Talk:List of genocides/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Holodomor edit war

@BritishMarxist, Lenoved3, and Donner60: Please use the talk page in lieu of further reverts. Thanks! — MarkH₂₁^talk 04:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella and 7645ERB: also pinging two other editors involved in this dispute. — MarkH₂₁^talk 06:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

If the "Holodomor" was a genocide, then so was the Irish Potato Famine and the many famines in British colonies. A famine doesn't equal a genocide.

BritishMarxist (talk) 05:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

The reason is that there is evidence to suggest that the Holodomor was deliberately engineered in order to destroy Ukraine, and 16 countries recognise it as a genocide, as do many scholars. Tulzscha (talk) 13:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Tulzscha is absolutely right it should stay.7645ERB (talk) 15:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

The list does not include genocide against Christians in Iraq and Syria by ISIL and other Jihadist groups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bozho777 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

It does have the other genocides that ISIL has done, we need sources that meet the criteria for Inclusion like as been already stated. Do you have any sources you'd like to share?7645ERB (talk) 01:34, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

• There is no consensus among scholars whether the Holodomor was genocide (see Holodomor genocide question). Therefore, it should not be included in the list. (t · c) buidhe 10:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

15 countries recognized Holodmor as genocide, and several scholars and books define it as such, as well."Qualitative methodology was used to investigate the intergenerational impact of the 1932–1933 Holodomor genocide...""This case moves the study of famine into the field of international law, in which Ukraine’s quest for UN recognition of Holodomor not only as a crime against humanity, but also as genocide, could be regarded as justified. ""It focuses on the peculiarities of women's experience of the Holodomor and explores women's strategies of resistance and survival in the harsh circumstances of genocide""...genocide carried out against the Ukrainian population""Holodomor survivor is defined as a person who was exposed to the genocide and unprecedented starvation in 1932–1933""Kulchytsky concurs that Holodmor consituted Genocide...""Insofar as this was therefore the consequence of conscious human policies, the term genocide can be used." There will never be a complete consensus on some genocides (or other controversial topics, in general): in Turkey, the Armenian Genocide may never be accepted, for instance. But ignoring or circumventing so many sources who classify it as genocide, would be POV pushing. If reliable sources say something, then Wikipedia follows, accordingly. As such, Holodomor should be included.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 13:20, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

This list is only for the actions that meet the legal definition of genocide. The only study you cite which seems to explicitly use the UN definition of genocide is an undergrad paper, which is not WP:RS. The article Holodomor genocide question cites Michael Ellman, who says it is "not proven" whether it meets the UN definition, Davies and Wheatcroft, who say it wasn't, and Snyder, who says it was.

Political recognition or non-recognition is not relevant to whether an even meets the legal definition of genocide since governments can call any event genocide. (t · c) buidhe 19:19, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Re: Buidhe, Stark 2010 is published in a peer-reviewed journal and cited by several peer-reviewed sources, so it is demonstrably a reliable source (Buidhe’s assessment is original research, and his requirement is not WP:RS’s requirement). Stark 2010 is also not the only source cited above that explicitly refers to the UN definition, and several of them demonstrate how the Holodomor meets the UN definition, without explicitly referring to it (which is not a requirement).

Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. When scholars mention genocide, they should know what they are talking about more than you do. When a scholar writes "Qualitative methodology was used to investigate the intergenerational impact of the 1932–1933 Holodomor genocide...", then the case is clear. We go with what reliable sources say. Holodomor may be disputed, but it should still be included since it is mentioned by multiple historians and scholars who classify it as genocide. By using these sources, Holodomor deserves to be included, per Wikipedia's policy.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 12:11, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Our article on Holodomor states, "Whether the Holodomor was genocide is still the subject of academic debate, as are the causes of the famine and intentionality of the deaths." All the sources that I have seen confirm the fact that it continues to be debated. Per WP:NPOV, Wikipedia should not take sides in a dispute by deciding that it *is* a genocide. (t · c) buidhe 18:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view says "[a]ll encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." When scholars openly disagree, as is the case on the Holodomor genocide question, we should not push the view of those who say it was a genocide. We should present all mainstream views on the Holodomor, but since this article is a list of genocide by death tolls, then the best thing would be to remove it, since by adding it, even if we state there is disagreement, we are giving more weight to those who say it was a genocide; and perhaps add a link to the Holodomor genocide question in the See also section. Davide King (talk) 18:53, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Neither should Wikipedia take sides by deciding that it *is not* genocide. If you’re going to cite fairness, proportionality, and editorial neutrality, then why come to an absolutist conclusion? Since many reliable sources have argued persuasively that the Holodomor does meet the UN definition of genocide, while pointing out fallacies in many of the arguments among academics who disagree, then is it not fair and neutral to mention the Holodomor while pointing out the controversy? As it is, we are giving all weight only to the denialists. —Michael Z. 03:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Mzajac, we are not taking "sides by deciding that it *is not* genocide." This article is not List of genocides but List of genocides by death toll, which is problematic as outlined here by Griboski and here by Paul Siebert. That you say "[s]ince many reliable sources have argued persuasively that the Holodomor does meet the UN definition of genocide, while pointing out fallacies in many of the arguments among academics who disagree", and that you see those legitimate academis disagreeing (even Conquest later stated "he does not believe that Stalin deliberately inflicted the 1933 famine", is he a 'denialist', too?) as "denialists", shows that you have clearly taken one side, but there is no clear consensus. Excluding it is not saying it was not a genocide; it means that there is a controversy, where we literally have a Holodomor genocide question and that we should simply link to this article as See also, rather than adding it to the table, which would give more weight to those who say it was a genocide. I would agree to put it if those saying it was a genocide were a majority, so it would make more sense to put it while addressing the controversy, but they are not a majority and there is no consensus, so I do not see why we should add, which would obviously pushing the POV it was genocide, even though there is no consensus for it. The problem of the table is that we should really only include those for which there is overwhelmingly consensus to have met the legal definition of genocide. We could simply list those significant others in See also. Davide King (talk) 15:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

There is debate about the details, like whether Stalin caused or merely intentionally exacerbated famine, and whether the extremely different responses to it in Ukrainian- and Russian-inhabited places demonstrate the intent of genocide. Denialists are those who deny things we know: that there was an artificially caused famine that killed millions of Ukrainians, or that Stalin knew famine threatened millions, and allowed their deaths by confiscating more food and preventing their escape. The Conquest quote is a bit misleading, by the way. Marples wrote that Davies and Wheatcroft “cite a letter from Robert Conquest in which that writer says that he does not believe that Stalin deliberately inflicted the 1933 famine, but rather put Soviet interests ahead of feeding the starving,” which is not a denial of intentional genocide. Marples was paraphrasing their original “Our view of Stalin and the famine is close to that of Robert Conquest, who would earlier have been considered the champion of the argument that Stalin had intentionally caused the famine and had acted in a genocidal manner. In 2003, Dr Conquest wrote to us explaining that he does not hold the view that ‘Stalin purposely inflicted the 1933 famine. No. What I argue is that with resulting famine imminent, he could have prevented it, but put “Soviet interest” other than feeding the starving first—thus consciously abetting it’.” —Michael Z. 15:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I do not understand what exactly is the point of the quotes. They show they do not think it was a genocide. Davies and Wheatcroft conclude the famine was man-made but unintentional, so it was not genocide. Agreeing that Stalin's policies towards the peasants were brutal and ruthless, and do not absolve Stalin from responsibility for the massive famine deaths, does not mean they agree it was a genocide, or that there was intentionality. So Conquest too does not see it as a genocide but see it as man-made. Either you are using a narrower definition of genocide, or I do not understand what exactly you are proving. Are you saying that Conquest, Davies and Wheatcroft say it was a genocide? That is not what they say, as shown by the quotes you yourself provided. They say Conquest changed his mind and no longer thinks Stalin "had acted in a genocidical manner", hence they believe Conquest support their positions, which is that it was man-made but unintentional, hence not a genocide. Again, this article is not about List of famines or List of famines by death tolls. If it was not included there, then you would have had a point; but since this article is about genocide and there is no consensus on whether it was genocide, not including it does not mean denial of the man-made famines that resulted in the death of millions; it just means there is no consensus on whether it constituted genocide, the topic of this article. You seem to give a more open criteria, where if some say it was genocide, then it must be included, whereas others and I are saying we should only include those for which there is consensus it was a genocide. Davide King (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Actually in the Chetnik discussion there was not one source stating the actions by the Chetniks as NOT genocide. So not the same as Holodmor. I even provided multiple sources stating it was. 17:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Everybody know what cause of the Holodomor caused by cereal diseases, which were in all Easter Europe. You can find that Poland had such "Holodomor" at the same time. At the same time there are a lot of historic documents which show that all country tried to prevent holodomor. Cause of such count of deaths were in domestic corruption. My relatives lived at this territory at this time and I know what I'm talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.250.75.64 (talk) 05:04, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Nakba

Add the Nakba maybe Hibsiwakawam (talk) 23:57, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Can someone edit a typo on this article

Under location of the Assyrian Genocide section, there is a typo. More specifically, there is a missing parentheses before "territories of present-day Turkey, Syria and Iraq." Normally, I would have fixed this myself, but it appears that I don't have the clearence to edit this page. Would it be alright if someone could fix that typo for me? unsigned comment added by Randomuser335S (talk) 16:09, 4 February 2021‎

Romani Death Toll/Article Conflict

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_genocide Cites a high figure of 1.5 million murdered, much higher that the figure this article has of 500,000. It has plenty of citations we could just copy. I'd grab the citation and correct this article myself but I'm a newish user. The current high number of 500,000 is in the mid range of what article says. Hamster Drink (talk) 06:11, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Moriori genocide listing

Hi, could someone who can edit this article please change the link of the genocide of the Moriori from the Moriori page to the Moriori Genocide page? And the language isn't entirely extinct. Thanks.--Aubernas (talk) 22:08, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Done, on the change of link. I do not have a source saying that the language still exists. Dimadick (talk) 22:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 March 2021

The highest estimation in the cited article for the "armenian genocide" is one million. You should replace the article or the number. 88.209.32.73 (talk) 01:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 15:51, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Nellie Massacre (1983, India) should be considered a genocide

I request that the targeted killings of Bengali Muslims in 1983 in Assam, India be included in this wikipedia list.

The massacre fully satisfies the conditions of a genocide. To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. The 1983 Nellie massacre is a part part of a clear intent to deprive the ethnic group of Bengali Muslims of their rights.

Genocide watch has already issued a warning:

> GENOCIDE WATCH: INDIA: ASSAM STATE > Like the Rohingya of Rakhine State in Myanmar, Bengali-speaking Muslims in Assam have faced constant discrimination. Assamese ethno-nationalist independence movements culminated in the Nellie massacre of between 1,800 and 3,000 ethnically Bengali Muslims in 1983.

