Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of atrocities

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete.

List of atrocities

List of atrocities (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

There is no acceptable definition of atrocity which will not allow a meaningful list of atrocities to be built. This list will have all the problems and non neutral points of view that the list of massacres has which is in a constant state of POV edit warring. (see Talk:List of massacres and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres)

The Atrocity article says "In general use, an atrocity or massacre designates a politically or ethnically motivated killing of civilians. In international law, more precise terms are war crime and crime against humanity". If the list is only to be constructed from definition of international law then they should be in lists of war crimes and crimes against humanity where there is a strict legal definition. Not a vague list generated from politically or ethnically motivated points of view.

Making the list a "list of alleged atrocities" would be an even worse idea as anyone can allege that anything is an atrocity. --

• Strong Delete or Merge Recommend deleting the article, unless it can be modified to something like List of Genocides. In that case, recommend complete deletion.Alloranleon (talk) 14:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is already a list of genocides called

talk) 14:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

• Strong Delete Unlike "war crime", there is no objective criteria for stating that an event was an "atrocity". This article is just a list of events that Wikipedia contributors think were atrocities. As such, it is not valid for inclusion in Wikipedia. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 15:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment FYI, this list was excised from the atrocity article, where one contributor seems hell bent on adding it back. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 15:11, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete: agree with nom. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Agree with the nom, the criteria for being on the list is far too vague Whitstable (talk) 15:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete. Yes, most definitely too vague. Malinaccier (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete. Criteria for entry is too vague or open to interpretation, bias and dispute. Apart from problems the article doesn't really add anything which does not already exist.-AlexCatlin (talk) 18:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I believe that an article on this subject is needed, but that it must allow all events that can be third party sourced. As i have said else where, in order to judge if a claim is true you have to know it exists in the first place. Perhaps the name should be alleged atrocities Slatersteven (talk) 19:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)]][reply]
• Strong Delete it doesn't get more POV than this. RMHED (talk) 20:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Userfy. This is very well-sourced and must have taken a considerable time to write.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 02:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as "atrocity" is a more subjectively defined term than "War crime" or even "massacre". Daniel Case (talk) 06:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 18:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete - well-intentioned but intractably POV. Biruitorul (talk) 23:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.