Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amhara genocide

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 keep. WP:SPAs aside, consensus is clear. ✗plicit 06:31, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amhara genocide

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is advocacy and massive POV pushing. Article writers have been cherry-picking sources (mostly unreliable) to create the narrative theirs a genocide. Even reliable ones (ex Amnesty) don’t state that. I’m surprised this article has stayed up for this long Ue3lman (talk) 05:08, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Ethiopia. Ue3lman (talk) 05:08, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep don't agree with above statements. 2+ million vanished without a trace, well documented systemic massacres, state policies to erode a ethnic group. Dehumanizing hate speech by government officials against the Amhara in regions where they are a minority. Sources like Lemkin Institute seems reliable. Though Petra/or editors could add more academic sources such as [[1]] & [[2]], this claim of advocacy and POV pushing is unjustified, and appears as a lazy statement of someone who doesn't want to read through all the sources. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 05:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article already cited [2] and will add [1] as well. Thank you. Petra0922 (talk) 06:34, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — Deletion nominator lacks experience on Human Rights cases. No solid justification

Ue3lman (talk). I came to learn about your interest in articles related to the Horn of Africa in which, to some of them already "discretionary sanctions" have been imposed. This applied to the Amhara genocide article as well. The crimes of Genocide cannot be declared or denied by individuals. Please state your justifications for this bold statement you have made. Amnesty International or Human rights watch or other non-profit global organizations provide reports on various rights violations in most cases with some questions of bias for what experts call “marginalized” cases. But this differs from case to case. It is important to note these guidelines when discussing Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes, and Crimes of aggression are based on international human rights laws: 1) The United Nations Genocide Convention of Article 4 and others that clearly state the elements of Genocide, and 2) Articles 6, 7, 8 of the ICC (the ROME Statute or International Criminal Court). These are the regulated bodies that determine Genocide and pass decisions for accountability measures whenever applied. The Amhara genocide article provides thorough references after almost major statements. Please note that the crimes listed in this article (element of Genocide) are backed by various sources (local reports, international reports including the UN and others, Embassy reports, interviews, field data from grass-root organizations, and the like..). When it comes to human rights cases or articles, it is natural for various parties or generally people of various interpretations of crimes to get involved, i.e. victims, perpetrators, or parties of opposing sides. I suggest independent editors investigate the impartiality of the editor who nominated this article for deletion. From my assessment, the editor doesn’t seem to demonstrate a solid track record of editing or producing content on the subject (human rights articles). My review of the editor's contributions certainly shows general interest in the HORN with specific engagement with certain ethnic groups. I would like to remind editors that the case in Ethiopia is based on internal ethnic conflicts. Therefore, it is important for others to take impartiality into consideration. Petra0922 (talk) 06:14, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I haven't looked too much into this case to formulate a !vote, but I felt as though I needed to clear a few things. First, Petra0922, an editor does not need experience in a field to nominate an article for deletion. Additionally, while Ue3lman's argument is not very good (as a longer explanation would have been much preferred for such a complex case), it is still a valid deletion rationale. The primary issue with the article that I can see is that there are too many sources. While this might seem like an oxymoron, see WP:CITEOVERKILL . Two-thirds of the page-length is dedicated to just the reflist (that isn't an exaggeration). Curbon7 (talk) 07:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Curbon7 (talk), thank you for the comment. You are right about the large set of references. I was conscious about it— I guess I was thinking since the article is about crime characteristics: type, place, and perpetrators, I was trying to provide as many supporting sources as possible. Another situation that my research on the Amhara cause thought me is that due to various reasons there are only limited stand-alone or one-stop references. Instead, the crimes under the elements of Genocide are mentioned in various sources. The effort for this article has been to try to research, organize, and structure it so it can be used as an input for other articles or external publications if others wish to cite it. With this intention, the reference list ended up taking large space. I can reduce the sources if the citations are too many. I would appreciate feedback on this or I can wait until you make the decision about the vote. Just let me know. Thank you. Petra0922 (talk) 08:50, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article is amply referenced to both explain the topic and explain the use of the term "genocide". After being draftified, it was accepted at AfC, reasessed as B class, and just today someone posted on the creator's talk page that its B-class assessment had been reaffirmed. The topic is sensitive and internationally contentious, but multiple experienced Wikipedians have judged the article more than acceptable in standard. The nominator's concerns with sourcing for the term "genocide" would have been better discussed on the talk page, where I have already opened a section to discuss possibly renaming the article in response to a re-draftification that gave no other reason than the name. The large number of sources largely invalidates the nominator's argument of cherrypicking and of course is far from disqualifying for an article in itself; on the contrary, it may be necessary in view of inevitable disagreements as to which sources are more trustworthy on the topic. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:59, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I do not see POV as being a reasons for deletion, nor do I see the article as being a form of advocacy. Even if these are faults with the article, they are not fatal, and any issues can be addressed by writing about the subject in a neutral point of view, which means reflecting any bias in the sources, too, Not dismissing the article out of hand. With 295 sources, even considering this article for deletion, now, is being far too zealous as it meets notability guidelines to exist as an article. Far better sourced, compared to the Moriori genocide article, for example. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:17, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is no policy reason for this to be nominated for deletion. I see nothing here that can't be fixed in the course of honest, neutral editing. The over-referencing is a bit much though, but again, easily fixed through editing. Perhaps nominator can add some ""un-cherry-picked" references and views to improve said article if he feels the need (—Just a thought). I would call for an early close on this, as there is no valid policy violation stated for the nomination, only an opinion. GenQuest ^"scribble" 17:21, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amhara Genocide is happening in real time in Oromia region of Ethiopia as we speak. It is an active and ongoing genocide that is state sanctioned. Awareness is vital in stopping genocide. This page serves that purpose. Archiving a past genocide on Wikipedia after human catastrophic occurs on our watch serves no purpose. Please refer to all humanitarian organizations and international mainstream media outlets that reported about the numerous massacres against Amharas committed especially in the past four years. The international law (UN) May be going in slow motion to declare this as a genocide, but the evidence is already out there. The latest significant massacre being close to 3000 ethnic Amharas massacred in Tole, Wellega, Oromia region in complicity with the local and regional government. The federal government is also in cahoots with the regional authorities and even denies the massacres happen. Also very recently, the town of Ataye, North Shewa was attacked, many homes burned, several dozens killed and the population of that town migrated out. All in all, all the 9 stages of genocide have been checked on this active and ongoing Amhara Genocide in Ethiopia. Please DO NOT DELETE this Wikipedia page. Menotmebaloni (talk) 21:44, 17 July 2022 (UTC)— Menotmebaloni (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Bbb23 (talk) 22:59, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Bbb23. Thank you for adding a protection to this discussion. I was concerned about the craziness earlier. Would it be possible to ask Menotmebaloni to specify his/her !vote. From the comment added, it looks like they wanted to !vote Keep (?). Petra0922 (talk) 23:14, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Petra0922: I don't think that's necessary; it's pretty obvious that it's a !Keep vote. Now how much weight the closing admin will give the vote is another story.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:34, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It makes sense, thank you. There is no rush for closing but I think I've seen that at least one week of discussion is recommended before consensus. In what circumstance the discussion takes longer than that? Petra0922 (talk) 23:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This should not be deleted. As others have mentioned, the page can be fixed to address any issues or mistakes, but the page provides sources to back up the claims made in the article, which support the evidence of an ongoing genocide against ethnic Amharas in Ethiopia. These claims aren't fictious or biased, but recorded and backed by evidence via sources. Over time, I am sure this page will continue to be updated with even more sources and will be a reference to the general public who will want to learn more about the ongoing genocide that Amhara people have faced by multiple perpetrators. Ab-croissant (talk) 22:43, 17 July 2022 (UTC)— Ab-croissant (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. --Bbb23 (talk) 22:59, 17 July 2022 (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.