Misplaced Pages

Talk:Second Chechen War: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:24, 26 March 2023 editCommunity Tech bot (talk | contribs)Bots267,020 edits Files used on this page or its Wikidata item are up for deletion← Previous edit Revision as of 00:32, 27 March 2023 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,709 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Second Chechen War/Archive 3) (botNext edit →
Line 22: Line 22:
Removed an questionable comment without source "most of the attacks were carried out against military forces" and replaced with link to specific attacks. Removed an questionable comment without source "most of the attacks were carried out against military forces" and replaced with link to specific attacks.
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion ==
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2022-04-04T15:37:07.276226 | Second Russo-Chechen war.Mira street. February 6, 2000 Grozny fell.webp -->
Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 15:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

== Deleting information ==

I am going to post my sources, The New York Times and a research paper from Tufts University that itself quotes John Dunlap, Human Rights Watch, Robert Seely, and Christopher Zurcher, all experts in the field, since every time I post this information it is deleted.

Estimates of the number of civilians killed range widely from 20,000 to 100,000, with the latter figure commonly referenced by Chechen sources. Most scholars and human rights organizations generally estimate the number of civilian casualties to be 40,000; this figure is attributed to the research and scholarship of Chechnya expert John Dunlop, who estimates that the total number of civilian casualties is at least 35,000. This range is also consistent with post-war publications by the Russian statistics office estimating 30,000 to 40,000 civilians killed. The Moscow-based human rights organization, Memorial, which actively documented human rights abuses throughout the war, estimates the number of civilian casualties to be a slightly higher at 50,000. The number of ethnic Russian civilian losses is estimated at 25,000-30,000, or roughly 85% of the total deaths.

There is no commonly accepted methodology for counting civilian fatalities during the First Chechen War. Most attempts to record fatalities focused on combatant deaths. Neither party to the conflict recorded accurate numbers of civilian deaths, and any records failed to disaggregate victims based on ethnicity. Although the Russian statistics office published a list citing approximately 40,000 civilian casualties in the war’s aftermath, the humiliating defeat of Russia’s first military campaign in Chechnya and the resulting unwillingness of Russian officials to provide accurate accounts of civilian or military losses have complicated efforts to determine total civilian casualties on both sides. Chechen officials have also released estimates of total casualties for both this conflict (1994 – 1996) and a second conflict (1999 – 2000), estimating losses at 160,000, but the figures are not further disaggregated. Efforts to verify statistics were further complicated by the lack of independent monitors and journalists on the ground in Chechnya during the wars.

Nonetheless, sources estimate that a large percentage of civilian fatalities occurred during the invasion of Grozny between December 1994 and March 1995. From the beginning of the invasion to the middle of February, fatality estimates range from 25,000 to 30,000 civilian deaths. This range indicates that the majority of the civilian fatalities in the entire war occurred during a mere four-month window. Of the estimated 25,000 killed in the invasion of Grozny, it is estimated that 18,000 were killed by mid January. According to General Dudayev, the first president of the Chechen Republic, 85 percent of civilians killed in the invasion (approximately 25,500) were ethnic Russians due to the fact that the Chechens were the first to evacuate the capital; this estimate is close to the figure put forward by Russian human rights campaigner Sergei Kovalyov, who estimated the number of ethnic Russian deaths at 24,000. The ethnic Russian population in Chechnya was 24.5% in the last Soviet census of 1989. In the 2006 census, ethnic Russians accounted for 3.4% of the population of Chechnya. ] (]) 02:36, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

:Whatever that is, this level of detail does not go ''in the goddamn lead of the article'', which is supposed to be a summary of the contents of the article, not a brand new expansion of them. ] (] / ]) 02:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
:This seems to be mostly about the ]. ]<sub>]</sub> 17:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but most of the casualty estimates, etc...are estimates for both conflicts, not strictly for just the 2nd Chechen War. In fact, most of the information combines both conflicts. Most sources agree on 35,000-40,000 civilian casualties, 50,000 is the highest reliable estimate I've seen. Most also, as I referenced a New York Times article, 3rd party historians on Chechnya, official office of statistics figures, official censuses, and even leaders from Chechnya itself, agree that 85% of civilian casualties were ethnic Russians, most of them in the beginning of the first war. But if figures from both wars are going to be combined like they are throughout this article, I certainly think it's only fair to point that fact out... <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 04:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Sources == == Sources ==


Revision as of 00:32, 27 March 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Second Chechen War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 7 months 

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Russian & Soviet / Post-Cold War
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
Taskforce icon
Post-Cold War task force
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconRussia: History / Military / Politics and law High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and law of Russia task force.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconEuropean history Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconRussia Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 200 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Insurgent apologist comments removed

Removed an questionable comment without source "most of the attacks were carried out against military forces" and replaced with link to specific attacks.

Sources

Ola Tønningsberg, thanks for adding information to the article. I've checked a small part of the sources you used and found a few problems:

  • Quoting only the upper bound of the range given in the source
  • No sources for a claim
  • Using a very dubious source for an WP:extraordinary claim
  • Using a passing mention in a newspaper article when much better sources are available

Could you please review all the content that you have added and make sure it's supported by reliable sources? Alaexis¿question? 16:10, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Alaexis

  • 1. The first source mentions the 9,000-11,000 killed range for Russian soldiers. The second source states 11,000 killed in the same period based on names provided by Russian families to the organization. Therefore I drew the conclusion as a general consensus of the sources that 11,000 Russian soldiers were definitely killed in this time frame. However, based on the two sources provided we will leave it as it is from your latest edit.
  • 4. For now I will agree with your latest edit, in light of more numerous sources.

Thanks for pointing out these inconsistencies.Ola Tønningsberg (talk) 20:43, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Regarding #1, the second source dates from February 2003 and so Melnikova's figures are likely to include the whole of 2002 and maybe the beginning of 2003. On the other hand the first source provides the figures for "the second war’s most intense phase, from its beginning in late summer 1999 to early 2002." Since there is a separate source for the 2002-2004 period, I think it's better to leave the 9-11 thousand range. Alaexis¿question? 07:29, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Re #3 the Chechen Minister of Health is a source associated with one of the sides of the conflict. Just like we shouldn't take what Russia says about its losses at face value, we should be careful here too. At the very least it should be attributed. Alaexis¿question? 07:33, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
I agree Ola Tønningsberg (talk) 14:50, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Ola Tønningsberg, there is a few issues with your edits. However, I think there is room for compromise and consensus. Namely, the problem is proper attribution for the figures, see WP guidelines on this Misplaced Pages:Attribution.
First, you say "total killed" for Russian losses which implies the figure is factual. The figures need to be appropriately attributed, just like we attribute figures claimed by Russia. Thus it needs to be emphasized those are in fact "independent estimates" (and estimates coming from different sources in fact).
Second, it may be obvious to you personally, but it may not be to the readers, so proper attribution needs to be made for the figure on Chechen anti-Russian losses since there are in fact two different Chechen factions, one being pro-Russian, the other anti-Russian.
Third, . I removed only one source, Deutsche Welle, which mentions 4,749 deaths in the period from August 2002 through August 2003. I did this because I considered it redundant for the following reason... This period is already covered by the Committee of Soldiers' Mothers figure which is for 1999-2005. The second reference , attributed to an analysis by both Jane’s Group and the Jamestown Foundation gives 9,000-11,000 dead from 1999 through February 2002, with another 3,000 dead for 2003. So that's, as I wrote, a total of 12,000-14,000 killed for 1999-2003 (excluding March-Dec. 2002).
Fourth, the consensus you mentioned here , as far as I can see above, was for the 9,000-11,000 (1999-2002) range to be be presented, which was actually removed from the infobox here and you did not restore it.
Fifth, with your edit here you removed the sources for losses among the Chechen police, FSB and GRU. If you insist on removing them again then we do not actually have a total of 7,268–7,476 dead as per Russia.
Sixth, with your edit here you removed the figures as per the Committee of Soldiers' Mothers, as well as its citation, for the period from 1999 through 2005.
Now, to be clear, I actually support the earlier compromise to present the 9,000-11,000 (1999-2002) range, with the separate figure cited to Military Balance (via DW) for 4,749 dead during 2002-2003. However, proper attribution for both figures needs to be presented. Further, there is no basis to remove the figures presented by the Committee of Soldiers' Mothers, which actually covers a larger time range than the other two sources (two years longer). To continue, in principal I do not support (for which there was no previous discussion for a compromise) combining estimates from two different organizations into one total (13,500-15,500) which is in my opinion contrary to WP: Original Research and WP: Synth potentially. However, for the sake of compromise, I would support presenting 13,500-15,500, but only if its properly attributed. I myself would be ready to reinstate this range, but only if you agree on attributing the figure. However, in that case, separating the 9,000-11,000 range and the 4,749 would be redundant and should be removed then (again, I can do it myself). As for your removal of sources for dead among Chechen police, FSB and GRU, if you still insist on this, then by all means remove it (I would not object), but you will need to adjust the total figure of dead as per Russia. Finally, proper attribution needs to be presented for the claim on losses among anti-Russian Chechen forces. It can be cited to Shamil Basayev, who was the primary source. What does Alaexis think regarding this? EkoGraf (talk) 20:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, EkoGraf. Thanks for tagging me as I think you misunderstood me. I don't have an issue with attributing the sources. The problem was that you removed two sources in your edit, this and this. The 9,000-11,000 source only counts for 1999 to early 2002, ignoring much of 2002 while then giving a number for 2003. You wrote this as 1999-2003 which was another issue. Regarding your 4th point, I didn't combine these two sources, just changed it back to the previous revision before you edited. Regarding 5th, I believe writing the individual losses for all the different russian forces unnecessarily clutters the infobox, so I combined them into one count. I don't remember removing the sources for chechen police/fsb/gru, might've been accidental. Not sure about WP:SYNTH, I might go ahead and ask someone more knowledgeable on a noticeboard or something regarding this. On a final note, there's nothing called "anti russian chechen forces". You have Chechen forces and pro Russian chechen forces in this conflict. I think writing "Shamil Basayev claim" just sounds silly. He's one of the senior leaders of the Chechen movement, therefore it would be more correct to write "chechen claim". Ola Tønningsberg (talk) 19:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
The infobox looks much better now than in your first edit. Ola Tønningsberg (talk) 19:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Apologies, I've been pretty busy lately. I think the infobox looks better now that all the claims are attributed. Please lmk if there are unresolved issues. Alaexis¿question? 22:08, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @EkoGraf:. I thought you supported to have the 13,500-15,500 range as long as it was attributed, which it was.

The Second Chechen War and the insurgency in the North Caucasus

What is the problem with statement, that these events are considered together as united and ongoing armed conflict? There is similar statement in insurgency in the North Caucasus. Alex Spade (talk) 18:54, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Categories: