Talk:2008 Armenian presidential election protests

Armenia Start‑class

	2008 Armenian presidential election protests is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArmeniaWikipedia:WikiProject ArmeniaTemplate:WikiProject ArmeniaArmenian articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Comments

POV issues aside, shouldn't this article be named 2008 Armenian presidential election protests VartanM (talk) 20:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed some weasel wording and pov wording.
LTP was not placed under house arrest
Exaggerated numbers
Added fact tags where one is needed

VartanM (talk) 22:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Number is much, much greater than 15,000. It was the largest demonstration yet. (see pics) --> I was there, I should know.

2. The demonstration at Liberty Square was violently suppressed by special forces using truncheons and electric shock equipment. There are videos showing this, so there's no disputing the government provocation and excessive force used.

3. Ter-Petrossian was de facto under house arrest. Serouj (talk) 22:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1 all numbers should be sourced with reliable, neutral, non-Armenian sources. 2 again reliable sources, preferably neutral, non-Armenian 3 we can say that he was being held in his house, but was not officially under house arrest. And then state the official reason. VartanM (talk) 22:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pictures. VartanM (talk) 22:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The two sources that need to be replaced are A1+ and Armenianliberty, both are anti-government. I'm looking for neutral ones to replace them. VartanM (talk) 22:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Armenianow should not be used as well for obvious reasons.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 22:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding? Who are you to decide what news sources to be used? You would like to use only government mouthpiece as a news source? I have personally seen here how the government has distorted the news. So far, based on my experiences, ArmeniaLiberty, A1+, and ArmeniaNow very accurately portray what is happening on the ground. There has been an information blockade by the Armenian government for over a week now on their news sources. Now they've made it into marshall law -- no Armenian mass media can write any news other than the official government line. Serouj (talk) 23:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually no, i'm quite serious. You need to back up your pov original research. All three are non neutral sources. You should be able to substitute those sources with non-Armenian neutral ones. As for the media blockade, that's what usually happens during a state of emergency, they oughta start imposing curfews as well.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 23:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... There's no problem in having Armenian sources. Almost all media in Armenia are, naturally, Armenian. It's like saying you need French and Swedish news sources to cover the article on the American Presidential elections. Serouj (talk) 23:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no media blockade in the U.S. when there's a state of emergency. Serouj (talk) 23:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are not using just any Armenian sources. You are using anti-government sources. A1+ is vehemently anti-government. The other two are less so but still cannot by any means be considered neutral sources.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 23:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look, for each of those A1+ articles, I personally witnessed the claims made (e.g. cordon around opera) and/or corroborated by at least one other source. The one on the provocateurs was also corroborated by RFE/RL and the NSS admitted to it in a press conference. Nevertheless, A1+ is not any more biased than any government source. It is a logical fallacy to assume that government sources are reliable. Serouj (talk) 23:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suffice it to say that there is much news that has not been published yet. For example, the reason the first car was burned (during daylight at around 4pm) was that that car was driven FULL SPEED into the thick crowd by a policeman. At least 2 women were injured and an ambulance came to take them. The policeman fled on foot... Car was destroyed by people. This happened in broad daylight. Serouj (talk) 00:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally withnessing and writing an article is called original research. Its simply not allowed in wikipedia, you might want to look at doing that in wikinews. VartanM (talk) 23:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to specific A1+ articles. Eupator thinks that they are unreliable... Just giving my two cents based on my experiences the last few weeks. Serouj (talk) 23:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A1+ is the least reliable of them all. They are not only pro-opposition, but pro-LTP. VartanM (talk) 23:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have no evidence to back this claim. Based on my experience, A1+ has so far been as reliable as ArmeniaLiberty, ArmeniaNow, and EurasiaNet. They corroborate what is happening on the ground. Government sources simply do not. And the further away you move from Armenia (e.g. NY Times, BBC) the less accurate the news gets. For example, NY Times stated in its article that central roads of Yerevan have been blocked by protestors for 11 days, which is simply false. That only happened for one day (March 1, indeed, less than 24 hours). Serouj (talk) 00:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there is much news that has not been published yet. For example, the reason the first car was burned (during daylight at around 4pm) was that that car was driven FULL SPEED into the thick crowd by a policeman. At least 2 women were injured and an ambulance came to take them. The policeman fled on foot... Car was destroyed by people. This happened in broad daylight. Serouj (talk) 00:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Serouj I'm not asking to use government sources, although we might have to when sourcing official announcements. Otherwise, opposition sources are not reliable. You're using one of them to source LTP's arrest, which is a POV claim. The article should first say that officially LTP is not unde house arrest[source], but x claims otherwise[source]. VartanM (talk) 02:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken Vartan. Note also that LTP's house arrest is referenced by RFE/RL in the intro. Will try to provide alternative / official positions where they differ from the oppositions or from third parties like RFE/RL, Reuters, AP. Serouj (talk) 02:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that we can cite differing perspectives and versions of things, from both the government and the opposition, and we don't have to settle on one version as the truth, with a certain "neutral" source backing it up. NPOV means that we try to represent what various sides say in a controversy. As a simplistic example, you could have: "On Day X, 50,000 protesters were present according to pro-opposition media source Y,[cite] while pro-government media source Z said that only 15,000 were present.[cite]" Everyking (talk) 03:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Gallery

I recommend cutting down on the photo gallery and perhaps adding a few of the images to the body of the article instead. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. It's easier to prioritize photos now that events are settling down. I still have some key photos I need to upload (of the actual rioting) and also of the peaceful condition the night before (Feb 29) the violent government intervention. (Number of tents had grown to 132, and covered much of the area of the square...) Serouj (talk) 01:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Serouj,

Under the rules of Wikipedia (WP:NPOV), we cannot present any one's opinion as the truth, even if such opinion is authoritative. HRW's opinion is an opinion--even if it's the truth, we do not present it as fact in this Encyclopedia. It's against the rules. I have made some changes in the language to reflect the fact that such opinions belong to appropriate sources and not directly to Wikipedia.--TigranTheGreat (talk) 05:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Perhaps reading the following pages will help acquaint yourself with the rules: WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, WP:V. In other words, pretend you are from planet Mars, you have not seen the events yourself, and you are trying to tell to your fellow Martians what is happening in Armenia. --TigranTheGreat (talk) 06:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]