Jump to content

Talk:Honor killing/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

per wikipedia convention

per wikipedia MOS spelling should be based on how the word is used in the country. Considering this is not an american phenemenon "Honour" should be the title, with a redirect from "honor"

And just to pre-empt: WP:ConsensuscanchangeLihaas (talk) 21:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Agree with suggestion to move to "Honour killing" for reason noted above.Parkwells (talk) 15:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Like the article states, honour killings were believed to be rare to non-existent in South India. But recently there have been quite a few murders of this kind in Tamilnadu, that was reported on TV. Fathers have killed their own daughters. Fie on our society. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.87.175 (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Honor Killing in Europe Tag

Why not? It would be notable. If someone has more information on it and is willing to split the article, it would be fine.

it would be helpful know how differently the police authorities take the report of a threatened honour killing. Do the police in Sweden go about dealing with such a threat diffently than in the UK for example? Until not so long ago, the UK police did not want to interfer as they regarded this as 'domestic violence'!

I think it should be noted that in Italy penalty reductions for honour killings were abolished only in 1981, and were quite common until fifty years ago (especially in the south), but in "Honor Killing in Europe" are only mentioned crimes committed by immigrants. even if Italy is an ecception i think deserves to me mentioned, unless this article only deals with recent times. sorry for my bad english. --Rambaldo (talk) 07:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

No mention of the horrific and disgusting so-called "honour killings" that happen in the UK periodically, I notice...I suppose it's "racist" to mention them, since they seem to happen exclusively within the Pakistani Muslim community......we can't have people of a certain race villified on the basis of mere "guilt" or "culpability" after all... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.68.95 (talk) 03:31, 20 March 2011 (UTC)


Honor Killing in the Middle East would be another worthwhile article. --Airborne84 (talk) 20:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose merging Karo-kari into Honor killing. It appears to have developed in parallel, rather than being the result of a consensus to split; it's not really very wikified; it appears to be the only country besides the United States with a separate article, and I think the USA is a slightly different case; and I think what useful information (statistics and law stuff) is there should be in the main article.

As a side note, if the merge proposal fails, I recommend renaming karo-kari to "honor killing in Pakistan" and suggest that some of the editors from this page take a look at it. -- Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:51, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Moved karo-kari to Honor killing in Pakistan as there was so much info to add to the main article. Since there is a lot of information about honor killings in Pakistan, it's best to have its own page (like the US does) --Turn685 (talk) 05:43, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Merger

The articles must be merged. Karo-kari is just another form of Honor killing, just that it's called so in Pakistan. B.suhasini (talk) 05:47, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

South America

What happened to the section on South America? Why has this turned into a Muslim country only article when it didn't used to be? Baalthazaq (talk) 07:00, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm South American and I'm a very interested one, but I will not make editions because I know it will become contamined with POV. So, please, other Wikipedians, take care of it to me?

I see very few repercussion on honor killings in Brazil accross the world. They are really quite common in rural areas when someone have LGBT kids (in our urban areas we have lots of hate groups influenced by this extreme macho culture, white power skinhead is just too recent and not-deeply-rooted-in-South-America-as-in-White-majority-West to make its sadly common occurrence responsible only by they as media blames), and honor killings by girls having premarital sex just stopped of happening thanks to our heterosexual-only late sexual liberation (since it is so less taboo in big cities than homosexual relationships and it affects and changes the point of view of people in minor cities and rural areas). There's not a plan to change their minds, proposals of including LGBT themes in sexual education widespread just have failed due to conservative agenda in government and low support of population (certain sectors of society still use out-of-date information about these themes to make everybody think about "how it will promote homosexualism (sic) to youth"). LGBT visibility exists, actually it is present in most of our culture even in more sexist areas, but with exaggerated stereotypes even in places where it "should not be" like Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo middle classes and youth (I'm suspect to say because the rivalry between the metropolises is gaining fame around the world, but in São Paulo people are much more conservative than in Rio, just ask any Brazilian leftist).

Sometimes I think that this massive portrayal of Middle East as a super sexist "barbarian" culture when everything we see there have ever existed also in Latin America represents some evil purposes masked with efforts to "westernize" and "civilizate" them (this idea in itself is evil, reactionary, retrograde, racist, it is hard to find so many offenses to describe it, but seems to be a consensus among the people who believe in a clash of civilizations and the potential Islamization of Europe blablablablablabla everybody saw the consequences of this kind of thought this year). Hahaha, a certain patriarchal religion that maximizes sexism here and is used to all sophistry to justificates the status quo in which tons of people are brutally killed and do not cares if millions of teenagers have feelings of isolation, loneliness, guilt and shame as well depression while there's a LGBT-friendly world outside our ridiculous unreported nutshell is not Islam. Domestic violence against women happens 4 times in 2 minutes here, it was on Globo's broadcast television yesterday.

At least 20.000 Latin American women dies per year in consequences of illegal abortions since we have backward laws and according to WikiLeaks 5 MILLION of such cases occured in Brazil from 1985 to 2005, but it puts in high risks only the poor. What are the responses of Catholic Church and conservative-majority Protestant segment? Put pressure on government to pro-choice laws being out-of-cogitation and make even unbrained fetuses and sons of rape protected as borned human beings (Sociology don't tell people that without culture we're just primates? Strangely enough, this same very persons are not used to animal rights that way). Just search, it is called Estatuto do Nascituro. Your womb? This does not belong to you mooooooooooooar! Laïcité was just killed, but it is not our Constitution? What about West and its values looking at less developed countries for respect to human rights and feminism? Now everything sounds hypocrate much to me. Christianity better than Islam? Only neonazi and redneck shit will think that way. Lguipontes (talk) 11:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

5,000 Annual Murders Citation

I was unable to verify with the United Nations the source of the estimated 5,000 honour killings per year.

Maritina Paniagua (at un.org) writes:

I have not been able to identify the source of the 5,000 number. Your best bet is to contact someone from the editorial team. I looked at the names of the editor and staff that compiled the 2000 report (see 1st screen shot) and cross checked with the UNFPA directory but had no success. I have a feeling that they might not be in UNFPA anymore. I looked at the editorial team for the 2011 report and they are totally different people. See the second screen print shot (orange color) I did find an office within UNFPA that perhaps could orient you to the editorial team of the publication.

While the UNFPA site does have a 5,000 estimate, the source for that estimate cannot be verified at this time, thus calling into question the reliability of that number. The document cited on the UNFPA page for the 5,000 number provides an estimate of 325 honour killings per year.

Thangalin (talk) 17:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for Changes/Additions

I would agree that more needs to be added regarding South America. In addition, I am working on adding in more statistics for the regions already mentioned in the article and more historical, religious, and cultural influences for the prevalence of honor killings. Feedback is welcomed. B.chachere (talk) 00:44, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Middle East Forum

I have had a look at their website and it doesn't look like a reliable source to me. PatGallacher (talk) 12:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


Could someone reword this -

It is thus believed that it is not Islam as a religion, but Islamic culture, and the prominent and long-standing view that women are considered property, as the sources of for honor killings

It sounds like "Islamic culture" and "women considered property" are merged here, when this generalization is not true. We know in places like India and other south asian countries, aswell as other places around the world, "women are also considered properties". Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.161.196 (talk) 22:31, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

No place for Males against it?

Now maybe "Definition" is not the best place for this information which Jayjg removed as WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS.

In 2010 Israeli Arab member of Parliament Ahmad Tibi proposed banning public media and law enforcement from using terms like "honor killing" or "crime of passion" to describe murders of women because it conveyed "positive characteristics to murder, send encouraging and sympathetic messages about violence." REF:Jonathan Lis Tags, Israel Arab MK: No murders should ever be called 'honor killing', [[Haaretz], October 11, 2010.

But obviously if it's notable in the "Culture" section that female academics are against it, it's equally notable that a male Arab member of the Israeli parliament is against it. What's needed is more information about more males of whatever culture who have spoken out against it. Anyone disagree? CarolMooreDC 21:45, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

A couple of years ago one member of Parliament of one small country proposed banning use of the term. Politicians say things all the time, and given that the country has a free press, it had no chance of going anywhere anyway. This is obviously the exact opposite of notable. Please review WP:NOTNEWSPAPER too. If some country ever passes legislation like this, then we'll have something to discuss here. Jayjg (talk) 23:09, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
You are not responsive to my new insight and comment based on your deletion, only repeating your edit summary. The issue is various males speaking out against the practice, in whatever way they do. I can see one just hanging loose without a larger context is problematic. However, four or five males of various statures opposing obviously would be appropriate for such an article. CarolMooreDC 01:14, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Is there an "issue" of "various males speaking out against the practice"? How do you know this? Do you have some reliable source indicating that this is some sort of "issue"? Jayjg (talk) 03:40, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Gosh, it never occurred to me that [later added to clarify: many] males would not [later clarify: speak out against honor killing]! Anyway, found some interesting WP:RS leads earlier that led to my posts; will pursue soon. CarolMooreDC 03:53, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
"males would not?" Sorry, I can make neither head nor tail of what you're saying. Jayjg (talk) 04:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
OK, after your "later clarify" additions above, I'm still mystified. What are you going on about? Jayjg (talk) 14:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Let's not discuss generalities. It will be clear when new material entered. CarolMooreDC 03:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Section on Evolutionary Psychology

There are various problems with this section. It relies on one source, possibly a primary source, even if that source discusses two other articles. Secondly the source cited uses the words "biological" and "evolutionary" but never makes any reference to evolutionary psychology. Thirdly it is not an accurate summary of the source or even part of it. Fourthly, while the source is written in pose that is easy to read, the passage inserted here is ungrammatical, with numerous errors and tortured sentence constructions: often it is hard to fathom what might possibly have been meant by the editor. That is compounded by the fact that it is almost impossible to work out how the text relates to the original source and to check whether some version of a particular sentence actually appears in the source. The source makes a distinction between sociological and biological explanations (that seems to be the point of the original essay), but that is lost in what cannot really be described as a paraphrase. The heading "Evolutionary psychology" at present seems unjustified, particularly if it is based on just one relatively short essay that nowhere mentions that topoc. The material added might be WP:UNDUE, unless it has become more established and appeared in book form. Fifthly and finally, the author Matthew A. Goldstein, JD, MA, appears to be a lawyer and not an established expert in psychology. Mathsci (talk) 09:41, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

The source is not primary and cites many sources. The evolutionary psychology theories are by well-known evolutionary psychologists like Buss. What exactly is wrong with the summary? Sociological theories are mentioned in another section. The article is called "The biological roots of heat-of-passion crimes and honor killings" and concentrates on that and not on sociological theories. Feel free to point out grammatical errors and I will make corrections. Academica Orientalis (talk) 09:47, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Obviously I have read the article, which I downloaded from JSTOR.[1] It's by a lawyer, not a psychologist and apparently not an academic. Your text is completely unreadable: it is some of the worst writing I've seen on wikipedia. This is a primary source and, as I say, the words evolutionary psychology do not appear in the text. You could have written "biological explanations". Your heading is pure WP:OR. Mathsci (talk) 09:57, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Again, it presents theories by well-known evolutionary psychologists. The source conducts no research but reviews the literature and is thus not primary. The journal is peer-reviewed.[2] Ad hominem against the author is not interesting. Peer-review establishes the reliability of the article. Academica Orientalis (talk) 10:06, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Editing wikipedia with WP:SYNTH of this kind is not permissible. If Matthew Goldstein is just a lawyer discussing the legal implications of sociological vs biological explanations of honor killings/heat-of-passion crimes, how can you write any wikipedia content based on that? Unless a review is written by a biologist or a psychologist, I cannot see that it merits being used on wikipedia as the sole source. You could write whatever you pleased that way. As I say, this is WP:UNDUE unless it is written by an expert in the subject. The author of the source seems to have been trained as a lawyer. Do you know who he is? Is he this person for example? (BTW no wikipedian editor is an authority on evolutionary psychology.) Mathsci (talk) 10:15, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
The article is certainly not only discussing the "legal implications" but reviews the state of research regarding evolutionary views. Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability. Peer-review establishes reliability. There is no exception for certain kinds of authors. Academica Orientalis (talk) 10:21, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes it does and he does so explicitly in the conclusion. Using sources inappropriately and refusing to try to work out who the author is just tendentious editing. Why is discussing the author a problem for you? It is standard practice on wikipedia, particularly in cases like this. He is a lawyer, since he has JD after his name; and my identification does seem to be correct. Mathsci (talk) 10:25, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Again, ad hominem against the author is not a valid argument. The paper is peer-reviewed which establishes reliability as a source in Wikipedia. Academica Orientalis (talk) 10:33, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Peer-reviewed is not enough and you don't seem even vaguely to understand the meaning of ad hominem. I understand that English is not your native language, which might explain your confusion. If we use any source on wikipedia, we need to know precisely who the author is. It does not seem to be at all irrelevant to raise the fact that the author is a practising lawyer who wrote a one-off article (a spin-off from a minor thesis prepared for his JD from the University of Arizona?). If you don't want to discuss the author of the source here, this discussion can be continued at another noticeboard. Mathsci (talk) 10:43, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
To quote from WP:V: "Where available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources". Nothing about excluding certain peer-reviewed papers due to the authors. That people may write important works outside the field they are educated in is nothing new and does not exclude such views. For example, many of non-evolutionary psychologists have written critical things about evolutionary psychology. Academica Orientalis (talk) 10:58, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Clearly Miradre is trying to have his cake and eat it too. On this page he defends the use of primary sources when they suit his POV, but on other pages [3] has argued that secondary sources should be preferred. This is a clear example of editing in bad faith. aprock (talk) 16:12, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

An international lawyer writing about biology and evolution. Whatever next? Mathsci (talk) 21:33, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Is the Middle East Quarterly a reliable source?

An user has claimed that the Middle East Quarterly is not a reliable source: [4] It seems reliable to me as a scholarly peer-reviewed journal.[5]. What is the objection? Academica Orientalis (talk) 02:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

This link shows past discussions of the source. Also see WP:Original research. The other objection may be that you have too freely interpreted the source and/or just put in mostly your own opinions. See the relevant policy and look again at what you did. CarolMooreDC 04:14, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Honor Killing in Colombia Cites Dubious Sources

Julie Mertus' commentary on "honor killings" in Colombia stating that before 1980 it could legal for a husband to kill an unfaithful wife, doesn't really match with criminal law in that country, which makes the assertion at least misleading and inaccurate, and at worse false.

