Talk:Greek genocide - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Demo66top (talk | contribs) at 09:14, 18 September 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 09:14, 18 September 2021 by Demo66top (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Greek genocide article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

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, 14Auto-archiving period: 3 months

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.

Crime and Criminal Biography Mid‑importance

	This 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Death High‑importance

	This 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

[REDACTED]

Discrimination Mid‑importance

[REDACTED]	This 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Ethnic groups Mid‑importance

This 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

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Former countries (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesFormer countries

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Greece High‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Human rights Mid‑importance

	This 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Ottoman / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Ottoman military history task force
	World War I task force

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Philosophy: Ethics Low‑importance

This 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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Turkey High‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics 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.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on May 19, 2011, May 19, 2012, May 19, 2013, May 19, 2014, May 19, 2015, May 19, 2016, May 19, 2018, May 19, 2019, and May 19, 2020.

This article can be in the scope of Greek and Turkish wikipedians cooperation board. Please see the project page for more details, to request intervention on the notification board or peruse other tasks.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Rummel death estimates

Rummel is simply not a reliable source for death estimates. Christian Gerlach refers to his "greatly inflated numbers", Benjamin Valentino states, "Rummel's estimates tend to be considerably higher than those of most other scholars", and Barbara Harff states, "he chooses numbers of death that almost always are skewed in the direction of the highest guesses". Therefore it lacks a "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" required by WP:RS. The book is not peer reviewed, nor has Rummel done much of any work specialized on Ottoman/Turkish history in particular. Therefore, the WP:ONUS for including material sourced to Rummel is not met. (t · c) buidhe 21:43, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

None of the above are disqualifying. Statements sich as "Rummel's estimates tend to be higher" and "skewed in the direction of the highest guesses" show disagreement, but do not disqualify the source. What counts as a death during a mass upheaval is after all a grey area. There are usually disagreements among scholars regarding death tolls from events such as genocide, and this case here is no different. Besides, Barbara Harff also states that Death by Government is a good introduction to the general phenomena of state-sponsored mass murder or democide (Rummel's concept). The numerous case studies are a mixture of carefully wrought description of the horrendous suffering of peoples under mainly authoritarian political systems, with just the right dose of personal horror stories to make the book a memorable study of human deprivation and misery. For this effort, Rummel ought to be applauded.. Rummel's estimates for the Pontic Greek genocide are actually entirely reasonable. Rummel is a professor of genocide studies and his book was published by Transaction Publishers, a reputable publisher. To suggest that this publisher does not meet WP:RS is ludicrous and not based on anything. Khirurg (talk) 00:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I definitely agree and I add that the mere fact that this POV was pushed into the article by rapid-fire edit-warring tells me that we are in WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS territory. Dr. K. 01:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

What's Rummel's expertise on Ottoman/Turkish/Greek studies? None, right? And his statistics don't have a reputation for accuracy, as I point out, just the opposite. Perhaps Davide King or Paul Siebert would like to comment as they have commented elsewhere on the reliability of Rummel's statistics. (t · c) buidhe 04:21, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

According to Barbara Harff, Rummel's estimate procedure was criticized by Dulic (he criticised him in a context of Yugoslavia, but the criticism is general: the estimates have a lower boundarey, zero, but no higher boundary, so even a single high estimates immediately skews the overall values upwards. Since Rummel never performed any data selection, he was using all published data, that inevitably lead to inflated figures for the data sets with high dispersion). Rummel responded, but Dulic was not impressed by his response. The source: . See Harff's chapter and the refs cired therein.

Everybody who is familiar with Rummel's approach knows that Rummel is not an expert in any country's history. He takes ALL available numbers of deaths and performs no selection of them. Then he calculates the lowest and highest probable values, and and the most probable value. He was interested in global trends, so minor or even major inaccuracies for some concrete country didn't bother him at all. Therefore, his figures are not a result of some independent study, but his own summary of already existing data. His estimates may be accurate if the data set is reliable (cambodia is an example). In other cases, such as USSR or Yugoslavia, it is just a garbage.--Paul Siebert (talk) 05:05, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Good to know. Regarding the topic the article, the estimates for the death toll range from 289,000 to 750,000. Rummel's estimate of 684,000 is indeed reasonable and certainly not inflated or wildly unrealistic. Khirurg (talk) 06:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Higher estimate are taken from Jones, right. Alas, that is a tertiary source, who is heavily using Rummel's data.--Paul Siebert (talk) 06:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Not only Jones. Hadzidimitriou puts the death toll at 735,000. And Sjoberg states that the "cautious estimates" for the death toll range from 300,000 to 700,000. The rough consensus estimate for the death toll in the Pontus region alone is estimated at 360,000. An estimate of 684,000 for the entire Anatolia region for the period 1913-1923 is not outrageous. Khirurg (talk) 23:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Inaccurate Rummel figures

Now I will not go into a dispute about whether Rummel is an authoritative source, because I believe that despite the frequent overestimation of numbers, he can be used in an article. However, I cannot remain silent about the fact that his numbers given in the article are grossly falsified. The scientist estimates 84,000 deaths in 1914-1918, not 384,000 and 347,000 for 1914-1923, not 648,000. My words are based on two tables (Table 5.1A, Table 5.1B) in the section "Genocidal purges in Turkey", in which opposite "Greek Genocide" in bold blue are these numbers. It is necessary to correct these numbers. About another source, which is given as a "confirmation" of falsified numbers,then he must be removed, since he misinterprets the source to which he refers, for in the book of Rudolph himself, obviously, precisely the assessment that he cites is given. Demo66top (talk) 06:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

A secondary source is usually preferred, especially when the data is as unclear as is the case with the Rummel charts.Pincrete (talk) 21:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

"especially when the data is as unclear as is the case with the Rummel charts" - no, there are no ambiguities about Rummel's numbers. I cite data from the tables of his book: Table 5.1A (http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1A.GIF): Turkey genocide of Greeks Deported Marmara Greeks deported 1915 5 ? 40 deported 1914 100 deported 1915 6 200 deported 1915 200 1,000 deported 1914 1918 240 300 Deported dead 1914 1918 60 68 75 Greeks killed Smyrna district killed 1915 6 1 killed 1916 1918 5 soldiers killed 1915 10 Sum 1915 4 1918 10 16 Greek Genocide 1915 4 1918 10 76 84 91 As we can see, 84,000 for 1914-1918, not 384,000. Table 5.1B (https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1B.GIF): Genocide of Greeks by Turks (Domestic): Calculated Domestic 1914 1923 289 347 459 Greek dead 1914 1922 286 Pop. Deficit 1912 1922 313 Final Genocide 289 347 459 Table 10.2 (http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DBG.TAB10.2.GIF): Greeks killed 347 By Young Turks 84 By Nationalists 264 As we can see 347,000 for 1914-1923, not 648,000. Now about secondary source: if the secondary source interprets the primary one incorrectly (and I have already demonstrated this), then there is no point in believing it. This is falsification. For example, I could insert any other number into the article, give a link to Rummel and say that he claims this, although he himself gives completely different numbers. Demo66top (talk) 04:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't see where the discrepancy lies, BUT the default position is that the secondary source takes precedence. I didn't say ambiguous, I said unclear and I continue to say that is true, just by virtue of being a chart rather than text, everything is unclear. I'm not remotely an expert on the genocide, even less so on Rummel's figures, but we need stronger proof before deciding that Demo66top can read, but the secondary source (and the proof-readers and publishers and reviewers) can't. You could be right, I don't know but we need stronger proofs or more knowledgeable editors to weigh in. I've known too many instances on WP where a seemingly obvious editor conclusion turns out to be wholly wrong for some simple, unforeseeable reason. Pincrete (talk) 18:20, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, if you don't trust Rummel's tables, let's see what he writes in his book. Statistics of Turkey's Democide (https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM): "Not only did the Turks murder Armenians, but Greeks as well. Estimates of this are far fewer (lines 201 to 203), but we do have assessments of those deported (lines 193 to 197) from which to calculate the possible toll (line 198). The actual percentages from which I make this calculation reflect the relevant historical bits and pieces in the sources. Combining this calculation and the sum of the estimates (line 204) suggest a likely genocide of 84,000 Greeks." - he writes this immediately after the calculation of the killed Armenians by the Young Turks, and since the nationalist democide (1919-1922) is described much later, it is clear that we are talking about the Young Turks (1914-1918), the same period is indicated in the table opposite the number 84,000. Demo66top (talk) 13:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

What do you think about this? Rummel in his book in the section "Genocidal purges in Turkey" wrote about 84,000, not 384,000 in 1914-1918 and 347,000 in 1914-1922, not 648,000, plus this can be seen from his three tables describing this section. I think that all this (text+tables) is full enough to appropriately change the numbers in the article and remove from the article a source that says something that Rummel did not claim. Demo66top (talk) 15:04, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

As I previously said, I know almost nothing about Rummel, but I'm extremely reluctant to say your reading is more accurate than the secondary sources', and in this instance the figues are MASSIVELY different. I've known too many instances on WP where that kind of way of working was ultimately wrong. I'm still unclear because the text you are giving is itself unclear. I was hoping that someone with actual knowledge of the sources would chime in here - or it could be taken to a different noticeboard in the hope that someone could settle this matter. Pincrete (talk) 18:04, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, then let's turn to the help of some experienced participant who knows the topic and understands Rummel's works, so that he can analyze what I have written and summarize. Demo66top (talk) 18:53, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

I would also like to point out that the number 384,000 in 1914-1918 is virtually impossible, since even Eleftherios Venizelos himself at the Paris conference after the First World War said that in total 300,000 Greeks were killed, which is obviously very overstated, and 384,000 even more. Demo66top (talk) 18:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Demo66top apologies for delay. I was hoping that someone who knew the sources better than I would join the discussion. They haven't, so, on balance, I think you must be right and even if not, someone can 'fix' at a later date. Pincrete (talk) 13:52, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

It's okay, it's not your fault. Thanks for the permission to correct the numbers according to the source. If someone wants to enter the discussion, he can always write here. Demo66top (talk) 09:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

to be more specific in the perpetrators part add “(kemalists)” in brackets right after the nationalist movement part as they were the ones behind the Greek genocide 174.88.28.164 (talk) 17:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

The term "genocide"

The article is full of biased information and allegations, a neutral article should not blame any nation without concrete reference, if the case isn't clearly proven and widely accepted as "genocide" by people such as tragedies of Holocaust, Armenian Genocide or Cambodian Genocide. For example reasons here are completely nonsense, unsupported and biased, since none of them gives concrete reasons, references or proofs but only excuses for the case not to be proven. Evuntia (talk) 13:01, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

It's ironical that you should refer to the Armenian Genocide, since approx the same official bodies recognise the Gk and Armenian killings and the circumstances, perpetrators, background and time period of the two (and of other Christian minorities), are much the same. The mass of the article is well supported by reliable historical sources, which unequivocally endorse that genocidal mass killing took place, perpetrated by nationalist elements of the Turkish state. So I don't see why you question the word 'genocide', BUT I partly agree that the section you highlight is a bit flaccid and imparts little concrete info.Pincrete (talk) 14:15, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

"Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting." You might want to look at older discussions on the word genocide's controversy. I agree that the section you mentioned needs work, however. -Kravk (talk) 20:00, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for focusing on the significant point since I couldn't express myself properly. I wasn't trying to commit any denial as it might be understood, but the article should offer significant reasons and sources instead of just giving up like the reasons section I gave above. I wish I had a reliable source to improve it, however it would be really great if someone would detail reasons and give reliable references. Evuntia (talk) 09:30, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you—I'll try to find some more reliable sources for the "reasons" section. -Kravk (talk) 15:09, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

"Forced conversion"

The opening includes the sentence "... included massacres, forced conversion to Islam, The source is little more than a propaganda pamphlet. More than that, it does not accuse the Turks of forcing conversion, except, possibly, in the most general terms.Mcdruid (talk) 04:11, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Mcdruid, apart from the poor source, the issue of conversion is not developed in the body (which the lead should be a summary of) - therefore I have removed it until/unless better sourced, more developed text is in the body itself. Pincrete (talk) 09:55, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Not genocide, "Allegation"

Anyone remember the principle of impartiality Epitken (talk) 16:39, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

If the majority of WP:RS call it 'genocide', so do we. Pincrete (talk) 21:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

"Pontic genocide"

