Talk:Genocides in history/Archive 1

message: See Israel/Palestine reverts section on this page.  It's been a two-person bickerfest for a little while now; my whole point has been that I'd like this page to be useful and not a POV war zone, but I don't think one-on-one revert wars make the page useful, nor would piling on a laundry list of claims made against Israelis for the sake of "balance".  I hope others will contribute to a larger consensus, any consensus, on how to handle the Israel/Palestine issue here in a way that is topical to genocide and as close to NPOV as the subject can get, anyway. —Bsktcase 21:00, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I thing good approaches would be those:
* of Johan Galtung and the group around him transcend.org, taking distance from any ideology and thus getting the possibility to have a look at a/this conflict and talk about possible solutions
* of Geneva Initiative. –wiki-vr 11:51, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV since a year 

message: The mentioning of Germany's refusal to apologize for the Herero Holocaust should be removed because it is outdated.
An official apology has been issued in 8/2004. (see here), Ar36 23:09, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the new link and retained the old link and indicated the dates for both stories. —Bsktcase 17:50, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germany-Namibia 

message: I just added the link to the film, Relentless, in which I saw the clips. For those interested the shots of PA State-TV are available to watch in the trailers section. Evolver of Borg 18:20, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  PA State Television 

message: While I support the US info being here, the crime doesn't neccasarily come under Genocide because of the holes in the convention. The Indian Removal Act was more of a case of Ethnocide, as Jackson didn't sign in the act with the intent of killing the natives, that would be more of a Indian Genocide Act, rather wanted to move them out of the way, something he knew would cost lives. For the meantime, keep it under Ethnocide with a link in the genocides page. Evolver of Borg 19:38, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  America 

message: I just removed a few things due to NPOV and removed that stupid statement from an anon user on this page. Mao's China isn't genocide because the Soviet Union blocked political killings being in the convention. Iraq paragraph cleaned up and unneccasary lines removed.
On another point it's good to see the India stuff added. However when the verses are as poorly written and POV as they are they can't remain there. If there is no evidence you can't just come making claims on the page. If you have a source of evidence though come and rewrite the paragraph. Evolver of Borg 16:48, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Cleanup 

message: :the revolutionary National Convention ordered a pacification of the province, with specific instructions to kill children and women of reproductive age.
Do we have references for that? Remember that, at the time, there was both pro-revolutionary and counter-revolutionary propaganda, and that counter-revolutionary propaganda permeated the British outlook on the situation. 
:Women are reproductive furrows who must be ploughed under.
Problem: this quote is found only on a single site apart from Wikipedia mirrors. I'd like to get the original French version. David.Monniaux 18:22, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revolutionary France 

message: This topic is widely disputed. The way its presented is unacceptable. --Cool Cat My Talk 05:14, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Massacre - Turkey 

message: User:JamesBurns deleted the following piece claiming that the below lacks evidence. 
===Alexander's genocide of Persians===   
:- The Macedonian generalissimo Alexander and his army of sixty thousand ravaged Persia's capital city, Persepolis, around 331 BCE, slaughtering nearly all the inhabitants, burning the great palace of Xerxes, and plundering vast wealth. While the butchery and the destruction of priceless cultural treasures is inexcusable by modern standards of morality, it cannot be rightly termed genocide: after all, the Persian ethnos was not placed in serious danger. There is evidence that the Macedonian conqueror was perfectly willing to coexist with the Persians, both as a culture and as an ethnos, provided they showed him submission. Of course Alexander was responsible for many acts of genocide perpetrated upon smaller groups of people, such as his near-extermination of the Thebans, his extermination of whole tribes in Bactria and Thrace, and his brutal campaigns in India. 
The ones who support the above claims, please provide references. Mikkalai 04:16, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted 

message: :- The Macedonian generalissimo Alexander and his army of sixty thousand ravaged Persia's capital city, Persepolis, around 331 BCE, slaughtering nearly all the inhabitants, burning the great palace of Xerxes, and plundering vast wealth. While the butchery and the destruction of priceless cultural treasures is inexcusable by modern standards of morality, it cannot be rightly termed genocide: after all, the Persian ethnos was not placed in serious danger. There is evidence that the Macedonian conqueror was perfectly willing to coexist with the Persians, both as a culture and as an ethnos, provided they showed him submission. Of course Alexander was responsible for many acts of genocide perpetrated upon smaller groups of people, such as his near-extermination of the Thebans, his extermination of whole tribes in Bactria and Thrace, and his brutal campaigns in India. 
The ones who support the above claims, please provide references. Mikkalai 04:16, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Alexander's genocide of Persians