Colombian criminal law code from 1936 (in force before 1980) says;

Artículo 382: Cuando el Homicidio o las lesiones se cometan por cónyuge, padre o madre, hermano o hermana contra la cónyuge, la hija o la hermana, de vida honesta, a quienes
sorprenda en ilegítimo acceso carnal, o contra el copartícipe de tal acto, se impondrán las respectivas sanciones…disminuidas de la mitad a las tres cuartas partes.
Lo dispuesto en el inciso anterior se aplicará al que en estado de ira e intenso dolor, determinados por tal ofensa cometa el homicidio o cause lesiones en las personas mencionadas, aún cuando no sea en el momento de sorprenderlas en el acto carnal.
Cuando las circunstancias del acto demuestren una menor peligrosidad en el responsable, podrá otorgarse a este el perdón judicial y aún eximírsele de responsabilidad.

Which translates into English as (sorry for the translation, I don't know English legal jargon):

Article 382: When the homicide or injury is committed by a spouse, parent, brother or sister against the spouse, daughter or sister of honest life who is caught in unlawful sexual intercourse, or against the partner of such an act , the sanctions will be reduced between a half to three quarters.
Dispositions int he preceding paragraph shall apply to who in state of "anger and intense pain" [temporary insanity] caused by such offense, commits murder or causes injury to the persons mentioned, even if [the murder] doesn't occur at the time of discovering the carnal act.
When the circumstances of the act demonstrate that the accused poses little danger, may the court grant forgiveness and even no civil responsibility.

Getting lower time in prison is quite different from being legally allowed to commit murder. A proper description of Colombian situation would be "In Colombia, before 1980, criminal law stated that murder committed by husband because of unfaithfulness by the wife would get reduced sentence and even total exoneration." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Camiloaa (talk • contribs) 08:40, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Ahmad Shafaat - dubious authority?

A paragraph of alleged practices in the ancient world (starting "It has been noted[by whom?] how in ancient Babylonian..." and ending "left to die after being placed into a well") draws information from an article "PUNISHMENT FOR ADULTERY IN ISLAM: A Detailed Examination" by Dr Ahmad Shafaat (see http://www.islamicperspectives.com/Stoning4.htm). The information there, specifically the sections from which the contentious paragraph in the 'Honor killing' article is drawn, is poorly sourced, and seems to base its authority on the fact it is boldly presented as fact by Dr Shafaat. He is cited at wikibin.org/articles/ahmad-shafaat.html as "a professor at Concordia University in Montreal, Quebec". Checking the university website proves this more or less true, though he works there part time, and specializes in Mathematics, Operations Management, and Statistics: not - it appears - in Islamic law, let alone ancient history.

The reason I am so wary of taking Dr Shafaat's authority on these subjects for granted is that - with due respect - unless it is proven that he is a qualified doctor on these matters then the information should be treated with deepest suspicion. There has recently been a case of another such doctor, Dr Martin Sewell, who teaches at Cambridge and though only qualified as a mathematician and computer programmer has chosen to publish articles on the internet which are of a distinctly dodgy nature [6]. While I don't want to suggest Dr Shafaat is the same, clearly one should beware of any 'Dr' who uses his title to give authority which may well be specious to articles on subjects outside his specialisation.

On that basis I am removing those paragraphs based on Shafaat's article, and suggest that any such material should be kept out until someone can provide a reliable reference for each and every one of its claims. Alfietucker (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Honor killing(possibly) in classical literature

From the Odyssey:
  • Then when they had made the whole place quite clean and orderly, they took the women out and hemmed them in the narrow space between the wall of the domed room and that of the yard, so that they could not get away: and Telemachus said to the other two, "I shall not let these women die a clean death, for they were insolent to me and my mother, and used to sleep with the suitors." So saying he made a ship's cable fast to one of the bearing-posts that supported the roof of the domed room, and secured it all around the building, at a good height, lest any of the women's feet should touch the ground; and as thrushes or doves beat against a net that has been set for them in a thicket just as they were getting to their nest, and a terrible fate awaits them, even so did the women have to put their heads in nooses one after the other and die most miserably.[13] Their feet moved convulsively for a while, but not for very long.
Also, perhaps the story of Verginia from Livy is a case of honor killing.198.189.194.129 (talk) 21:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Verginia was killed to save her from slavery if I recall correctly. I do not think it an honour killing as such. The Odyssey however would be one, but a source would be needed which binds them both, else we fall afoul of WP:OR Facts, not fiction (talk) 17:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

As vendetta

It should probably be mentioned somewhere that in some cases "honor killings" are used as blood revenge. According to this,

"In Meerwala village in the Punjab in 2002, a tribal "jury" claimed that an 11-year-old boy from the Gujar tribe, Abdul Shakoor, had been walking unchaperoned with a 30-year-old woman from the Mastoi tribe, which "dishonoured" the Mastois. The tribal elders decided that to "return" honour to the group, the boy's 18-year-old sister, Mukhtaran Bibi, should be gang-raped. Her father, warned that all the female members of his family would be raped if he did not bring Mukhtar to them, dutifully brought his daughter to this unholy "jury". Four men, including one of the "jury", immediately dragged the girl to a hut and raped her while up to a hundred men laughed and cheered outside. She was then forced to walk naked through the village to her home." My very best wishes (talk) 05:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Spanish honor killing laws

Spain only resently abandoned laws which allowed males of family to kill females suspected in adultery.
I find it nesssesary to include such information .

Edelfred (talk) 18:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Sweden section - relevance

User TelusFielder keeps reverting deletes of this section without giving any reason as to why beatings and threats are relevant to this article, whose subject is murder due to honor/shame motives. Instead of reverting, please discuss here first. I have already tried alerting user TelusFielder with comments on his talk page, but received no response. If we could reach a consensus here, I would much appreciate it. AadaamS (talk) 06:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

See previous post in this discussion and please participate to reach a consensus. I have never used the RfC template before, if I used it the wrong way then please tell me what I ought to have done. AadaamS (talk) 13:08, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Comment - This article has been lacking good sources since I first visited it a month ago. It was really inevitable a dispute like this would arise. There are a lot of things we have to consider when we're including controversial material such as this. First of all, exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Not only do the sources have to be reliable, but there must be many of them, enough we can be sure that this isn't just one person or supposed expert making an outlandish claim. This sort of thing happens all the time. What we have in the article currently is not sufficient sourcing to justify the claims made. Let's assume that The Local is a reliable publication, that is, it has a "reputation for fact checking and accuracy". This is the passage in question:

"These are examples of honour crimes in ethnic Swedish families, even though the term 'honour crime' is usually reserved to people of non-Swedish origin."

It doesn't explicitly say who is being quoted, but I think we can assume that it is Kitimbwa Sabuni. First of all, AadaamS is correct that the article does not say any Swedes have killed anyone for having children with Muslims. Secondly, the article attributes Sabuni with no notability, nor expertise. It only says that he, "edited the report submitted to the UN's Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) by the Network of Swedish Muslims". He is certainly not qualified to represent any consensus among sociologists or other experts on the nature of Islam in Sweden. Thus quoting his, and only his opinion here is undue weight. Therefore, because we have an extreme deficit of reliable sources for such a controversial claim, I am deleting the section again. While this is not an outright rejection of the material, the onus is on editors who wish to restore the material to provide reliable sources. If more sources can be provided that support this claim, and they are sufficiently reliable, then and only then should the material be restored and probably expanded. PraetorianFury (talk) 17:11, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree with PraetorianFury. If it's true, then it should be easy enough to validate to the satisfaction of other editors. I suggest that the topic be discussed on the talk page before being inserted again. By the way, you might want to add a category to the rfc, as it is currently unsorted. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Throughout the article, the word "violence" is mentioned. There's even a section on the right which has all sorts of articles on violence against women. This is also a reliable newspaper (PraetorianFury does not get that and instead attacks an individual the article mentions). I believe it should at least be re-worded. TelusFielder (talk) 04:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

There is no reliable source stating that such crimes have actually occurred in Sweden. There are only claims that this is a thing that happens. Please find a reliable source which describes such a case.2A02:2F0A:506F:FFFF:0:0:BC19:A123 (talk) 12:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Telus, while I respect your passion for spreading awareness of women's issues, advocation is not something that we do here on Wikipedia. We report on issues with respect to their severity and weight. If this is the only article that debatably glancingly almost mentions honor killings by ethnic Swedes that you can find, it is simply not enough for us to include here. As I said, exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Something like this is potentially controversial, so we would need multiple sources before including it, and the onus would be on you to provide them. And you are overlooking another significant argument, specifically that what was mentioned was no an honor "killing". This is the first line from the lead of this article: "An honor killing, or honour killing[1] is the homicide of a member of a family or social group by other members, due to the belief of the perpetrators that the victim has brought dishonor upon the family or community." This isn't about domestic violence. It's about honor killings. Or at the least, honor attempted killings. We have 0 evidence of that, at this point. Rather than edit warring with us about this, why don't you attempt to Google this and find better sources. It is the hallmark of a POV warrior when they find flimsy sources and battle over them rather than finding more. Show us your good faith and find better sources. And if you can't, that should be a message to you that this is infact not a significant issue that we need to cover. PraetorianFury (talk) 16:08, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Telus, this wikipedia article is named "Honor killing", not "Honor violence". If you want to rename the article and expand its scope then the lead section section has to be changed as well as it only mentions murder. As it is, your stated source mentions no honor killing by ethnic Swedes and therefore it does not support your claim, even if the source itself were reliable. Also, since the name of the disputed section was Sweden and not Swedes, that section could never have been complete without the mentioning of Fadime Sahindal who is the most widely recognized honor killing victim in Sweden. That is why she has an article on Wikipedia and is mentioned in the Europe section of this article. So yes indeed, I agree with you that IF the section should be reinstated (which I don't think at the moment), it should be reworded and expanded to contain verified and notable honor killings in Sweden. The general current structure of the article is that there is a "Europe" section mentioning honor killings in Europe, is your intention to create one subsection for every country in Europe? AadaamS (talk) 06:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

} Hello all, I am responding to a RfC on this topic. Given that this a page on the series of homicide and is a page relating directly to Honour (You are spelling it wrong by the way ;)) Killings, then material in this article should be directly related to Honour Killings, and not include every little example about a threat here or there as some users have posted in the past. I hope this helps clears things up. MisterShiney ✉ 17:19, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Summary: I believe the consensus at this point is clear that we do not have good enough sources to justify inclusion of this controversial material. Let me take this opportunity to reiterate that while Telus seems to have the benevolent goal of decrying honor killings in Sweden, our primary goal on Wikipedia is not advocacy, but simply reporting as accurately as possible on the state of things. High level articles such as this can be controversial, as our decisions concerning how extensively to cover material will almost always leave someone unhappy. But one thing that is certain is that we can't cover every murder and every beating in a country, and we can't take a single incident as evidence of a nationwide trend, especially with as flimsy sources as we have here. I encourage Telus to fire up Google and see if he can't convince us with more sources, or convince himself when they can't be found. Please do not be discouraged or embittered by the result of this RFC. Instead perhaps review our points after cooling off and realize that we are not your enemies, but are instead reviewing the information with a level of skepticism necessary to prevent all kinds of nonsense from making it to the page. What few comments from you that I've seen so far reek of "WP:I didn't hear that", but I can sympathize. I have spent months battling over a page when I believed I was in the moral right. I hope you won't hold a grudge or consider this a "defeat", and that should we meet on articles in the future, there will be no bad blood. Happy editing. PraetorianFury (talk) 17:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done

Misleading reference

The text leading to Reference 13 says:

"Additionally, according to a poll done by the BBC’s Asian network, 1 in 10 of the 500 Hindus, Sikhs, Christians and Muslims surveyed said they would condone any murder of someone who threatened their family’s honor."

The article referred to does not say if 500 people were interviewed (probable), or if 500 people from each group were interviewed (unlikely). The make-up of the 500 people interviewed could easily have been 2 Christians, 2 Muslims, 2 Sihks, and 494 Hindus. (Or any other combination, I am not making any religious inference.) And the 10% condoning it could have all been from the same religion.

The reference is totally misleading, therefore I propose deleting it. Darkman101 (talk) 22:04, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Honor killing of Arash Ghorbani-Zarin

That article is unlikely to be expanded. The murder has some coverage in a couple of academic books: just the basic facts, 3-4 sentences within a paragraph. Perhaps that makes it a WP:DUE example in the Europe section here? I see there are plenty more examples in that section, some which received much more attention, so I'm not entirely convinced it would add much, but I'm leaving this note here just in case. 86.121.18.17 (talk) 09:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

No mention of passages from the Hadith?

In the "Religion" section of the article, I propose we add references to sections of the Hadith which can be interpreted to condone honor killings, such as:

  • Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 196
  • Sahi Bukhari: 8:6814
  • Sahi Muslim No. 4206
  • Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 2. pg 1009; and Sahih Muslim Vol 2. pg 65

Aelius28 (talk) 19:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia primarily relies upon secondary scholarly sources on matters of interpretation. It would be unacceptable for anyone to speculate on the meaning of verses as this would violate "no Original research" - find some academic references as Wikipedia primarily relies on secondary sources not primary sources. NarSakSasLee (talk) 20:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Dangerous words "Can be interpreted" and make sure the academic ref is from someone qualified to speak, not just a guy with a PhD in political science.--Inayity (talk) 22:32, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
So what does "The Reliance of the Traveller" say? Anyone got a copy to hand? 62.196.17.197 (talk) 15:11, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Disputed Source which is used in article Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence? by Phyllis Chesler

[Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence? by Phyllis Chesler http://www.meforum.org/2067/are-honor-killings-simply-domestic-violence] The source is already in use. Is it academic? Is it NPOV, is it RS. One editor is inserting it to label the problem as a "Muslim problem" (kind of like how they try to say FGM is something Muslims do (right)). Can the source be used in the rest of the article? While not used as the user is trying to use it? Or should we take it out in totality if it is maliciously biased?--Inayity (talk) 10:50, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Did not take long look who runs MEast Forum. Daniel Pipes now it is making sense. 100% not a RS for anything NPOV. That man is on a crusade against Muslims. --Inayity (talk) 10:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
First of all, FGM is almost exclusively committed by Muslims. Second of all, the fact that an institution has an ideological bent does not necessarily make it wrong. I could just as easily argue that many of the politically correct, culturally relativist, far-left claims made in Islam-related articles should be removed because of their sources' ideological bias. Thirdly, it is not necessarily racist to criticize Islam and the Muslims that do and believe terrible things. It speaks volumes about your character that you would call Daniel Pipes racist as you did in your edit summary. I propose we reinstate the Middle East Quarterly source unless you have some other source that shows they are wrong in what they claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aelius28 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Let me say it again, to make more volumes. Daniel Pipes is a another version of David Duke Thanks for info on FGM. Points stand. How come it is antisemitic to critique anything Israeli. Let us be serious and source NPOV R.S not political religious organizations which are Islamophobic.--Inayity (talk) 19:10, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
On what basis do you accuse Daniel Pipes of being like David Duke? David Duke is a racist and I see no evidence indicating that Daniel Pipes is a racist. I do not think it is antisemitic to critique anything Israeli. You, on the other hand, and the politically correct multicultural acolytes like you, think it is Islamophobic to critique anything Islamic. Aelius28 (talk) 19:34, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Not really. But can you please just find alternative sources to say what ever (without generalizing Jews, Africans, Muslims, or anyone group (the thing racism is a master of).You see thats what Hilter did, he keep telling people "its the Jews". Duke says "Its the blacks--look at them!" When you have a source that is concerned with the subject and represents the topic of honor killing with balance (not an agenda) then its all good. Like a neutral academic with no horse in the race. Not asking for much, but anyone who advocates war and invasion in Muslim Lands is not a R.S.Just like Duke --Inayity (talk) 19:45, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
For someone so critical of biased sources, I find your choice at the end to include that link very curious indeed. You consider that a reliable source? Besides, where in that link does it indicate that Daniel Pipes is racist? Daniel Pipes simply takes issue with extremist Islam, like we all should. I highly doubt he hates all Muslims or thinks they are inferior. Finally, and most importantly, my point still stands that we allow biased left-wing pro-multicultural Islamic apologist sources on all sorts of articles relating to Islam, so why the double standard? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aelius28 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
observe NPOV and we do not need to discuss it anymore. WP:NPOV. Duke also does not hate all Jews and Africans. He actually said so also. (only extremist Zionist Jews and criminal Blacks (according to him). all devils will explain away their devilry. --Inayity (talk) 22:43, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
You still have not responded to my point. Plenty of non-NPOV sources are used on Wikipedia in defense of Islam and the practices of Muslims. Why the double standard for sources that are non-NPOV that are not in defense of Islam? Aelius28 (talk) 23:44, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Evolutionary psychology section

Should the evolutionary psychology section be in this article? EP is a controversial field anyway, with their methodology and conclusions often being deemed as pure speculation and unscientific. Having a specific section dedicated to the EP explanation of honor killing seems WP:UNDUE and pushing a WP:POV.188.25.160.47 (talk) 11:37, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Also, the section only offers explanations for honor killings due to adultery, but adultery isn't the only trigger for honor killings (it's not even the most common).188.25.160.47 (talk) 11:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
You don't know anything about evolutionary psychology if you think it is unscientific and based on pure speculation. They make hypotheses and predictions just like other scientific disciplines, they test them, and the predictions either vindicate the hypothesis or they discard the hypothesis if it was wrong. Aelius28 (talk) 18:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
"You don't know anything about evolutionary psychology if you think it is unscientific and based on pure speculation".
That's not what "I think" - there is an immense body of criticism of EP which argues that it is unscientific; you cannot deny that the field is controversial. That is addressed in the main article and there is also a Criticism of evolutionary psychology article. Anyway, I could care less about EP, and I'm not interested in debating its validity; what I was asking is whether the section in this article is justified.188.25.160.47 (talk) 19:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
It's only controversial because a lot of people resent the idea that our behaviour can be in part explained by evolution. It's the same reason why the study of sex differences between the genders is controversial. It's not because there's controversy regarding the accuracy of the data - nobody who understands the data and is in the relevant fields thinks there's a controversy - it's because certain people have a knee-jerk reaction to any data which indicate that certain psychological traits are hardwired because it contradicts their erroneous understanding of the mind as a "blank slate" with no predispositions, instincts, etc. Aelius28 (talk) 20:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to remove the section because it basically deals with explanations of murders due to adultery - most honor killings are not due to adultery, and neither are they committed only against women.2A02:2F0A:502F:FFFF:0:0:BC19:1A29 (talk) 05:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
We should have a section which explains what the causes of honour killings are, in order of prevalence. If adultery is oen of the causes, it should be stated and supported by WP:RS. Murder due to adultery could also be confused with a Crime of passion and we don't want overlap, but maybe cross-linking where the subjects intersect. AadaamS (talk) 08:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Congo

I'm removing the Congo section because it is unsourced - not one single source is cited; and the section is also tagged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.160.47 (talk) 12:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Victims

The Victim list needs description, about each victim. OccultZone (talk) 08:27, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Napoleonic Code

The Napoleonic code covered "crimes of passion". Honour killings are not crimes of passion, but attacks based on a "considered" need to protect a family's honour. Sometimes they occur in the heat of passion, but mostly not.

"A man who killed his wife whom he caught in the act of adultery could not be charged with premeditated murder – although he could be charged with other lesser offenses". That is misleading and in fact wrong. A killing in the heat of the moment is inherently not premeditated!

The whole concept of a crime of passion is that the killing occurs in the heat of the moment - it is mostly not premeditated. Laws of this type are common, though not described as "crimes of passion" outside the Napoleonic Code. For instance under the common law a person who has been sexually or even emotionally abused can often be convicted of manslaughter, where the circumstances suggest both premeditation and an intention to kill - which would normally a clear instance of murder.

This is a difficult legal area, and needs accurate treatment.Royalcourtier (talk) 05:10, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Jordan law

Is the text of Article 340 that is cited here that of the current law? Several sources suggest the law now only offeres mitigating circumstances, not a complete defense. [7]

According to this source [8]:

"With regard to honor crimes, Article 340 of the Jordanian penal code lists the mitigating reasons for reducing the penalty. The article says that “he who discovers his wife, or one of his female ascendants or descendants or sisters with another in an unlawful bed and he kills, wounds or injures one or both of them, benefits from a penalty reduction."

And according to this:[9]

"Jordan, like some other countries in the Middle East and Asia, has an old tradition of honour killings and a poor record when it comes to criminalising such violence against women. Right up until 2001, an article of the Jordanian Penal Code stated that a man who “catches his wife, or one of his female close relatives committing adultery with another, and he kills wounds or injures one or both of them, is exempt from any penalty.”

The government of Jordan has increasingly criminalized honour killings, and in 2009 a special court for prosecuting honour crimes was established. Researchers were therefore able to examine the extent to which a change in attitudes could also be found amongst young people more generally."

I made the change, with a source. 2A02:2F0A:507F:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD51 (talk) 07:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Napoleonic Code, Ottoman Code, Jordanian Law and Arab countries law

FRANCE

Article 324 Penal Code 1810(repealed by Article 17 law no.617/75 of 7/11/75)

He who catches his spouse, his female ascendant, female descendant or his sister in the act (en flagrant délit) of adultery or illegitimate sexual relations with a third partyand commits unpremeditated homicide or wounding against the person of one or theother of them may be exempted from liability.*He who commits murder or wounding may be liable to a lesser penalty [in view of extenuating circumstances] if he has surprised his spouse, female ascendant or descendant or sister with a third person in a suspicious situation.

OTTOMAN:

Article 188 Penal Code 1858

He who has seen his wife or any of his female mahrams* with another in a state of disgraceful adultery and has beaten, injured, or killed one or both of them will be exempted [from liability] (ma`fu). He who has seen his wife or one of his female mahrams with another in an unlawful bed and has beaten, injured or killed one or both of them will benefit from an excuse (ma`dhur). *mahram: relative within the prohibited degrees of relationship (i.e. the woman cannot marry the subject)

list of Arab countries Napoleonic Code article 324 penal codes

ALGERIA Article 279 Penal Code 1991

EGYPT Article 237 Penal Code (no.58 1937)

IRAQ Article 409 Penal Code 1966

JORDAN Penal Code No.16 1960: Article 340

KUWAIT Article 153 Penal Code

LEBANON

4August 2011: Parliament votes to remove article 562 from the Penal Code.

Previous developments:Article 562 Penal Code 1943 (as amended 1983, 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1999):

Article 193 Article 252 Article 253

LIBYA Penal Code Article 375

MOROCCO Penal code 1963 as amended: Article 418

OMAN Penal Code Article 252:

PALESTINE Decision on Law no.71 of 2011 regarding the amendment of the Criminal Code in force in the Northern Governorates and the Criminal Code in force in the Southern Governorates (Official Gazette no.91 of 10 October 2011) (signed by President Mahmoud Abbas 5 May 2011):

Article 1: repeals article 340 from the 1960 (Jordanian) Penal Code that was till then in force in the West Bank;

Article 2: amends article 18 of the (British Mandate-issued) Criminal Code in force in the Gaza Strip (by adding “and this does not include crimes of killing women against the background of ‘family honour’” at the end of Article 18 which allows the court to“accept the excuse” made on grounds of self defence or defence of one’s own honouror that of other persons etc);

Article 3: repeals “anything which contradicts this Decision in the law”

SYRIA

Article 548 Penal Code 1949 (as amended 1953)

TUNISIA

Article 207 of Penal Code 1991 (repealed)

UAE Article 334 of law no.3/1978

YEMEN Article 232 of law no.12/1994

20:38, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Honor killing

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Honor killing's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Warrick66":

  • From Laws regarding rape: Warrick, Catherine. (2009). Law in the service of legitimacy: Gender and politics in Jordan. Farnham, Surrey, England; Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate Pub. p. 66. ISBN 978-0-7546-7587-7.
  • From Women in Islam: Warrick, Catherine (2009). Law in the service of legitimacy: Gender and politics in Jordan. Farnham, Surrey, England; Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate. pp. 65–68. ISBN 978-0-7546-7587-7.

Reference named "NYCBar30":

  • From Laws regarding rape: Barad, E. (2007). "Gender-Based Violence Laws in Sub-Saharan Africa". Report prepared for the Committee on African Affairs of the New York City Bar: 30. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • From Marital rape: Barad, E.; E. Slattery; Enikő Horváth; Monwabisi Zukani; Desmond Eppel; Monica Kays; Abdoul Konare; Yeora S. Park; Ekaterina Y. Pischalnikova; Nathaniel Stankard; Tally Zingher (2007). "Gender-Based Violence Laws in Sub-Saharan Africa". Report prepared for the Committee on African Affairs of the New York City Bar. With the assistance of: Alana F. Montas and Nicole Manara: 30.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Romani people and Yazidis

The majority of honour killings are perpetrated by Muslims of every nationality, ethnicity and skin-colour but non-Muslim romani people and Yazidis commit it too.--141.19.228.15 (talk) 14:10, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Romani people and Yazidis

The majority of honour killings are perpetrated by Muslims of every nationality, ethnicity and skin-colour but non-Muslim romani people and Yazidis commit it too.--141.19.228.15 (talk) 14:10, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Latin America vs Hispanic America

If you talk about Latin America you should include Brazil. If you talk about Latin America but only includes spanish speaking countries and exclude Brazil, then it is not Latin America but HISPANIC America. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaac.wikipedia (talk • contribs) 06:10, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

The section includes Brazil. Brycehughes (talk) 09:58, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Honour Killings and Religion?

The Majority of the offenders and victims of honour killings worldwide are Muslims only a very small minority of the offenders and victims of this archaic tradition are non-Muslims. The most of these non-Muslims offenders and victims are (non-Muslim) Romani people and Yazidis.--Justin del Santo (talk) 14:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC) 


   Dictums of Quran and Hadiths which may dictate/incite honor killing:

Quran- 4:15 “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four (reliable) witness from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them. Or God ordain for them some (other) way.”

Quran-24:2 “The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day.”

Quran-17:32 “ Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils).

Quran-33:33 “stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display.” 

   Sahih hadiths:

Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 196: Narrated Abu Huraira: A man from Bani Aslam came to Allah's Apostle while he was in the mosque and called (the Prophet ) saying, "O Allah's Apostle! I have committed illegal sexual intercourse." On that the Prophet turned his face from him to the other side, whereupon the man moved to the side towards which the Prophet had turned his face, and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I have committed illegal sexual intercourse." The Prophet turned his face (from him) to the other side whereupon the man moved to the side towards which the Prophet had turned his face, and repeated his statement. The Prophet turned his face (from him) to the other side again. The man moved again (and repeated his statement) for the fourth time. So when the man had given witness four times against himself, the Prophet called him and said, "Are you insane?" He replied, "No." The Prophet then said (to his companions), "Go and stone him to death." The man was a married one. Jabir bin 'Abdullah Al-Ansari said: I was one of those who stoned him. We stoned him at the Musalla ('Id praying place) in Medina. When the stones hit him with their sharp edges, he fled, but we caught him at Al-Harra and stoned him till he died. (See also Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 63, Number 195.)

Sahi Bukhari: 8:6814: Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah al-Ansari: “A man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to Allah’s Messenger [Muhammad] and informed him that he had committed illegal sexual intercourse; and he bore witness four times against himself. Allah’s Messenger ordered him to be stoned to death as he was a married person.”

Sahi Muslim No. 4206: “A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God’s forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community. And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on her face he cursed her.”

Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 2. pg 1009; and Sahih Muslim Vol 2. pg 65: Hadhrat Abdullah ibne Abbaas (Radiallahu Anhu) narrates the lecture that Hadhrat Umar (Radiallaahu Anhu) delivered whilst sitting on the pulpit of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam). Hadhrat Umar (Radiallahu Anhu) said, "Verily, Allah sent Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) with the truth, and revealed the Quran upon him. The verse regarding the stoning of the adulterer/ess was from amongst the verse revealed (in the Quraan). We read it, secured it and understood it. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) stoned and we stoned after him. I fear that with the passage of time a person might say, ‘We do not find mention of stoning in the Book of Allah and thereby go astray by leaving out an obligation revealed by Allah. Verily, the stoning of a adulterer/ress is found in the Quraan and is the truth, if the witnesses are met or there is a pregnancy or confession."

Al-Bukhari: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever guarantees me that he will guard his chastity, I will guarantee him Paradise”.

Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, An-Nisa’i and others: Abu Hurayrah reports that the Messenger of Allah said, “No one commits adultery while still remaining a believer, for faith is more precious unto Allah than such an evil act!” In another version, it is stated, “When a person commits adultery he casts away from his neck the bond that ties him to Islam; if, however, he repents, Allah will accept his repentance”.

Al-Bayhaqi: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “O mankind! Beware of fornication/adultery for it entails six dire consequences: three of them relating to this world and three to the next world. As for the three that are related to this world, they are the following: it removes the glow of one’s face, brings poverty, and reduces the life-span. As for its dire consequences in the next world they are: it brings down the wrath of Allah upon the person, subjects him to terrible reckoning, and finally casts him in hell-fire.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.93.178 (talk) 07:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Southern Europe

The article claims that honor killings took place in Southern Europe as recently as the 1960s, which sounds like total bullshit to me. I reviewed one of the cited sources -a 14-page academic paper- which explores machismo and masculine honor decades ago in more conservative times, but no mention of honor killings. The section on Greece, for example, ridiculously misquotes its cited source. Just a heads up: in the next few days, I will be reviewing all the cited sources on Italy, Greece, France, and Greek Cyprus, and I expect to find all the claims about honor killings (not having to do with Middle Eastern or Pakistani immigrant communities) baseless and will remove them accordingly. Skyduster (talk) 00:59, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Honor killing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:47, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Edit and add under "Cultures of Honor and Shame" heading

I would like to add to this section, perhaps about the concept of honor as a gendered value system. This is a source that I think has a lot of good information about honor as a concept outside of religion. Also, in this section it states that honor killings often take place in "high-context" cultures, but I think collectivist culture is a more accurate description. Student5643 (talk) 01:50, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

The origination of honor as a gender-based concept has its roots in modern religious ideologies.  The antecedent concept of honor, quite different, can be identified in such bodies of dogma as the Vedas, the Bible, the Koran, Gnostic literatures, Egyptian Mysticism.  Documentation of this Bronze Age concept of honor is also evident in archeological relics and allegorical mythologies of ancient Mesopotamian cultures and pre-Roman Mediterranean societies. Isobel Chaveh (talk) 13:58, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Honor killing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Additions reverted

@Melvin toast and Rivertorch: I reverted addition content for discussion. The first edit is too generalizing. Subsequent additions lack rationale as the value of info may be questionable. --George Ho (talk) 04:37, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Honor killing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:52, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Honor killing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:21, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Honor killing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Use of the offensive and misleading term "Honor killing" in the article when the case is actually an "Aggravated domestic murder"

The term "Honor killing" is really an offensive and misleading term. The term suggests as the perpetrators carried out the killing in order to save their honor, which is completely a misleading, deceptive. No matter what her family members believe in this regard, by marrying someone she likes, with or without the consent of her family members, a girl has in no way degraded the honor of her family members. So there is no question of using the term "honor" here in the title of the article. There is no such thing as "Honor killing" in legal terms. It's a murder. A cold blooded murder, which in legal terms is known as "Aggravated 1st degree murder". - http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=10.95.020 (Washington State Legislature) and http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.32.030 (Washington State Legislature)

= Let's not get confused between US state-specific law and a global topic. And whether something is 'offensive' is subjective. In UK media and society 'Honour Killing' is well understood to be the murder of a family member for not complying to rules mostly / closely associated to Islamic religions. This is much more specific than 'Aggravated murder'. 86.11.51.106 (talk) 04:23, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Collins English Dictionary defines "Aggravated murder" as "A murder made more serious by its violent circumstances". - https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/aggravated-murder

Furthermore, I checked the title of this article in other languages. In many languages, the article title mean "Killing of honor" or "Crime of honor". In Croatian, the title is "Ubojstvo zbog časti" which means "Murder for honor". The title of the Bangla version of this article which is "সম্মান রক্ষার্থে হত্যা" is amongst the most offensive title which means "A killing for the purpose of saving dignity/honor". Please don't try to get the meaning of the Bangla title "সম্মান রক্ষার্থে হত্যা" with Google translate which will give you a wrong meaning (as Google translate doesn't provide good translations for Bangla). You can rather search the meaning of the 3 Bangla words "সম্মান", "রক্ষার্থে" and "হত্যা" which means "dignity/honor", "for the purpose of saving" and "killing" respectively.

The meanings of the titles of this article are being really offensive. I request the administrator to rename the title of the article in English Wikipedia to "Aggravated domestic murder".

What the article talks about is a "cold blooded murder" an "aggravated 1st degree murder" which is in no way comparable with crime of passion. I further recommend to remove any hyperlink/statement from this article linking this type of murder with crime of passion. For example, "Crime of passion" is currently in the list here: Honor_killing#See_also. And I recommend "Crime of passion" to be removed from there as it may give the readers a wrong impression towards this type of killing that it's a kind of "crime of passion". Idel800 (talk) 14:21, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Please read WP:COMMONNAME. "Honor killing" is the most common term used when describing the particular type of murder. --NeilN talk to me 06:15, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
According to WP:RS, domestic violence and killing is usually done by a single perpetrator, whereas an honor killing may be sanctioned, planned and done by several or all members of an extended family. That's the difference. AadaamS (talk) 06:18, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Honor killings in Canada - outdated

I've read in Canadian press, that since Justin Trudeau'l Liberal party won the federal election in Canada in 2015, they removed the mention that Canada doesn't support barbaric practices from the citizenship guide, so this information should be removed as not being true anymore. Here is one of the proofs: http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/taxes-census-treaties-described-as-obligations-of-citizenship-in-new-guide I won't bother removing it from the article myself, because Wikipedia is moderated by an organized group of communists, and anything which is changed without their approval, will be restored to their version anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.72.193.19 (talk) 06:08, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Honor killing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Honour killings in Afghanistan

The honour killings in Afghanistan section of this is very limited and does not have its own page. Is anyone interested in adding this? I have looked into creating a page for this, but have found limited scholarly research and would therefore only have some basic statistics and news articles available, in addition to citing actual laws. I am interested to see if someone has more information to work with out there. You can view the information I have on my page. Please let me know if you have any thoughts. UniversityofUtahGrad (talk) 20:58, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Middle East Forum does not pass WP:RS for statements of fact.

It's a think tank run by Daniel Pipes to promote his views; its "journal" used no peer review until recently, and even now uses its own idiosyncratic version that invites solely reviewers Pipes considers ideologically acceptable, which isn't sufficient for WP:RS purposes. Publication there carries no weight, and sources from it can't be used for statements of fact or to source people making WP:EXCEPTIONAL claims. We need to find better sources for anything that was cited to it - the extent to which it was cited on this article meant that we were pretty much just repeating Pipes' personal opinions verbatim and as fact without citing him directly, which isn't acceptable. --Aquillion (talk) 11:24, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Perspective of the perpetrator

This article is just showing the subjective perspective of the perpetrator. In professional criminal litarature about the subject we can read, that perpetrators often act in the beliving that they are right. They sct in an extrem subjective mannor. So in reality this subject is much complexer than this article is showing us. In fact is gaves us a very subjective and strange impression on the mather. The perspective of the victime and most important the one of professionals as of police, psychology and the law is not mentened in this questanable article. Is that serious? --178.197.230.124 (talk) 13:31, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

@178.197.230.124: There's a Law section in the article; what would you propose to add to round out the various other perspectives you mentioned? -- Beland (talk) 18:37, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Not serious by now or huge gaps

The article is actual particularly and very undifferenciated. The introduction gives us neighter a complete nor a correct picture of the hole situation. The cultural aspect that makes clear, that killing by shame has to do with antiquated and backwardly belivings and perspectives and mostly by a not funtional justice, a vigilantism, is not showen by now. This most important point is just let away. Is that serious? The following sentence just after the introduction The distinctive nature of honour killings is the collective nature of the crime – many members of an extended family plan the act together, sometimes through a formal "family council". makes clear, that here is a huge gap of fundamental informations. The lack of a functinal justice system can make, that strange and backwarded belivings come to people. The beliving is than something collective for a family or a specific reagon. To say that most of the killins by shame are made by collective is not proven by now and so this sentence from the article is not serious. We should differentiate as clear as possible between the collective or generalor normal belivings of a region or family and the act of killing. This is case by case very complex. --178.197.230.124 (talk) 14:04, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

@178.197.230.124: I've rephrased the claim that honor killings are always planned by multiple people to allow the possibility they may be the act of one person (which is more common I don't know). I've also added material to the intro explaining that many legal systems either allow this sort of killing or punish it leniently. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you are proposing, but if you can point to reliable sources on the topic, that could help expand the article. -- Beland (talk) 18:41, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

PhD thesis on honor violence in the UK

Found a helpful PhD thesis https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/161509653.pdf WhisperToMe (talk) 18:29, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Also there is a book called Forced Marriage and 'Honour' Killings in Britain but I need at least two book reviews to write about it:

WhisperToMe (talk) 18:32, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Clicked the PhD thesislink and the author thanks his deity in the foreword. Since the author puts his private faith in the thesis, there's a risk that the author may be biased on religious aspects of honor-based abuse (HBA). A Thousand Words (talk) 08:05, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Relationship with domestic violence

@1Kwords: Regarding this revert... your edit summary was cut off, but it sounds like the distinction you are making is between a domestic murder that is an honor killing, and a domestic murder that is not an honor killing. Depending on the circumstances, either type of killing might involve a single perpetrator who may or may not experience regret, or multiple perpetrators or victims (such as a husband and wife who both abuse their children). The article domestic violence explicitly includes honor killing and talks about them in the section on physical abuse. -- Beland (talk) 21:22, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

The lead should clarify how HBV and DV are different, not try to paint them "as nearly the same thing". Trying to portray DV and HBV as "nearly the same" is a WP:FRINGE view held by an activist subset of sociologists (if you wish I can dig out a source stating this). A Thousand Words (talk) 06:38, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
@1Kwords: The claim is not that honor killing and domestic murder are the same thing, but that honor killing is a type of domestic violence, simply because it is violence that occurs within a family. That doesn't rule out domestic violence that is completely unrelated to honor, murder, adultery, etc. Does that part at least make sense? There is other language in the intro that mentions domestic murders in response to adultery etc. which are not honor killings, but which activists highlight as raising similar issues (as explained later in the article). It would certainly be interesting to get information on how statistics or patterns of behavior differ between these two types of killings, but I think the definitions are pretty clear that non-honor-related domestic murders and honor killings are both different types of domestic violence. -- Beland (talk) 18:09, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Actually, after poking around, it seems some authors use "domestic violence" as a synonym for intimate partner violence, of which honor killing is not a strict subset. I'll make it clear which meaning is intended. -- Beland (talk) 18:56, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

The "methods" section seems pointless

The "methods" section simply lists what are likely the most common forms of murder, honor killing or not.

New Source

Hi folks,

Here's a new source which seems relevant to the article. MonsieurD (talk) 14:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

European Colonialism

There are a couple of clarifications this section needs. First, did the Napoleonic Code simply enable Arab countries to formalise something that had already been practised there in modern legal language, or did it create a culture of honor killings anew where previously there had been none?

Second, with regard to the 1860 legal code imported to British India, the source, while mentioning 'grave and serious provocation' as a justification for more lenient sentencing for violent crime, does not actually mention anything specific to men or women. It says in full:

352. Punishment for assault or criminal force otherwise than on grave provocation.—Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both. Explanation.—Grave and sudden provocation will not mitigate the punishment for an offence under this section. If the provocation is sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse for the offence, or if the provocation is given by anything done in obedience to the law, or by a public servant, in the lawful exercise of the powers of such public servant, or if the provocation is given by anything done in the lawful exer­cise of the right of private defence. Whether the provocation was grave and sudden enough to mitigate the offence, is a question of fact. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1672685/

So is there some other source which attests to the claim made in the article? LastDodo (talk) 15:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

With no response on this, due to the fact the paragraph as it stands is so intensely misleading, I have decided to delete it. Perhaps that will prompt whoever wrote it to re-write it in more clear and honest manner. Here it is, for reference. Read it then re-read the law as it is actually written above:
A similar situation is found in Pakistan's penal code, which was based on the 1860 code imported by Britain to rule colonial India,[1] where a man who killed his wife for "grave and sudden provocation" was given a lenient sentencing.[2] In 1990, Pakistan reformed this law to bring it in terms with the Shari'a, and the Pakistani Federal Shariat Court declared that "according to the teachings of Islam, provocation, no matter how grave and sudden it is, does not lessen the intensity of crime of murder". However, judges still sometimes hand down lenient sentences for honor killings, justified by still citing the British law's "grave and sudden provocation."[3][4] LastDodo (talk) 19:55, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
So my edit was reverted without discussion. Please come here to discuss rather than just reverting again. I have trief to make the passage clearer rather than just deleting, though I still think deleting is probably preferable because the connection to European colonialism is exceptionally tenous given the British law only makes reference to 'grave and sudden provocation' for any violent crime, and certainly says nothing about honor killing. As far as I can see there is absolutely no reason to believe that the type of 'provocations' that an honor killer would point to would be covered by the British law.LastDodo (talk) 13:47, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference DrBrown was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ "Section 352 in The Indian Penal Code". indiankanoon.org. Retrieved 5 May 2020.
  3. ^ Welchman, Lynn; Hossain, Sara (2013). 'Honour': Crimes, Paradigms, and Violence Against Women. Zed Books Ltd. pp. 84–97. ISBN 978-1-84813-698-4. Retrieved 5 May 2020.
  4. ^ Idzikowski, Lisa (2017). Honor Killings. Greenhaven Publishing LLC. p. 74. ISBN 978-1-5345-0133-1. Retrieved 5 May 2020.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Honor_killing/Archive_4&oldid=1239947470"