Talk:Military of Sri Lanka

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Military of Sri Lanka article.
Article policies
Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, and are not for engaging in discussion of off-topic matters not related to the main article. User talk pages are more appropriate for non-article-related discussion topics. Please do not use this page as a discussion forum for off-topic matters. See talk page guidelines.

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation, a collaborative, bipartisan effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Sri Lankan Civil War. For guidelines and a participants list see the project page. You can discuss the project at its talk page.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Source

http://reference.allrefer.com/country-guide-study/sri-lanka/ Source for more info however do not use information on what it says is miiltary currently as ithat is dated 1988, it will have to used in historical areas. but you can use data from historical periods to fill in incompletes areas, remember don't blatantly plagaise write it in your own words if you are going to undertake this. CooldogCongo 29 June 2005 04:32 (UTC)

[edit] extra information

http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Elkawgw/cdf.html It had good information on history of Ceylon military history CooldogCongo

[edit] Violence in December / January

No mention was made to the killing of innocent civilians during the same period. Many of it blamed on the military. Nor any mention was made to the 30 odd missing person’s complaints made at the Human Rights Commission. Again all the missing persons reports suggested abduction by Sri Lanka Military.

Please bear in mind this is an Encyclopeida and not a platform to justify the appalling atrocities being committed by the Sri Lankan military against the Tamil community.

do you have conclusive proofs??

AGAIN SIGN YOUR COMMENTS and do not make claims without evidence, you will just get ignored.A complaint isn't the same as a conviction btw.Pubuman 20:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Following is the link to the full statement released by the European Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) with regards to recent incidents of violence in Sri Lanka.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/5298748.stm
The statement clearly states that the Sri Lankan Military has carried out “war crimes”. --82.40.185.111 11:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
The statement alledges that. It doesnt "clearly say" anything. Either find some proof or shutup and get lost. OzLawyer
This article is loaded with pro-government propaganda and POV. Just in the intro it uses the word "deadliest terrorist." Elalan 02:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
No no, I dont think so at all. This is a very good article about SL forces. No need to change it. And bloody sign your posts next time you bloody guys. Child_Soldier 23:14 24 Nov 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Terrorist

I have changed the "terrist" tag and have added "proscribed as a terrorist organisation by 32 countries". Please try to keep it NPOV and avoid such tagging. It is therefore best to write it as I have written (That is not my strandard but its how its writen everywhere). If you want you can add the countries but I thought that some would dissagree with it. Watchdogb 21:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SLNS Ship pic.jpg

Image:SLNS Ship pic.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SLAF kfir pic.JPG

Image:SLAF kfir pic.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Paramilitaries

Please do not remove what I have added. These are documented from both the State Department and the world Factbook. Wiki Raja (talk) 06:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh is that the same State Department and the same CIA, who said there where weapons of mass-distraction in Iraq ?????Nitraven (talk) 13:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a place for opinionated blogging, but factual and neutral information. Wiki Raja (talk) 23:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
True Very True !!!!!!! cant agree with u any more. However the listed groups are not official Paramilitaries. As termed Military of Sri Lanka these include the official state forces sanctioned by Parliament. But you seem to do exactly what you ask others not to do??? Adding that link without any credible and official references is in fact on different from "opinionated blogging" and can not be considered as "factual and neutral information". Therefore do not add these to the list unless you have credible and official references.Nitraven (talk) 09:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
The citations back these groups as paramilitary. For example, TMVP, is a widely known paramilitary organization. There are even allegations from RS that Karuna took many orders from Sri Lankan Military to kill people and so on. Watchdogb (talk) 21:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Using fake references is bordering on vandalism, and if these groups are added back without references that explicitly state they are part of the "Military of Sri Lanka", I will take this to AN/I. --snowolfD4 ( talk / @ ) 05:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
The U.S. State department web site is not fake and so is the World Factbook. Would you like to contest this to admin here in Wikipedia? Wiki Raja (talk) 05:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Please stop blanking info backed by official sources. Also, please refrain from calling legitimate edits vandalism. Wiki Raja (talk) 06:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Please state reason why *CIA World Factbook, 2005 edition should be added to the see also when there is no information about Sri Lanka or Sri Lankan Military on the wikipage. The See also should provide links to other wiki pages that contain additional information about the subject matter of the relevant article. Nitraven (talk) 18:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