message: Remove these from Pro Russian demagogy
*there was never any discrimination against Ukrainians in the USSR
:this is complete nonsence - removing
*the Soviet government, not Russians, contributed to the famine,
*historically Russians have no quarrel with Ukrainians and
: well, it can be said about anything, e.g it's not German people but Nazi government who made Holocaust
More changes to follow...
Ilya K 18:28, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: numerous articles and books show that estimates would range between 7,000,000 to 15,000,000 people
Certainly not 15,000,000 people killed in something that qualify as genocide.... Ericd 08:55, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  USSR 

message: Oldadamm, why did you remove this information:
(1992–1995) Bosnian Genocide was an organized murder of Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks), during the Bosnian War, where authorities of Republika Srpska and its Army targeted for extinction a wide group of Bosnian Muslims.
Statement by Radovan Karadžić co-founder of Republika Srpska and its first president, alluded to the origins of this ideology on March 4, 1992 to the Bosnian Parliament:
..."the road to which you want to take Bosnia and Herzegovina is the same highway of hell which Slovenia and Croatia took. Don't think you won't take Bosnia and Herzegovina to hell and the Muslims into annihilation... Muslims can't defend themselves if there is war here"...
 
It also included organized ethnic cleansing carried out by Republika Srpska against Croats, Roma, and Bosniaks throughout the period displacing nearly a 1 million people.
More than 7,000 Muslim men and boys were massacred in Srebrenica in July 1995 alone. Total numbers of killed in Bosnian Genocide are still being determined but they range anywhere between 100,000 and 250,000. See also History of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  
--AI 02:23, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Bosnia]] 

message: I find that genocide of the Hindus in Pakistan particularly in the late 1940s needs to be mentioned and incorporated in the article.
This qualifies as genocide as 
1) it was particularly aimed at systematically eliminating the Hindus in Pakistan irrespective of their ethnicity.
2) it was practiced throughout Pakistan, West Pakistan as well as East Pakistan( now Bangladesh)  
3) the evidence of change in percentages is very clear. The genocide involved murder, permanent displaceent and complete loss of property. 
4)The numbers involved run to 7.45 millions, involving 3.06 millions in West Pakistan and 4.39 million.
5) The Hindu % percentages dropped between 1941-1951 from:
a) 20.91% to 3.36% in West Pakistan. ( Now stands at 1.5%)
b) 29.45% to 23.14 in East Pakistan.
c) 26.03% to 15.11 for all of combined Pakistan. 
These are official census figures of Pakistan, consider this.
1.Punjab + Bahawalpur : 24.58% to 2.77%
2.Sind+Khairpur+Karachi:28.6%  to 8.53%
3.NWFP Provinces       : 4.6%  to 0.1%
4.Baluchistsan         : 8.53% to 1.47%
These sort of figures involving millions and organised decimation cannot be ignored either by Wiki or the world at large.
: Now, a drop in numbers isn't necessarily due to genocide. I do not believe that immigration out of a country/region due to even religious discrimination is considered genocide. Pluse, you continue to mention East Pakistan, a non-existent entity! So, I will express doubts about adding such demographic change figures in genocide. However, if you could find explicit evidence of systematic elimination from some source, we should definitely add the topic. -- Urnonav 04:21, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genocide of Hindus by Pakistan 

message: How many countries recognise the assyrian genocide and greek genocides? If we are saying Turkey denies these genocides then should we not say how many countries actually acknowledge it to get an idea of the validity of these claims?  --E.A 14:22, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turkey 

message: Neither the massacre by General Dyer nor the one of Sikhs by the Indian Army are genocide. There was no intention to destroy a particular group. I intend to remove unless someone disputes this.
Exile 16:47, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But we have some lists on these. Reading in addition to writing often helps (although I agree with your estimate of the subject). Mikkalai 04:23, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  India 

message: Someone tried to remove this entire section.  Why?  Also note that the section on Japan regarding the Nanking massacre has also been removed and is awaiting discussion.  Are these events genocides or not?--AI 03:28, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Genocides in history#Islamic Conquest of India]] 

message: I think that it would be helpful if the principle were maintained in this article that genocides were not attributed to whole people groups. This would be a perpetuation of the whole objectification that is characteristic of genocide. I think that the section on Germany follows this quite well (as indeed do most of the sections) - identifying the victims of genocide and, where attributing any blame, identifies the Nazi party, whose ideology included genocide. 
The sections that currently do not meet this are the "Boer Wars" (for which references for the numbers would be good) and "Rwanda".--sf-andrew 19:01, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attribution of Genocide 

message: "in aggressive state and well armed with sticks and stones"
Well armed indeed against machine-guns.
Ericd 1 July 2005 20:05 (UTC)
::: Note: This was a comment about Amritsar. Ericd 18:43, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this anonymous contribution is related to Croatia (see above). Please read again my comment, I'm not denying the Ustasha massacres. Ericd 18:39, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Well armed 

message: This section seems to be at times incredibly inaccurate and pov. I'd especially like to see sources for the claim that "mostly Muslim and some Hindu civilians" have been killed and for the claim that most of the atrocities are blamed on Indian military (and not terrorists) by Human Rights groups and the UN. --Kefalonia 18:57, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The article still states the following: "Most of the atrocities including rape, torture and massacre are attributed to the Indian Army personnel in the region, mostly by human rights groups and the UN ."  I don't want to judge the objectivity or neutrality of this article, but this particular article focuses heavily on the India military or similar, not on the terrorists or the Pakistani military. The HRW article says that the Indian military also commited atrocities, but not that it commited most of the atrocities, so this should be corrected in the article.  --Kefalonia 13:46, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Notice how the section is about Jammu and Kashmir (Indian Administered), so it has to focus on the Indian side. Besides there is nothing that commonly classifies as genocide that was conducted on the Pakistani side. Also it is well documented that Indian military did have a greater hand in killings than separatists. The separatists (or "terrorists" in less NPOV version) do kill people but not as much as the army has. And selective killings were done by both the military and separatists. Also there is a Muslim majority in Kashmir and any good source will tell you that more Muslims have died than Hindu. The HRW article has several pages on Indian military actions and there is one page on separatist actions. Look at the linked sources. Not all the groups are Pakistan-based either, that is only allegation. Hope that helps.  --a.n.o.n.y.m   t 14:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kashmir 

message: :Shouldn't there be more added to the Soviet Section such as the genocide of Jews after World War 2 and the genocide of Germans, both in the USSR and occupied Europe after the end of WW2, also what about the genocide of other ethnic groups that found themselves on the wrong side after WW2, like the massacre of the cossaks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.241.73.130 (talk) 11:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet Section 

message: The further reading section is a leftover from the time we move the list from the Genocide article and then started to cite all the facts in this article. It was left in place because some of the articles could have been useful as sources for the sections in the article. However it is some years since this arrangement came into place and I intend to delete the further reading section as it is very large and any sources that are likely to be extracted from the section have long since been used. --PBS (talk) 10:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further reading 

message: What about the genocide of palestinians that Israel is commiting?? Nobody talks about that??
I think all we know how many palestinians are dying just for being family or neighbours of some suicide terrorist. Israeli forces sistematically destroy their houses as a punition, it's not a secret. Can you imagine (wherever you are, in the US, Europe, or somewhere in your confortable country) your house being destroyed just because your brother/son has killed someone?? What about the so many olive trees cut off as a punition?? Is this the democracy of a "western" country like Israel??
We could be here writing hundreds of examples of what the israelis are doing to the palestinian peolpe, but even in the 21th century is not polite to say they're commiting genocide, just because they have suffered so much in the WW2 that now everybody feels guilty and no one is brave enough to tell them "STOP".
I strongly believe it must be a section in this article about the genocide of palestinians. 89.131.5.91 (talk) 09:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genocide of palestinians 

message: Per the report at WP:ANI#Genocides in history, this page is protected for two weeks or until consensus is reached on the issue above. I am now examining whether additional sanctions are required per WP:ARBAA2.  Sandstein  09:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have provided all contributors to the recent edit war with the following precautionary notification: This is to notify you that, per Wikipedia:ARBAA2#Amended Remedies and Enforcement, editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process while editing content related to Armenia and Azerbaijan may be given sanctions which may include blocks of up to one year in length, bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict, bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics, restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors, or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.  Sandstein  09:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The trouble is, your project (i.e. your agenda) seem very different from the project.  Meowy 23:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected 

message: I found this edit: Revision as of 18:38, 23 October 2007 by user:Arcot which introduced the sentence with this "Historian dismisses Tasmanian aboriginal genocide "myth"" as the source. But the source only says "He argues only 118 Tasmanian Aborigines were killed directly by the British. The rest died from a lethal cocktail of introduced diseases." it does not mention what the diseases were, so I'll remove the specific diseases from this article. If anyone objects then I'll have to re-instate it, until the protection comes off.  --PBS (talk) 15:04, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that this source is pretty much the only source that argues this, and nobody else agrees. The natives were murdered by settlers, as everybody knows.Likebox (talk) 17:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Likebox you have made  this edit citing With intent to destroy By Colin Martin Tatz pp. 78-79 Given the wording in the first paragraph on page 78 ("diseases introduced by convicts and settlers ... seriously depleted Aboriginal numbers") which paragraph do you think over the two pages supports the sentence you added to this article namely "The majority were killed at the hands of settlers" (my emphasis)? --PBS (talk) 23:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australia