Talk:Alexandrian riots (38 CE)

message: this needs to be deleted. it's about a bible story as if it was fact, for petes sake.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.234.79 (talk) 06:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: Gambetti states clearly that she believes that the use of the term pogrom for the Alexandrian events of 38CE "was created" to connect the events to "later events in modern or contemporary Jewish experience".
Our article should not be connecting anything to anything without evidence, and since Gambetti states that the "wide and delicate topic" needs "future research", we can assume that there is no evidence at this stage. This is assuming that other editors are unable to provide evidence of scholars stating the opposite case - i have looked and have not seen anyone disagreeing on this. And even then, Wikipedia should not be endorsing one side of an issue, unless that view is in the clear majority.
WP:NPOVTITLE is clear that for a non-neutral name to be used as a title it must be the "significant majority" name. The best that editors editors supporting usage of "pogrom" here have been able to come up with is a 1 vs 1.3 minority.
The article name must be changed bask unless those editors can show that the non-neutral name is in a "significant majority".
I will wait a few days before changing it back, to allow evidence to be provided. If the responses are simply hot air and no substance, the article title will be changed back.
Oncenawhile (talk) 11:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Oncenawhile, as several editors have already explained, there are issues with your WP:GOOGLE methodology, high-quality reliable sources support the current name, and there is no consensus to change the article's name. In addition, as has also been explained, Gambetti is just an associate professor, she herself uses the term, and she does not in any way state that it is "non-neutral". Given that policy does not back the move, nor consensus, any further attempts to change the name will be disruptive. Jayjg (talk) 18:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

text: With the WP:GOOGLE and source quality problems that have been already pointed out, no strong argument has been brought to support a change.  I'm sorry you feel that having this pointed out sounds like "hot air and no substance" to you, but that doesn't make an argument based on faulty assumptions or research strong enough to support a change.  Zad68 21:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

text: These arguments don't look any better than your arguments at Talk:Pogroms of 1096. Actually, they look even weaker. The article has been at this name for many years, the name is used by lots of reliable sources, and the arguments to move it to a new name are weak. Your OR at Talk:Pogroms of 1096 shows that you have an issue with the word pogrom, but Wikipedia is not the place to campaign against it. Plot Spoiler (talk) 22:38, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to be clear, I have no issue with the word pogrom - it is a word used to describe some of the worst events in modern human history. My efforts on these articles are because I see a trend where certain editors are trying to use the word as widely as possible, even if the event may not be commonly referred to as that. Gambetti saw that in the scholarly world too - her comment quoted above is very clear. Pogrom is such a powerful word it can be misleading if not used carefully. Oncenawhile (talk) 23:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

text: Again the arguments here have no substance. They are simply "we don't agree with googlebooks" and "we agree with the Alexandrian pogrom title", plus a conscious ignoring of Gambetti's statement that the use of the term pogrom suggests an inherent POV. Oncenawhile (talk) 23:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

text: Not sure about whether "pogrom" or "riots" would be better, but the page should definitely be moved from "riots (38)". We should probably get rid of the "(38)" for now, then decide whether to have the title be "pogrom" or "riots". Like, the "riots of 68" doesn't even have a page. Paintspot Infez (talk) 14:24, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:NPOVTITLE 

message: First, few people who see the current title will immediately recognize that "38" is a year. I suggest qualifying it as "38 CE". Second, the appearance of 27 citations on the first few words is ridiculous. Please choose at most 2 or 3 of the most reliable sources for each word and remove the rest. Zerotalk 00:19, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The title and the lead 

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: not moved. Clear consensus against the proposed move. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 09:42, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Alexandrian riots (38 CE) →  – Cleanup of Template:Disputed title, which is currently at WP:TfD. Long-standing disagreement that needs to be resolved about whether "pogrom" or "riots" is more appropriate. As a result of this disagreement, the first sentence of the article contains no fewer than 27 citations variously supporting the former or latter nomenclature. TompaDompa (talk) 09:18, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

text: I deleted all the citations on the first sentence. That was an example of WP:POINT violation and can't be allowed. Zerotalk 11:31, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Presumably the fact that it's a jarring anachronism is the reason why it hasn't caught on.  "Pogrom" usually applies specifically to campaigns of persecution against the Jews occurring in the Pale of Settlement under the Russian Empire; loosely to similar campaigns outside of Russia or following the Russian Revolution of 1917; only metaphorically in other contexts (organized persecution of the Jews at other times or places, as when a historian refers to the riots in Alexandria as "the first pogrom in history"—which still doesn't make it a proper name for them—or similar persecutions of other groups).  Nero might have served ice cream at a notorious banquet, but it's unlikely that we would refer to the event as "Nero's Ice Cream Social", even though a historian or two might saucily call it that.  P Aculeius (talk) 15:09, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 26 October 2021