Talk:Decimation (punishment)

message: The source for the claim that Trotsky used the Decimation is quite controversial. This should be reflected in the Text. (Source that the Book is controversial can be found on the Page about Robert Service-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Service_(historian) )
: The source being controversial doesn't even matter here. The citation refers to one line in the text "He implemented a policy of decimating regiments which deserted or showed cowardice under enemy fire, and the victims included the commanders.26". The footnote refers to a text from Roger Reese, The Soviet Military Experience. In that text, it says that Trotsky implemented a draconian policy where deserters were to be shot, but it was seldom carried out by commanders. That is not what this article means by decimation. With that in mind, I'm removing the claim due to lack of citation.  Istandwiththesilent 19:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Use by Leon Trotsky

message: "In addition, troop morale often increased dramatically after a decimation"
Where is the citation for this claim?
This seems to be a counterintuitive statement, it would be hard to imagine one's morale improving after having executed one's own comrade.
:I guess there'd be a sense of relief and strengthened resolve in the soldiers not chosen. But yeah, we need a source for that one. Rufous 23:45, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: References sure, but it's not implausible with a proper understanding of morale.  Morale has two meanings and perhaps this is the source of the confusion.  The nice version of morale means how happy and upbeat the troops are.  The meaning to commanders refers to their level of adherence to command. sometimes being happy and upbeat makes you more obedient as a soldier, but sometimes being treated poorly makes you more apt to carry out orders too.Grabba (talk) 06:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Morale is not the same as discipline. Being treated poorly may make one tow the line, but it certainly is never good for morale. Morale is conviction and belief in one's own cause, one's own abilities, one's comrades, one's leadership etc. The notion that decimation should in any way be good for morale is indeed highly implausible. --Tsuka (talk) 04:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing Citation

message: What the heck does "decimation" have to do with "noise shaping" (under "See also")?? I've been to the Noise Shaping page and there's absolutely nothing to do with decimation on it. I recommend removal of that link unless there's some extenuating circumstance that I'm not seeing here. The Chief 03:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Link removed. -- DocSigma 22:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Noise Shaping

message: I've heard, that decimation was used by the French forces in 1917 as a reaction to mutiny. Can anyone confirm? /:da:Bruger:Poul G
I heard the same thing, cited by Wesley Clark in an interview. Some googling gives this. This is highly relevant for the article. Haakon 14:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Use by the French

message: When this is included- the article name should be change from roman army also because there is a "current usage" sectionVeggieburgerfish 12:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Title

message: I honestly do believe this does not fit in here. Wikipedia is a place for much, but not for everything in my opinion. Am I the only one thinking this or shouldn't this be removed? /204.162.xx.xx 00:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: World of Warcraft Team

message: Unless someone has survey data, I think "some" is a better descriptor than "few" for the number of people who use the historical meaning. Erall 20:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Current Usage

message: We have seriously missed the point on this, and no mistake.
The punishment for mutiny, or cowardice in the face of the enemy, is usually death:
If the punishment for a whole unit doing this is to kill one man and let another nine off with a warning,
Then that isn’t extreme, that’s an exercise in leniency, borne no doubt of practicality.
For example:-
When the crew of the Bounty mutinied, all of the mutineers were under sentence of death; there was no suggestion of a 10% punishment.The Admiralty mounted a huge effort to re-capture them; though only 6 of the mutineers were returned for trial, 3 of those were hanged (50%)
In the Hermione mutiny, of the 33 mutineers re-captured, 24 were hanged (60-70%)
Before the battle of Bunker Hill, 5 men broke from the British lines and ran towards the Americans. All of them were caught; General Howe (who had a reputation as a humanitarian) ordered 2 to be taken at random and hanged, while /and the other 3 returned to their unit. (40%)
The contrary view is from the mutinies at Spithead and the Nore (which was more of a strike, really); the Admiralty (recognizing its own faults in the matter), ‘only’ hanged the ringleaders.
Thats where our view that decimation is severe probably stems from. Xyl 54 07:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Extreme?

message: And this bit:-
"However, because a decimation significantly reduced the troop strength of an army, and because it damaged unit cohesion by requiring soldiers to kill their comrades in a close-up and personal way, it is believed that the punishment was rarely used."
Is pure speculation: It either needs a citation to back it up, preferably from a Roman source, or it should be deleted.Xyl 54 07:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I’ve removed this; it implies also that a Roman Army unit mutinied, or ran, one time, and was not decimated; is there any evidence that ever happened? Xyl 54 12:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Speculation

message: "As a result, the threat of decimation inspired fear and resolve in the Roman Legions."
I’ve asked for a citation for this. The threat of a death sentence might inspire fear and resolve; a 90% chance of getting away with it probably less so.Xyl 54 11:58, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations needed

message: "The current corporate managerial practice of rank and yank bears some similarities to this practice."
Can someone explain the connection? The implication is that sacking 10% of your workforce at random would improve productivity; “rank and yank” sounds more like culling. Xyl 54 12:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's correct. In "rank and yank", the key is to rank before yanking. There is no randomness or lottery... key aspects of decimation. I'm removing the reference. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: R+Y

message: The dictionary says that the word itself is post-Augustan, while the practice was in use by at least 283 A.U.C. as Livy wrote.  Did Caesar use this word, or Livy for that matter? Legis Nuntius (talk) 22:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First use of dëcīmo -āvi, ātum 

message: The article is unclear, or perhaps contradictory, regarding the guilt of those "decimated". It says
"Because the punishment fell by lot, all soldiers in the selected cohort were eligible for execution, regardless of guilt and innocence or rank and distinction."
But then
"the officers reject the idea of bludgeoning or slaughtering all the men involved [as is the case with a small group or an individual]. Instead they find a solution for the situation which chooses by a lottery system sometimes five, sometimes eight, sometimes twenty of these men, always calculating the number in this group with reference to the whole unit of offenders so that this group forms one-tenth of all those guilty of cowardice."
So the 1-in-10 is selected from "all the men *involved*", not *all the men*; so it's just 1 in 10 guilty parties who are killed, no? One tenth of "all those guilty", so this is *not* "regardless of guilt".
I think that should be amended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.76.32.145 (talk) 20:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The second statement is sourced, so I'd rely on that. the group to be decimated would be those involved, be it 50, or 80 or 200; so those that stood fast wouldn't be included. But the group at fault would be punished without regard to the degree of their individual fault. I've tried to clarify this. Xyl 54 (talk) 03:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guilt 

message: Terribly interesting article that is held back by its title. Since all other articles are derivations (in some sense) of this original meaning, its probably a good idea to move it to simply 'Decimation' and let the other two (rather obscure.. minor Marvel comic and computering?) disambig from there.
Also, this article only factually revolves around the Roman army in the beginning. Seems like a good 'origins' section to me, and all kinds of other input would be more welcomed.Yeago (talk) 07:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, no; this is an article about decimation in the Roman army, which has attracted a lot of extranaeous material. To that extent it would make more sense to move the "modern instances..", "current usage.." and "popular culture" sections to the Decimation page and revamp that as an article. Xyl 54 (talk) 02:44, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articlespace outgrowing 'Roman army' 

message: " The word decimation is often used to refer to an extreme reduction in the number of a population or force, much greater than the one tenth defined by the "deci" root. It is often inaccurately used as a synonym for the word "annihilate" which the OED lists as meaning "to reduce to non-existence, blot out of existence "
: I find that the claim that people misuse the term for annihilate to be dubious, in that the misusers of the term have always implied to me that the decimated party was at the very least in highly critical condition. For the other misuses I have no gripe - I have encountered others use the term in a way mirroring Stephen Jay Gould's "nine in ten" definition, and I have encountered people use it as a malaprop for "devastate".--Soft and Stout (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Its misuse a synonym for "annihilate" 

message: In Sources:
:"A legend suggests that the Theban Legion was decimated in the third century AD. The Legion had refused to a man, to accede to an order of the Emperor, and the process was repeated until none were left. They became known as the Martyrs of Agaunum."
Mathematically impossible.  Did the last man kill one tenth of himself?    Heavenlyblue (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  until none were left 

message: Kanliot (talk) 14:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  broken link 

message: The text claimed Suetonius said Augustus used it "for the last time" in 17BC, but I don't see in Suetonius where it says that was the last time.  S. also says Galba used decimation, and Galba came after Augustus.  I fixed the text accordingly, but I'm no expert, so some expert please check it. I also don't know what year S. says G. did it; I don't know how Suetonius reports dates. Cbogart2 (talk) 01:58, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suetonius 

message: In the "See also" section some of the unicode appears for me as "?": http://i.imgur.com/RpVkZAs.png
Since you're reading this - could you do me a favor and answer a question "Can I embed an image in a talk page? And if so - how?"
AllThatJazz2012 (talk) 09:06, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unicode broken 

message: Huruslahti had nothing to do with decimation. See for reference s.232. Marko Tikka / Ajatuskirjat 2006 : Terrorin aika /   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.23.200.178 (talk) 16:08, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huruslahti 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Opposers argue: that clickstream data show our readers often want other topics, inappropriate incoming links would be difficult to fix, and that decimation often means more general topics, such as a tenth of something or killing a large portion of a population. There may be consensus to move to Decimation (military punishment), but I'm not seeing a clear consensus in this discussion, so I would suggest a follow up discussion on that.   (t · c) buidhe 23:39, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: *That is a good argument too Avilich (talk) 14:20, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

text: I support renaming to Decimation (military pinishment). Narky Blert (talk) 14:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 28 April 2021 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved to Decimation (punishment). (closed by non-admin page mover) Elli (talk | contribs) 21:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Decimation (Roman army) →  – This move was suggested by several editors during Talk:Decimation (Roman army)#Requested move 28 April 2021; but there was no formal proposal, and so could be no WP:CONSENSUS. I now make that formal proposal.
Although the practice is often associated with the Roman Republic and Roman Empire, the article makes it clear that it was not limited to there. Alexander the Great ordered one before Rome and Macedon ever came into conflict. There are also examples through the 17th to 20th centuries. It is uncertain if Marshal Luigi Cadorna actually ordered a decimation after one of the repeated bloodbaths at Caporetto during WWI, but the question of whether or not he did has been discussed seriously in scholarly literature; in addition to the enwiki article, see :it:Decimazione#La decimazione nel Regio Esercito. Even if Rome has the dubious privilege of claiming priority, the qualifier (Roman army) is too narrow.
Courtesy pings to the editors who took part in that recent move discussion: , , , , , , , ,  and .
*Support as proposer. Narky Blert (talk) 20:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 7 June 2021 

message: I can't find a ready online source that confirms that Alexander the Great used decimation. The current citation does not include a page number. There should, in addition, be a classical source, but I'm not aware of one. Andwats (talk) 15:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's on page 88 of the book in question, for what it's worth. As for an ancient source, the assertion appears to be based upon Book Ten of Quintus Curtius Rufus's Histories of Alexander the Great, which relays an account of Alexander judging the misdeeds (rapes, looting, etc) of 5,000 foot soldiers and 1,000 cavalry and deciding to punish them by executing 600 men. 2601:152:A00:1E90:6F38:792:BB92:DED7 (talk) 06:58, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alexander the Great Citation