Thank you for getting back to me and I hope to see you in the discussion forum helping to make this a great article :)

Cheers,Zuchinni one (talk)02:44, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should really add better comments to your edits explaining what you are doing. It makes it easier for everyone to understand the changes you've made, why you've made them, and work with you to improve the article.

Cheers,Zuchinni one (talk)12:03, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hi Mr Zuchinni, do you have any examples? i noticed a few editors don't do this, but i will try to more. i hope you leave other editors the same comments. thanks, --Brendumb (talk)17:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brendumb,

Please remove the photo you recently added with the claim of the Dogan death.

There are several problems with this photo:

1. The photo already exists in a previous section of the article.
2. You re-added the photo without any additional proof as to its legitimacy as perWikipedia:V#Burden_of_evidence
3. Even when I translated the Turkish report it said that this was claimed to be him getting killed, but did not say who claimed it or how they came to that conclusion.
4. The video edits together 2 pieces of film. In the first you can clearly see the soldiers are kicking someone ... but who they are kicking is unclear. In the second clip you can see the soldier doing something with his gun, but he is not firing it.
5. The actual photo used comes seems to come from a clip on this blog, which is not an RS, rather than either of the sources cited.http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/tag/furkan-dogan/

Bottom line is that this is an unverifiable claim by an unknown source an does not meet the wikipedia standards forWP:verify. Please remove it for the time being. If it can be verified then we can add it back in later or modify the caption of this photo that already exists in the article.

Zuchinni one (talk)06:36, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Zucchini, the best place to discuss this would be talk where multiple editors are arguing for inclusion. Haber andCihan News Agency are both reliable sources, and the threshhold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability not truth. If we attribute to what reliable sources are saying, then it isn't up to editors to make any form of judgment. Let sources speak themselves.

--Brendumb (talk)15:17, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Brendumb, andwelcome toWikipedia. I hope that you have enjoyedcontributing and want to stick around. Here are sometips to help you get started:

• Learn the basics by readingthe introduction and takingthe tutorial.
• Remember tosign messages ontalk pages by typing fourtildes (~~~~) to automatically insert your username and the date.
• Enjoyediting toimprove articles, but try toleave an edit summary to explain what you are doing.
• Createyour first article using theArticle Wizard to helpavoid common mistakes, which may lead toarticle deletion.
• Although you don't need to be familiar withall of Wikipedia's policies, try to keep to thecore principles andbasic guidelines.
• When dealing with fellowWikipedians, please remainpolite,solve problems calmly, and remember thatno-one is out to get you.
• Get involved with thecommunity byjoining a WikiProject.
• Make any test edits inthe sandbox orclick here and create a sandbox of your own.
• If you are having difficulty, considerfinding a mentor to give you more personal advice.
• If in doubt,be bold. If you make a mistake, it can easily bereverted.

If you need any more information, plenty ofhelp is available - check outWikipedia:Questions; ask your question here and attract help with the code{{helpme}}; or leave me a message onmy talk page explaining your problem and I will help as best as I can. Again, welcome!strdst_grl(call me Stardust)12:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]