Talk:2024 Barsalogho attack
(Redirected from Talk:2024 Barsalogho battle)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Wtmnagain in topic 'Massacre'
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2024 Barsalogho attack article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | A news item involving 2024 Barsalogho attack was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 30 August 2024. |  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
'Massacre'
editLooking through the limited coverage on this topic, there is no mention of the term massacre in RS. I understand why massacre would have been used in the article title given the number of deaths and the blunt killing of civilians but this is an ongoing war with frequently very high casualties. Massacre seems like a one-time isolated event. Schwinnspeed (talk) 12:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. This was a battle over a trench line and combatants were killed on both sides. I shall amend the title accordingly. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson: The descriptions I’m seeing in sources refer to this as an attack, not a battle, so that doesn’t seem like an appropriate title. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- An attack for one side is a defence for the other. The word "battle" is more neutral. Other words might be "engagement", "firefight" or "skirmish". Andrew🐉(talk) 20:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC) Andrew🐉(talk) 20:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- "given the number of deaths" -- the comparison between the number of deaths on either side practically defines a massacre; it is sensible to give weight to this.
- "Massacre seems like a one-time isolated event." --it may be that many people are, happily, accustomed to think of massacres as isolated events, but although time and space distinguishes one massacre from another, the concentration of massacre (as uncountable, for argument) in this event certainly qualifies it as a massacre. Many died quickly by enemy action and without fighting effectively.
- It could be considered antihumanist to try to ameliorate and soften the event in order to appear fair and balanced to one side or another in the conflict. I suggest that we worry less about the Just War and impartiality pub tests and more about precision. When a widely recognised government massacres rebels, feel free to report it as a massacre. The tragedy and the descriptive massacre are none more or less for your reporting it as a massacre, but you may avoid misleading your reader by omission.
- It is true that calling it a battle will give more context. It was both a battle in a war and a massacre, from the information available. I think "attack" is less desirable than either of those, because either of those begin to inform the reader more. Lots of different kinds of events are attacks, but "battle" and "massacre" each provide additional information beyond "attack'. Wtmnagain (talk) 12:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson: The descriptions I’m seeing in sources refer to this as an attack, not a battle, so that doesn’t seem like an appropriate title. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. This was a battle over a trench line and combatants were killed on both sides. I shall amend the title accordingly. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Requested move 29 August 2024
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. Abductive (reasoning) 08:36, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
2024 Barsalogho battle → 2024 Barsalogho attack – Sources describe this as an attack, not a battle. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support, as per nom and main page description. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 04:34, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Seems like more of a massacre than a battle. 2401:7000:CAE8:F800:455E:9CD4:9982:BA5 (talk) 05:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support It should be either named as an attack or an massacre as dead are seemingly civilians rather than soldiers. Golem469 (talk) 07:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
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.
Why use the older figure of 200 rather than 400+?
editIt seems Reuters reported 400-500 dead two days after Al Jazeera said up to 200. Why do we keep reporting the older figure? 2A02:8071:184:4E80:0:0:0:5084 (talk) 13:03, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- 400+ seems good to me. The "at least 400" seems good; maybe "more than 500" is a bit iffy for Wikipedia right now based on the contents of the Reuters article being cited. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)