Misplaced Pages

Talk:Holodomor: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:27, 4 March 2024 editDreamy Jazz Bot (talk | contribs)Bots106,824 editsm Replacing Template:Ds/talk notice with Template:Contentious topics/talk notice. BRFA.← Previous edit Revision as of 02:46, 22 March 2024 edit undo2a02:aa1:1648:a346:55d7:de77:732b:565a (talk) "While scholars are in consensus that the cause of the famine was man-made": ReplyTags: Reverted ReplyNext edit →
Line 47: Line 47:
::::::In regards to Andriewsky, he literally states "Historians of Ukraine" as the beginning of the sentence. The article is about how historians of Ukraine treat the issue of the Holodomor. If you want to write "historians of Ukraine" in the lead, I'm fine for it. But nothing states academic consensus as stated in the lead. We're going to ignoring ]?] (]) 12:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC) ::::::In regards to Andriewsky, he literally states "Historians of Ukraine" as the beginning of the sentence. The article is about how historians of Ukraine treat the issue of the Holodomor. If you want to write "historians of Ukraine" in the lead, I'm fine for it. But nothing states academic consensus as stated in the lead. We're going to ignoring ]?] (]) 12:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
:::::::571 of the published page 5 of the pre-pub the first paragraph of the 'TERROR BY HUNGER' section. How on earth is historians of Ukraine being in agreement about an event in Ukraine's history not academic consensus? Especially given that the academic debate is not about this but the intentionallity of the famine and everyone researching this sees it as a result of government policy to some extent—] 15:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC) :::::::571 of the published page 5 of the pre-pub the first paragraph of the 'TERROR BY HUNGER' section. How on earth is historians of Ukraine being in agreement about an event in Ukraine's history not academic consensus? Especially given that the academic debate is not about this but the intentionallity of the famine and everyone researching this sees it as a result of government policy to some extent—] 15:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
::::::::So if we very selectively pick the country the scholarly consensus originates in we can make the "scholarly consensus" fit our own views and write the article accordingly? The scholarly consensus in Russia and China is that it wasn't man-made, how about we start of the article with a link to their consensus? In Romania the scholarly consensus is that Vladimir the Impaler was just defending his country and wasn't particularly evil, despite impaling a whole lot of people, how about his article begins with that consensus?
::::::::Perhaps it's better to form a consensus of all historians who've made major research into the issue instead of this political selectiveness. ] (]) 02:46, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
::::::Tauger disagrees with other scholars about the size of the harvest. It seems that when he questions the term "man made" he is disagreeing with the position that the famine was intentional. ] (]) 12:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC) ::::::Tauger disagrees with other scholars about the size of the harvest. It seems that when he questions the term "man made" he is disagreeing with the position that the famine was intentional. ] (]) 12:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Well, but if so that would only show that he misunderstands the meaning of "man-made". An unintentionally man-made famine would still be man-made. ] (]) 13:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC) :::::::Well, but if so that would only show that he misunderstands the meaning of "man-made". An unintentionally man-made famine would still be man-made. ] (]) 13:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:46, 22 March 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Holodomor 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
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

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.
Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on 10 dates. November 24, 2007, November 22, 2008, November 28, 2009, November 27, 2010, November 22, 2014, November 28, 2015, November 26, 2016, November 25, 2017, November 24, 2018, and November 23, 2019
This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconUkraine Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSoviet Union: Russia / History High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Russia (assessed as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
WikiProject iconDeath High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconHuman rights High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPhilosophy: Ethics High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Ethics
WikiProject iconCrime and Criminal Biography High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconEthnic groups High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

WikiProject iconDiscrimination High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Section sizes
Section size for Holodomor (46 sections)
Section name Byte
count
Section
total
(Top) 6,577 6,577
Etymology 4,152 4,152
History 14 83,760
Scope and duration 4,985 4,985
Causes 3,967 24,617
Low harvest 1,254 1,254
Collectivization, procurements, and the export of grain 6,378 6,378
Discrimination and persecution of Ukrainians 11,617 11,617
Peasant resistance 1,401 1,401
Regional variation 1,862 1,862
Repressive policies 683 23,772
Preceding the famine 7,675 7,675
During the famine 9,576 9,576
Near the end of and after the famine 5,838 5,838
Torgsin system 1,865 1,865
Cannibalism 2,929 2,929
Ukrainians in other republics 642 6,533
Kuban and the North Caucasus of Russia 5,312 5,312
Kazakhstan 579 579
Aftermath and immediate reception 1,933 1,933
Death toll 15,250 15,250
Genocide question 8,069 8,069
Soviet and Western denial and downplay 2,406 2,406
In modern politics 6,780 29,191
Government recognition of Holodomor 22,411 22,411
Remembrance 154 21,909
Ukraine 4,549 4,549
Germany 1,484 1,484
Canada 5,136 5,136
Poland 1,453 1,453
United States 6,329 6,329
On film 1,281 1,281
Vatican City 532 532
Holodomor memorials 991 991
In culture and the arts 29 2,148
Cinema 1,165 1,165
Literature 845 845
Theatre 109 109
See also 711 711
Notes 9,904 9,904
References 35 35
Bibliography 105,091 105,091
Further reading 150 23,562
Declarations and legal acts 406 406
Books and articles 23,006 23,006
External links 6,770 6,770
Total 304,285 304,285

Inclusion of Kazakh Famine under See also

I think a link to the Kazakh famines during the same time period would be helpful in the See also section. 2800:150:15B:1829:F07D:DBBD:5D8E:F08B (talk) 18:38, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

It was already mentioned once in the article, but only in the context of Ukrainians falling victim to it, and it's easy to overlook. So that request sounds reasonable and I've added the link. Gawaon (talk) 14:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

"While scholars are in consensus that the cause of the famine was man-made"

Per WP:RS/AC, "a statement that all or most scientists or scholars hold a certain view requires reliable sourcing that directly says that all or most scientists or scholars hold that view". I'm not seeing this sourced anywhere. Can somehow source this or can it be changed? Thanks.Stix1776 (talk) 07:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

It's explained in the paragraph following the sentence you quote, and in more detail in Causes of the Holodomor. Some historians believe that it was "deliberately engineered", while others think it was an (unintended) "consequence of rapid Soviet industrialisation", and a third position is that both intentional and unintended factors came together. However, no serious historian seems to suggest that the famine was entirely or primary due to natural reasons (such as a severe drought) – hence the "consensus". Gawaon (talk) 08:36, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
So no source says it's "consensus", per WP:RS/AC? It seems that Wheatcroft and Tauger disagree that it's man-made, which explicitly speaks against "academic consensus".Stix1776 (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Hold up consensus isn't unanimity. Tauger is the only one who thinks it was natrual. Wheatcroft (and davis) are the ones who dispute his methodology. Not to mention they say explicitly that policy was the cause of the famine blindlynx 17:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
I've added a citation from Andriewsky 2015 historiography. The relevant section is:
Historians of Ukraine are no longer debating whether the Famine was the result of natural causes (and even then not exclusively by them). The academic debate appears to come down to the issue of intentions, to whether the special measures undertaken in Ukraine in the winter of 1932-­‐33 that intensified starvation were aimed at Ukrainians as such. —blindlynx 17:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Plus the article states: "Wheatcroft notes that the Soviet extension of sown area may have exacerbated the problem, which Tauger also acknowledges." – So even Tauger seems to agree that the famine was partially man-made. Gawaon (talk) 18:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
I've added another source. That said tauger is the only scholar who argues that its causes were natural and it is wp:undue to privilege one scholar out of all of the people working on this—blindlynx 21:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
@Blindlynx, would you mind putting a page number and quote with that source, because I'm unable to find what you're saying. The article I'm reading starts with "1".
In regards to Andriewsky, he literally states "Historians of Ukraine" as the beginning of the sentence. The article is about how historians of Ukraine treat the issue of the Holodomor. If you want to write "historians of Ukraine" in the lead, I'm fine for it. But nothing states academic consensus as stated in the lead. We're going to ignoring WP:RS/AC?Stix1776 (talk) 12:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
571 of the published page 5 of the pre-pub the first paragraph of the 'TERROR BY HUNGER' section. How on earth is historians of Ukraine being in agreement about an event in Ukraine's history not academic consensus? Especially given that the academic debate is not about this but the intentionallity of the famine and everyone researching this sees it as a result of government policy to some extent—blindlynx 15:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
So if we very selectively pick the country the scholarly consensus originates in we can make the "scholarly consensus" fit our own views and write the article accordingly? The scholarly consensus in Russia and China is that it wasn't man-made, how about we start of the article with a link to their consensus? In Romania the scholarly consensus is that Vladimir the Impaler was just defending his country and wasn't particularly evil, despite impaling a whole lot of people, how about his article begins with that consensus?
Perhaps it's better to form a consensus of all historians who've made major research into the issue instead of this political selectiveness. 2A02:AA1:1648:A346:55D7:DE77:732B:565A (talk) 02:46, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Tauger disagrees with other scholars about the size of the harvest. It seems that when he questions the term "man made" he is disagreeing with the position that the famine was intentional. TFD (talk) 12:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Well, but if so that would only show that he misunderstands the meaning of "man-made". An unintentionally man-made famine would still be man-made. Gawaon (talk) 13:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
He's mostly arguing that the human causes of the Holod don't set it apart from other most famines as most have similar levels of human causes—blindlynx 16:04, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Whether he understands the term correctly or not, he agrees that it was man made within the definition provided in this article. So that seems to mean there is a consensus, just disagreement over intention and whether ethnic Ukrainians were specifically targeted. TFD (talk) 16:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Exactly—blindlynx 17:00, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
@Blindlynx, I added the quote to the source. Is this the correct quote? If not, can you please update it.Stix1776 (talk) 04:44, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you!—blindlynx 15:08, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Guys, I think the causes on the side of the article are not causes

Yeah, that's about it. They're not causes, but international reactions. AccomplishedTale7 (talk) 12:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean. The causes listed in the infobox are:
  • Industrialization policy during the First Five Year Plan
  • Whether it was intentional is debated by scholars
What point are you disputing? — The Hand That Feeds You: 21:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, forgot to say i changed that after seeing this —blindlynx 21:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Ah, well, that'll do it! — The Hand That Feeds You: 21:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Categories: