit warring noticeboard.
Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned.

With respect to any reverting restrictions:

Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism.
Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Alleged Hezbollah involvement

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I put Hezbollah as the suspected perpetrators (widely accused by various opposition members in Lebanon). Certainly it is not officially a "perpetrator" until some proves are given or Hezbollah admits it (i doubt they ever do it).GreyShark (dibra) 11:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

References to potentially add

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Plot Spoiler (talk) 01:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

removing content

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

If you look article history you'll see now one israeli editor is removing sourced content and desperately wants to accuse Hezbollah. We're all well familiar with Wahhabi-Israeli friendship, but keep in mind that Shias and Christians don't share their ways so their opinions should be represented also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.239.0.37 (talk) 03:57, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Comment on content, not the contributor. Cease your WP:Personal attacks - claiming I am Israeli that is promoting some kind of "Wahhabi-Israeli friendship".
http://lubpak.com and a fringe commentator at the questionable Iranian government outlet PressTV are not WP:RS.
Labeling the March 14 Movement as "pro-Saudi" is WP:NPOV well-poisoning. Plot Spoiler (talk) 02:11, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Answers:

There's more then obivous you're trying to present only pro-Saudi and anti-Hezbollah view.
Lubpak contains article written by journalist Laleen Ahmad, he also write for Daily Star from Lebanon and his other article is already included.
There's absolutely no rule that Press TV "isn't reliable source", it's your own personal and political view. I already saw hardcore Zionists complained about PressTV because it offers completely different view, but Wikipedia isn't Zionist outlet and it should present all views. PressTV, Daily Star, Haaretz, etc. "IJustDontLikeIt" isn't good excuse for manipulating with Wiki policies. Press TV is cited in more then 1000 Wiki articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=presstv.com&title=Special%3ASearch
Denial that March 14 movement is pro-Saudi is ridiculous, there's million sources for it, even statements from their politicians. Leading politician of that coalition is Saudi-Lebanese citizen born and living at the moment in Saudi Arabia. The same goes for pro-Iranian March 8 movement which contains Hezbollah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.165.157.220 (talk) 04:34, 16 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Add topic