Talk:Guangzhou massacre

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Asian / Chinese / Medieval

This 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 articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Chinese military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

China

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Unbelievable deathtoll

The deathtoll is ridiculous. Estimates put Guangzhou's total population by year 800 at about 200 thousand. If the muslim claim is true, then the majority of Guangzhou's population would need to be massacred foreigners. The 120 thousand to 200 thousand claim is obviously a lie.Qwertzy (talk) 16:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit crazy to see a missionary's report in 1869 used as the primary reference in this article. He's not a scholar; his report wasn't based on what he personally experience. He didn't even indicate how that number came from. Ahyangyi (talk) 13:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for the Guangzhou massacre

http://www.muslimheritage.com/uploads/China%201.pdf

http://www.franckgoddio.org/fileadmin/docs/Lost_at_sea_Franck_Goddio_first_pages.pdf

http://www.learner.org/courses/worldhistory/support/reading_7_3.pdf

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZV_TtfkxYUgC&pg=PA14#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.learner.org/courses/worldhistory/support/reading_7_3.pdf

Page 27 Familiar strangers

http://books.google.com/books?id=Y8Nzux7z6KAC&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=YJibpHfnw94C&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118#v=onepage&q&f=false

Its under "2nd book", the year of the massacre is recorded as "878" (the western calender year) and 264 (the Hijra year)

http://alrihlah.com/nadawat/research/219

Just the hijra year 264 is used here

http://www.alwaraq.net/Core/waraq/bibliography_indetail?id=181

Other information about the book or citing the book but not the massacre specifically

http://www.alarabnews.com/show.asp?NewID=5804&PageID=26&PartID=1&TypeID=1

22:03, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Death Toll

I'm curious. There were Han Chinese living along with the arabs and persians. Were there any Chinese and mixed Chinese kill in the massacre? If so, the death toll would be much more. Sonic99 (talk) 00:05, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading

"Foreigners have at different periods settled in China; but after remaining for a time, they have been massacred." This only happened a few time when the cooperative central government lost their control over the plutophobic peasants (including those in the cultural revolution) and the quote made it sound like it happened a lot. China, at least the government, had been the most minority friendly country in the world until even now. Try search a policy called "两少一宽" and don't be fooled by the "tibetan/uyghur massacre" bullshit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CD2C:4C00:4428:775D:C0C:A4A9 (talk) 05:23, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I think you misunderstood things. That quote was made in 1869. How would any policy of the PRC be related to that quote in any way, at all? Ahyangyi (talk) 13:47, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article borders on POV pushing

The intro section reads like it's trying to discredit the article itself.Nightryder84 (talk) 18:16, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]