Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Davide King (talk | contribs) at 17:50, 17 November 2021 (test). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

As for the proposals themselves, I prefer this topic:

• It really is the only notable one, while the other may greatly improve NPOV but still suffer from OR/SYNTH — per TFD's comments here and in the same discussion.
• I think it may fit well with North8000's proposal and the more agreement on the article's talk page on theory-based and focused rather than on the events
  • for which we already have all relevant articles and there is no general sources that treats MKuCR as we do
    • the only ones may be Courtois and Rummell but as has been noted, they are controversial, revisionist, and minority at best, and
    • by having an Excess deaths or mass mortality events under Communist regimes (EMuCR) article, we are still giving too much weight to those minority views and the generic Communist grouping as we do for MKuCR, as if it was a scholarly discourse and consensus, because most scholars do not discuss them all together, e.g. scholar A discusses excess deaths under Stalin, not Communism or MKuCR and/or EMuCR
      • by placing him and other scholars in a discussion about generic Communism and EMuCR, we risk OR/SYNTH
      • unless we have a tertiary source (no one has presented it here, or any source for that matter)
      • but we do not, which is why we have no such academic book about MKuCR but we have Courtois and Rummel who are the closest thing to that
      • e.g. Courtois and Rummel are sources about MKuCR and/or EMuCR, and they do not discuss mainstream scholars like Ellman (it could be anyone else) because it would go against what they are proposing, therefore ...
      • if we add Ellman to balance NPOV but we are citing this to Ellman, and not to a secondary source about or discussing MKuCR and/or EMuCR, we are engaging in OR/SYNTH — even though I agree it would be an improvement from NPOV — because Ellman wrote about the Stalin era, not Communism
      • hence, Ellman is perfect for Excess mortality in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin but not MKuCR and/or EMuCR
        • which, ironically, just goes to highlight the fact that MKuCR and/or EMuCR are not notable (are ignored by many scholars, there are no tertiary sources, and Karlsson dismisses the closest sources to it) and the only notable topic is that summarized by Siebert
          • "the discussion of the view that Communism was the greatest mass murderer in XX century. Who said that? Why? What was the main purpose for putting forward this idea? How this idea was accepted? Who supports that? Who criticise it and what the criticism consists in? How this idea is linked to recent trends in Holocaust obfuscation? And so on, and so forth." It is theory-focused — any significant event can be easily linked, no need to coatrack it
        • which is broad enough to include all relevant scholars (e.g. respect the NPOV criteria), which cannot fit in a MKuCR and/or EMuCR article for the simple fact those scholars are not writing in such broad sense, or are ignoring the topic. To conclude, there can be no MKuCR and/or EMuCR article that respects the NPOV criteria, without risks of OR/SYNTH. The solution is a rewrite of the only notable topic without any OR/SYNTH.
    • the summary style would require much work on each event's main article, which may be a good incentive to improve them, but that does not change the aforementioned problems. It would be a good compromise though, but it would still require a big rewrite. Davide King (talk) 17:50, 17 November 2021 (UTC)