The so-called "Pontic genocide" is actually not recognized by any major international organization. It is built largely on lies and falsification, and is recognized by only a small minority of scholars. Most researchers do not mention this term at all in their works. Therefore, it should be removed from the preamble. Now about a much more important thing: the death toll. The article gives a number of 353,000 and an estimate of 350,000-360,000. However, modern research (including Greek) shows that these numbers are grossly overestimated. The most striking example is the Greek (!) Journalist Thassos Kostopoulos, who proved that Valvanis includes in 353,000 "deaths" a lot of exiled and survivors. Moreover, almost all sources claiming that the number of victims is 350,000-360,000 people refer to Valvanis, who himself was a Greek refugee and clearly overestimated the numbers. Kostopoulos also offered a somewhat overestimated, but much closer to the truth estimate - 100,000-150,000 killed. In this he is supported by Eric Sjöberg. There are sources with even smaller numbers. For example, Justin McCarthy estimates the population loss of the Pontic Greeks in 1914-1922 to be 65,000, including deaths from fighting and famine. Thus, the number of victims as a result of the repressions (not genocide) is even less than 65,000. Another Greek source (Η ‘’ανάκλησις’’ εις τους πρόσφυγας Έλληνας του Πόντου και αι επιπτώσεις αυτής δια την έρευνα της ποντιακής διαλέκτου, Αρχείον Πόντου, τόμ. 29, Αθήνα 1989, σελ. 3.) says that in total there were about 400,000 Pontic refugees in Greece. Let's add here about 200,000 more refugees from Pontus to the USSR. Considering that before 1914, the Pontic Greeks in the Ottoman Empire numbered about 700,000 people (according to Sotiriadis, even 450,000, which completely crosses out the number 353,000), the number of deaths clearly does not exceed 100,000, including victims of war, hunger, and so on. Now let's look at the number of deaths of all Greeks. The total number of Greeks in the Ottoman Empire before the outbreak of events was 1.8 million - the most real and generally accepted number, confirmed by the Ottoman census. The number of refugees settled in Greece is 1.2 million. About 200,000 Greeks (almost all of them Pontic) moved to the USSR. 100,000 Greeks stayed in Turkey (mainly in Istanbul). Thus, the total number of deaths does not exceed 300,000. Plus, if we subtract from this number of refugees in the United States and the assimilated, who died from hunger and hostilities, we get even less. This is more or less consistent with the estimates of Rummel, not a pro-Turkish scientist. That is, the total number of deaths (not 300,000-900,000, but 200,000-300,000) is less than 350,000. To sum up: it is necessary to remove the "Pontic genocide" from the preamble, and in the paragraph on the number of deaths in the Pontus region, the number 353,000, which have nothing to do with reality, should be replaced with much more realistic estimates, including those given by me. Demo66top (talk) 16:10, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

1) Kostopoulos is a communist journalist. Not a historian. I don't see how he is a WP:RS. 2) The Pontic Genocide has been officially recognized as a genocide by (at least) the Swedish Parliament . 3) Justin McCarthy has been widely criticized for being a pro-Turkish genocide denier . 4) “given by me”. Misplaced Pages isn't based on WP:OR, which seems to be what you're doing by making calculations to prove your point. And lastly 5) WP:SYNTH. Deji Olajide1999 (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Since when has the Swedish parliament become a reliable source in terms of genocide or not?Neither the International association of genocide researchers, nor the UN, and so on, recognized this "genocide." If it was recognized by only one or two countries, this only confirms its improbability. If Kostopoulos is not a historian, then how is it that he wrote tens of books on history (mostly Greek)? Plus, I think, Eric Sjöberg, who in his book prefers an estimate of 100,000-150,000 instead of 353,000, agreeing with Kostopulos, you will not be able to accuse unauthority. Yes, McCarthy is pro-Turkish, but this does not mean that his opinion cannot be shown in the article. For example, Rummel overestimates the number of victims at the hands of the communist and nationalist regimes of the 20th century and has been criticized more than once for this, but this does not interfere with his stay in the article. There is nothing unrealistic about 65,000. My mathematical calculations were only a reinforcement to the cited sources, which confirmed my opinion. Demo66top (talk) 19:17, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Here are 5 sources on the Pontic Genocide: (last one is included in this article). And yes, Sjöberg says that the Pontic Greeks that died were 100–150,000 but he also says this some lines later (it's literally the 1st source in this page). Nevertheless, that still doesn't make Kostopoulos (or McCarthy) reliable here per WP:FRINGE. Also, the sources say 100–150.000 but your calculations say 65.000? Well, you need a reliable reference for the 65.000 which you probably won't find. Deji Olajide1999 (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Kostopoulos is WP:FRINGE, and while Sjoberg reports his view, he does not endorse them. The "mathematical calculations" (as opposed to "non-mathemetical"?) of[REDACTED] users are out of the question. Khirurg (talk) 21:27, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