Emakalam (talk) 07:42, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 March 2021

I am requesting a change for the Greek Genocide death toll. Requesting to change the highest estimate from 900,000 to 1,000,000.

Reasoning:

1. British scholar Carlile A. Macartney, estimated the death toll only in Asia Minor was about 1,000,000. In 1931 he wrote: "The Greek population in Ionia in 1914 was estimated at about 2,000,000. Of these, it was calculated that about half perished."

2. According to author and former military Attaché at the Greek Embassy in France Harry Tsirkinidis, the death toll of Greeks was 1,574,235 based on Ecumenical Patriarchate figures and his own estimates. However Tsirkinidis argues that the death toll is probably higher if one takes into account the population of Greeks in the Ottoman Empire prior to the genocide which he estimates to be 3 million, and subtracts the figure of 1,221,000 which is the total number of Greeks that arrived in Greece post-genocide. In other words, a death toll of 1,779,000 or more.

The number being between 300,000 and 900,000 may be incorrect, and based on estimates it could potentially be upward of 1,000,000. By increasing the highest estimate to 1,000,000, the article is updated to current metrics. As well as this, for 1,000,000 to be the highest estimate recognizes the estimates of Greek and British scholars who lived in Asia Minor to testify to their own mathematical justification. By rejecting the possibility that the death toll could have been up to 1,000,000 is discrediting the estimates of prominent scholars, therefor factually incorrect and biased.

Please consider this edit and understand its significance.

Source for 1.: George William Rendel, "Memorandum by Mr. Rendel on Turkish Massacres and Persecutions of Minorities Since the Armistice," in British Documents on Foreign Affairs: Reports and Papers from the Foreign Office Confidential Print, Part II, Series B, Turkey, Iran and the Middle East, 1918-1939, Volume 3, The Turkish Revival 1921-1923, ed. Kenneth Bourne et al. (University Publications of America, 1985), 54.

or

Memorandum by Mr. Rendel on Turkish Massacres and Persecutions of Minorities since the Armistice. British Foreign Office Document: FO 371/7876.

or

https://www.greek-genocide.net/index.php/bibliography/books/252-memorandum-by-mr-rendel-on-turkish-massacres-and-persecutions-of-minorities-since-the-armistice

Source for 2.: Harry Tsirkinidis, A Synoptic History of the Genocide of the Greeks of the East: Documents of Foreign Diplomatic Archives, (Kyriakidis, 2009), 198-199. SpiroTsol (talk) 04:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I looked for that book by Harry Tsirkinidis and only found it mentioned on greek-genocide.net, which is not a reliable source. The other source is a primary document which isn't great for us, and we can also only review the excerpt on greek-genocide.net. Looking at that excerpt it supports that the genocide was horrible, but does not mention the million deaths figure. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:38, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Mongols - better sourcing

One note is quoting a journalist, not a specialist scholar, the other a website that isn't really accredited - we can do better than this. HammerFilmFan (talk) 10:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Uyghur genocide

Is there any reason why the Uyghur genocide has been left out of this list? There is already a main Wikipedia article on the event if legitimacy is the concern: Uyghur Genocide. The article includes sources verifying that it meets the criteria for being classified as a genocide. I was about to edit it in myself but I figure that a page like this is fairly emotionally charged as-is, so thought it would be best to ask first. Appreciate any input on this. ReasonVEVO (talk) 20:12, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

When people talk about the 'Uyghur Genocide' they do not mean it in the sense of mass killings so it would make no sense to include it here.PailSimon (talk) 20:17, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi PailSimon. This article is about "genocide, as it is defined by the UN Convention on Genocide." That definition reads as follows: "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group". The Uyghur genocide has been confirmed by multiple sources to fit that definition. It especially fits article 2's terms d & e in the full definition, but does also fit all other terms (though to a lesser extent). Therefore the Uyghur genocide absolutely fits this article. For more information, please view the full Wikipedia article on the Uyghur genocide, particularly the classification section. I will go ahead and edit in the Uyghur genocide if that is okay with everyone. ReasonVEVO (talk) 02:09, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

See Talk:List of genocides by death toll/Archive 3#Repeated inclusion of entries with no referenced death toll. This list inclusion criteria includes having death toll estimates from published reliable academic sources (e.g. academic books, academic journal articles, etc.). So the first step is to find and present such sources.

By the way, PailSimon is blocked and therefore is unlikely to respond any further. — MarkH₂₁^talk 02:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Huge mistake made

There is no such thing as "Genocide against Bosniaks and Croats by the Chetniks", you can't classify isolated war crimes as genocide. And the references are biased, only unimportant ideology driven Bosniak and Croatian authors.

Please delete that, no one ever considered such thing a genocide. 37.220.68.223 (talk) 02:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

That listing is reasonably well sourced. Please establish consensus to remove before requesting an edit. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:31, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Conflicting Information

The lowest number for Armenian Genocide is 700.000 and the highest is 1.800.000. And it says at least %50 of Armenians perished. This is stated by the source that says the death toll is 700.000. So accordingly, max. Armenian population is about 1.400.000 which conflicts with the number 1.800.000. How can we present this information more accurately?--Visnelma (talk) 16:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 April 2021

Somebody put the Foibe massacres as a genocide on the page but the main page has no sources that say it is? 158.140.234.209 (talk) 22:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 April 2021

Good day,

I would like to have a genocide added to the list please.

The genocide is the deaths of almost 48 000 Boers and Blacks in British Concentration Camps in 1901 and 1902 during the Second Anglo-Boer War in South Africa.

There is a website that details the camps and internees and the deaths. See https://www2.lib.uct.ac.za/mss/bccd/

An article also gives details regarding this genocide here: 'Spin on Boer atrocities' www.theguardian.com/world/2001/dec/09/paulharris.theobserver. Retrieved on 22 April 2021

Kind regards, Krotoa2 (talk) 12:36, 22 April 2021 (UTC) Krotoa2 (talk) 12:36, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. I don't see either of the sources provided referring to this as a genocide. I'm not saying it shouldn't be included, but I'd like to see what others on the talk page have to say about it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:46, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

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

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

• Flag of the Crimean ASSR (1938).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:54, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Genocides in Kerala, India

I have an enquiry, Can the religious persecution of Hindus and Christians in North Kerala (Malabar) by Tipu Sultan be considered as a Genocide? As it also included religious conversions. Same as of the Mappila riots in Malabar where it started of as a rebellion against the British but ended up as a riot on Hindus killing thousands. Can it be referred as a Genocide... Please see the following articles, Mappila Rebellion and Mysorean invasion of Malabar Bethany Argus (talk) 10:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Genocides in Africa

The genocides happened in Africa are entirely excluded unless they are applied by the other Africans. Why the crimes committed by white men are excluded such as Algerian genocide by France, Congo genocide by Belgium?

Aren't Africans as human as white man? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.209.32.73 (talk) 01:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, the indigenous South Africans, the Zulus at the hands of England, many central Africans at the hands of the Belgians, and many more. Magonz (talk) 14:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree. ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~^Contact 14:34, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

• Editing only to comment on the below. It is shocking that Wikipedia would omit the worst genocide in recorded history on the "official" Wikipedia page for genocides. Please correct this outrageous omission.

Genocide of Native Americans

90 to 95% of the indigenous people were intentionally murdered to steal their land, and the methods employed fit the UN's definition of genocide.

Up to 70 million people were killed:https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf

Thornton’s estimate that about 75 million Indigenous people lived in the Western Hemisphere in 1492 and his estimate that more than 5 million lived in what later became the continental U.S. are arguably the most methodologically circumspect and reliable current appraisals for researchers in this field. As James Wilson has suggested, Thornton’s estimate of a total of more than 7 million Indigenous people north of Mexico is probably “the nearest to a generally accepted figure,” and “a figure for the Western Hemisphere as whole of 75 to 100 million” is not unreasonable.32 Future research may disclose an even larger Indigenous population, but Thornton’s carefully considered, mid-range estimates provide a vital starting point for the development of informed and reasonable, if very rough, estimates of the total loss of life in the Indigenous Holocaust.

Up to 55 million people were killed: yesmagazine.org/opinion/2019/02/13/how-colonization-of-the-americas-killed-90-percent-of-their-indigenous-people-and-changed-the-climate/

Up to 8 million people were killed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples#:~:text=Spanish%20colonization%20of%20the%20Americas,-See%20also%3A%20Spanish&text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%20during,genocide%20of%20the%20modern%20era. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katpcar (talk • contribs) 14:51, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

We already have an article on the topic: Genocide of indigenous peoples. Dimadick (talk) 17:25, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

What is the criteria for listing certain genocides by death toll and not others? I know there is another article on the topic of Gencide of indigenous peoples. But that does not take from the need to list this genocide. Magonz (talk) 01:50, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

The article states at the top: "The term genocide is contentious and as a result, its academic definition varies. This list only considers mass killings which are recognized as genocides by the legal definition in significant scholarship and criteria by the UN Genocide Convention." The key phrase here, I suggest, is "in significant scholarship". So papers like the 2017 Smith paper you cite are relevant. I think what is needed is multiple examples of papers like that. Bondegezou (talk) 16:36, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

The American Indians did not agree to the definition made by the "UN Convention on Genocide", so they were killed once by violence and again by the UN historians.Charles Juvon (talk) 00:50, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

And who is in the UN Security Council? USA, UK, France, China, Russia. Why does this article cherry pick definitions that cover up the largest genocide in history? Magonz (talk) 13:50, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Agree with user Magonz above, the lack of information about the number of Indigenous peoples of America subject to genocide as part of the project of colonization from 1400-1900 is a direct consequence of that government's genocidal policy. Adding Indigenous peoples of the Americas with aforementioned sources, and a note that more resarch is needed but difficult to conduct because of the degree to which this genocide is still part of policy today would ensure that this page does not perpetuate Indigenous genocide by its erasure of such atrocities. MeganPeiser (talk) 16:36, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

"subject to genocide as part of the project of colonization from 1400-1900". Are you basing these dates on any source? No colonization efforts precede the Voyages of Christopher Columbus (1492-1504). And the American Indian Wars did not end until 1924, with the final campaign of the Apache Wars.:

• "The last Apache raid into the United States occurred as late as 1924 when a band of natives, who were later caught and arrested, stole some horses from Arizonan settlers. This is considered to be the end of the American Indian Wars." Dimadick (talk) 18:41, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

  1492 is part of 1400s. Guatemalan genocide where Mayans were targeted by the American-backed government is up to the 1980s.Magonz (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Plenty of sources for genocide of indigenous peoples to be top ten, if not the first in terms of death toll. Historian David Stannard estimates that the extermination of indigenous peoples took the lives of 100 million people: "...the total extermination of many American Indian peoples and the near-extermination of others, in numbers that eventually totaled close to 100,000,000.". See American Holocaust, by David Stannard, year 1993,page 151 Magonz (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Native american genocide should definitely be included. It is as big as the Circassian genocide if not bigger and also even more widely accepted. ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~^Contact 20:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Today, one user (User:SoaringLL) deleted 3400+ words of reliably sourced content about Native American genocide without saying a word in the Talk section. Magonz (talk) 18:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

This has been discussed extensively, not just in the thread above, and there is indeed no consensus that the deaths of indigenous peoples throughout the Americas over several centuries, the vast majority (>90%) of which were caused by disease, qualify as a single event or meet the inclusion criteria for this article, specifically: "This list only considers mass killings which are recognized as genocides by the legal definition in significant scholarship and criteria by the UN Genocide Convention."TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 18:46, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Are you saying that the user can delete 3400 words of sourced content without taking the trouble to discuss in the talk page (as is required in the article itself)? Magonz (talk) 20:46, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

It seems we are using the wrong definition. All state members of the permanent UN security council have committed genocide (can anyone else spot the conflict of interest here? How can we expect intellectual honestly?). We should use the definition by Raphael Lemkin, the one who coined the term. Magonz (talk) 20:46, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Sheri P. Rosenberg, “Genocide Is a Process, Not an Event,” Genocide Studies and Prevention 7, 1 (April 2012): 16–23. © 2012 Genocide Studies and Prevention. doi: 10.3138/gsp.7.1.16. Magonz (talk) 22:56, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

The first point is that it is widely accepted that circa 90% of indigenous deaths in the Americas were due to diseases, which penetrated the continent before Europeans through contacts between different indigenous peoples.

The second point is, even considering the other 10% of deaths of indigenous Americans one single 500 year genocide would be wrong. That would be like expanding the Holocaust definition to consider it the murder of any Jew throught millenia old European history. Instead we should point out individual genocides and put them on the list. Knoterification (talk) 03:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Hispaniola genocide (seeking consensus)

I want to add the following genocides to the list: -Hispaniola genocide (in the Spanish Empire)

Here is a list of sources for the data, many peer reviewed:

-Keegan, William F., “Destruction of the Taino” in Archaeology. January/February 1992, pp. 51-56.

-David Moshman (2007) Us and Them: Identity and Genocide, Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 7:2, 115-135, DOI. pp 125.

-Alexander Laban Hinton, “Critical Genocide Studies,” Genocide Studies and Prevention 7, 1 (April 2012): 4–15. © 2012 Genocide Studies and Prevention. doi: 10.3138/gsp.7.1.4. page 11.

-Grenke, Arthur. God, greed, and genocide: The Holocaust through the centuries. New Academia Publishing, LLC, 2005. pp 141-143,200.

-Rosenbaum, Alan S. Is the Holocaust unique?: perspectives on comparative genocide. Routledge, 2018. Page 302.

-Churchill, Ward (1997). A little matter of genocide: Holocaust and denial in the Americas, 1492 to the present. San Francisco: City Lights Books. pp 86.

-Donald Bloxham, A. Dirk Moses, The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies, OXFORD UNIVERSITY press, 2010, page 310.

-Norman M Naimark, Genocide a world history , OXFORD UNIVERSITY press, 2017, page 39.

-Russell Thornton - American Indian Holocaust and Survival_ A Population History Since 1492 (Civilization of the American Indian)-University of Oklahoma Press (1990). pp 16.

-Jones, Adam. 2006. Genocide: a comprehensive introduction. London: Routledge. pp 108-111.

Please respond if you have any objections.

Magonz (talk) 13:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Genocide in Hispaniola under the Spanish Empire

Where:

Island of Hispaniola (Haiti and Dominican Republic)

When:

From 1492 to 1513

Low estimate:

1.000.000

High estimate:

8.000.000

Victims:

95% of the population

Magonz (talk) 05:57, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Genocides (plural) not genocide (singular)

There were hundreds of First Nations or nations of Indigenous peoples and there were multiple genocides, not a single genocide. Magonz (talk) 16:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Inconsistency in inclusion

This list is inconsistent in which things are included and which are excluded. It includes the "Queensland Aboriginal genocide" on the basis that "some sources have characterized these events" as genocide - but the linked article (Australian frontier wars) does not mention the word - though the sources cited here can easily be added to that article. On the other hand, the Holodomor is not included. The genocide designation is controversial (see Holodomor genocide question) but it is indeed called a genocide by many scholars, and it has even been suggested that this is the scholarly consensus. Now, I'm not sure if Queensland and Holodomor should both be included or both excluded, but as it stands the list is POV. StAnselm (talk) 17:33, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be more helpful if you can decide whether you think the Holodomor should be added or the Queensland Aboriginal genocide removed, and then we can discuss the details of the matter. These were very different events and have been handled by the scholarly literature differently, so I'm not certain how to compare them directly. Bondegezou (talk) 12:02, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

OK, sure: include Holodomor. It certainly fits the "significant scholarship" inclusion criterion. StAnselm (talk) 15:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

