| Revision as of 00:16, 23 February 2010 editAsdfg12345 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers6,640 edits →Fixing the name: indent← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 17:51, 3 December 2024 edit undoSpookyaki (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,342 edits Assessment: banner shell, Human rights (High), Politics (Rater) |
| (246 intermediate revisions by 57 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
| ⚫ |
{{oldafdfull| date = 8 February 2010 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = Anti-communist mass killings }} |
|
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Not a forum}} |
|
⚫ |
{{Old XfD multi |date=8 February 2010 (UTC) |result='''keep''' |page=Anti-communist mass killings |date2=21 June 2018 |result2='''Keep''' |page2=Anti-communist mass killings (2nd nomination)}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|blp=other|vital=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Low|serialkiller=yes|serialkiller-imp=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Death|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Discrimination |importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Economics|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject History |importance=Low|Contemporary History=yes |Contemporary history-importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Human rights|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject International relations |importance=Low|law=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=Low|religion=yes|political=yes|ethics=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Mid|libertarianism=yes|libertarianism-importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Socialism|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Sociology|importance=Low}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Annual readership|scale=log}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{skiptotoctalk}} |
|
|
|
| algo=old(90d) |
|
{{Talkheader}} |
|
|
|
| archive=Talk:Anti-communist mass killings/Archive %(counter)d |
|
{{pbneutral}} |
|
|
|
| counter=1 |
|
{{notforum}} |
|
|
|
| maxarchivesize=150K |
|
|
| archiveheader={{tan}} |
|
|
| minthreadsleft=1 |
|
|
| minthreadstoarchive=1 |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Add table ? == |
|
==Original research== |
|
|
While this article lists acts of mass killings against communists, it lacks a properly sourced lead that is referenced to reliable sources defining a concept for anti-communist mass killings. Are there any reliable sources that describe this concept? ] (]) 05:36, 16 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:] is a good start. However there are tonnes of other RSes. Give me a while (couple of weeks) and I'll find some for you.] (]) 18:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
Wouldn't it be interesting to add a table summarizing all the mass killings mentioned in the article? ] (]) 01:04, 1 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
::PS: I was reading Galeano before Hugo Chavez made it cool. ;) ] (]) 19:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Agree that this article should have a better lead with references, and probably needs to qualify its claim to say something like "mass murder or allegations thereof", since not all of these allegations have been settled in court trials, or have otherwise been established as uncontroversial facts. The Pinochet trial, for instance, is noted as ongoing. --] (]) 19:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:According to whom? AFAIK he was pronounced guilty and has since died. ] (]) 19:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::According to the current version of this article... --] (]) 20:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Headdesk. My bad. That being said, considering what happened ''prior'' to his death, it is very likely he would have been convicted had he lived long enough. And the absence of a conviction for Pinochet doesn't change the fact that ] was killed during the coup due to his leftist policies; or that ] was tortured and killed by the regime for leftist positions. Or that the disappeared were... well... disappeared for their political opposition to the regime.] (]) 20:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::::''Salvador Allende was killed during the coup due to his leftist policies'' Last time I checked, Salvador Allende killed himself. ] (]) 00:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
Julian Pefanis' book ''Heterology and the postmodern: Bataille, Baudrillard, and Lyotard'' (Duke U Press, 1991) notes that Pierre Clastres identified "capitalism as a global ethnocidal venture" (p. 24) ... I have the Clastres book that he refers to somewhere so perhaps we can refer directly to that work as well. ] (]) 21:46, 17 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding sources can I suggest ]'s on the universal psychological causes of white terror (heterosexual fear of women). ] (]) 02:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:Why wait, I added it. ] (]) 02:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::And I removed it, at least from the lead. I see no remotely valid reason why a brief tidbit about an analysis that explains "white terror" in terms of male psychosexual pathology relating to communism and female sexuality belongs in the lead of this article. Without more context I'm not even sure it belongs anywhere in the article at all, though I simply don't know. Some discussion before re-adding is probably advisable. --] <small>| ] | ]</small> 03:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Not really. This article is a SYNTHESIS and COATRACK, just like its relatives. Theweleit's book is the only reference to a theorisation of the object of this article, "Anti-communist mass killings". What follows is a coatrack of individual events with no context or theorisation. The article could probably do with being cut down to '''only''' Theweleit, with a simple See also section. ] (]) 03:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Both this article and its cousin should probably go, and maybe a combined AfD in a few months could have that effect, but they are here for now. The sentence I removed and which you re-added does not seem to refer to a source that is "a theorisation of the object of this article." "White terror" is not synonymous with "Anti-communist mass killings," obviously (for example the terror of the first ] during the period of Reconstruction had nothing to do with communism, but sexual fears no doubt played a major role; likewise anti-communist mass murder is ], as the article points out). Perhaps the problem is that the sentence does not adequately summarize Theweleit's book, but as written the reader of this article will be taken aback by that sentence as it simply does not seem to relate to the topic at hand. You may think it does (and you may be right, or possibly not), but that needs to be clear from the article text. For starters can you clarify here how Theweleit's analysis theorizes "anti-communist mass killings"? I'm not scared of theory so fire away! --] <small>| ] | ]</small> 04:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you are misunderstanding the concept ], taking it to mean killings perpetrated by people with white skin. The "white" refers to white (reactionary) vs. red (revolutionary), see the WP link for more. --] (]) 04:12, 9 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Okay, well that makes sense, and while I was thinking in racial terms (and the term "white terror" is also used in that respect, albeit less frequently), I am familiar with ] in the political sense but just was not thinking in those terms, which was rather dumb on my part. There's still possibly an issue though, as white terror does not refer exclusively to reaction against communist or socialist forces (e.g. the ]). I'm still not clear that Theweleit's book actually theorizes "anti-communist mass killings" per say, and I think that needs to be demonstrated more conclusively here on the talk page before using it. And this leaves aside the question of whether the theory is respected or not, which is also relevant. --] <small>| ] | ]</small> 04:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Looking at the (and customer reviews, just to get a sense of the content) the study seems to be very limited in terms of geographic and temporal scope (Weimar Germany, apparently with some reference to the Baltic states per the footnote in the text of our article). Unless there are specific passages in the book which theorize anti-communist mass killings in general (rather than explaining root causes of fascism in psychological terms, which seems rather different on the face) then it seems unlikely to me that the source is appropriate. --] <small>| ] | ]</small> 04:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Willing to accept this judgement. It seems to me that article editors here are satisfied that this article shouldn't exist. The Other Article needs a bit more time before it should be put to AFD. When the (next) AFD list goes, the nomination ought to be a collective nomination with a very simply explained justification for the inevitable coattail riding that will occur. (sigh) ] (]) 04:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::Combined AfD is definitely the way to go, and as you say it will have to wait awhile since the last one was so recent. I'm going to go ahead and remove the Theweleit bit for now then. If there are passages of the book that actually relate more directly to the topic of this article I'm quite open to including that, and indeed would think an actual quotation is probably best. But like you I'd rather this and the other article were simply deleted. I might actual consider doing the nomination sometime next year if I think of it. --] <small>| ] | ]</small> 04:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Name == |
|
|
|
|
|
The current name "Anti-communist mass killing" is confusing. Till I read the lead, I wasn't sure if the article is about killings of or by anti-communists. --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 19:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Spanish Civil War== |
|
|
During the Spanish Civil War, freemasons along with communists were put up against the wall and executed as each town was taken by nationalists. I'm not sure which group was more numerical in the revenge killings, but the figure on this page it seems to include the vanquished freemasons and separatists (non-communists) as included in the figure for communist deaths in general. Thus the figure is not reliable for the scope of the article it would seem. - ] (]) 19:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:And this is the problem with every other paragraph here just as well. But the article is so virgin a piece of red propaganda, it would be pity if we lose it. ''ith the intent of crushing any vestige of Hungary’s brief Communist revolution'' - wow, I am getting ready to shed a tear. ] (]) 20:07, 11 November 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Quid Pro Quo == |
|
|
This article should only be deleted if the "Communist mass killings" article goes as well. The latter is academically unsound and lacks any kind of balance. I propose that both these articles be deleted and replaced with a broader "Mass killings in totalitarian states" article. ] (]) 06:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Perhaps a proposal for a merger is the way to go? --] (]) 18:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Fixing the name== |
|
|
Currently the name here is rather confusing. Can it be changed to "Massacres of communists"? That actually has textual support, as shown by CarolmooreDC in the deletion discussion. Are the historical perversions going to be fixed, as well? Right now a stack of information could rightly be deleted from this page, it would seem (including the lead sentence!) for lack of substantiation. Anyway, can the name be changed? Also, does anyone at all feel personally responsible for making sure the contents of this article are respectable and make sense? It would be good if someone could do that. In particular, it needs some sources for the lead sentence maybe.--<font style="bold">]</font><font color="black" style="bold">]</font> 15:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm gonna be bold and change the name then. --<font style="bold">]</font><font color="black" style="bold">]</font> 06:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Done. If there's a problem with this, please write here. I have watchlisted this page. I don't want to spend any time fixing it though. I hope the people who made it take responsibility for that. --<font style="bold">]</font><font color="black" style="bold">]</font> 06:35, 22 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::I'm not going to revert, because I am not sure how to do it correctly without salting the current page. But I think this was a bad move (would have said so before if I had noticed the comment). The AfD discussion showed that many people's reason for wanting to keep this article were tied up with ]. If so, a common terminology should be used for these two articles. It has been argued that ] is a concept with a fairly clear definition. If so, this article could be called ] or something equivalent. The fact that there is a bunch of hits on google for the current title ]. What matters is if someone actually has a definition or a theory which uses this term as a proper concept or category. --] (]) 12:59, 22 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Hi, actually it's all about how many sources can be found, not about whether this one is supposed to balance another. The notability guideline ] defines what can have an article and what can't. 's the AfD discussion. The only reason I supported it was because it had the textual support from sources. See the notes from CarolMooreDC for example. As usual though, it's easier to do a whole lot of talking about the issues without ever actually improving the article! --<font style="bold">]</font><font color="black" style="bold">]</font> 22:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Re: "it's all about how many sources can be found" - actually, ] would indicate otherwise: ""Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material." I don't think the simple google searches that have been cited are enough to document that the term is addressed directly as a subject in the sources. That is the issue, not the number of hits in the google searches. |
|
|
::Re: "As usual though, it's easier to do a whole lot of talking about the issues without ever actually improving the article!" Well, yes, actually it is! Improving the article takes some thinking, and a lot of discussion, and ideally someone who has more detailed knowledge of the subject than me... I'm a generalist, but I try to contribute where I can. --] (]) 22:47, 22 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
::Oh and for the record, you give the impression of being a reasonable-minded editor who is working in good faith to improve the article. We just happen to disagree about the title. I appreciate your contribution, trying to move the discussion forward. --] (]) 22:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Really there have never been "mass killings of Communists" just mass killings of people with the excuse that they were "Communists". So the last title was better, if imperfect. It is like calling Salem "mass killing of witches". ] (]) 23:18, 22 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:So let me get this straight. The title should be changed back? I thought that user's comments were good (I mean, make sense): |
|
|
|
|
|
:<blockquote>Keep: Title "Massacres of Communists" seems more popular in Books google search than confusing "Anti-Communist Mass killings." And looks like a lead could be generated from one or more of those sources. Or maybe "Mass killings of Communists" to mirror Mass killings under Communist regimes. (Though didn't find that exact phrase in google.books.) Text and refs show such massacres has been a real phenomena and do deserve and article detailing them. CarolMooreDC (talk) 04:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC)</blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
:<blockquote>Week Keep I am changing my vote per the argument provided by Carolmooredc. It meets the notability threshold, but the article needs editing to fix certain POV issues. --Defender of torch (talk) 15:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)</blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
:These remarks argue for the current title. Then some other remarks complain about the confusing nature of "Anti-communist mass killings": |
|
|
|
|
|
:<blockquote>The current name "Anti-communist mass killing" is confusing. Till I read the lead, I wasn't sure if the article is about killings of or by anti-communists. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)</blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
:Really though, I'm not going to lose any sleep over this. Should I change the title back? --<font style="bold">]</font><font color="black" style="bold">]</font> 00:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