As a matter of fact Dr Kostopoulos is both a journalist and a historian, as stated in scientific journals that publish his writings and refer to him mentioning both aspects of his work -- see e.g. here: "About the author - Tasos Kostopoulos - Historien et journaliste". He holds a PhD in History and is currently employed in one of Greece's leading research centres, as one can see in its his scientific/academic profile in the centre's website.

It is also false that "while Sjoberg reports his view, he does not endorse them". He clearly writes in p. 47 of his monograph The Making of the Greek Genocide that Dr Kostopoulos "has demostrated" that the figure of supposedly 350,000 deaths in the Pontus area is a forgery of Pontic Greek journalist Valavanis.

Other than Dr Kostopoulos being a historian and a journalist and his view being endorsed by Sjoberg, it is widely known to all those familiar with contemporary Greek historical writing that the mainstream position among members of the community of Greek historians is that labelling the events dealt with in this article as a "genocide" is wrong from a historical point of view. This assessment of the field can be found in books, such as Sjoberg's Making of the Greek Genocide (2017), p. 4 (" despite the predictable Turkish efforts to discredit it, Greek mainstream historians, educators and influential commentators oppose this claim as founded upon "ahistorical and anti-scientific opinion"."), or the abstract of a paper Sjoberg read in 2015 (see here: "Though the Greek state recognizes two instances of genocide against Greeks of Ottoman Anatolia, the claim is mostly advanced by non-state actors, and has in the early 21st century become the object of fierce controversy in the "culture wars" of Greece, as mainstream historians and debaters dismiss it as a politically distorted memory.") or scholarly reviews in scientific historical journals (see here Alexander Kitroeff reviewing The Genocide of the Ottoman Greeks in the Historical Review vol. 11 (2014), 201-2 :"those disputing the usefulness of the term genocide belon to to the mainstream of the historical profession in Greece"). To dismiss this mainstream historiographical position as supposed "WP:FRINGE" is actually an egregious case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Ashmedai 119 (talk) 19:25, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

The only thing that Sjoberg says Kostopoulos has "demonstrated" on p. 47 is that Valavanis added 50,000 to the death total: as the journalist Tasos Kostopoulos has demonstrated, Valavanis had reached this figure by simply adding a rough estimate of 500,000 "neo-martyrs" to the figure 303,238..., and not the figure of 100,000-150,000. Regarding the figure of 100,000-150,000 dead, all Sjoberg says is that this is Kostopoulos' own figure, and does not endorse it: Kostopoulos' own estimate of dead is considerably lower; between 100,000 and 150,000. That is not an endorsement; Sjoberg is decidedly neutral. You surely also noticed the part where he described Kostopoulos as a "journalist" and not a "historian"? If he considered Kostopoulos a historian, he would have described him as such. Regarding Sjoberg's own views on the number of casualties, on page 234, he seems to endorse the cautious assessments ranging between 300,000 to 700,000. Those seem to be the figures that Sjoberg is endorsing (given his description of these figures as "cautious"). As for Kostopoulos himself, having a Ph.D. does not automatically absolve one from WP:FRINGE. Kostopoulos' main activity seems to be a journalist for the fringe far left "Efymerida ton Syntakton" (https://www.efsyn.gr/), where he writes numerous fringe articles in which among other things, he compares the current center-right Greek government to the Greek Junta , describes the Greek War of Independence as "200 years of Orthodox Jihad" , or writes in support of the release of convicted far left terrorist Dimitris Koufontinas . But this aside, what really makes Kostopoulos WP:FRINGE is that his figure of 100,000-150,000 dead is contradicted by all scholarship on the issue, which is the very definition of WP:FRINGE. I do agree with you that we have a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, just not quite the way you imagine. We may also have WP:CIR or intellectual honesty issues, not sure which is worse. Khirurg (talk) 22:06, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

