Talk:Execution by elephant/Archive 1

Spamming
I just removed a bit of spam on the article that read as following "Elephants are really big and hurt alot when the step on you."

I'm wondering, do people intentionally screw up good articles?


 * Yes. Stebbins 03:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Validity
Is it really true "many people are still killed nowadays by elephants"? If so, where? Do these people live in close proximity to elephants? Vivacissamamente 02:33, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, See for example the economist Aug 31, 2003 story When man and elephant collide.  Elephants like corn, people on the verge of starving do not like their entire crop eaten, and the mix tends to go badly for both parties. Jrincayc 13:52, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Moved
I moved this page to a more grammatical form for a title. - Montr&eacute;alais

What an excellent article. -- ESP 06:56 21 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Gruesome! But still a great article. --mav

Biblography
I don't want to be offensive. But is it possible to add some Bibliography ? -- Ericd 00:05, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Spelling
The quoted section reads "taer it in pieces" which I guess is "tear" but not sure if the original or copy is wrong, any ideas? --/Mat 03:37, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * That's the original spelling, which I took from an original copy of the book. -- ChrisO 08:39, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * I think it might be a good idea to add [sic] after that word. I realize 17th century spelling is different, but that really looks misspelled. --Ornil 22:54, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I think it is misspelled, I couldn't find any 17th century spelling references on the word "taer"... So the "[sic]" has been added to the article... =) --Andylkl 13:10, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * The spelling is definitely as Knox gives it (remember, I used the original 17th century edition). It's not modern spelling, I agree, but I suspect that it may be semi-phonetic: we'd pronounce it as one syllable now, but Knox may have pronounced it as two ("taer" = "tay-ur"?). -- ChrisO 19:24, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I think that [sic] should be removed. The book is full of archaic and interesting spellings, and this cannot be definitively classified as a misspelling.

And altho here be both Bears and Tygers in theſe Woods, yet they are not ſo fierce, as commonly to aſſault people; Travellers and Way-faring men go more in fear of Elephants than of any other Beaſts.
 * I think that passage (on the same page as the passage quoted in the article) demonstrates the spelling quirks present in the book. I'm going to be bold and remove the sic because I feel that it needlessly discounts Knox's words. I don't, though, have a particularly strong opinion about this, and I also don't want to offend anybody, so put it back in if you feel strongly. &mdash;[[User:MikeX|MikeX (Talk)]] 23:38, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Part of the reason why the [sic] was added was because people kept "correcting" the spelling. This needs to be watched for. -- ChrisO 12:19, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * And "sic" doesn't mean "Misspelling here! Look what an idiot the author is!" (I know that's how Bush-bashers or Clinton-bashers use it, but that's not what it means.) It simply means "thus" -- that is "I have checked and double-checked this quote and, while you might think I have made an error in quoting it, that is not the case. The original author spoke/wrote exactly thus." I would vote for its restoration as protection of the spelling of the original. Mpolo 14:32, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * OK, colour me stupid. I don't like the look of it personally, and won't add it back myself, but I certainly won't have a hissy-fit if you put it back :). Also, there's a rather...confronting...HTML comment warning the casual editor not to "correct" the spelling ;) &mdash;[[User:MikeX|MikeX (Talk)]] 18:24, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

Bibliography?
What is the source for the 1947 crushing execution? I think that it should be removed or a source for the data should be added. This should be reasonably easy to find documentation of, so there should be a reference for it. On the other hand, I doubt there is anyone on wikipedia who has the first hand experience to contradict it, so the many eyes is insufficient for this. I believe that this should have the source documented or it should be removed, especially considering that this is a featured article. Jrincayc 01:18, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Edit of Elephant that added 1947 crushing execution. Edit that claimed it was widespread in India after the British began ruling

The following information was added by User:130.94.107.162 contribs or User:130.94.107.163 contribs (presumably this is the same person):

The last person to be officially executed in this fashion was put to death in India in April, 1947. The execution took place in Bikaner. The condemned had been convicted of strangling another man's wife, and was therefore sentenced to the more excruciating death of having the elephant step on his chest rather than his head. The executioner was a state elephant named Hawai that weighed just over 8 tons and which had over the years, put over 150 men to death beneath its huge foot.

As a rule, the elephant would step upon the head of the condemned. In the most common procedure, the execution elephant was trained to place its enormous foot gently upon the condemned's head. At this point, those who had accused the condemned would be brought forward and allowed to look beneath the elephant's foot to confirm the identity of the prisoner. They could then either recant or confirm their accusations. Typically, the condemned would scream and beg for witnesses to recant, but few ever did, as it often would mean trading places with the condemned since perjury was commonly considered to be a capital offense. Once the confirmations were made, the mahout, or elephant driver, would give the command, and the elephant would press down with its immense weight, bursting the condemned's skull and then crushing the head completely flat.

However, on occasion the death would be made even crueler by either having the elephant drag the condemned through the streets before the execution (usually by a rope attached to the elephant's leg), or through the use of an elephant that was trained to crush limbs first, and then the Although it was common in South Asia for rulers to use elephants as executioners, one Mogul Emperor in particular, Akbar (1547-1605), used his favorite elephant as a judge, as well as an executioner. While ruling in the city of Agra from 1570-1585, Akbar came to believe that his favorite royal elephant could discern by instinct who was guilty of an offense and who was innocent. As a result, thousands of people during those 15 years, who were suspected of even minor offenses, were staked out before the great royal elephant and had to watch in horror as it was coaxed to step on them.

The great majority of suspects were crushed to death, but on occasion the huge elephant would refuse. If that happened, the suspect was immediately released because, as Akbar noted, there was now clear proof of innocence!

Records of most executions by this method have been lost over the years, or in many instances, no records were kept. The British maintained the richest source of documentation during their long rule of India. Records show that the British continued using execution by elephant well into the twentieth century, partly as an instrument of terror, and partly because it was their practice to maintain local customs and methods wherever possible. Methods also differed greatly from region to region. Records from one region show that the condemned was placed inside of a canvas bag so that he would not have to watch what was about to happen. The elephant would then trample the bag flat with the condemned inside. In another, the condemned was forced to watch the elephant slowly approach from a great distance, its gigantic feet coming ever closer. In some instances, the condemned was buried up to his neck and the elephant would then approach and step on his head. In others, the condemned was required to place his head on an elaborate pedestal that contained fountains on its sides so that his brains and viscera would gush freely for spectators to watch when the elephant pressed down with its huge foot.


 * No bibliographic information was given for these facts. No external source of evidence was check during the time when the article became featured I consider this information highly suspect, unless someone can confirm by citing an external source. Claiming that this method of execution continued in India until months before british rule ended strikes me as 'facts' that might have an agenda behind them if fabricated.  Jrincayc 13:37, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Reason for Removal of Text by 130.90.107.*
After an hour of searching the internet, and two hours of searching in a university library, I was unable to find any confirmation that elephants were used to crush humans during the british rule of india. The only mention I was able to find of elephants used in executions was the following quote that talks about atrocities commited during the 1850s:


 * Volunteer hanging parties went out into the districs and amateur executioners were not wanting to the occassion. One gentleman boasted of the numbers he had finished off quite "in an artistic manner",  with mango-trees for gibbets and elephants for drops, the victims of this wild justice  being strung up, as though for pastime, in the form of an figure of eight.

This originally comes from the book Tirtha-bhramana by Jadunath Sarvadhikari, and I found it quoted on page 593 of The History and Culture of the Indian People, British Paramountcy and Indian Renaissance, Part I, edited by R.C. Majumdar, published in Bombay, in 1963 by P.H. Raman. By far, the vast majority of executions in India were by hanging, and I found no mention of elephants used to crush humans as a method of execution during British rule. However, I was unable to find evidence that elephants were not used during British rule, so I have no objection to the information being re-added if a reliable source for it can be found.

Requests for the source of this information has been previously asked on August 29, 2003 and April 3, 2004. None has been provided. This information is unlikely to be common knowledge to anyone in the world (since the last incident decribed was in 1947) to be removed by someone with personal experience. Therefore, I am removing the following paragraphs:

Removed paragraphs
As a rule, however, the elephant would step upon the head of the condemned rather than tear the condemned apart with its tusks. In the most common procedure, the execution elephant was trained to place its enormous foot gently upon the condemned's head. At this point, those who had accused the condemned would be brought forward and allowed to look beneath the elephant's foot to confirm the identity of the prisoner. They could then either recant or confirm their accusations. Typically, the condemned would scream and beg for witnesses to recant. Few ever did, as it would mean trading places with the condemned if, as was often the case, perjury was also a capital offense. Once the confirmations were made, the mahout, or elephant driver, would give the command, and the elephant would press down with its immense weight, bursting the condemned's skull and then crushing the head completely flat.

Although it was common in South Asia for rulers to use elephants as executioners, one Mogul Emperor in particular, Akbar (1547-1605), used his favorite elephant as a judge as well as an executioner. While ruling in the city of Agra from 1570-1585, Akbar came to believe that his favorite royal elephant could discern by instinct who was guilty of an offense and who was innocent. As a result, thousands of people during those 15 years, who were suspected of even minor offenses, were staked out before the great royal elephant and had to watch in horror as it was coaxed to step on them. The great majority of suspects were crushed to death, but on occasion the huge elephant would refuse. If that happened, the suspect was immediately released because, as Akbar noted, there was now clear proof of innocence.

Records of most executions by this method have been lost over the years, or, in many instances, no exact records were kept. The British maintained the richest source of documentation during their long rule of India. Records show that the British continued to sanction execution by elephant well into the twentieth century, partly as an instrument of terror, and partly because it was their practice to maintain local customs and methods wherever possible.

Methods also differed greatly from region to region. Records from one region show that the condemned was placed inside a canvas bag so that he would not have to watch what was about to happen. The elephant would then trample the bag flat with the condemned inside. In another, the condemned was forced to watch the elephant slowly approach from a great distance, its gigantic feet coming ever closer. In some instances, the condemned was buried up to his neck and the elephant would then approach and step on his head. In others, the condemned was required to place his head on an elaborate pedestal flanked by fountains so that his brains and viscera would gush freely for spectators to watch when the elephant pressed down with its massive foot.

The last person to be officially executed by an elephant was put to death in India in April, 1947. The execution took place in Bikaner. The executioner was a state elephant named Hawai, which weighed just over eight tons and which had, under British rule, put over 150 thieves and murderers to death beneath the crushing weight of its huge foot.


 * These were removed due to a lack of citations and the fact that I was unable to locate sources for these in both an internet and a library search. They were all added by User:130.94.107.162 contribs or User:130.94.107.163 contribs (presumably this is the same person).  I reverted the captions as well, since they were from text by 130.94.  I would not recommend re-adding this information to the article until solid sources for these facts can be found.  Jrincayc 19:45, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * I think it would be well worth looking at the 1868 Le Tour du Monde mentioned, and from which the woodcutting comes. Robert Knox's An Historical Relation Of the Island Ceylon(London, 1681) would be another good place to look.  I can imagine either of those would require an interlibrary loan.  The Gutenberg Project includes Jules Verne's Around the World in 80 Days (in French under the title Le Tour du Monde en 80 Jours) which is roughly contemporary with the 1868 write-up, though the article text suggests it would be a different source.  I just looked at Gutenberg for other relevant information and had a difficult time coming up with things, but I wouldn't rule it out yet. -- ke4roh 20:56, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)


 * I am reasonably confident that crushing by elephant occured at some point in asia (I was able to find a few mentions of it in an internet search and a amazon search of books). What I was not able to find was any evidence that it occured during British Rule of India, and especially as late as 1947.  The prefered method of death penalty for the British was by far hanging, though I also found mention of firing squad, and bayoneting.  So at best, 130.94's additions are probably exaggerations, and at worst outright fabrications.  I would be especially interested if someone in India could check local references in the city of Bikaner to see if that fact could be verified or disproved.  Jrincayc 02:05, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Added ISBN #s for Knox book
I added ISBN numbers for the Knox book mentioned in the article (on the book's page); so that should make it easier for people to verify the quote. Could someone add some text to the article mentioning the lack of Bibliography?


 * None of the ISBN numbers on An Historical Relation of the Island Ceylon are valid according to. --Xanzzibar 05:32, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC) removed link because I could not edit page; got warning that there was a link to a blocked website Enuja 02:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I got them from http://www.alibris.com/books/isbns/7746 . Alibris says they have copies they can sell you of the book with that ISBN.  I don't know why the ISBN's fail the check. I've marked them as probably incorrect on the article.  I also found an Indian printing of the book with a correct ISBN and I listed it there. JesseW 14:08, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Explanation for reverting edits by User:Would Be Gnostic

 * 1) I didn't mean that his edit was vandalism.
 * 2) Sorry about not giving an explanation in the edit summary, it is because I used the rollback option for sysops.
 * 3) I feel that the information that was added by User:Would Be Gnostic was not relevant to the article. If any, it belongs in "elephant". Also, his previous edit reverted by someone else appeared unencyclopedic and like a random remark which I felt was only rephrased to sound encyclopedic.

-- 12:38, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * Thank you. That is what I wanted to know. Jrincayc 12:43, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * When I read the article, the first question that popped in my mind was how much weigh an elephant. That's the whole point or the article, isn't it? Nobody ever speaks of Crushing by Cats. The article is gruesome precisely because elephants are heavy. There is a reference that an elephant may weigh 9 tons further down the article, but it's not prominent enough. So, I thought this article deserved to give a clear reminder at the very beginning of the weight of those nice animals...

Never mind...


 * I think it's pretty obvious to almost everyone that an elephant weighs a great deal. We don't really need to repeat specific details in the article unless its specific value enters into things somehow. Someone looking for specifics about elephant weight would simply click on the elephant link that appears as the third word in the article. --Xanzzibar 19:05, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Elephant "crushing"
What's that Elephant "crushing" on the end of the article supposed to mean? May someone explain this process? Thanks, --Abdull 21:44, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Pretty self explanatory. Basically means the taming of an elephant. they "crush" the spirit of the elephant and then use it for domestication. hope that clarified. --Idleguy 05:00, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * But how are they taming it? I mean, you drive a wild horse into water but what do you do for an elephant? We're told it's "brutal" so what's involved? GarrettTalk 23:47, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, basically it goes like this. The elephants are brought in when they are young and locked in a cage. Here the elephants are beaten, fed improperly, are sleep deprived and thirsty. All this torture is done that they know who's boss thus breaking their spirit as an elephant has a much stronger "spirit" than other animals. Once this is done at the right age - probably around 4 years or so, the elephant is tamed for life. It is doen to show the elephants fear of man and the pain of disobeying human beings.


 * Another more effective method is practiced in the Indian Subcontinent which is far less physical and brutal and more mental. It is called the "elephant trap". The following is taken from a newsletter. "From when an elephant is a baby they tie him for certain periods with a rope to a tree. The young elephant tries his hardest to escape, he pulls and wriggles and jumps and crawls yet the rope just tightens and to the tree it remains tied. Learning that, the elephant doesn’t try to escape and accepts his confinement. A couple of years pass and the elephant is now an adult weighing several tons. Yet the trainer continues to tie the elephant to the tree with the same rope he’s always used, for the simple reason that the elephant has the concept in his mind that the rope is stronger than him. Abiding to this conditioning the elephant is trapped for life. To break free all the elephant has to do is erase that limiting thought for in fact he is free to go."
 * Now THAT is what I was after, an explanation! :) Verrrrry interesting. I also vaguely remember reading in a book about using trained elephants to press a wild elephant against the walls of a pen in order to... something... yeah. Also some sort of subduing process IIRC, but it's just too long ago to recall... anyway, sounds like something interesting. Not sure if it is enough for an article of its own, but then again it's not really related enough to put at the bottom of this page. Hm. GarrettTalk 05:59, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Was this article really FARCed?
The FARC box at the top of the page has red link for the why it was removed link. Can anyone provide a link to the relevant FARC discussion for this article? Was it ever really FARCed? &mdash; Scm83x talk 00:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Seems so: Featured article removal candidates/archive/August to October 2004. -- ChrisO 00:41, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I've fixed the template, no more red link. I'll still poke around for the nomination page some time though. MichaelBillington 12:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It's funny because I remember this article was brought up during a debate as to whether to exempt Gay Nigger Association of America from deletion, and someone thought this article was so funny it should be featured. I don't think anyone knew then that it once had been. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 18:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

does it hurt
???


 * Well, why don't you try it and let us know? -- ChrisO 09:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't buy it...
This article has been here for three years, and it still doesn't have a single reliable source. If it was such a "common sentence throughout south and southeast Asia, particularly India, for over 4,000 years" then how come we have nothing more than a couple of travel stories?

Everything you find on the web is just a rehash of the Wikipedia article. And all the actual article consists of are a few tall tales by some obscure travel writers (who, of course, would never make up wild stories about other, scary countries). And the descriptions don't even match! In one case the elephant is used to pick the victim up and "slay" him, in the other case he's crushing him. But at least it's an elephant in both cases...

And a travel journal named "Le Tour du Monde"??? Published in 1868? Is that where Jules Verne got his 1872 book title Le tour du monde en quatre-vingt jours from? The coincidence!

And as far as the detailed descriptions and drawings are concerned - I could easily come up with just as many stories about fairies, ghosts, and you-name-it. Doesn't make it any more real, though...

I think we should nominate this for the hoax page, unless someone comes up with some real sources...

--Frescard 02:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think the different descriptions are indicative of fraudulency: There's more then one way to skin a cat and more then one way to kill someone with an elephant. 68.39.174.238 03:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but using a story about a "swinging elephant" as support for a "crushing elephant" doesn't really count...;) --Frescard 03:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Tagging this as a hoax is ludicrous. It might be argued that the article should be changed to "Execution by elephant" or something along those lines but the act of using elephants in capital punishment is documented. If you have proper citations that call into question the travellers' accounts given in the article, then you should enter those objections into the article itself and cite them. Otherwise your gut feeling that this is a hoax is, at best, original research. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 04:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I strogly subject to you removing my tag without even a previous discussion. I have clearly explained why I put that tag there, and it is very inappropriate to remove a posted tag without even conversing with the poster first.


 * But regardging your "post-removal" arguments:
 * Are you asking me to prove that something didn't happen? How exactly am I supposed to do that?
 * And I am supposed to supply "proper citations" because I'm doubting an article that itself doesn't offer any?
 * The article is called "Crushing by Elephant", and it is obviously about this particular execution method (not generic involvement of elephants in executions). It has detailed descriptions of this method without any verifiable sources. Yes, it's a gut feeling I have that it's a hoax. But if an article is up for three years, and still doesn't have any reliable and verifiable sources to prove its point then my gut tells me that there's something fishy going on. And that's not the point of an encyclopedia, to make people rely on their gut for judgment...
 * You're an administrator - you should know the criteria for verifiability:
 * {| align="center" style="background-color: #f0f0ff; border: 1px solid #333; padding: 5px;"


 * align="left" |
 * 1. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable sources.
 * 2. Editors adding new material to an article should cite a reputable source, or it may be removed by any editor.
 * 3. The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it.
 * }
 * I posted my concern above. The burdon of proof lies with the author of the article, not me...--Frescard 06:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't get it. Are you trying to argue that An Historical Relation of the Island Ceylon and Le Tour du Monde don't exist? I can tell you that An Historical Relation of the Island Ceylon certainly does exist - I tracked down an original 335-year-old copy of the book to provide the image at the top of the article. Ironically, I've just discovered that this article is quoted in almost its entirety in a book called "Crime: Computer Viruses to Twin Towers", describing methods of capital punishment... -- ChrisO 07:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I've added more references to demonstrate that this definitely isn't a hoax. But can anyone work out why the refs appear to be duplicated? -- ChrisO 08:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the further references, but I'm still skeptical...;)
 * I guess one part of the problem is that historical refences can't easily be verified, unless you have access to a historical library, but so far all the quotes that have been given document the death by all kinds of other means. But none of the cited works describe crushing. The longest chapter about crushing is from "Le Tour de Monde", and yes, I have my doubts about whether it actually existed, and if so, how accurate it was.
 * I don't have a problem believing all the other execution methods (dragging, even whipping, and certainly accidental trampling), but with crushing I have a problem. And since the article's title and its emphasis is on the specific method of crushing I think that aspect needs to be documented better.
 * And since it's well-known that for political/religious/financial reasons sometime scary stories were made up about those exotic far-away places, I tend to be skeptical of sources that might an agenda (be it to sell books, be it to show your people how barbaric those other religions/countries are). A story like this sounds to me like a perfect "scare-story" to be used for these purposes.
 * And again, if, as the article states, this was "common" for "over 4000 years" then there should be plenty of evidence. But where is it? --Frescard 16:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * As it happens, I do have access to an historical library - several, actually - and I've been able to find lots more evidence; in fact, almost too much to cram into the article. I've mostly rewritten the entire article to address your concerns. Hopefully this will settle the question of it being a hoax! -- ChrisO 18:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I appreciate the work you put into it.
 * With all those new sources and quotes it now sounds a lot more believable, and, at least as I'm concerned, I don't think the hoax concern is valid anymore.
 * Sorry to have caused a bit of a ruckus at first, but initially this article did look very suspicious, and I'd hate to have somebody sneak some bogus articles into Wikipedia! (Hope I didn't cause you too much work...) --Frescard 19:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Course not, it was actually pretty interesting research (and I've had a soft spot for the article for a long time, even though I didn't start it). -- ChrisO 19:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Again, your hunch cannot form the basis of a decision to label the article a hoax. There are available sources, which have been cited, that do indeed describe crushing. Many of the other sources describe other methods, and I would support a move for the article to "Execution by elephant" or similar title. But unless you can find a historical source calling into question the practice, you cannot simply decide unilaterally that the other sources are unreliable. That is not how WP works. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 17:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Re-featuring?
Since this was originally a featured article but got de-featured due to a lack of references, I'd like to get it re-featured. Does anyone have any suggestions for changes or improvements before I re-nominate it? -- ChrisO 19:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thugs were also crushed by elephants. Source: book by Dr. Mike Dash about thuggee. Will try to insert it later. Andries 01:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales' candidate for most random article
Yup - this article! "Crushing by elephant: a form of execution used in India for more than 4,000 years. That's the most random entry Wikipedia founder Jim Wales said he has ever found on his own Web site." -- ChrisO 13:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Comments
Great article. But just some comments:
 * Could you add some dates(years) to the "West Asia" subsection?
 * And why is "Wester empires" before "Asian powers"? Shouldn't it be the other way around because this execution was primarly in Asia, while it was rarely used by Western empires. Thank you. CG 16:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Inconsistent Quotation marks
It looks like quotes got converted to cquote tags but some of them still have the ending quotation mark. Since it's inconsistent and I didn't know the accepted practice, I didn't want to change this. If some one can confirm which way it should be, I'd be happy to edit them. See, e.g., the quote below "Sri Lanka" section. Skumarla 05:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I've fixed this. -- ChrisO 06:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Elephant attacks?
We have Crocodile attacks and Alligator attacks in Florida, but no Elephant attacks. This excellent NYT article might be a good source to get started. "An Elephant Crackup?", .. "Attacks by elephants on villages, people and other animals are on the rise. Some researchers are pointing to a species-wide trauma and the fraying of the fabric of pachyderm society."

(cc: Talk:Elephant)

--Stbalbach 01:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

retitle
above, User:Briangotts commented "It might be argued that the article should be changed to "Execution by elephant" or something along those lines . . .", and so it shall be argued. this article covers impaling by elephant, dismemberment by elephant, and torture by elephant as well as crushing by elephant; its title ought to be changed to reflect its expanded scope. 67.68.207.52 07:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Frequency of Modern attacks on zoo keepers
The cited soruce, does, in fact, claim that 3-4 zoo employees are killed every year in Europe & North America, but its list of elephant deaths does not have even one per year. I found a PETA fact sheet, updated on 4/3/07, that only claims 12 human deaths in the US in a 17 year period. Also, the source used in the article doesn't seem terribly reliable. I'm just going to cut the end of the current sentence like so: "Being crushed by captive elephants is also a major occupational hazard for elephant keepers in zoos ; several such fatalities are reported annually ." If anyone can find a good, reliable source that shows multiple fatalities per year, please add in the new information and replace the current source. I'm convinced by the linked source and others that elephant keeping is dangerous, but I'm not convinced of exactly how dangerous it is. Enuja 02:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

disambig
classical period needs disambig Randomblue (talk) 16:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC).

Insertion of Ibn Battuta's eyewitness account from 14th century?
Here is the text, from the 1829 translation: "Upon a certain day, when I myself was present, some men were brought out who had been accused of having attempted the life of the Vizier. They were ordered, accordingly, to be thrown to the elephants, which had been taught to cut their victims to pieces. Their hoofs were cased with sharp iron instruments, and the extremities of these were like knives. On such occasions the elephant-driver rode upon them: and, when a man was thrown to them, they would wrap the trunk about him and toss him up, then take him with the teeth and throw him between their fore feet upon the breast, and do just as the driver should bid them, and according to the orders of the Emperor. If the order was to cut him to pieces, the elephant would do so with his irons, and then throw the pieces among the assembled multitude: but if the order was to leave him, he would be left lying before the Emperor, until the skin should be taken off, and stuffed with hay, and the flesh given to the dogs"

Pp. 146-47: http://books.google.no/books?id=IZ5CAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:The+intitle:travels+intitle:of+intitle:Ibn+intitle:Battuta&hl=no&sa=X&ei=8K36UOuaLImF4gTe4YDoAw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Personally, I think the description is vivid and good enough for inclusion, but since this is a featured article, I leave the decision for inclusion to the other editors. Arildnordby (talk) 14:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Improper removal of redlinks
The redlinks do not need to be removed, per WP:REDDEAL. It is not necessary to remove all redlinks, in fact quite the opposite is true p  b  p  01:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:REDNOT - "do not red-link personal names". This is not at all a difficult concept to grasp and implement. Joefromrandb (talk) 01:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Geographic scope map doesn't make sense
The map associated with the article on what societies used execution by elephant doesn't align with what is stated in the article. The article mentions execution by elephant was used on occasion by Romans, Carthaginians, and Macedonians, but only highlights Asian civilizations that used the practice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.10.239.130 (talk) 20:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC)