Revision as of 20:08, 30 May 2012 editPotočnik (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers14,741 edits →Genocide denial← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:15, 30 May 2012 edit undoF382d56d7a18630cf764a5b576ea1b4810467238 (talk | contribs)20,803 edits →Genocide denial: reNext edit → | ||
Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
::I wasn't a participant in any of those previous discussions. The fact that it's been discussed previously does not indefinitely suspend it from being brought up in the future by users who did not get to have a say. The point made in your linked section is that it's "loaded language". Both the suggestions "Opposition to the description "genocide"" and "Genocide denial" state the same thing: the claim that genocide had not occurred. How could one be claimed to be more neutral than the other? When I look into the topic of genocide and genocide denial reliable sources (newspapers, books, etc.) are much more likely to say something along lines of " denies genocide occured" rather than " is opposed to the description/term of genocide being applied". I'd also love to see this claim try to be argued at the ] talkpage... --<font face="xx-medium serif"> ]</font></font> <sub>(])</sub></font> 20:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC) | ::I wasn't a participant in any of those previous discussions. The fact that it's been discussed previously does not indefinitely suspend it from being brought up in the future by users who did not get to have a say. The point made in your linked section is that it's "loaded language". Both the suggestions "Opposition to the description "genocide"" and "Genocide denial" state the same thing: the claim that genocide had not occurred. How could one be claimed to be more neutral than the other? When I look into the topic of genocide and genocide denial reliable sources (newspapers, books, etc.) are much more likely to say something along lines of " denies genocide occured" rather than " is opposed to the description/term of genocide being applied". I'd also love to see this claim try to be argued at the ] talkpage... --<font face="xx-medium serif"> ]</font></font> <sub>(])</sub></font> 20:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
:::I disagree with prod, those two are two different terms, with two slightly different meanings. --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">]<sup>]</sup></span> 21:14, 30 May 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:15, 30 May 2012
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Srebrenica massacre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26Auto-archiving period: 4 months |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Revisions succeeding this version of this article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Since the external publication copied Misplaced Pages rather than the reverse, please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
|
A news item involving Srebrenica massacre was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 25 June 2008. |
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on July 11, 2006, July 11, 2007, July 11, 2008, July 13, 2009, and July 11, 2010. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Purported IDC/RDC discovery of 500 missing from Srebrenica
Mirsad Tokaca has pointed out that his reference at the launch of the IDC/RDC "Bosnian Atlas of the Dead" project in Banja Luka, to 500 persons from Srebrenica who were considered dead and have been discovered alive has been taken out of context. The IDC/RDC considers the misrepresentation of what he said a "classic abuse of the media". Tokaca was not referring to victims of the genocide, he was referring to IDC/RDC's work on human losses 1991-1995 in the municipality of Srebrenica. IDC/RDC have pointed out that this distortion of what he actually said was the responsibility of the Serb news agency SRNA. http://www.idc.org.ba/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=243%3Ademanti-povodom-citiranja-gosp-mirsada-tokae-o-rtvama-genocida-u-srebrenici&catid=1%3Alatest-news&Itemid=50&lang=bs
Victims identification
The Preliminary List of People Missing or Killed in Srebrenica compiled by the Bosnian Federal Commission of Missing Persons contains 8,372 names, of whom some 500 were under 18 ( 33 under 15), and includes several dozen women and girls. As of June 2011, 6594 victims have been identified through DNA analysis and more than 5100 victims have been buried at the Memorial Centre of Potocari.
Srebrenica victims are subsequently buried in Srebrenica - Potocari Memorial and Cemetery.
Memorial Center of Potocari ( July 2011): 5138 victims already buried, of them 306 boys under 18 and 8 women.
The summary of victims of Srebrenic massacre buried at memorial place in Potocari according to their birthdate:
1984: 1 note 1 1982: 1 note 2 1981: 12 1980: 35 1979: 76 1978: 118 1977: 176
1976 - 1955: 2513 1954 - 1935: 1769 1934 - 1925: 379 1924 - 1915: 54 1914 - 1899: 4
Total : 5138
note 1: Together with his 15 yo. brother killed with grenate explosion during shelling of Srebrenica
note 2: Died in woods after 19.7.1995
77.240.177.27 (talk) 07:54, 10 August 2011 (UTC) Kutil
- The page reads The majority of those killed were adult men and teenage boys but the victims included boys aged under 15, men over the age of 65, women and reportedly even several babies. Surely if the above figures are correct (The Preliminary List of People Missing or Killed in Srebrenica compiled by the Bosnian Federal Commission of Missing Persons contains 8,372 names, of whom some 500 were under 18 ( 33 under 15), and includes several dozen women and girls), I would suggest it's more accurate to add the word 'vast', 'overwhelming', 'great' or something similar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.220.41 (talk) 01:23, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
"See also" section
If the article states: "According to Human Rights Watch, the ultra-nationalist Serbian Radical Party "launched an aggressive campaign to prove that Muslims had committed crimes against thousands of Serbs in the area" which "was intended to diminish the significance of the July 1995 crime." A press briefing by the ICTY Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) dated 6 July 2005 noted that the number of Serb deaths in the region alleged by the Serbian authorities had increased from 1,400 to 3,500, a figure the OTP stated " not reflect the reality."
Then why is this:
- Serbian innocent victims in the Srebrenica area (from 1992-1995), over 3500 victims (in Serbian)-names and surnames:
- Serbian victim in Bosnia and herzegovina
- Srebrenica Historical Project, (about 3500 serbs killed, 1992-1995, in Srebrenica area)-
- Others about Srebrenica, about Serbian victims -
- Books about Srebrenica truth-
- List of Serbs murdered around Srebrenica (1992-95), 3287 Serbian victims-
...in the "see also" section? Because in this concept it seems like it is showing something that is actually confirmed and legaly confirmed (especially since it is using words like "murder, innocent" etc, which is something that court needs to confirm), while the article clearely states otherwise.--92.36.255.27 (talk) 09:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- According to the Research and Documentation Center: The allegations that Serb casualties in Bratunac, between April 1992 and December 1995 amount to over three thousand is an evident falsification of facts. The RDC's research of the actual number of Serb victims in Bratunac has been the most extensive carried out in Bosnia and Herzegovina and proves that the overall number of victims is three to nine times smaller than indicated by Serbia and Montenegro . Perhaps the clearest illustration of gross exaggeration is that of Kravica, a Serb village near Bratunac attacked by the Bosnian Army on the morning of Orthodox Christmas, January 7, 1993 . The allegations that the attack resulted in hundreds of civilian victims have been shown to be false. Insight into the original documentation of the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) clearly shows that in fact military victims highly outnumber the civilian ones. The document entitled “Warpath of the Bratunac brigade”, puts the military victims at 35 killed and 36 wounded; the number of civilian victims of the attack is eleven. In addition to information received from relatives and family members of the victims and inspection of cemeteries, RDC has collected all existing primary sources, official documents and documentation of RS Ministry of Defense and Bratunac brigade of VRS, as well as research by the Serb authors. The victims have been categorized on the basis of two time-related criteria: the first was the municipality of residence at the time of the beginning of war; the second was the municipality of premature and violent death. After all the sources have been processed, cross-referenced and reviewed, the results showed that 119 civilians and 424 soldiers classified in the first group died in Batunac during the war. Under the second category the number of civilians is somewhat higher (119) whereas the number of soldiers is 448. The result demonstrates that 26 members of other VRS units other than Bratunac brigade of VRS fought and died in combat in the municipality of Bratunac .RDC inspection of the military cemetery in Bratunac showed that of 383 victims buried it is impossible to ascertain the exact cause of death for 63 victims, even though they may have died during the war. In addition, 139 victims who have lived elsewhere at the time of the outbreak of war and died in fighting either in their places of residence or elsewhere in Bosnia and Herzegovina, are now buried in Bratunac military cemetery. 48 victims buried in Bratunac fought and died in Hadžići; 36 fought and died in Srebrenica; 34 and died in Vogošća; 3 in Konjic and 3 more in Ilijaš; 2 fought and died in Sarajevo, two more in Ilidža; one in Trnovo, Pale and Tuzla each.Of the remaining victims from outside Bratunac one lived in Kiseljak, but died in Hadžići; one lived in Srebrenica and died in Jajce; three lived in Travnik and died in Hadžići, three lived in Ilidža and died in Hadžići, nine lived in Sarajevo and died in Hadžići, one lived in Hadžići and died in Vogošća, one lived in Zenica and died in Vogošća, one lived in Zenica and died in Srebrenica. Furthermore, one victim lived and died in Tuzla , one lived in Bosanski Brod and died in Olovo, one lived in Srebrenica and died in Bihać. Lastly, two individuals who lived in Kakanj and died in Hadžići are buried in the military cemetery in Bratunac, one who lived in Hadžići and died in Ilidža, two who lived in Vitez and died in Hadžići; four residents of Konjic who died in Hadžići, two residents of Pale who died in Hadžići, seven residents of Zenica who died in Hadžići, one resident of Vareš and one resident of Kakanj, who both died in Ilijaš. The number of victims from Central Bosnia buried in Bratunac is consistent with the population movements after the war, especially the Serb population from the suburbs of Sarajevo . Under the Dayton Peace Accords, the suburbs of Sarajevo held by the VRS were to be re-integrated into the city of Sarajevo . The then leadership of the RS called on the local Serb population to leave Sarajevo and even take the graves of their loved ones with them. In fact, such a large majority followed the instructions that parts of the city of Sarajevo remained deserted for months. The remnants of their loved ones have been buried in Bratunac after the war, but their deaths are presented as the result of actions taken by the Bosnian Army units from Srebrenica. As importantly, a number of foreign nationals (mainly from Serbia and Montenegro and Croatia) are included in the overall figure of Serb victims in Bratunac. At least 15 such individuals lost their lives in Bratunac as a result of fighting; it may be of some significance that all of them were members of a paramilitary group that arrived to Bratunac in April 1992, upon invitation of Bratunac Serb Democratic Party and in coordination with the State Security Service of Republic of Serbia (see testimony of Miroslav Deronjić, President of Municipal Board of SDS Bratunac, at International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia). Some of those individuals are Vesna Krdžalić, Dragica Mastikosa, Aleksandar Grahovac and Sreto Suzić who all died in combat on May 29, 1992 . Subsequently, they were all classified as “victims of Muslim terror” by the RS authorities. However, individuals from Serbia continued arriving to Bratunac throughout the year 1992, if the death records of the Bratunac brigade are to be trusted: one such individual died in fighting in August (Žarko Komnenski) and one more in November (Đuro Vujaklija). Furthermore, death records show that “volunteers” arrived from Serbia to Bratunac even in 1993, such as Dragan Milićev, who died in combat in January 1993 and Dragoslav Stanković who died in February 1993.
Headline
I hope you will change the headline, the headline must be the Srebrenica genocide but not Srebrenica massacre! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SA-1987 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
File:Srebrenica exhumed.jpg Nominated for Deletion
An image used in this article, File:Srebrenica exhumed.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests May 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Srebrenica exhumed.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC) |
Genocide denial
Why the wordy title "Opposition to the description "genocide""? If you are stating that the events do not fit the "description of genocide" then you are denying that genocide took place. -- ◅PRODUCER (TALK) 19:04, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- This has been discussed repeatedly. (Talk:Srebrenica massacre/Archive 18#Section heading - Opposition to the term "genocide") --Ckatzspy 19:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- I wasn't a participant in any of those previous discussions. The fact that it's been discussed previously does not indefinitely suspend it from being brought up in the future by users who did not get to have a say. The point made in your linked section is that it's "loaded language". Both the suggestions "Opposition to the description "genocide"" and "Genocide denial" state the same thing: the claim that genocide had not occurred. How could one be claimed to be more neutral than the other? When I look into the topic of genocide and genocide denial reliable sources (newspapers, books, etc.) are much more likely to say something along lines of " denies genocide occured" rather than " is opposed to the description/term of genocide being applied". I'd also love to see this claim try to be argued at the Armenian Genocide denial talkpage... -- ◅PRODUCER (TALK) 20:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- I disagree with prod, those two are two different terms, with two slightly different meanings. --WhiteWriter 21:14, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- I wasn't a participant in any of those previous discussions. The fact that it's been discussed previously does not indefinitely suspend it from being brought up in the future by users who did not get to have a say. The point made in your linked section is that it's "loaded language". Both the suggestions "Opposition to the description "genocide"" and "Genocide denial" state the same thing: the claim that genocide had not occurred. How could one be claimed to be more neutral than the other? When I look into the topic of genocide and genocide denial reliable sources (newspapers, books, etc.) are much more likely to say something along lines of " denies genocide occured" rather than " is opposed to the description/term of genocide being applied". I'd also love to see this claim try to be argued at the Armenian Genocide denial talkpage... -- ◅PRODUCER (TALK) 20:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- Misplaced Pages In the news articles
- Selected anniversaries (July 2006)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2007)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2008)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2009)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2010)
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class Bosnia and Herzegovina articles
- High-importance Bosnia and Herzegovina articles
- All WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina pages
- C-Class Death articles
- Mid-importance Death articles
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class Balkan military history articles
- Balkan military history task force articles
- Start-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- B-Class European history articles
- Mid-importance European history articles
- All WikiProject European history pages
- B-Class Discrimination articles
- Low-importance Discrimination articles
- WikiProject Discrimination articles