Talk:Libyan genocide
(wider definition of genocide) Based on the death toll and what the UN and other Arab historians said, the genocide should cover 1911-1943 no?
[edit]I think my revisions were good based on this fact. Or at the very least maybe the article should be made similar to the Bosnian genocide article where it states the total deaths of Libyans under Italian rule as (wider definition of genocide) alongside the death toll from 1929-1934. NuancedProwler (talk) 15:42, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Reliable sources?
[edit]Gaddafi's statement about 750,000 deaths is considered exaggerated; how can a propaganda be encyclopedic? Also, I don't understand why the sources I inserted about Angelo Del Boca's estimates have been removed, being him among the main scholars of Italian war crimes. Caffeinate Mac (talk) 19:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- Angelo Del Boca’s figures are not reliable/usable here for a couple of reasons.
- 1. His figure of 100,000 doesn’t even cover the entire Italian colonial period (1911-1943) which is what is being covered in this article. His figure only covers 1922-1932, which closely aligns with the Second Italo-Senussi war (which you yourself inserted into the article when you made these unwarranted consensus-free edits btw), which has been covered here already. Del Boca’s figure at best can be cited within the 80k-120k scope of the 1929-34 period as in the article.
- 2. He is a biased Italian scholar, and especially when he claims 100k total deaths from 1922-1932 (which is an odd starting year). The UN estimated a minimum of 250k Libyan deaths from 1911-1943, therefore Del Boca’s figures are nullified. 2600:1012:B18B:25C2:F16C:6E5D:9340:C76 (talk) 20:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- The inclusion of Ghaddafi’s figure is a separate issue. However, you are not wrong to call it into question and open a discussion about it, that is what Wikipedia is about. If, keyword if, consensus is reached here that Ghaddafi’s figures are not reliable, then they will be removed and the death toll for 1911-43 will be placed at 250k-500k instead. That being said, please do not make anymore changes to the article until consensus is reached here. 2600:1012:B18B:25C2:F16C:6E5D:9340:C76 (talk) 20:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Caffeinate Mac I would be interested to know why the source and figure were removed. Wikipedias of other languages, which (aside from Spanish) lack a 'Libyan genocide' article per se, reproduce the number in relation to the Second Italo-Senussi War. The supposition about Del Boca's bias in the other replies is peculiar, especially in light of who he is.
- The number of 250,000-750,000 in the wikibox is taken, it appears, from the "necrometrics" source, but it apparently concerns deaths from all causes including combat, as does the smaller number of John Wright, whom the "necrometrics" source cites for the UN number. The current article and wikibox are unscrupulous, to put it mildly, and do not explain what sources actually say, nor distinguish when the numbers pulled from them are said to relate to those who "died", or "were killed", or so on. Zusty001 (talk) 03:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Concerns over use of "Genocide" in wikivoice
[edit]I've done a quick survey of some of the major academic books and papers that discuss the history of Libya and the events of this article, and have tallied whether or not they classify it as "genocide". Here's the results:
Explicitly states as "Genocide": A. A. Ahmida various (e.g. 1994, 2006, 2023); A. d. Boca various (e.g. 2005); G. Rochat various (e.g. 1980), E. Salerno 1979, I. T. Powell 2015
"Some have described as Genocide" or similar: R. J. B. Bosworth 2006, A. Baldinetti 2010, D. M. Smith 2004, N. Labanca 2007, M. Ebner 1972, G. Finaldi 2019, M. Jerary 2005
Does not mention "Genocide": D. Vandewalle 2006, N. Labanca 2005, M. Mann 2004, C. Duggan 2008, J. Wright 1981, F. H. Dotolo 2015, E. Ryan 2015, 2018; L. Anderson 1986, I. Pappé 2005
I'm not at all convinced that the broad scholarship allows us to state in Wikivoice that the actions are definitively classified as genocidal—title of the article notwithstanding, I think it would be prudent to state throughout this important caveat, which is currently completely ignored. Meluiel (talk) 21:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Copyright problem removed
[edit] Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Meluiel (talk) 09:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)