Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Rabaa massacre/Archive 4) (bot
 
(23 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{oldafdfull| date = 15 August 2013 (UTC) | result = '''speedy keep''' | page = August 14th clashes }}
{{oldafdfull| date = 15 August 2013 (UTC) | result = '''speedy keep''' | page = August 14th clashes }}
{{Bannershell|1=
{{WikiProject Arab world |class=B |importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Egypt |class=B |importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Politics |class=B |importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Military history |class=b |B1 <!-- Referencing and citations -->=y |B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy -->=y |B3 <!-- Structure -->=y |B4 <!-- Grammar and style -->=y |B5 <!-- Supporting materials -->=y |African=y}}
}}
{{ITN talk|15 August|2013}}
{{ITN talk|15 August|2013}}
{{image requested|political topics|military history}}
{{controversial}}
{{controversial}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 16: Line 9:
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(14d)
|algo = old(14d)
|archive = Talk:August 2013 Rabaa and Nahda clashes/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:Rabaa massacre/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{OnThisDay|date1=2021-08-14|oldid1=1038813642|date2=2023-08-14|oldid2=1170374523}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|
{{WikiProject Arab world |importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Egypt |importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Politics |importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Military history |class=b |B1 <!-- Referencing and citations -->=y |B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy -->=y |B3 <!-- Structure -->=y |B4 <!-- Grammar and style -->=y |B5 <!-- Supporting materials -->=y |African=y}}
}}
}}
{{archives|search=yes}}
{{archives|search=yes}}


==Change title==
== Proposed title change ==


*'''August 2013 Rabaa massacre''' -> '''August 2013 Rabaa and Nahda sit-ins dispersal'''
"Clashes" indicates two sides fighting more or less equally. Can we change this to "raids", a more one-sided term. My understanding is that military and police armed with firearms and tear gas attacked protesters armed with sticks and rocks. "Massacre" is probably too strong a word at this point because it does not seem to have been widely used in the press. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 11:49, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
:There's reports and videos of some of the protestors firing back with automatic weapons. Some of them were confiscated after their arrest. But they appear to have been a minority, and only responding to attacks by the security forces. "Raids" as a title fits. --[[User:Harizotoh9|Harizotoh9]] ([[User talk:Harizotoh9|talk]]) 13:11, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Recently, I've cleaned up the article of POV, and here is a much more accurate title. Also doesn't feature the word "massacre," which is a one-sided and biased word which fits into the Brotherhood's narrative, as an earlier user noted in the past section. Should we keep the title as is, change it to my proposed version, or take a third option? Thanks. [[User:Zakawer|Zakawer]] ([[User talk:Zakawer|talk]]) 16:27, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
:'''Oppose''': A broad-spectrum of reliable sources refer to incident as Rabaa Massacre. Further, injecting one's own biases and POV doesn't qualify as clean-up. --&nbsp;[[User:Dsprc|<span style="color: purple">'''dsprc'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Dsprc|<span style="color: green"><sup>'''[talk]'''</sup></span>]] 07:03, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
:No both sides were armed and using fire arms, obviously armed police/military vs paramilitary will reflect in the casualties [[Special:Contributions/118.211.192.60|118.211.192.60]] ([[User talk:118.211.192.60|talk]]) 12:45, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
::I would also add "14 AUgust 2013 Egyptian raids" as there will be repercussions of more violence TIED to this in the coming days in August, so we should clarify when it all began. Then the "aftermath" section can cover it. Also don't gorget the Aftermath of the coup page will also carry other details. So this separate event needs to indicate it happened on the 14th.([[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 13:27, 15 August 2013 (UTC)).


