Talk:Persecution of Christians/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Persecution vs Discrimination

I apologize if this is already being discussed in a different topic, but I had some hard time following what's going on so I'm making a new topic just in case. I found it surprising that Wikipedia doesn't have an article for Discrimination of Christians, but instead the article is phrased "Persecution". Now, I get that common vernacular in all Christian apologetics favors the term "Persecution", but my point is there is some discrepancy with other articles on the subject, such as Discrimination against atheists, which uses the other word instead.

In my understanding, these two words are related but not the same thing, because of a difference of scope. Persecution is very narrow in scope, and implies direct violent action or institutional suppression. Discrimination is broader in scope, which can be persecution as well, but can also refer to any social or institutional marginalization. As a result of this difference, this article is more narrow in scope, and only describes instances of violent actions or government suppression of Christian groups. Other articles that use the word discrimination, from what I can tell, are more broad in their scope: they include references to nations which have religious freedom, but the faith in question is not the social norm, so it becomes generally marginalized even without violent actions.

So this isn't so much of a proposal, and I'm sure there are multiple ways to approach the problem, but either way I think there should be some balance brought between the use of these different terms. LutherVinci (talk) 15:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

The idea that Christians are discriminated in US and EU is a fanciful idea of the extreme right. There are indeed countries wherein Christians get discriminated: Egypt, China, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and so on.

Of course, in the US and EU Christians are losing privileges. They are no longer the unopposed rulers of politics, society and culture.

Stark, Rodney (August 2000). "The Secularization Debate (chapter by Rodney Stark)". In Swatos, William H.; Olson, Daniel V. A. (eds.). Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 9780520222021. Retrieved 2012-06-02. Indeed, corruption and sloth, as well as power struggles and enforced conformity, became prominent features of the Christian movement in the fourth century, almost immediately upon its having become the official state church (Johnson 1976). Thus, for example, Christian bishops no longer were leaders of a stigmatized, if rapidly growing, sect, but were "rapidly assimilated as quasi civil servants into the mandarinate which administered the empire" (Fletcher, 1997, 22). House churches were replaced by resplendent public buildings, sustained by imperial largess. Contrary to received wisdom, the conversion of Constantine did not cause the triumph of Christianity. Rather, it was the first and most significant step in slowing its progress, draining its vigor, and distorting its moral vision. Most of the evils associated with European Christianity since the middle of the fourth century can be traced to establishment.

The honorable member has introduced the subject of religion. Religion is not guarded—there is no bill of rights declaring that religion should be secure. Is a bill of rights a security for religion? Would the bill of rights in this state exempt the people from paying for the support of one particular sect, if such sect were exclusively established by law? If there were a majority of one sect, a bill of rights would be a poor protection for liberty. Happily for the states, they enjoy the utmost freedom of religion. This freedom arises from that multiplicity of sects, which pervades America, and which is the best and only security for religious liberty in any society. For where there is such a variety of sects, there cannot be a majority of any one sect to oppress and persecute the rest. Fortunately for this commonwealth, a majority of the people are decidedly against any exclusive establishment—I believe it to be so in the other states. There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. Its least interference with it would be a most flagrant usurpation. I can appeal to my uniform conduct on this subject, that I have warmly supported religious freedom. It is better that this security should be depended upon from the general legislature, than from one particular state. A particular state might concur in one religious project. But the United States abound in such a variety of sects, that it is a strong security against religious persecution, and is sufficient to authorise a conclusion, that no one sect will ever be able to out-number or depress the rest. James Madison, POTUS

DEAR SIR:

