Talk:Pakistani Taliban threaten revenge attack after bin Laden death; CIA says retaliation is likely

Merge

There seems to be an awful lot of overlap between this and the existing article; why do we need another? — μchip08 14:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Disagree I could not disagree more. These are two entirely separate stories. One announces the death of the world's most wanted man, the second announces the proclaimed intentions of an international terrorist organization. Whereas it's true that they are making these threats ostensibly because of bin Laden's death, the fact is, these are the same people who make the same threats over cartoons, and book burnings, and anything else they disagree with. These are separate stories, and should be treated as such, especially since they will likely develop separately. Tadpole256 (talk) 14:46, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

• Disagree given that this has now blossomed into multiple warnings from U.S. officials and analysts and a threat from the Pakistani Taliban. While the story about Osama and this are linked, they are still very separate. wackywace 18:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
• Disagree Plus, the death is getting a little long in the tooth to be honest... this warrants enough for it to be a separate article. --Patrick M (TUFKAAP) (talk) 20:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1225638 [Failed]

Revision 1225638 of this article has been reviewed by TUFKAAP (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 21:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Last paragraph is not sourced NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Were's the article quoting John Gearson? Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 1225638 of this article has been reviewed by TUFKAAP (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 21:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Last paragraph is not sourced NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Were's the article quoting John Gearson? Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

The article in the "related" section above the sources. wackywace 22:47, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Which source exactly? I'm not in the mood to search through 40 sources to find the quote? --Patrick M (TUFKAAP) (talk) 23:55, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Added the source to the source section. wackywace 06:28, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1225995 [Passed]

Revision 1225995 of this article has been reviewed by TUFKAAP (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 12:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Now it's good. :) Good work, good article. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 1225995 of this article has been reviewed by TUFKAAP (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 12:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Now it's good. :) Good work, good article. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.