: '''Oppose''' A quick search indicates that "massacre" is the term commonly used by international press ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/08/14/counting-the-dead-of-egypts-tiananmen/ Washington Post], [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/16/rabaa-massacre-egypt-human-rights-watch The Guardian], [http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/aljazeeraworld/2016/08/massacre-rabaa-160816085846897.html Al Jazeera]). Even searching for "sit-in dispersal" brings up articles whose headlines call it "massacre", while the former term seems to be used almost exclusively by Egyptian press. This brings the change in conflict with NPOV per [[WP:UNDUE]]. [[User:Eperoton|Eperoton]] ([[User talk:Eperoton|talk]]) 02:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
: I agree, 'August 2013' suggest we are discussing a much wider angle here. So this should be renamed to August 2013 Egyptian 'clashes' or 'protest', which resulted in a raid in 14 august. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:PLNR|PLNR]] ([[User talk:PLNR|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/PLNR|contribs]]) 01:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:'''Support''', as I am the person who made this proposal. [[User:Zakawer|Zakawer]] ([[User talk:Zakawer|talk]]) 14:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
:I strongly suggest that the title needs to be changed to ''Rabaa Adawiyya Massacre.'' Calling it a 'dispersal' fits into the pro-coup (or 'it's not a coup')narrative that was widespread at the time. This is now widely described as a coup, and outside of Egypt, at this point, this event is now considered to have been a massacre. Importantly, the death total (at least 500 and probably close to a thousand demonstrators killed) places the event fairly high in any list of the bloodiest state massacres of civilian demonstrators in history. Calling it anything else is a clear violation of NPOV. CF: [[Sharpeville Massacre]], [[Tlatelolco Massacre]] [[User:Jackbrown|jackbrown]] ([[User talk:Jackbrown|talk]]) 20:54, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
: '''Oppose''', this is the title that's overwhelmingly used by reliable news outlets and scholars. [[User:Snooganssnoogans|Snooganssnoogans]] ([[User talk:Snooganssnoogans|talk]]) 14:23, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


: '''Support''' -- Moving these MB, armed people was not a massacre. They weren't innocent civilians. They were asked to leave for a long time. Like in the [[Waco siege]] people died when Janet Reno asked to make a move and get them out. But the main media WP, Al Jazeera and Guardian are biased against Egypt and for MB -that's why they call it a massacre. Egypt is still fighting the MB in Sinai with police being killed almost every day. I don't know what the correct title should be but I don't think it should be called a massacre. Maybe it should be named the Rabaa siege. [[Hisham Barakat]], the general prosecutor, who ordered the people to be moved from Rabaa was assassinated a year later. Another example where it was called a seige is here [[Siege of La Rochelle]] . Also note this (copied from the Al Jazeera WP article) "The network is sometimes perceived to have mainly [[Islamist]] perspectives, promoting the [[Muslim Brotherhood]], and having a pro-[[Sunni Islam|Sunni]] and an anti-[[Shia Islam|Shia]] bias in its reporting of regional issues."<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-07-10/why-does-al-jazeera-love-a-hateful-islamic-extremist- |title=Why Does Al Jazeera Love a Hateful Islamic Extremist?|access-date=2015-09-23 |date=10 July 2013 |first1=Jeffrey |last1=Goldberg |publisher=[[Bloomberg L.P.]] |website=bloombergview.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.businessinsider.com/al-jazeera-us-government-funded-anti-muslim-brotherhood-activists-2013-7?IR=T |title=AL JAZEERA: US Government Funded Anti-Muslim Brotherhood Activists |date=10 July 2013 |work=Business Insider |accessdate=16 June 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.agsiw.org/why-america-turned-off-al-jazeera/ |title=Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington - Why America Turned Off Al Jazeera - Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington |work=[[Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington]] |accessdate=6 May 2016}}</ref> So we shouldn't be calling it a reliable source on this specific topic related to the Muslim Brotherhood.[[User:The Eloquent Peasant|The Eloquent Peasant]] ([[User talk:The Eloquent Peasant|talk]]) 02:38, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
:: I think it should be renamed into a battle or to clashes; The police have been fired at and lost 49 of its own. Photographs taken by military helicopters also show weapons being used by Islamist militants. Calling it a massacre highly fits into Islamist claims of what they call "the throne of Egypt". Coup or not, Islamists still fought the state, it wasn't the security forces' faults they lost badly. ''[[User:One last pharaoh|<small><span style="border:2px solid #000;"><span style="color:#fff;background:#000;">&nbsp;<b>Mahmood</b>&nbsp;</span></span></small>'']]'' 14:32, 24 October 2014 (UTC)


*'''Strongly oppose''' the move request on several grounds. First, the phrase "rabaa massacre" returns 18,600 hits on Google, while "rabaa dispersal" or "rabaa sit-in dispersal" return only 2,600 hits. Therefore per [[WP:COMMONNAME]] "massacre" is the globally recognized title of this event. Second, "massacre" is the term used by [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] from the right, center, left, mainstream, and financial press from all over the world, and by human rights organizations [https://www.ibtimes.com/five-killed-egypt-anniversary-protests-rabaa-square-massacre-1660470][https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/11804439/UN-urged-to-investigate-Rabaa-massacre-launched-by-Egyptian-security-forces-in-2013.html][https://www.dw.com/en/egypts-rabaa-massacre-rights-group-calls-for-international-probe/a-45066244-0][https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2013/1114/Egyptian-authorities-pave-over-Rabaa-massacre][https://www.voanews.com/world-news/middle-east-dont-use/5-year-anniversary-rabaa-massacre-looms-egypt-comes-under-fire][https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/08/arab-spring-rabaa-massacre/536847/][https://time.com/longform/rabaa-square-massacre-legacy/][https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/egypt-no-justice-900-rabaa-massacre-victims-mass-show-trial-continues][https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/egypt-rabaa-massacre-cairo-muslim-brotherhood-abdel-fattah-al-sisi-ibrahim-halawa-a8491821.html][https://www.ictj.org/news/egypt-marks-five-years-%E2%80%98rabaa-massacre%E2%80%99][https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/08/egypt-rabaa/][https://www.msn.com/en-gb/video/other/egypt-marks-five-years-since-rabaa-massacre/vi-BBLU6KD][https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/egypt-years-rabaa-massacre-180813145929087.html][https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/yw4k87/egypts-rabaa-massacre-of-1000-morsi-supporters-went-according-to-plan][https://www.huffpost.com/entry/rabaa-massacre-anniversary_b_5678581?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACXhSz-FPaaQ0AjRlQDNHg9-pAHXxQeOATTElRMvNfdt7txwJKRpcSK9X6mPWnROO1OPzOu4n70CFZujKCne8PnzJlUEa6NIjTdrLj5hkUug2N_VXExVKp6favbXEEa6gsuwNosR5TFTU3QRvl_9JpvSoC0ZwtBDjS-q29K3xyq_][https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-morning-after-egypts-rabaa-massacre]. Lastly, a "massacre" is what actually occurred, and we shouldn't be engaged in [[WP:EUPHEMISM]] here. -[[User:Darouet|Darouet]] ([[User talk:Darouet|talk]]) 04:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
==Move discussion in progress==
There is a move discussion in progress on [[Talk:Potato Riots#Requested moves |Talk:Potato Riots]] which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. <!-- Talk:Potato Riots crosspost --> —[[User:RMCD bot|RMCD bot]] 03:00, 19 November 2014 (UTC)


{{reftalk}}
== Inherently biased anti-govt content should be removed along with a requested rename to a neutral title ==
== Requested move 13 August 2023 ==
<div class="boilerplate mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]] after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.''


The result of the move request was: '''page moved'''. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] ([[User talk:Andrewa|talk]]) 03:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Ever since the Egyptian Revolution of 2013, political content in Egypt here on Wikipedia has had a visible bias against the Egyptian government. This shitty article, along with [[2013 Egyptian coup d'état]], are the two most obviously biased articles. Blatant POV follows the same fucking stupid narrative as the Muslim Brotherhood, whose first-party sources confuse international media. I think this encyclopedia should more rely more heavily on Al-Ahram's English website and Daily News Egypt, which are as unbiased as imaginable. Also, requesting rename to "August 2013 Rabaa and Nahda sit-ins raid" or something like that. [[Special:Contributions/197.167.6.0|197.167.6.0 (Zakawer as anonymous user)]] ([[User talk:197.167.6.0|talk]]) 16:28, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
----


[[:August 2013 Rabaa massacre]] → {{no redirect|Rabaa massacre}} – Per [[WP:CONCISE]]. There is no other Rabaa massacre to disambiguate. <span style="border:1px solid;padding:2px 6px;font-variant:small-caps">'''〜 [[User:Festucalex|<span style="color:#3cb400">Festucalex</span>]] • [[User talk:Festucalex|<span style="color:#ff007f">talk</span>]]'''</span> 21:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
: I agree, this article it seem to convey the opinion and not provide the facts, the citations are weak and misrepresent the facts. Who chooses the title ? [[Special:Contributions/118.211.192.60|118.211.192.60]] ([[User talk:118.211.192.60|talk]]) 12:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)


*'''Closing comment''': This article title has a complex history see [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Andrewa/sandbox&oldid=1171440203 here] and the talk page archives. Hopefully this will lead to some stability. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] ([[User talk:Andrewa|talk]]) 03:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
:: I think the title is fine as it is. A great many civilians were killed, and this has been corroborated by the likes of HRW who are considered to be neutral in this case. Perhaps you could provide specific examples of how the article conveys "opinion and not facts"? And could the OP please refrain from using abusive language, it's not needed and is disrespectful. [[User:Muzher|Muzher]] <small>([[User_talk:Muzher|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Muzher|contribs]])</small> 16:00, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from [[Template:Archive bottom]] -->
</div><div style="clear:both;"></div>


== Crimes against humanity category removal ==
:::[[Mass murder]] is what it is. Maybe next time the perps will think ahead... [[User:Fred Bauder]] [[User talk:Fred Bauder|Talk]] 09:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
::::[https://www.facebook.com/TuCasaInc/photos/a.423185250951.206225.206580540951/10152721139945952/?type=3&theater Neutral about mass murder?] [[User:Fred Bauder]] [[User talk:Fred Bauder|Talk]] 10:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
:::::The lamestream media of the Western world (with minor exceptions such as [[Fox News Channel|Fox News]]) have a record of failures in accurately reporting on the [[Muslim Brotherhood]] as a whole, including its [[Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt|Egyptian division]]; this explains their terrible coverage of Egypt. Here are a few links explaining the epic fails of the U.S. mainstream media to properly report on the MB; you should go read 'em:
:::::[https://www.globalmbwatch.com/2016/05/24/new-york-times-continues-media-epic-failures-on-global-muslim-brotherhood-the-latest-puff-piece-on-rachid-ghannouchi/''New York Times'' Continues Epic Media Failure on Global Muslim Brotherhood- The Latest Puff Piece on Rachid Ghannouchi]

:::::[https://www.globalmbwatch.com/2014/06/08/analysis-media-fails-to-do-even-basic-research/ ANALYSIS: Media Fails to Do Even Basic Research]

:::::[https://www.globalmbwatch.com/2016/04/06/us-media-fails-again-us-muslim-brotherhood-electoral-group-receives-no-scrutiny/ U.S. Media Fails Again- U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Electoral Group Receives No Scrutiny]

:::::[https://www.globalmbwatch.com/2016/04/11/epic-us-media-failures-part-2/ Epic U.S. Media Failures Part 2]

:::::Also, HRW is a bunch of poorly-informed but well-intentioned dudes. They most likely got their information on the sit-in dispersal from MB members. The title is clearly one-sided, and reflects the MB's bullshit agenda it pushes towards Westerners to make it seem like a bunch of peaceful dudes. Nevertheless, the [[National Council for Human Rights|NCHR]] released a superior report before HRW released its own report which explains the sit-in dispersal properly. Read this article, which explains it in brief:

:::::[http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/96882/Egypt/Politics-/,-people-injured-during-Rabaa-dispersal-NCHR.aspx 1,492 people injured during Rabaa dispersal: NCHR]

:::::And here is the NCHR's rebuttal to HRW's sit-in dispersal "investigation," which you should ''definitely'' read:

:::::[http://www.nchregypt.org/index.php/en/media-center/news/1427-the-response-of-the-national-council-for-human-rights-to-the-report-of-human-rights-watch-in-the-memory-of-the-dispersal-of-rabaa-al-adaweya-and-al-nahda-squares.html The response of the National Council for Human Rights to the report of Human Rights Watch in the memory of the dispersal of Rabaa al-Adaweya and Al-Nahda squares] [[User:Zakawer|Zakawer]] ([[User talk:Zakawer|talk]]) 16:34, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

== Proposed title change ==

*'''August 2013 Rabaa massacre''' -> '''August 2013 Rabaa and Nahda sit-ins dispersal'''
Recently, I've cleaned up the article of POV, and here is a much more accurate title. Also doesn't feature the word "massacre," which is a one-sided and biased word which fits into the Brotherhood's narrative, as an earlier user noted in the past section. Should we keep the title as is, change it to my proposed version, or take a third option? Thanks. [[User:Zakawer|Zakawer]] ([[User talk:Zakawer|talk]]) 16:27, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
:'''Oppose''': A broad-spectrum of reliable sources refer to incident as Rabaa Massacre. Further, injecting one's own biases and POV doesn't qualify as clean-up. --&nbsp;[[User:Dsprc|<span style="color: purple">'''dsprc'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Dsprc|<span style="color: green"><sup>'''[talk]'''</sup></span>]] 07:03, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

: '''Oppose''' A quick search indicates that "massacre" is the term commonly used by international press ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/08/14/counting-the-dead-of-egypts-tiananmen/ Washington Post], [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/16/rabaa-massacre-egypt-human-rights-watch The Guardian], [http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/aljazeeraworld/2016/08/massacre-rabaa-160816085846897.html Al Jazeera]). Even searching for "sit-in dispersal" brings up articles whose headlines call it "massacre", while the former term seems to be used almost exclusively by Egyptian press. This brings the change in conflict with NPOV per [[WP:UNDUE]]. [[User:Eperoton|Eperoton]] ([[User talk:Eperoton|talk]]) 02:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

:'''Support''', as I am the person who made this proposal. [[User:Zakawer|Zakawer]] ([[User talk:Zakawer|talk]]) 14:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
: '''Oppose''', this is the title that's overwhelmingly used by reliable news outlets and scholars. [[User:Snooganssnoogans|Snooganssnoogans]] ([[User talk:Snooganssnoogans|talk]]) 14:23, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


[[Crimes against humanity]] is a specific legal concept. In order to be included in the category, the event (s) must have been prosecuted as a crime against humanity, or at a bare minimum be described as such by most reliable sources. Most of the articles that were formerly in this category did not mention crimes against humanity at all, and the inclusion of the category was purely original research. [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 07:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
: '''Support''' -- Obama's first visit was to Egypt to send a message of support to the Muslim Brotherhood. Morsi was installed, thanks to Obama. When the people of Egypt protested and removed him, the MB armed themselves in the streets and ''sat in''. They had to be removed. Would any country allow thousands of people to sit-in for months and block major thoroughfares, they didn't allow people get to their flats. I don't think so. Moving these MB, armed people was not a massacre. They weren't innocent civilians. They were asked to leave for a long time. Like in the [[Waco siege]] people died when Janet Reno asked to make a move and get them out. But the main media WP, Al Jazeera and Guardian are biased against Egypt and for MB -that's why they call it a massacre. Egypt is still fighting the MB in Sinai with police being killed almost every day. I don't know what the correct title should be but I don't think it should be called a massacre. Maybe it should be named the Rabaa siege. [[Hisham Barakat]], the general prosecutor, who ordered the people to be moved from Rabaa was assassinated a year later. --[[User:The Eloquent Peasant|The Eloquent Peasant]] ([[User talk:The Eloquent Peasant|talk]]) 14:35, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Buidhe@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Buidhe/messages&oldid=1207219674 -->

Latest revision as of 19:24, 14 February 2024

Proposed title change[edit]

  • August 2013 Rabaa massacre -> August 2013 Rabaa and Nahda sit-ins dispersal

Recently, I've cleaned up the article of POV, and here is a much more accurate title. Also doesn't feature the word "massacre," which is a one-sided and biased word which fits into the Brotherhood's narrative, as an earlier user noted in the past section. Should we keep the title as is, change it to my proposed version, or take a third option? Thanks. Zakawer (talk) 16:27, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: A broad-spectrum of reliable sources refer to incident as Rabaa Massacre. Further, injecting one's own biases and POV doesn't qualify as clean-up. -- dsprc [talk] 07:03, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A quick search indicates that "massacre" is the term commonly used by international press (Washington Post, The Guardian, Al Jazeera). Even searching for "sit-in dispersal" brings up articles whose headlines call it "massacre", while the former term seems to be used almost exclusively by Egyptian press. This brings the change in conflict with NPOV per WP:UNDUE. Eperoton (talk) 02:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as I am the person who made this proposal. Zakawer (talk) 14:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, this is the title that's overwhelmingly used by reliable news outlets and scholars. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:23, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Moving these MB, armed people was not a massacre. They weren't innocent civilians. They were asked to leave for a long time. Like in the Waco siege people died when Janet Reno asked to make a move and get them out. But the main media WP, Al Jazeera and Guardian are biased against Egypt and for MB -that's why they call it a massacre. Egypt is still fighting the MB in Sinai with police being killed almost every day. I don't know what the correct title should be but I don't think it should be called a massacre. Maybe it should be named the Rabaa siege. Hisham Barakat, the general prosecutor, who ordered the people to be moved from Rabaa was assassinated a year later. Another example where it was called a seige is here Siege of La Rochelle . Also note this (copied from the Al Jazeera WP article) "The network is sometimes perceived to have mainly Islamist perspectives, promoting the Muslim Brotherhood, and having a pro-Sunni and an anti-Shia bias in its reporting of regional issues."[1][2][3] So we shouldn't be calling it a reliable source on this specific topic related to the Muslim Brotherhood.The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 02:38, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose the move request on several grounds. First, the phrase "rabaa massacre" returns 18,600 hits on Google, while "rabaa dispersal" or "rabaa sit-in dispersal" return only 2,600 hits. Therefore per WP:COMMONNAME "massacre" is the globally recognized title of this event. Second, "massacre" is the term used by reliable sources from the right, center, left, mainstream, and financial press from all over the world, and by human rights organizations [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. Lastly, a "massacre" is what actually occurred, and we shouldn't be engaged in WP:EUPHEMISM here. -Darouet (talk) 04:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 August 2023[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 03:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


August 2013 Rabaa massacreRabaa massacre – Per WP:CONCISE. There is no other Rabaa massacre to disambiguate. Festucalextalk 21:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing comment: This article title has a complex history see here and the talk page archives. Hopefully this will lead to some stability. Andrewa (talk) 03:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Crimes against humanity category removal[edit]

Crimes against humanity is a specific legal concept. In order to be included in the category, the event (s) must have been prosecuted as a crime against humanity, or at a bare minimum be described as such by most reliable sources. Most of the articles that were formerly in this category did not mention crimes against humanity at all, and the inclusion of the category was purely original research. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply