Talk:Katyn Massacre

Who says

TK added a "who says" tag to the opening sentence. I see his point, but the introductory sentence for an uncontested historical fact usually doesn't include a citation. For example, the World War 2 page doesn't have a citation proving that it was a global conflict between 1939-1945; it's an obvious and undisputed fact. For the sake of comparison, I also looked at the pages on the Holocaust, Battle of Iwo Jima, Wounded Knee Massacre, World War 1 and the Korean War. None of them have citations there either.

Besides, the article itself contains a bunch of citations, so I think it's clear that the Katyn Massacre is a real event and this is a credible article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EMorris (talk)-- 12:04, 26 May 2010

EMorris, if you wish to become a "Wiki-Lawyer", I suggest you find a credible university offering such courses. But practicing such a profession here, without a degree is practicing without a license! Please go to your talk page and stare at the template I previously placed there. If you look long enough, hard enough, you will see links to our Editors Guide, etc. If you actually read those articles you will perhaps see the references/citations provided are not formatted in an acceptable way. My placement of the "who says" tag had nothing to do with the opening paragraph or the veracity of the event, and everything to do with the lack of proper formatting, as it appeared to me you created/re-created the article.

And yes, before you ask, I really am that "fragile" that it bothers me when proper formatting isn't used. This is a conservative wiki project and nasty little barbs (like at Wikipedia) aren't acceptable. Wake up and smell the coffee, buster. --ṬK_/Admin^/Talk 15:29, 26 May 2010 (EDT) (and yes, I answered you in kind because of your comments to my friend , Ed Poor.)

TK, that was unnecessary. Ed Poor called me a troll, a troublemaker and untrustworthy because he disagreed with my phrasing over a correction I've made. My contributions to CP have been strictly productive and in good faith. I didn't insult him back. Ed used "nasty little barbs" and I pointed out that he was being over-sensitive about my perceived error. But frankly, my dialogue with Ed is our business, so there's no reason for you to chime in with such a patronizing message.

Back to the point (and I hope we can stay there), I clicked on your "who says" tag, and the corresponding section discusses attribution; it doesn't say a word about formatting. Please don't patronize me when you provide a link to the incorrect information. If the formatting is wrong, just tell me! Don't send me a link about attribution. If your intention was to draw my attention to incorrect formatting, it was very unclear. As it stands, I took another look at the link your provided and your point remains unclear. I'd appreciate it if you could fix whatever's wrong so I know how to avoid it. EMorris 12:08, 27 May 2010 (EDT)

I wanted a citation, at the end of the opening line, EMorris. Flights of fancy about formatting, when no complaint about formatting was given, is a liberal trait...try to fight against it! Your dialog (and anyone else using this wiki) with another Administrator is my business. IMO you use too much hyperbole and drama when extrapolating out what others say, like you do above taking a simple cite request and turning it into something about formatting. Wake up and smell the coffee, buster. --ṬK_/Admin^/Talk 14:07, 2 June 2010 (EDT)

Image

Could please someone upload this and this image to illustrate the article?--JoeyJ 12:23, 2 January 2015 (EST)