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.
No editor may make edits to the article unless such edits are either
minor edits as described at WP:Minor edit and marked as minor,
reverts of obvious vandalism or an obvious WP:BLP violation,
or have consensus as described below, and the edit summary contains a link to the talk page discussion establishing that consensus.
Procedural details
The rules at WP:BAN#Exceptions to limited bans apply to reverts of vandalism or BLP violations. (For clarity's sake, the removal or addition of cleanup tags, for any reason, are neither minor edits nor vandalism.)
For the purpose of this sanction, an edit may only be deemed to have consensus if the following minimum procedural requirements are met:
It has been proposed on the talk page, in a dedicated section or subsection, for at least 72 hours.
In that section, the proposal has been either unopposed or at least four registered editors (including the proposer) have commented about the proposal.
The proposal does not substantially duplicate a previous proposal that failed to achieve consensus, or seek to undo a previous change that did achieve consensus, if that previous proposal or change was made less than a month before the new proposal.
The editor who makes an edit is responsible that the edit has consensus as outlined above. To prevent the risk of being sanctioned in the event that an administrator finds that the edit did not have consensus, any editor may ask on a community forum for an uninvolved administrator to determine whether or not consensus exists for the proposal. Such determinations are binding for the purpose of this sanction, but do not prevent consensus from changing by way of a new proposal. Administrators may ask for continued discussion if they believe that this would help consensus-finding, and they may weigh the arguments advanced in the light of applicable Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines in order to determine consensus or the lack thereof.
Editors who violate this editing restriction may be sanctioned with escalating blocks or other discretionary sanctions per WP:ARBEE#Discretionary sanctions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
Firstly the Hunagry section is strange. It has no source and it claims that the State Protection Authority "committed mass genocides". Is this true? Are there good sources for this. Plus the wording is at the very least hyperbolic.
Also would the Communist purges in Serbia in 1944–1945 be good enough for inclusion? Another suggestion which I think would fit count as a mass killings under communist regime would be the Fractionism purges in Angola. 10 of thousand appear to have been excecuted in a couple year, so would this count? There are a number of source on the Angolan Civil War page. At the very least couldn't Angola and possibly the Partisans/Yugoslavia be mentioned in name as place where mass killing have occurred. Thoughts? Stumink (talk) 14:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Possible sources exist - but would need consensus for inclusion per the article restrictions. Meanwhile, the blue-linked articles do appear sourced.
During the anti-Tito campaign in 1949-1953, the prominent leader, Laszlo Rajk (see Rajk, Laszlo), was executed together with others after a show trial. A wave of purges followed, "cleansing" the party of social democrats who were coopted after the enforced merger of the two parties. Further show trials were conducted against prominent church leaders and noncommunist organizations. However, some leading communists, who remained in Hungary in the underground party, were also subjected to the horrors of torture and show trials. These included Janos Kadar (see Kadar, Janos) and Gyorgy Marosan (see Marosan, Gyorgy). About 7,500 communists fell victim to the purges, of whom about 2,000 were killed. Altogether, almost 750,000 Hungarians were investigated for possible political opposition. Many thousands were expelled from their homes, and about 250,000 were placed in concentration camps. There was hardly a family in Hungary who escaped persecution.
Sorry, but this is going to take longer than I had anticipated. My life is currently at a stand still and I need to deal with things before I can take the time to go through and expand/alter each and every single section. Kurtis09:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
What is the relevance of an article like this?
There could as well be an article about "Mass killings under Capitalist regimes" (which could probably lead to far higher numbers) or an article about mass killings in general (which apparently doesn't exist), eventually mentioning the political or social system of the committing society.
This article makes it seem like mass killings would be somewhat a probable or even unique consequence of communism or supposedly communist societies and that is some serious political bias and not constructive at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.17.64.182 (talk) 13:56, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Been there, done that - the relevance of this article and its place in Misplaced Pages have been settled for a long time by about 6 AfD attempts. Why not think of something new to say? Smallbones(smalltalk)20:06, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
This is the editor's first posting and it might be more helpful to explain why the article exists than to make appeals to authority. In case you were unaware, nothing is ever settled in Misplaced Pages. TFD (talk) 20:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
@TFD - I was addressing you. Why not just admit, once and for all that there is no case to delete this article. To the extent possible on Misplaced Pages, this is a settled matter. See WP:Dead horse. Smallbones(smalltalk)20:45, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
It is very difficult to get any article deleted. The article Richard Tylman for example was only deleted on the 4th nomination, yet clearly the subject failed notability. A large number of AfDs for an article made by different editors may be evidence that there is something wrong with it. TFD (talk) 22:08, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
TFD, if you have forgotten how this article differs from the "Mass killings under Capitalist regimes" article, then maybe we should start a FAQ for this talk page so we don't have to spend time reminding you. The Richard Tylman article you linked to does not have an established consensus one way or the other regarding deletion (a consensus was only established on a previous version), whereas there is a clear consensus over two consecutive AfDs to keep this article. AmateurEditor (talk) 22:16, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
The Tylman articles were not all about the same person at all -- counting AfDs for such is a pointlesss exercise indeed. Collect (talk) 23:55, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
The first four AfDs including the one I proposed and that successfully led to the article's deletion, were about the same person. An article about a person with the same name but who lived hundreds of years before was then created and it survived AfD. TFD (talk) 00:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
This article had a number of AfDs that did not have a clear consensus and looking at the votes of those that supposed did there was substantial support for deletion. By all means start a FAQ. Answering why there is a MKuCR article but not one for capitalism, fascism, nazism, liberalism, imperialism, democracy, etc. could be one of them. TFD (talk) 22:35, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
The very first sentence starts out with a verifiably false statement, or at least an extermely controversial statement stated as fact, something inappropriate for wikipedia. The entire article seems to just be a coatrack of any violence or deaths associated with communism. I wonder under what "mass killing" article would be placed the millions killed in war by the Japanese during the 30s, 40s, and under what article would we place the tens of thousands of children who starved to death today in Africa? Furious Style (talk) 02:23, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
,_Emblem_of_Russia_(1991%E2%80%931992).svg)
Done. —