As laid out at the article on the topic, there is sufficient sourcing to support including Holodomor here, so I also support that. Bondegezou (talk) 13:33, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Fully agree with the posters above . Given other entries on the list , the exclusion of the Holodomor is inexplicable Romdwolf (talk) 23:45, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 May 2021

I want to add the following genocides to the list: -Hispaniola genocide (Spanish Empire) Magonz (talk) 17:17, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:21, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

page 10 https://www.se.edu/native-american/wp-content/uploads/sites/49/2019/09/A-NAS-2017-Proceedings-Smith.pdf Magonz (talk) 18:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

It looks like this is not aa peer reviewed paper, rather just the writings of that one professor. I can't find anyone of that name at the University of Houston, but I can find one that was fired from a position as a government professor at a community college outside of Houston. I don't think this source is reliable enough to establish a genocide. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

The fact that he was fired is irrelevant. Anyway, I will send you many more reliable sources when I have time. Hey what do you do when all peers are homogeneous? Whitewash Magonz (talk) 19:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Regardless of your views on the peer review process we have to go by the sources. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Keegan, William F., “Destruction of the Taino” in Archaeology. January/February 1992, pp. 51-56.Magonz (talk) 22:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

David Moshman (2007) Us and Them: Identity and Genocide, Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 7:2, 115-135, DOI. pp 125.Magonz (talk) 22:48, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Alexander Laban Hinton, “Critical Genocide Studies,” Genocide Studies and Prevention 7, 1 (April 2012): 4–15. © 2012 Genocide Studies and Prevention. doi: 10.3138/gsp.7.1.4. page 11.Magonz (talk) 22:53, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Grenke, Arthur. God, greed, and genocide: The Holocaust through the centuries. New Academia Publishing, LLC, 2005. pp 200.

Rosenbaum, Alan S. Is the Holocaust unique?: perspectives on comparative genocide. Routledge, 2018. Page 302.

Churchill, W. (1997). A little matter of genocide: Holocaust and denial in the Americas, 1492 to the present. San Francisco: City Lights Books. pp 86. Magonz (talk) 23:24, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. This is clearly contentious and such additions have been reverted. Please establish consensus. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:19, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

How exactly do I establish consensus and how will it be measured? What are the rules? Magonz (talk) 03:23, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Please stop opening the edit request until you have consensus for the edit. Consensus is gained either through discussion or an WP:RFC. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Wow that is a non-answer. I have provided a number of peer reviewed reliable sources, like you requested. Now you keep moving the goal posts and don't establish the exact requirements you establish.Magonz (talk) 14:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

The idea is that you propose additions or changes here, and other editors respond with comments, support, opposition, and counter-proposals. The basic concept is explained at Wikipedia:Consensus. Once consensus is achieved through discussion, the edit request can be reactivated. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:59, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

@Magonz: Your edit summary stating that there is still no answer is inaccurate. Please read the reply above and please don't open the edit request again until consensus is achieved. Thanks! Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 04:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Bsoyka talk Here it is again, as it has been proposed by myself in adjacent section for a long time:

Genocide in Hispaniola under the Spanish Empire

Where:

Island of Hispaniola (Haiti and Dominican Republic)

When:

From 1492 to 1513

Low estimate:

1.000.000

High estimate:

8.000.000

Victims:

95% of the population

Magonz (talk) 11:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)Magonz (talk) 05:57, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Celtic holocaust/genocide

The Celtic civilisation in 52 BCE, had 1,000,000 killed and 1,000,000 enslaved by the Romans. This is documented according to Julius Caesar's war diaries. Archeological evidence confirms a dramatic halt of gold and jewelry found in the Gallic area (today's France). A total population of ~10,000,000 reaching from Portugal to Turkey, is ~20% wiped out, specifically targeting national, ethnical, racial or religious Celtic/Gallic peoples. Eiger3970 (talk) 01:09, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Do you have examples of reliable sources describing this as genocide? Bondegezou (talk) 13:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Why aren't the Mongolians on this list?

Destruction_under_the_Mongol_Empire (37.75 - 60 million people in Eurasia). In my opinion it qualifies as a genocide under U.N. convention. The Mongols wiped whole populations off the map, just so people fear to resist them more.

"Sources record massive destruction, terror and death if there was resistance. David Nicole notes in The Mongol Warlords that "terror and mass extermination of anyone opposing them was a well-tested Mongol tactic".[3] The alternative to submission was total war: resistance caused Mongol leaders to order the collective slaughter of populations and the destruction of property. Such was the fate of resisting Muslim communities during the invasions of the Khwarezmid Empire."

They even used cadavers as biological warfare against enemy cities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abacus1997 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Find sources that refer to what they were doing as targeted genocide, and they can be included. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:42, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

This comment is confusing to me. In wikipedia's own https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history_(before_World_War_I)#Mongol_Empire, we find several such sources, including Jones 2006, p. 3, footnote 4. My version of the book doesn't have the same formatting, but it includes this passage:

Eric S. Margolis, War at the Top of the World: The Struggle for Afghanistan, Kashmir, and Tibet (New York: Routledge, 2001), p. 155. In Hannibal Travis’s summary: “After 1200 CE, Genghis Khan led a campaign through Asia that destroyed millions of lives and many ancient cities. In Beijing in 1219, the Mongols slaughtered thousands of people and set the city ablaze, causing it to burn for a month…. In present-day Konye-Urgench in Turkmenistan, then called Gurganj, a contingent from Genghis Khan’s army, with 100,000 Mongols in all, killed over a million people, in house-to-house fighting that burned large sections of the city…. ” Matthew White recorded that when Genghis Khan “finally beat the Tatars, he is said to have lined up all of the men and boys alongside a wagon and ordered his followers to kill every Tatar male who stood taller than the lynch pin of the wagon wheel.” According to Travis, Genghis Khan’s grandson, Hulagu Khan, “reached Baghdad in the 1250s and massacred 100,000 to two million people there, seizing enormous amounts of gold and treasure, destroying libraries, and soiling and ruining mosques. Mesopotamia’s irrigation system was severely damaged, leaving a legacy of dependency on imported food that would have catastrophic consequences during U.N. sanctions in the 1990s.” Travis, Genocide in the Middle East: The Ottoman Empire, Iraq, and Sudan. (Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2010), pp. 167–168; White, Atrocitology, p. 117.

Specific "genocidal labeling", i.e. an author (The Encyclopedia of Genocide, ABC-CLIO, 1999, p. 48, article "Afghanistan, Genocide of") using that word to describe these killings, was given in that source by author Rosanne Klass. What else is missing from your criteria for inclusion? Joebhakim (talk) 18:40, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

I would also support bringing Holodomor onto the list again.

Bosnian Genocide

The section on the Bosnian genocide could use some more clarity. As it is, it looks like there's uncertainty about how many Bosniaks were killed (anywhere from "just over 8,000" to around 31,000), when in actuality the numbers are fairly precise. The 8,000 figure refers to the Srebrenica massacre (considered an act of genocide), and 31,000 refers to the total number of Bosniak civilians killed during the course of the Bosnian War. --Maryam.Rosie (talk) 17:37, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Delete Circassian genocide

As described in the link this event don't named a genocide by UN. Death toll a wrong too. Circassia didn't have such population. Russian government told to circassians to stop slavery and burglary of slavic people on their territory and who didn't agree with this just migrated to Ottoman empire and continue doing this with slavic people. There is the genocide ?

 Not done: What you just described is a conspiracy theory put out as part of Russian nationalist agendas, and it has no support from any scholarly opinion. Wikipedia is not a place for your POV (WP:POV). Regarding your first point, according to scholarship, it does fullfill UN criteria for genocides. ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~^Contact 15:46, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 July 2021

Recotera (talk) 00:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

There is no enough proof that ottoman empire killed 90 percent of ermenian. Its totally wrong. Please remove it from list. If you dont remove it proof that ottomans genocides ermenian. YOu will probably not.

 Not done: The sources for the claim are linked in-line and within the Armenian genocide article. — IVORK _Talk 01:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Numerous genocides missing

Missing genocides 1. Genocide of Arab settlers on Zanzibar 1964 The Sultanate of Muscat and Oman colonized the east African coast for centuries and imported ivory and slaves from there. The Omani ruling dynasty settled on Zanzibar as did many people from Muscat and formed a ruling class that was abruptly overturned by Africans in 1964, who proceeded to massacre the Arab settlers. 2. Islamization and settler colonialism of Papua and abduction of Papuan youth for indoctrination in Islamic religious schools on Java 3. Bangladesh genocide against the Jummas of the Chittagong Hill Tracts The indigenous Sino-Tibetan peoples collectively known as the Jummas who inhabit the Chittagong Hill Tracts in Bangladesh, are largely Buddhist, but also Hindu, Christian and animist. When Bangladesh shook off Pakistan's colonial oppression and asserted its Bengali identity in 1971 it began a campaign of settler colonialism and sporadic genocide against the indigenous peoples of the Chittagong Hill Tracts. There has been an influx of Bengali settlers from the plains. Between 1980 and 1997, almost 10,000 people are known to have died in the low-intensity war. The International Labour Organisation (ILO) has spoken of “the calculated annihilation of the tribals”. 4. Saddam Hussein's Ansar genocide campaigns against the Iraqi Kurds. 5. Genghis Khan killed a larger share of the earth's population than any other person, but he is not mentioned. 6. Taliban and Al Qaeda genocide in Afghanistan 1996 to 2001 According to a 55-page report by the United Nations, the Taliban, while trying to consolidate control over northern and western Afghanistan, committed systematic massacres against civilians. UN officials stated that there had been "15 massacres" between 1996 and 2001. They also said, that "[t]hese have been highly systematic and they all lead back to the [Taliban] Ministry of Defense or to Mullah Omar himself." .... Bin Laden's so-called 055 Brigade was responsible for mass-killings of Afghan civilians. The report by the United Nations quotes "eyewitnesses in many villages describing Arab fighters carrying long knives used for slitting throats and skinning people". The Taliban's former ambassador to Pakistan, Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, in late 2011 stated that cruel behaviour under and by the Taliban had been "necessary". 7. Genocide of the Kashmir Valley Pandits 1989 The Hindu Pandits, hundreds of thousands of whom were massacred and driven from their ancestral lands in the Kashmir Valley by Islamic militants in 1989, amid scenes of unparalleled brutality and carnage. Their land and houses were seized by Mohammedans. 8. Pakistan constantly perpetrates genocidal oppression against various minorities, like the Hazara Shia minority that fled Pashtun persecution in Afghanistan in the 19th century and is still persecuted in Pakistan, principally in Baluchistan. Likewise brutal persecution of Shias, Christians Ahmadis and Hindus that often amounts to genocide 9. The partition of India in 1947 was likewise the occasion for mass reciprocal genocide. "Violence was not just a marginal phenomenon, a sudden and spontaneous communal frenzy that accompanied Partition. It was on the contrary at the very heart of the event. Nor was it merely a consequence of Partition but rather the principal mechanism for creating the conditions for Partition. Violence constituted the moral instrument through which the tension between the pre-Partition local character of identity and its postcolonial territorial and national redefinition was negotiated (Gilmartin, 1998: 1069-1089). Violence operated as the link between the community and its new national territory. That is precisely what gave it its organized and genocidal dimension as it was meant for control of social space so as to cleanse these territories from the presence of other religious communities (Hansen, 2002)." Strambotik (talk) 05:35, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 September 2021

The native american genocide has been brashly added with very little consensus, for a claim this bold, there should be more consensus, i suggest, it should be removed or at least moved into a disputed section of the page until more people support this entry. Justknowthatyourenotinthisthingalong (talk) 15:51, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: That's not how consensus works. Do you have a substantive objection to the section? Elli (talk | contribs) 16:26, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

A number of people have disputed this above in the talk page, The Native American genocide also doesn't have it's own Wikipedia page, it links to a general page about genocide Justknowthatyourenotinthisthingalong (talk) 00:25, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 September 2021

The Native American genocide doesn't even have it's own wikipedia page. It shouldn't really be listed here until it does. Justknowthatyourenotinthisthingalong (talk) 10:10, 21 September 2021 (UTC) Justknowthatyourenotinthisthingalong (talk) 10:10, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. Genocide of indigenous peoples#Colonization and genocide in the Americas ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Inconsistencies with respect to Native American genocide

Multiple aspects of this article seem inaccurate or lopsided. The pre-columbian population of the Americas is itself a contentious issue, with higher estimates in the 50-100 million range. Even if we accept this already debated figure at face value, it would necessarily include the population of Central America and South America, which aren't even mentioned under locations. Maybe we could link the Spanish Empire or the Viceroyalties of New Spain/Peru? It's also worth noting that the events in question don't totally line up with the definition outlined as the guideline for defining a genocide here: "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group." It's obviously true that massacres and forced migrations took place and that they were reprehensible, but the historical consensus is that the vast majority of native deaths, perhaps as many as 80-90%, were caused by the spread of old-world diseases to which Native Americans lacked immunity. This fact somehow goes unmentioned in the description box. To call this "intent" would be a reach. It's also worth noting that the current description of the locations as "British Empire, United States, Canada" is directly at odds with the content of the cited articles, which explicitly analyze the death toll throughout the Americas, not just North America. On top of everything else, the article is riddled with grammatical and spelling mistakes. One of the cited sources is even an opinion article from Yes! Magazine, which seems especially bizarre. I think that this section should be removed. A significant amount of the information is just factually incorrect or unsupported. ReadingSalmon (talk) 14:48, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

At this point, the talk page has something like a dozen editors pointing out the issues here. None of the above mentions have been substantively answered. I think we have enough to say that we've established a consensus. ReadingSalmon (talk) 15:16, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. Please take part in the RFC below. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:26, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Massacres by the Mongol armies?

The 13th century Mongol invasions of Eurasia (most brutally in the Khwarazmid Empire and Western Xia) could be one of the most horrendous killings in history. More than a tenth of the global population (around three fourth of the Iranian population) were killed in indiscriminate massacres, most notably in the case of Baghdad (around two million people), Nishapur (around one million) and Merv (around 700,000).

I am amazed that such genocide that nearly wiped out the entire population of Central Asia, Khwarazmid Persia and the Levant has not been considered here.

Also a very good source for additional statistics: necrometrics

--Nicxjo (talk) 17:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

We would need a broad consensus by historians that such an event was genocide to include it here, and as far as I can see neither your second or third sources define it as genocide (though I would generally dismiss them in this case given the academic nature of the subject), while the first seems to be some sort of masters thesis? BilledMammal (talk) 23:09, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Locations for the native american genocide

The Spanish and Portuguese Empires should be added to the location section for this, especially considering 90% of the deaths occurred south of the Rio Grande. PaKYr (talk) 23:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Spanish and Portuguese Empires

The sources make very clear that the estimates include both North and South America, even stating that the majority of the indigenous population lost was in the South. Thus the Spanish and Portuguese empires need to be added for the entry to be accurate.

If we're including Canada and the United States, then nations accused of similar behavior such as Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico should be included as well. A case can be made for the French colonial empire as well. But at very minimum, the Spanish and Portuguese empires must be added to avoid having the entire article discredited by readers. Please do not be disingenuous on an entry that is already controversial.

Carthagechris (talk) 22:35, 5 October 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carthagechris (talk • contribs) 22:04, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 October 2021

Native American genocide should be extended to 1996 when the last residential school was closed. 2607:FEA8:9C40:B900:BC55:7C69:3D94:728F (talk) 03:18, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:08, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Putting the "Native American Genocide" at the top of this list totally discredits Wikipedia

Every historian knows that the Native Americans mostly died off due to disease. The unintentional spread of disease cannot be considered a genocide. There is no historical evidence that any Native Americans were killed by the intentional spreading of disease. The number of Native Americans that can be historically proven to have been intentionally killed is incredibly small, in the thousands. This number of 50-100 million is almost laughable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:C602:F300:9DE2:D9C6:950D:F021 (talk) 05:31, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Please see the RFC above. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:09, 9 October 2021 (UTC)