This has already been discussed numerous times. I agree with what Deji Olajide1999 and Khirurg wrote. Furthermore, historians who specialize, and are renowned for their scholarship on genocide, such as Samuel Totten and Paul R. Bartrop, do call it a "genocide", and include it as an entry in their book "Dictionary of Genocide" (not currently cited in the article, but i am including it); they also support the 353,000 estimation of deaths, emphasizing that it is the Turkish governments which have systematically denied that a Pontic genocide ever occurred (in parallel with the Armenian genocide). Also, Travis (2009), whose work is cited in the article four times (but only as a reference on the origin of Pontic Greeks), also calls it a genocide, and even adds that the widespread attacks by the successive governments of Turkey, on the homes, places of worship, and heritage of minority communities since the 1930s, constitute cultural genocide as well; from the "Conclusion" in his chapter "The Destruction of Indigenous Peoples' Cultural and Intellectual Property in Turkey and Iraq":

The indigenous Assyrians, Greeks, and Armenians of Iraq and Turkey have had their communal integrity and intellectual heritage shattered by the genocide of World War I and its aftermath, and along with the Yezidis, Mandaeans, and Jews, by smaller-scale and sometimes more subtle but nevertheless destructive pogroms and assimilatory policies since then. The Ottoman and Kemalist Nationalist massacres of the Anatolian Armenians, Assyrians, Greeks, and Yezidis, as well as of the Mesopotamian Assyrians and Yezidis, constituted genocide under the initial definition and international criminal application of the term. The widespread attacks by successive governments of Iraq and Turkey on the homes, places of worship, and heritage of minority communities since the 1930s have amounted to cultural genocide, as defined by the framers of the Genocide Convention. Cultural genocide occurs when a government takes “ny action which has the aim or effect of depriving of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities,” or “ny form of assimilation or integration by other cultures or ways of life imposed on them by legislative, administrative, or other measures.” Although cultural genocide not accompanied by physical measures against group members was not made a separate crime by the Genocide Convention, Raphael Lemkin working as a consultant to the U.N. Secretary General on the drafting of the Genocide Convention urged that it include “systematically destroying historical or religious monuments.” The U.N. General Assembly voted against making cultural genocide a separate crime because its members believed that “culture was already covered to a large extent by the word ‘religious’” in the Genocide Convention. Thus, one U.S. court referred in 2006 to “cultural genocide” as a wrongful policy. Massacres, extrajudicial executions, assaults, and seizure without compensation and on ethnic or religious grounds of cities, villages, places of worship, schools, homes, businesses, and personal effects also constitute the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, extermination, and looting..

I am including him as well. Last, regarding the Greek mainstream historians, neither Sjöberg nor Kitroeff refer to all of them; if that was the case, which it isn't, it would be WP:EXTRAORDINARY and would require many more reliable sources.

Sjöberg doesn't refer to all, but some. Unless you think that his reference to Greek educators (teachers) and influential commentators also pertains to all:

Meanwhile, despite the predictable Turkish efforts to discredit it, Greek mainstream historians, educators and influential commentators oppose this claim as founded upon "ahistorical and anti-scientific opinion".

Furthermore, i find it interesting that Sjöberg bases this claim on a 2001 article written by journalist Nikos Filis (a famous genocide denier in Greece) in the politically-left newspaper I Avgi, and even quotes him. Even though i haven't read the newspaper article, a personal view of a biased journalist from 2001, even if indeed valid, is not necessarily true for 2021 (regardless of the fact that it is being reproduced in Sjöberg's 2017 publication); just something to think about.

Kitroeff speaks of an institutional split among Greek historians (not them as a whole); with the ones who dispute it belonging to (he means being counted among) the mainstream of the historical profession in Greece:

There is also an institutional split, with those disputing the usefulness of the term genocide belonging to the mainstream of the historical profession in Greece.

Though, Kitroeff that was cited to support this claim, continues in the very following sentences with the following:

As its title suggests, this volume falls clearly on the side of those who wish to affirm that genocide was committed against the Greeks of the Ottoman Empire between 1912 and 1922. The publisher, Aristide Caratzas, summarizes the purpose of this book in a prefatory note: “The efforts to eliminate the Greeks, the Armenians and the Assyrians, peoples whose biological presence in that geographic space goes back millennia before recorded history, are integral to the process that led to the creation of what became the modern Turkish Republic. The predatory methods used, and indeed what may be called a policy of effective physical elimination of populations, as well as of the cultural traces of their presence in areas they inhabited, bespeak of planning at the highest levels of government and its systematic implementation.” Further on he adds, “Greek scholars, with some significant exceptions, have been less active in researching the subject of the violent elimination of the Greek presence in Asia Minor and eastern Thrace, which spanned three millennia. The avoidance of the subject of the genocide by many mainline academics in Greece is a convergence of factors, which range from governmental reticence to criticize Turkey to spilling over into the academic world, to ideological currents promoting a diffuse internationalism cultivated by a network of NGOs, often supported by western governments and western interests.” Then he concludes: “This volume represents a kind of scholarly opening statement to an international audience on the subject of the extermination or expulsion of Ottoman Greeks, as part of the genocide of the Christians of Asia Minor.” (pp. ix-x) Thus, this book has a dual purpose, to present information that highlights the extent of the massacres suffered by the Greeks, and to argue that the massacres qualify as a genocide and, also, to implicitly criticize those who do not agree with this perspective.

I am including this as well in the article. Demetrios1993 (talk) 07:05, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

I see that as i was editing the article, Pincrete removed the claim pertaining to Greek mainstream historians. Personally i have no problem removing the claim until consensus is reached in the talk page. Demetrios1993 (talk) 07:11, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

If you give me 5 or even 10 scholars who acknowledge the "Pontic genocide" out of hundreds or thousands of historians who have studied the subject, that does not mean that it is generally accepted. Again, most sources describing the Ottoman Empire's involvement in World War I and the Turkish War of Independence describe the Armenian (and Assyrian) genocide, but almost all do not mention the "Pontic genocide". Neither Patrick Kinross, Rudolf Rummel, Reynolds, Eugene Rogan, nor Taner Akcam even use this phrase in their works. Most authoritative sources describe the Greek/Pontic Greek exodus not as genocide, but as an population exchange. The handful of researchers who define it as "genocide" are not well known and constitute only a marginal minority in the academic discussion whose opinions you push into the article. Also, you have answered nothing to the fact that there is no serious international organization has recognized this "genocide". Stop baselessly trying to prove the so-called "Pontic genocide" by equating it with the Armenian genocide. The second is recognized by most scholars and several international organizations, is a big part of today's politics and diplomacy and is very popular, the first - I have already written about it before... Demo66top (talk) 08:35, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Now let's move on from the term "genocide" to the number 353,000. As far as I know, Tassos Kostopoulos has a history degree, plus he has written many books on Greek history that have been published by various publishers. We have at least 2 authoritative sources directly stating that the number 353,000 is inflated (Kostopoulos and Sjoberg), which is enough to at least add their opinion to the article, so as not to give the impression of "the only true number 353,000". One of them (Kostopoulos) gave his estimate of 100,000-150,000 and I would like to see it in the article too. Recently I found a Greek site suggesting 200,000 and saying that 350,000 is supported only by some historians ("By the time of the Asia Minor Catastrophe of 1922, the number of Pontians who died had exceeded 200,000; some historians put the figure at 350,000"). You also never proved that McCarthy's opinion cannot be used in the article, so his 65,000 can be included too. It has never been commented that the Greek source gives the number of 400,000 Pontic refugees in Greece, and given the population of 700,000 before the events (according to Sotiriadis 450,000), the large number of refugees in the USSR, it is obvious that based on this source the number of deaths is clearly under 300,000, which clearly contradicts the number of 353,000. Also keep in mind that Rudolf Rummel gives a number of 347,000 for all Ottoman Greeks in 1914-1922, which contradicts the number of 353,000 for one Pontus. Thus, we have 2 authoritative sources directly pointing to the incorrectness of the number 353,000 and 2 indirectly. Most researchers givingAdd to all this McCarthy and the Greek site and you get an inconvenient truth. Again, most historians who give an estimate of 350,000-360,000 refer to either Valаvanis or other historians who refer to him. Moreover, it has been proven that its 353,000 is nothing more than a beautifully forged fake. Demo66top (talk) 09:14, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Categories: