Talk:Krusha massacres

2009

Two articles differed muchand i removed article in polish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SLAK (talk • contribs) 12:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. Note the suggestion of User:Joy that somebody try to find a secondary source that discusses this town in depth. We could use whatever version of the name is preferred by that source. If anyone can find such a source, it might be worth reopening the discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 04:31, 3 March 2014 (UTC) EdJohnston (talk) 04:31, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

---

Massacre at Krusha e Madhe → Massacre at Velika Kruša – As this article relates to a period prior to Kosovo's declaration of independence, I think many editors will agree that it is important for the sake of historical accuracy to use place names as they were prior to 2008. Massacre at Velika Kruša has 45,800 results on Google while Massacre at Krusha e Madhe 41,500 results I also must point out that reports by human rights groups were compiled by interviewing Albanian eyewitnesses and by assessing official reports from the time, which is probably why the place is referred to as both Velika Kruša and Krusha e Madhe in various contemporary reports. 23 editor (talk) 20:14, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose usage is about even per nom's results; and the place is Albanian, so usage at the time also contained some Albanian usage, as it is now Kosovar, it should use Albanian. -- 70.24.244.161 (talk) 06:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
• Comment. The nominator's search is doubly flawed, by ignoring the guidance at WP:COMMONNAME : a) it does not exclude wikipedia results, and b) it is based on a general web search, rather than a search of reliable sources. So I did a Google Books search, excluding "books, llc" which is a republisher of wikipedia articles:

1. "Massacre at Velika Kruša" -"books, llc" 2 hits
2. "Massacre at Krusha e Madhe" -"books, llc" 5 hits

That's a very different picture to the one presented by the nominator.

The nominator also claims that the article title should use a particular form, based on the village's official name at the time. That ignores WP:COMMONNAME; what matters here is "the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources". The subject here is the event, not the town. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

The results of these two searches seem to not be a good basis for finding the common name. One result that appears in both searches, "World War II", states on the third page that it's based on Wikipedia articles. The other Velika Kruša one seems to be in Serbian. For Krusha e Madhe results, 'Panorma: The Truth About Happy Hour' doesn't strike me as a relevant result. Same with 'Maximum Adverse Excursion'. The other two are about Nicolae Ceausescu and how Britain armed Iraq. I find these results to be inconclusive. --Local hero ^talk 04:56, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose Per Common Name. IJA (talk) 12:50, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. No basis for the move in policy. I note that the argument is instead I think many editors will agree that it is important for the sake of historical accuracy to use place names as they were prior to 2008. Well, they may, but IMO it's far more important to stick to the article naming conventions where place names subject to ethnic disputes within living memory are concerned, and this is a case in point. Andrewa (talk) 02:57, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

• Support. I did two searches on Google books: "massacre" "Velika Kruša" and "massacre" "Krusha e Madhe" so the wording was a bit more flexible. I found 18 results for the former and 11 for the latter. A few results on both sides are unhelpful, as I stated in the situation above. There isn't too much out there in general for this event, but I do think that Velika Kruša is the better option. --Local hero ^talk 03:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

• Google Books searches give so few results for either version that they're practically unknown, and the search engine thinks many similar are synonymous, strangely enough - I saw both "Krishna" and "Krush" in some false positives. The two English-language sources (HRW, BBC) used by the article are fairly inconclusive as well. We should instead research what's the most in-depth secondary source on the topic, and use what they use. Hopefully there aren't two of them each using their own terminology, bringing us back to square one :) --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

• Support. I suport this simply becose its a fact. The name of the place at that time was Velika Kruša. It was renamed later to Krusha e Madhe witch means thesame. Still wikipedia can not base things on disputations but only on facts. A good example would be the capitol of Montenegro, Podgorica. Looking at some politicans and athletes from that town they are almoust all mentioned as born in Titograd NOT as born in Podgorica as the name of the town is today. The reassons for this are simple. The name of that town WAS Titograd at the time of their birth even if it changed historicly recently. Historians do NOT rename towns as they are called today but as they are called at the moment of a happening with a mentioning that todays name is... Fact states clearly the place of the massacre was called Velika Kruša at the time of the massacre and renamed later. Loads of towns in the region has been renamed later but still they are under the name of historical things as they where called. Kosovo polje is still under the article of Kosovo Polje and not under the name of Fushë Kosovë when we speak about the battle becose that was the name of the place when it happend. The books and google search everyone is doing are bassed upon who writes the things. My vote is only based upon facts. Suport in the name of the fact.Stepojevac (talk) 10:41, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

• Support as nominator. 23 editor (talk) 13:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose; as Andrewa says, there's no policy basis for this move. bobrayner (talk) 21:56, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name

The previous move discussion was erraneous. Bold move to Velika Kruša massacre, as per other related articles, and timeframe.--Zoupan

Adam Jones (2 December 2008). Gender Inclusive: Essays on Violence, Men, and Feminist International Relations. Routledge. pp. 94–. ISBN 978-1-135-97400-8.; BBC, CNN uses contemporary official spelling, Velika Kruša.--Zoupan 02:55, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Being bold shouldn't mean disregarding prior consensus, Zoupan. Just a year ago there was a discussion, which you called "errAneous". --Gjidede (talk) 14:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Move to Krusha massacres

I moved the article to the plural "massacres" because its subject is about two massacres which happened in Krusha e Madhe and Krusha e Vogël. I kept the form Krusha because this is the last one which was agreed via consensus before Zoupan moved the article to Kruša massacre without some form of discussion. Uniacademic (talk) 06:18, 25 June 2021 (UTC)