Talk:Killing of captives by the Islamic State

Possible merge?
Ping article creater and main contributor

Is there a reason why we have this article and one titled ISIL beheading incidents? It seems there is overlap between the two article. Thoughts? Mbcap (talk) 16:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * That's a good question. I'm not sure why two separate articles were created. Perhaps there's a propaganda aspect to the beheading videos that isn't present to the same extent in ISIL's other killings? Beheading videos seem to be a thing with jihadists, much as martyrdom videos are. Of course, now we have the burning of the Jordanian pilot. Perhaps it isn't the manner of death that's significant, but the use in propaganda. Would it make sense to refocus the article on ISIL beheading incidents into something that focuses on the propaganda use, such as "ISIL death videos", "ISIL execution propaganda" or "ISIL's use of death in propaganda"? Then this article could be the broader one covering all the deaths.


 * Or maybe we could just merge these two. EastTN (talk) 18:13, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes you are right about the propaganda aspect of the beheading videos. But this would apply to the burning incident as well, would it not? There is a news story that broke about 4 hours ago by the Washington post, which is slowly being picked up by other news organisations, where there is a reported burning of 45 prisoners belonging to the Iraqi security forces, in Al-Baghdadi. I would say the burnings are as severe, if not more, than beheadings. To add further, there have been numerous occasions over the past eight months, where prisoners from the Iraqi Army have been executed. As time goes on, we will need to make a collective effort to document these events and having one place to do it would be useful. We could keep the same format as this page with military and civillian captives, and add sections relating to methods employed in executions, and what sources say about the purpose of these actions and their widespread dissemination. Mbcap (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree that the propaganda aspect applies to the burning of the Jordanian pilot, and to the new story you mentioned about the burning of 45 Iraqi prisoners. That's why I was wondering if an article dedicated to ISIL's propaganda use of killing, rather than beheadings per se, might be an alternative. But your point about maintainability is valid too. If folks think it makes sense, I'm fine with putting all of the incidents of ISIL killings into a single article. EastTN (talk) 19:53, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Mbcap and EastTN sorry I did not respond but, for whatever reason, I did not get the ping. I did not get the importance of the Beheadings article and think that it would be quite appropriate to merge contents here.   Mbcap for raising the issue.  I was also wondering about working to an article move to Killing of captives by ISIL.  For various reasons the main article name has been argued not to be moved to "Islamic State" but I think that "ISIL" is more used and recognised than "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant".  GregKaye 19:51, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Greg, are you thinking that the merged article would focus primarily on capturing the killings, or on the propaganda use that ISIS/ISIL is making of them? Or are you thinking of moving this one to "Killing of captives by ..." and putting a list of the killings in it, and focusing the other article just on the propaganda use? I don't have a strong opinion - I'm really just wondering which direction your thinking of going in. EastTN (talk) 21:33, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * EastTN I think both are good options. However I think that a focus on propaganda may have a more one sided focus on issues from the angle that the group wants to present and may be less NPOV.  From the beginning I objected in thebeheadings article at the way that a single western victim was prioritised in the sequence of presentation over large pluralities of Iraqi and Syrian and perhaps other victims.  I think that the killings article would be more likely to present each life as of equal value or at least more so than a propaganda issue which might be more likely to present prisoners in accordance to their international news value.  This is just one way where I think that "reliable sources" are quite outrageously and immorally non-NPOV as reporters, in all outlets pursue sensationalism over balance and equity.  This is not to say that I don't think that there would be great value in a Propaganda focused article but I would certainly be uneasy if it were to skew relative perceived values of people's lives.  Anyway, that's my two pence worth.  GregKaye 22:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 4 March 2015

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: All four moved per consensus below. Convincing arguments were made regarding "America" being used in titles in spite of America's article being at United States, etc. A superficial vote-counting does not lead to a huge majority, but policy is pretty strongly in favor behind this one. Red Slash 02:44, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

– so as to match titles of articles such as: Destruction of cultural heritage by ISIL, Human rights in ISIL controlled territory, ISIL beheading incidents, LGBT rights in ISIL controlled territory, Military of ISIL, Persecution of Assyrians by ISIL, Persecution of Yazidis by ISIL, Portrayal of ISIL in American media and United Kingdom and ISIL. The title of the article in the namespace Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant has been debated on numerous occasions at Talk:ISIL with various arguments being placed for and against moves to such titles as "Islamic State (with disambiguation)" and "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria". Regular reference to the group by the names ISIL, ISIS and Daesh remains in reference to the groups self proclaimed name as "ad-Dawlah al-Islāmīyah fī al-'Irāq wash-Shām" but, in English media, references such as ISIL are made with more frequency than references to the full translation as "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant". This long title may provide suitable natural disambiguation for the main article but, in other contexts, I think a contraction to ISIL is more than warranted. GregKaye 11:05, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Killing of captives by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Killing of captives by ISIL
 * List of wars and battles involving the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → List of wars and battles involving ISIL
 * Military intervention against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Military intervention against ISIL
 * Timeline of events related to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Timeline of ISIL related events


 * Strong oppose the root article is located at Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant not "ISIL"; all the non-conformant articles should be renamed to match the root article "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant", not the other way around which introduces a disparity in naming of articles between the root article and subsidiary articles, which is unhelpful. As the naming of the root article has been discussed several times, we should not relitigate it in subsidiary article renames -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 06:15, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment, 70.51.200.101 even in the article the long time trend has been to use Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant irregularly in the text and make reference to ISIL through the text. The "... of Iraq and the Levant" is mainly used as a disambiguation of title.   GregKaye 12:54, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
 * We're not talking about the text of the article, we're talking about article titles. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 03:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

70.51.200.101 What do you think of all the Wikipedia articles that refer to America? These articles refer to the "United States" that make title reference to America instead. There's even a currently active RM that proposes a move of Best High Schools in America → Newsweek survey of Best High Schools in America. Consideration of re the reference to "United States", as per the first line of article text, has not even been mentioned even in the current title counter proposal.

ISIL is more succinct than either Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant or any "Islamic State" title with disambiguation and is highly recognisable. I don't see the problem.

It is also standard practice to use acronyms in Wikipedia titles and this is even seen from the beginning of the alphabet. Wikipedia hosts a main article American Automobile Association and yet in Category:American Automobile Association we find the articles AAA 400, AAA California, AAA Five Diamond Award, AAA Texas 500, AAA Travel High School Challenge, AAA Mid-Atlantic and AAA Northern New England. The only non acronym based article in this particular category was the ironically titled American Automobile Ass'n v. United States but, even here, there is an abbreviation. GregKaye 13:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Those are WP:UCN titles. The articles you are proposing moving have no UCN title since they are all descriptive titles invented by Wikipedians. They have no independence as they are just the history of Da'esh. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:05, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that this is a valid comment but ISIL is itself a commonly recognisable designation for the group. "Killing of captives by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" is not, in itself, a WP:UCRN title.  It only gets, I presume, mainly Wikipedia related results on the web and no results in news. GregKaye 09:24, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You should open a discussion about the main Da'esh article then, not these subsidiary ones with descriptive titles. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose all the above moves. To move from the full name of "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" to the acronym of ISIL is is not possible per WP:ACRONYMTITLE and WP:TITLEFORMAT since the group is not known primarily by the ISIL acronym. Mbcap (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: no where does that manual of style say the move is not possible, rather it says: "Acronyms should be used in a page name if the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation". ISIL is in fact very commonly referred to as "ISIL" (along with the other names used for it). Khestwol (talk) 06:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Admittedly it is more commonly known as ISIS but I think that this comes from an arguably erroneous yet commonly used translation as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. I think that anyone looking at the group to the depth of looking at the content of these articles will be very familiar with the designation ISIL whether or not they understand that it is short for the "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant". GregKaye 09:11, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * NOTE see related move request at Talk:List_of_Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant_members -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:22, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Support all 4 suggestions, for consistency with other already-existing titles on Wikipedia which use ISIL rather than the full name. ISIL is more succinct and simpler, and yet highly recognizable, than the full name so ISIL is more suitable here. Khestwol (talk) 06:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Or we could rename all the other articles to match the main article at Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant for consistency with the main topic article -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 13:13, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Support all 4 suggestions, for succinctness. Banak (talk) 12:32, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose the root article is located at Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant not "ISIL". Also, the group calls itself "Islamic State", not ISIL. In fact the use "ISIL" is US-centric, as it is mostly US-media that use "ISIL", following the designation the U.S. government adopted on 14 May 2014, but non-English media, rather reasonably, do not slavishly follow U.S.-government directives.  For example "Islamic State" is the tile of the French Wikipedia (État islamique (organisation)), the German Wikipedia (Islamischer Staat (Organisation)), the Spanish Wikipedia (Estado Islámico (organización terrorista)), the Italian Wikipedia (Stato Islamico), the Portuguese Wikipedia (Estado Islâmico do Iraque e do Levante), and the Russian Wikipedia (Исламское государство). There you have the six top non-Asian world economies. XavierItzm (talk) 15:26, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * They don't really have any right to call themselves the "Islamic State", just like I couldn't make something and force everyone to call it "The World". Such names are POV to the max, and are unacceptable. I frankly don't care if this gets moved or not, but I object to any attempt to change references of them to "Islamic State", when that is the WORST name that could be chosen. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 04:29, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * XavierItzm Your reference to a "US-centric" usage makes no sense to me and your WP:ASSERTions should be justified. As you know a very wide range of nations make exclusive use of ISIL, ISIS or Daesh as is particularly used by Arabic and Persian using nations and media. GregKaye 09:40, 24 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose per others opposing this move and other similar moves. Adds no value. Legacypac (talk) 00:43, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * NOTE see a similar move request at Talk:The Beatles (terrorist cell) -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:SHORTFORM. bd2412  T 21:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Support all. As says, WP:SHORTFORM recommends this solution. Titles should be WP:CONCISE and natural.--Cúchullain t/ c  13:22, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose all, except Option 1 - The root article is at Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Although I agree that most of the articles involving ISIL should be shorthanded, the largest, or the most significant ones, should have the name spelled out in full so that the readers know exactly what the topic is dealing with. This should especially be done with the major articles, due to the naming controversy and the boat loads of discussions and failed move/rename proposals over the main ISIL article. Although ISIL has been commonly accepted as the default consensus acronym (as the US Government has done), many other acronyms and alternate names are used by many users, especially those from other countries (e.g. Daesh, ISIS, IS, etc.). The controversial nature of this should be remedied through the use of the full name for the major articles, like those listed above. Also, simple redirects can be created to help shortcut to the articles with the longer titles, with I have done multiple times. By the way, I often use the War on ISIS or War on ISIL example to reach the Military intervention against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant article instead of just typing the whole darn thing out. That being said, I do support the renaming of the first article listed. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - WP:SHORTFORM does seem directly applicable. WP:ACRONYMTITLE seems like a good counter argument, but it doesn't specifically address the topic of subtopic pages, which is what this requested move addresses. Also, to get WP:ACRONYMTITLE to apply to, you'd need to demonstrate that "ISIL" or "Islamic State", is primarily known one of those two monikers. It's not clear to me that one name is more common than the other. NickCT (talk) 18:41, 21 April 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:14, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

wikipedia being used as a propaganda site for Iran
the lede states: burying alive,[1] electrocuting, lowering in a tub of corrosive acid,

yet IS has not used any of these methods of killing

the acid claim links to the same "source" as the burying alive claim which mentions nothing about acid and is as such, without any source

the burying alive claim links to "armenpress", which in its article cites ""Ahlul Bayt News Agency (ABNA)""

Ahlul Bayt News Agency is NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE and is in fact based in Qom, and run as a propaganda campaign for Iran and Shiites

if you want the full history of this organisation, you need only look at its about section. it is a project of the "Ahl Al-Bayt World Assembly" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahl_Al-Bayt_World_Assembly) which was established by Ayatollah Khamenei in 1990. the Hojjat al-Islam Mohammad Hasan Akhtari, a former Iranian ambassador to Syria is the current president of "Ahl Al-Bayt World Assembly", which is the organisation that established ""Ahlul Bayt News Agency (ABNA)""

http://en.abna24.com/about.html "authorities of the Ahlolbayt World Assembly during the tenure of present Secretary General Hujjatol-Islam Mohammad Hasan Akhtari well recognized the sensitivity of the condition. To fill the gap, they embarked on launching a three-language electronic news agency"

wikipedia editors are not following the reliable source guideline and are either too ignorant or lazy to research their sources this is a disagace

I will now remove those claims and you have had the explanation here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.112.144.10 (talk) 16:00, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Killing of captives by ISIL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140704015301/http://www.todayszaman.com/news-350389-un-warns-of-war-crimes-as-isil-allegedly-executes-1700.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/news-350389-un-warns-of-war-crimes-as-isil-allegedly-executes-1700.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.siteintelgroup.com/blog/index.php/entry/289-jund-al-khilafah-in-algeria-beheads-french-hostage-in-video

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:51, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Killing of captives by ISIL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20140913034036/http://albaghdadia.com/index.php/iraqnews/item/32772-2014-09-03-12-30-15 to http://albaghdadia.com/index.php/iraqnews/item/32772-2014-09-03-12-30-15

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:32, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Killing of captives by ISIL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150201201040/http://www.nicematin.com/derniere-minute/nicois-enleve-en-algerie-fabius-confirme-lauthenticite-de-la-video.1914423.html to http://www.nicematin.com/derniere-minute/nicois-enleve-en-algerie-fabius-confirme-lauthenticite-de-la-video.1914423.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Crucifixion removed
The lede mentions crucifixion several times, one tagged as requiring sources since 2016. The main body of the article doesn't mention this once. While the practice may have occurred, it's not in the article. Leaving it in the lede just seems like sensationalizing, I will remove it. Ifnord (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Wtf is ISIL?
Just looking at Google trends, ISIL is like 0.1% that of ISIS. Put them both in (and select the groups so it knows you mean ISIS not Isis and same with ISIL) and you'll see that literally no one outside of the government of one country, CNN and a few other yellow press media outlets call it ISIL. I don't understand what the deal is with ISIL but the same people who seem so passionate about it are the same who prefix it with 'so-called' all the time. I'm not a political man so I don't understand their subversive agenda but I'm a rational man and I see allowing this tiny minority to take over and change the name of a thing as wrong. 121.210.33.50 (talk) 10:10, 23 February 2020 (UTC)