Talk:Russian troops advance into Georgia, violating truce

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Nemo bis in topic New peer review
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Do not self-publish please. --SVTCobra 14:27, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Eh, both articles are from Associated Press. We need two independent sources. --SVTCobra 15:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

I saw cnn reporting on it and that they not anymore head against Tiblisi but turned north. I guess they want a bufferzone or someting. And according to swedish radionews Russia admited troops around Gori. Russians claim they destroy Georgian military equipment. At all The article should include this. Maby a breakingtag and keeping it updated should avoid article fall in the 'void of old newsiness' international (talk) 16:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply
added non AP source. Anonymous101talk 16:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply
The Time article is independent, but it does not verify the facts asserted by this article, esp. the part about Russian troops being deep inside Georgia. --SVTCobra 16:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

The npoving


As it is a draft I have no problem with edit bold. The part have not much with the headline or other part of the article and make the article unneutral, POV. It is not firstleadmaterial in its current form. international (talk) 16:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

"perceived bias" OK, Can you find another quote that respond to the events better than this and perhaps a little something from the Russian side it would be nice. There is lot of BS flying arond in the 'mediawar' international (talk) 16:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply



I unpublished this article because it does not follow WN:NPOV and it relies on a single source for the main thrust of the article. Please improve the article before republishing. --SVTCobra 17:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

I found another source and made other improvements to the article. Please review. --SVTCobra 21:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

New peer review


The article is still misleading... --Nemo bis (talk) 21:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Reply