The Notice which you mention in your letter of the 3d instant has only been called to my attention by your reference to it. I presume that it is nothing more than a contemplated assemblage of certain officers of the army and navy in their character of citizens and Christians, having for its object the inculcation upon others of their religious tenets, for, as they believe, the benefit and advantage of Mankind. A similar call on the part of any other religious sect would be alike tolerated under our institutions. The Government has nothing to do with the publication, nor has it issued from any one of the departments. Whether General Scott is to preside over the meeting, I am not in any way other than through your letter informed. If he attends, it will not and cannot be in his character of General in Chief of the army. He will necessarily for the time being lay aside his sword and epaulets, and appear, it is true, as a distinguished citizen, but in no other light than as a citizen. Was he a Hebrew and of the same tribe with yourself, his right to preside in your synagogue, if permitted or required by your laws would in no manner affect him in his military character; nor would it make him obnoxious to the censure of the Government for so doing. The United States have adventured upon a great and noble experiment, which is believed to have been hazarded in the absence of all previous precedent—that of total separation of Church and State. No religious establishment by law exists among us. The conscience is left free from all restraint and each is permitted to worship his Maker after his own judgment. The offices of the Government are open alike to all. No tithes are levied to support an established heirarchy, nor is the fallible judgment of man set up as the sure and infallible creed of faith. The Mohammedan, if he were to come among us, would have the privilege guaranteed to him by the constitution to worship according to the Koran; and the East Indian might erect a shrine to Brahma if it so pleased him. Such is the spirit of toleration inculcated by our political institutions. The fruits are visible in the universal contentment which everywhere prevails. Christians are broken up into various sects, but we have no persecution, no stake or rack—no compulsion or force, no furious or bigoted zeal; but each and all move on in their selected sphere, and worship the Great Creator according to their own forms and ceremonies. The Hebrew persecuted and down trodden in other regions takes up his abode among us with none to make him afraid. He may boast, as well he can, of his descent from the Patriarchs of Old—of his wise men in council, and strong men in Battle. He may ever more turn his eye to Judea resting with confidence on the promise that is made him of his restoration to that Holy Land, and he may worship the God of his fathers after the manner that that worship was conducted by Aaron and his successors in the priesthood, and the Aegis of the Government is over him to defend and protect him. Such is the great experiment which we have tried, and such are the happy fruits which have resulted from it; our system of free government would be imperfect without it.

The body may be oppressed and manacled and yet survive; but if the mind of man be fettered, its energies and faculties perish, and what remains is of the earth, earthy. Mind should be free as the light or as the air.

While I remain connected with the Government be assured, Sir, that so far as the Executive action is concerned, the guarantees of the Constitution in this great particular will know no diminution.

For your kind expression of good will towards me personally, I beg you to accept my thanks along with my best wishes for your health and happiness.

John Tyler, POTUS

You see therefore that the honorable citizens of the United States have always had scorn for the state supporting a particular religion: they don't want that the state meddles with religion. All bona fide Americans oppose the mixture of state and religion. It is un-American to pretend otherwise.

Constantine the Great enforced theological unanimity. The Bill of Rights endorses theological quarrels against theological unanimity. Constantine wanted mandatory harmony; democracy is based upon quarrels. Even a sincere desire to unite Christianity has become an object of quarrels, and therefore produced more quarrels among Christians. Roman Emperors enforced theological unity through the use of weapons and of the capital punishment, while US democracy simply admits that theological disputes will remain unresolved for ever: the state will call no theological winner. It is not the task of the state to settle theological disputes.

(In case you wonder what this is, it is called explaining religious liberty to a Conservative Christian from US, since they apparently believe that the First Amendment provides liberty to Christianity only, [1], and they also appear to think that Women's suffrage in the United States is a flawed decision—don't blame me because I say those look rather like the sayings of a member of the KKK rather than a member of the GOP.) I have overlooked the part they wrote that when they were 14 years old. tgeorgescu (talk) 03:27, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

I understand where you are coming from, but I think I need to clarify what I mean by scope. The nations you cite have some form of institutionalized discrimination, i.e. persecution by national suppression. They generally aren't nations that claim to be a secular state with freedom of religion, or otherwise claim it but effectively aren't. So purely using a definition of institutional discrimination, then certainly the west does not count, and nor would it count for discrimination of any religion at least in the present day (as you just cited, the United States was always abhorrent to the establishment of a national religion).

But some sources define discrimination in a broader scope, that includes non-institutionalized actions against people who aren't part of the social norm. On a national level, this still may not be the case where Christianity is the numerical majority, but documented cases can still exist of discrimination within a more isolated subculture (or even a physical subcommunity), which may not a numerical majority (or experience discrimination while being the numeric majority, anyway). Intuitively, the larger the population the more likely that these individual cases will arise. And these individual cases would also become more likely with larger populations of non-Christians, such as France that is 40% atheist or Czechia that is 60% agnostic-atheist.

Admittedly, this is more hypothetical and I don't have sources of individual cases on hand, but I just assume that this article has glossed over it because it focuses on the persecution (i.e., institutional suppression) of Christians, which would exclude any secular state with religious freedom. Even then, this more specific article does highlight violent actions against Christians in nations where they hold the majority (Latin America, Norway, and Russia), which I think sufficiently demonstrates that these individual cases in America and Europe do actually occur. LutherVinci (talk) 06:59, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

In Norway there were arson by a bunch of extremist wackos—Christians were not discriminated by the Norwegian society. If people sneer at rednecks, that has little to do with their religion. If you want to see what the Norwegian press writes about that (Christians being persecuted or discriminated): [2], [3], [4]. tgeorgescu (talk) 07:52, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

You don't seem to be reading what I'm saying. Norway's welfare system is a public institution, which like every secular state is not going to discriminate against any religion. I didn't mention "sneering at rednecks", that's a strawman argument. Arson in Norway was by "extremist wackos", and the Christchurch Mosque shooting was an extremist wacko as well, and I wouldn't classify these two things differently. I'm not saying that a nation as a whole, like "Norwegian society" would persecute Christians, I am pointing out individual incidents like the arson attack are an example of non-institutionalized religious violence. LutherVinci (talk) 08:11, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Persecusion has to be more than just a few random incidents, it has to be an organized campaign. As to discrimination and persecution, they are not synonymous, though one often leads to the other. Indeed just because the targets are Christian does not make it either discrimination or persecution. After all vandals burn down all kinds of buildings, it would have to be a deliberate attack on Christians because they are Chrisitan.Slatersteven (talk) 13:47, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

"Persecution" can sometimes be a loaded, it sure can be misused by the ultra-religious, and it must be used sparingly and only in cases such as massacres mutilation and forced deportation etc. The page should renamed to something like anti-Christian sentiments, mistreatments& atrocities, because there can be varying levels of hostility towards people both religious and irreligious. Persecution must not be made into an umbrella term.

If anybody is trying to downplay or gloss over the "persecution" of Christians, Discrimination against atheists itself shows beheading for apostasy is largely committed by Shariaist polities of Sunni Muslim majorities. It's in Christian majority West where most of the world's atheists are found living, so this discussion should have started on the Persecution of Sunni Muslims page. I suggest that an article such as Persecution of atheists in Sunni Sharia countries be made address the complaint, "persecution" of atheists is largely found in those countries where apostasy is banned and punishable by Sunni Sharia polities. @LutherVinci: I am not denying discrimination, but there is no systematic persecution/ executions/ incarcerations of the irreligious in Christian majority West as far as I know. Can you give us modern examples of Christian majority countries systematically rounding up irreligious atheists agnostics etc and putting them to death for their slacking in religion?

Afterthought: Antitheistic ideologues (often posing as "secular"), such as communists, have been involved in at least a couple such pogroms, eg Soviet genocide, Reign of Terror in Christian majority countries, "persecution of Christians" appropriately describes what happened in those cases. The Sinicisation of Tibet, Cambodian genocide& Uighur genocide committed against non-Christians by antitheistic ideologues.Nolicmahr (talk) 16:02, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Some observations on your suggestions:

• "it sure can be misused by the ultra-religious" We know, but we already have an article about the Christian persecution complex.
• "The page should renamed to something like anti-Christian sentiments, mistreatments& atrocities" Overly long titles are not particularly helpful to readers. "Atrocity" itself is rather vague, and could equally well apply to any war crime, any crimes against humanity, and any genocide.
• "committed by Shariaist polities of Sunni Muslim majorities" This seems to be out of topic. By the way, are you suggesting that Shia Islam-dominated countries do not persecute religious minorities? Per human rights in Iran, "conversion from Islam to another religion (apostasy) is prohibited, and may be punishable by death". Also, non-Muslim men can be executed for minor sex crimes (such as adultery), while Muslim men receive non-lethal punishments.
• "Can you give us modern examples of Christian majority countries systematically rounding up irreligious atheists agnostics etc and putting them to death for their slacking in religion?" That is easy: Nazi Germany. "all of Germany's atheist and largely left-wing freethought organizations such as the German Freethinkers League (500,000 members) were banned the same year" "In a speech made later in 1933, Hitler claimed to have "stamped out" the atheistic movement." "Heinrich Himmler was a strong promoter of the gottgläubig movement and did not allow atheists into the SS, arguing that their "refusal to acknowledge higher powers" would be a "potential source of indiscipline"." "The SS oath (Eidformel der Schutzstaffel), written by Himmler, also specifically denounced atheists" Remember that Nazism was primarily a Christian movement. Dimadick (talk) 06:51, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Beheading is not the only form of persecution, this looks far too specific for my liking.Slatersteven (talk) 09:59, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Russia

The Russian Federation actively persecutes Christians, e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses have been banned. Basically, all Christians except those from the Russian Orthodox Church get creamed. In Russia freedom of religion is seen as a Satanic plot. Allowing freedom of religion means for them allowing the Devil to harvest souls for hell. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:50, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Source?Slatersteven (talk) 09:56, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Well, everybody knows that JW have been disbanded in Russia as an extremist organization. See e.g. https://www2.stetson.edu/religious-news/00currentchoices.shtml tgeorgescu (talk) 17:16, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

I am unsure that is an RS.Slatersteven (talk) 17:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Are you in denial? Here is a mainstream news outlet: https://abcnews.go.com/International/russias-mysterious-campaign-jehovahs-witnesses/story?id=78629389

Here is another: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/28/absurd-crime-religious-worship-putins-russia/ tgeorgescu (talk) 17:28, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

That is better, you should have led with them.Slatersteven (talk) 17:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

There's no denying that JW are a paranoid apocalyptic cult; but they are also the least likely to commit violent crimes. tgeorgescu (talk) 05:42, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

"Chrisophibia" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Chrisophibia and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 13#Chrisophibia until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:03, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

question

my source on saladin persecuting christians and Muhammads dislike of the cross was removed for not being "RS". what does that mean? Oceans112 (talk) 21:46, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

You are in Wikipedia, and you are asking what "reliable sources" mean? Did you check the policy on Wikipedia:Reliable sources, before starting to edit? Dimadick (talk) 13:13, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Serious omissions

Despite being vastly oversized, this article still manages to omit critical periods in history regarding the subject, most notably upon casual inspection the Viking Era in Europe - alone quite a monumental omission, and they are likely more. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise

Careful handling of this source is required. The work is quite polemical in nature, and, as noted on The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise Wiki page, which includes cautions, among others, that the author "lacks first-hand knowledge of his subject matter and has misinterpreted his readings" and ""veers between genuine scholarship, pedantry, and advocacy". That is but a sample of the criticism. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:23, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Verifiability vs inclusion

Hi @GenoV84: I just wanted to note that this edit, where you commented on reliability, undid this edit, where none of the reasons provided in the edit summary related to reliability. The reasons all fell under the 'verifiability does not inclusion' premise on Wikipedia. This article is almost two times over-length, and, to elaborate, neither an anchor about the Muslim World, or specific to Pakistan, are appropriate for this section, anecdotal individual cases of blasphemy sentencing are not appropriate in the opening summary to such as section, where the introduction should be generalist, and a report ordered by a UK politician known for their Christian activism is not a good source for balanced analysis. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:14, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Iskandar, I restored the content that you mentioned because both The Guardian and Bbc News are considered WP:RS on Wikipedia, therefore those articles can be included here; I find it strange that someone would delete those references and their related content when there's no need to do it. GenoV84 (talk) 10:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Anyway, this entire article is supposed to cover the topic of persecuted Christians, therefore removing episodes of persecution against them in the islamic world (such as Coptic Christians in Egypt, for example) would constitute a violation of the WP policy WP:NOTCENSORED.

By following your argument, we should delete every episode of persecution against Christians from the 1st century onwards, and it definitely doesn't sound like the most appropriate way to deal with this issue.

Having said that, the subsection about Pakistan should be rewritten thoroughly. GenoV84 (talk) 10:33, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@GenoV84: To reiterate, the page is currently nearly double the length the length at which one would usually start thinking about splits. It's currently pretty objectively worthless as an encyclopedic summary. And yes, it certainly should not include every example of persecution ever covered by a reliable source. It is a encyclopedia entry, not a list of Christian persecutions, although anyone is able to go a create such a list if they consider the exercise valuable. Judicious assessment of which material is due is not censorship; it is pragmatic editing and a necessary exercise. I've now explained twice why I removed that material, both in the edit summary and here, and you have not really addressed those points. Again verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. Also bear in mind that much of this material is repeated again at the child article Persecution of Christians in the post–Cold War era. Moving forward, if removing anything with a reliable source is anathema to you, I would like to hear how you would halve the length of the content here through splitting or otherwise. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Splitting the article by creating a List of Christian persecutions and moving the related content there sounds like the best solution to me, while all the material related to the persecution of Christians in islamic countries and history could be moved to a new standalone article titled Persecution of Christians in the Muslim world. I would propose the same solution regarding all the material that should be moved from here to the article Persecution of Christians in the post–Cold War era. GenoV84 (talk) 15:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

deletions of reliable sources

many citations dont have page numbers yet mine are being really nitpicked by iskandar and constantly deleted. he can atleast put the "page number needed" sign that i see in other wiki pages but chooses to delette reliable sources. he even deleted sources with page numbers. what the hell? 206.47.6.162 (talk) 04:11, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

This page is currently grossly overlength: nearly two times the recommended length of an article. Yet you keep adding anecdotal information and elaborate quotes. This is not helping the article, which principally needs reducing in size. If there is a related topic that you wish to elaborate on, the best thing to do would be to either navigate to one of the child articles, such as Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire, and elaborate further there, OR, if you cannot find a child article to your liking, potentially because it does not exist, then why not go ahead and create some child articles containing the kind of very granular detail that you appear to be interested in. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:51, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Underworld

Ottoman Turks destroyed medieval Romania to such a dangerous extent that the entire region became an example of the underworld.

06:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)06:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)06:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)06:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)~~/////////////06:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)43.242.178.247 (talk) 43.242.178.247 (talk) 06:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Rumelia

Ottoman Turks renamed their occupation territories in the "Greater Balkans", they massacred, kidnapped, enslaved, sex trafficking of Christian people into the service of their empire.

06:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)06:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)06:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)06:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)06:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)///////////////////06:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)06:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)43.242.178.247 (talk) 43.242.178.247 (talk) 06:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Source? Slatersteven (talk) 11:50, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Palestine

Ethnic Cleansing of Christians in Palestine by Israel is almost complete. This should be added especially in light of Ben Gvir’s open declaration of Israel’s goal of 100% cleansing — exterminating all Palestinians. 2601:648:8400:2050:7086:2F79:705F:346 (talk) 16:43, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

You need some very good sourcing for this claim. Slatersteven (talk) 16:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

That seems just a little bit hyperbolic, but the more everyday plight of Palestinian Christians certainly is something that could be written about. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:57, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Historical revisionism

"In the 1910s and 1920s, the Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian genocides were perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire and its successor state, the Republic of Turkey."

Can someone please tell me why this sentence is persistently not deleted? How come the Republic of Turkey is responsible when all three events mentioned took place before the establishment of the Republic of Turkey? If this is not historical revisionism, what is? How can a country founded in 1923 be the perpetrator of events that ended before 1923? Do you think modern Germany is the perpetrator of the Holocaust? Or is the Russian Federation the perpetrator of the Katyn Forest massacre? By this logic, Modern Germany is the perpetrator of the holocaust, while the Russian Federation carried out the Katyn massacre. Doesn't that sound ridiculous? I demand that these ridiculous and historical revisionist statements I mentioned be removed. Apparently some fanatic greek far-right extremists are doing historical revisionism and Wikipedia admins are supporting it. If it is not deleted, I will delete it. LittleBrother07 (talk) 20:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC) blocked user

Those are well documented events, this site is not your blog where you can spread your panturk nonsenses. Also, "If it is not deleted, I will delete it" I strongly suggest you to avoid such things, as this is a community encyclopedia that works with consensus. Thank you.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:23, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm not knowledgeable about this—this user's question makes sense to me. How can the successor state of one state be responsible for something that the predecessor state did before the successor was established? @Wikaviani Zanahary (talk) 00:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Just take the time to read what the sources say, on Wikipedia we go by what reliable sources say, our opinion, as editors, is irrelevant.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:39, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Ukraine

Banning practice of the orthodox faith 2605:8D80:6E0:9309:C827:EF0D:41ED:CA40 (talk) 23:08, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

honestly yeah; it should be counted. Saxumwasbased (talk) 02:39, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Persecution of Palestinian Christians in Gaza genocide

Since 7 October 2023 conflict, the Christian community in Gaza has been suffering immense losses. The world'third oldest known church has been bombed by Israeli army . A mother and with her daughter that were sheltering in a church were shot dead by Israeli army snipers. The Pope has made a public speech condemning these atrocities and agreed that they appear to be terrorist acts carries put by the current occupation i.e. Israel. The Palestinian Christian Orthodox community leaders have made official calls on media platforms pledging for worldwide support and prayers in the wake of the recent shooting and arrests in West Banks as well as the ongoing en masse indiscriminate killing of over 20 thousand civillians in Gaza many of them being children and infants ,women and elderly.The exact number of Christians killed in Gaza is unknown as the international call for immediate ceasefire continues. At this moment in time USA has been the only nation voting against ceasefire at the United Nations urgent assembly. As the Christmas approached many were hoping that this would be the moment the ceasefire would come into place. Unfortunately it hasn't been the case. On Christmas Day ,speaking from the loggia of St. Peter's Basilica to the throngs of people below, Francis said he grieved the "abominable attack" of Hamas against southern Israel on Oct. 7 and called for the release of hostages. And he begged for an end to Israel's military campaign in Gaza and the "appalling harvest of innocent civilians" as he called for humanitarian aid to reach those in need. Francis devoted his Christmas Day blessing to a call for peace in the world, noting that the biblical story of the birth of Christ in Bethlehem sent a message of peace. But he said that Bethlehem "is a place of sorrow and silence" this year. 86.6.205.173 (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 March 2024

Change North Korea having the top spot for 12 years to North Korea has had the top spot for 13 years. 162.245.156.198 (talk) 13:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done Please give a reliable source for your claim. My Pants Metal (talk) 14:02, 13 March 2024 (UTC)