Content deleted Content added
m →2006 Lancet paper: move comment |
|||
Line 364:
</blockquote>
I added that content in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War&diff=851142445&oldid=851136011 July 2018] in a good-faith effort to balance the article and address some of your stated concerns. Is it deficient in some respect, or was it merely "collateral damage" from your reverting to a pre-Snooganssnoogans version of this article? In truth, a lot of good sources were caught in the crossfire of your mass deletions.[[User:TheTimesAreAChanging|TheTimesAreAChanging]] ([[User talk:TheTimesAreAChanging|talk]]) 08:23, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
:The most highly cited academic literature (including the Lancet studies) do not treat the higher casualty estimates of the Lancet studies and ORB poll as questionable. The views of Spagat and co-workers are a minority position among experts. They do not belong in this article. All of the minority-position-based material (including the criticism of the minority position by Tirman and others) should be moved to another article. [[User:Jrheller1|Jrheller1]] ([[User talk:Jrheller1|talk]]) 15:15, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Stop the edit war. If there is no consensus to add the material, then do not re-add the material until you can gain consensus. Quoting our policy here - {{tq|The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content}}. {{U|TheTimesAreAChanging}} and {{u|Snooganssnoogans}}, you need to self-revert and gain consensus on the talk page. Admins would be well justified in blocking everyone participating in the edit war, and I hope it doesn't come to that. [[User:Mr Ernie|Mr Ernie]] ([[User talk:Mr Ernie|talk]]) 09:16, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
| |||