The text of the state department document does not state that these are groups funded by the SL Government but only goes far as to state that there is "suspected of being linked".
"There were numerous reports that armed paramilitary groups, suspected of being linked to the government or security forces, participated in armed attacks during the year. These groups included the Karuna faction of the LTTE, the Eelam People's Democratic Party (EPDP), and the People's Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam (PLOTE). The LTTE continued to control large sections of the north and east and engaged in politically motivated killings, disappearances, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, denial of fair public trial, arbitrary interference with privacy, denial of freedom of speech, press, of assembly and association, and the recruitment of child soldiers. "
The official paramilitary units are clearly stated so,
"Following the November 17 presidential election, the government eliminated the Ministry of Internal Security and placed control of the 66-thousand-member police force, which includes the 6-thousand member paramilitary Special Task Force, under the Ministry of Defense."
Farther more wikipages such as the page on Indian Paramilitary Forces lists only state/central governmental paramilitaries that have been formed after being sanctioned by the Parliament.
Due to this reason stating that these individual groups are paramilitaries based on this document maybe legitimized, however claiming that they are official governmental paramilitaries is inaccurate, vandalism and opinionated blogging.Nitraven (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
It is not important whether they are official or unofficial paramilitaries, but their functions are similar to regular paramilitaries of a country. US State Departments and CIA references[1][2][3][4] enough to categorise them as paramilitaries. If you want, refer them as "Unofficial Paramilitaries", but the attributions are encyclopedic and not contradicting with any of the wiki policies.Teasereds (talk) 15:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
This is about the Sri Lankan Military, a military of a Sovereign state if you go to state that we should have a link of paramilitaries of the country of Sri Lanka then you can go far as to add the LTTE since its engaged in paramilitary activities in the island of Sri Lanka. However is seen no reason why we should add them to the list of units of the Sri Lankan Military since there are not one of them. You may categorise them as paramilitaries in general but not paramilitaries of the Sri Lankan Military. By the way there is nothing called unofficial paramilitaries, thats just word used to term paramilitaries that are claimed to be associated with, yet is not proven to be.Nitraven (talk) 16:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


You stated "a military of a Sovereign state", but still it is criticized by various groups globally for its various sorts of killings. So your "Sovereign state's military" doesn't take it anywhere. If you have citation that LTTE also involved on paramilitary activities, then add it. You state "yet is not proven to be", then how the CIA and US State Department relate things on their statements. If you are reluctant to use the word "unofficial", then you can state "Paramilitaries Aided by Sri Lankan Military". Don't try to purify the Sri Lankan Military. We are developing here a neutral encyclopedia.Teasereds (talk) 17:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible solution

I think we can split the controversy into two questions:

  1. Should non-governmental paramilitary groups be covered in this article at all? I think they should not; we already have the article Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups, which already lists TMVP, EPDP, PLOTE and EPRLF (to which Razeek Group redirects).
    If this does not convince inclusionists, then I ask that they take a look at similar articles, which should be under Category:Military by country. If we find several articles that support inclusion, then we can take it from there. I advice the exclusionists to also look at articles that might back up their point, so we get a good basis for comparison.
  2. What is the right wording of the section? The current wording clearly refers to all paramilitary groups, which does not fit to the limited list. I will therefore change it from "There are only two Paramilitary Forces in Sri Lanka" to "There are only two Paramilitary Forces under the direct command of the Sri Lanka government. See also Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups." I'm no expert in military matters, please someone who knows better adjust the wording.

— Sebastian 06:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Please let me suggest changing the name Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups to Sri Lankan Tamil paramilitary groups. By grouping all these paramilitaries with the LTTE, it makes it look like that all these groups are fighting against the Sri Lankan government, when in fact it is all these parmilitary groups that support the government. In the ethnic war there are two primary combatants which is the LTTE and the GOSL. As for the Tamil paramilitaries, they are used by the Sri Lankan military. Wiki Raja (talk) 07:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Furthermore, LTTE should be taken off the list on that page since they run a virtual de facto state with its own courts, police, and administration. The others on the list do not and are under the command of the Sri Lankan military. Wiki Raja (talk) 07:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
While I see that this issue is connected with a possible solution to this discussion, I feel this should be discussed primarily at talk:Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups#Proposed name change. I'm copying it there. — Sebastian 07:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the change of wording by Sebastian, however I suggest that the link to the Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups should be moved to the See also category from the sub-category of Paramilitary Forces.Nitraven (talk) 08:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
I disagree, since there are a total of five Tamil paramilitary groups used by the Sri Lankan armed forces. Also, the Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups should be changed to Tamil paramilitary groups. Or, I can kindly create a page for Tamil Paramilitary groups. Wiki Raja (talk) 08:53, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Note: Proposal to create a new article for "Sri Lankan paramilitary groups" has been moved to Talk:Sri Lankan Tamil militant groups, where it fits to the existing discussion about the proposed name change. Let's fight discussion creep! — Sebastian 00:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the military expenditure

i think it is time to update the military expenditure figures since the 2008 figure is more than twice the sum shown in wikipedia. 124.43.44.53 (talk) 03:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). — Sebastian 20:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
That said, it is important, especially in this disputed area, to back up everything you write with reliable sources. — Sebastian 21:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)