Talk:Mass murder/Archive 1

Edits by anon
The edits by 199.46.200.23* (see diff here) need a serious NPOV check, his additions are extremly anti-gun control POV. Or should we simply revert him? I'm not quite sure how to turn that stuff NPOV. --Conti|&#9993; 10:33, May 3, 2005 (UTC)


 * Reversion's best I think - there is some worthwhile content in there, but it's unsalvageable from the mass of POV. Md25 17:57, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I've added an NPOV boilerplate... His/her additions and edits are pretty absurd. They not only attack gun control, they also make unverifiable statements like "and should have been in prison for many years" and "This mass murder would have been prevented California had adequate prison space and if prosecutors and judges were more responsible." There's a lot of good but unverifiable info in there, though. I'd hate to see what Gun control looks like though. - Matthew Cieplak (talk) (edits) 23:24, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Could someone explain this statement: "family annihilators, firearms enthusiasts or disgruntled workers."

Including firearms enthusiasts under types of mass murderers, with no further explanation seems to be a serious breach of NPOV. Granted, I'm sure there are many firearms enthusiasts that commit mass murders, but the way it is phrased suggests that being a firearms enthusiast will motivate a mass murderer in itself. I'd take it out, but I'm thinking there might be a good point behind that, albeit one that is poorly explained- I'd rather it be fixed than removed entirely in that case. G worroll 15:57, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I've changed "firearms entusiasts" to "individuals with mental defects". This goes back to earlier versions which refered to mental illness, I used "mental defects" to draw a line between those with issues and those who flip out and kill lots of people.  G worroll 03:08, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

AfD closed - speedy keep
This article was nominated for deletion, and the result was Speedy Keep - the topic is obviously notable, and the nomination failed to state a legitimate reason for deletion. For details, please see Articles for deletion/Mass murder. BD2412 talk 16:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Sean Stevenson
Who the heck is Sean Stevenson? Can someone provide a definition for this kid who supposedly committed these murders? The only reference I find to him on Internet searches are references to this article.


 * Seconded. I'm removing this section and putting it here: (anon) 08:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * "It can also, in rare cases, be a child (usually a male adolescent) who kills his parents and siblings. One example is Sean Stevenson, a sixteen year-old from Washington State who, on New Year's Day 1987, shot to death his parents and raped and killed his eighteen year-old sister. He was caught after talking of the murders to his girlfriend and inviting her to flee with him to Mexico."

Further Reading Deletion
Removed the review of the novel "Guttersnipe", which has been added to numerous pages. Don't see the relevance, and looks like the author's plug. Ogdred 01:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

POV template and citation needed template
As far as I could tell, the POV had a lot to do with the classification of types of mass murderers. The three-category classification provided is not referenced, and hence does not conform to Wikipedia policy of verifiability. Appropriate citations should be added or the information should be removed from the article. Kelly 17:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Sabra and Shatila massacre, and Qibya massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mass_murder&diff=68262974&oldid=68261331

Why can't they be listed here? BhaiSaab talk 22:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Because the section is for "clear examples of state-sponsored mass-murder"; large numbers of killings do not automatically qualify as "clear examples of state-sponsored mass-murder", especially when the state in question here did not authorize or carry out the killings in the first instance, and in the second instance insists killings were as a result of anti-terror activities. Also please note that most of the incidents listed describe millions or hundreds of thousands of deaths, not 60. I've cleaned up the section from some IP insertions as well. Jayjg (talk) 22:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

"State Sponsored"
Including the Mai Lai massacre in this section is, I think, misleading. Whereas the Nazi state intended the Holocaust--and the Stalin regime the purges--the soldiers who carried out the Mai Lai massacre were punished for doing so. Obviously the state did not endorse the Mai Lai massacre, although it did technically "sponsor" it by providing training, equipment, and transportation to those soldiers.

Removed Mai Lai and added Project Phoenix, which was a state sponsored murder campaign against Viet Cong sympathizers. Azureprophet 05:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I would like to know the basis of this phrase: "the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by Israel and Arab States." Please verify or provide citations for such an absurdly general and incendiary phrase!--Don 07:39, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Strategic bombing "clear examples of mass murder?"
This page is naturally getting a lot of traffic today, so I'll propose an edit here rather than starting an edit war. I'm really surprised to see WWII examples of strategic bombing, specifically the Blitz, the Dresden raid and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki listed as "clear examples" of mass murder. As the WP pages of the last two makes clear this is a highly controversial POV; as for the Blitz, the WP article (wisely in my view) doesn't even mention the issue of whether it was mass murder. Unlike, say, the Katyn massacre, which the Soviets tried to keep hidden (an implicit admission of wrong-doing), strategic bombing (on both sides) was widely reported in the media of the attacking country and seen as part of the war effort. Obviously a case can be made for mass murder in all these instances, but there is an arguable case against as well which has been frequently made. Therefore these cases should be listed as disputed, not clear examples. PaddyLeahy 23:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It's also troubling that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are listed multiple times, yet the Japanese attrocities in SE Asia get no mention at all. Japans crimes in SE Asia, by many accounts, dwarf those of the Nazis. If one were to come to the article with no historical context, the assumption would be that the US was a vicious aggressor that wrongfully dropped a nuclear weapon on Japanese civilians with no provocation. That is disturbingly POV.

Hanadi Jaradat
It does not seem appropriate to single her out on the list if we will not have any other recent suicide bombers on it. I'll remove her if no one objects. Thrawn562 05:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)Thrawn562

Jim Jones
The Wikipedia article on Jim Jones specifically calls the Jonestown massacre a "mass murder - suicide". Virtually all refs agree that some people took their own lives, while hundreds others (including many of the children) were murdered upon Jones' order. He orchestrated the mass murder, and had he survived to stand trial, would certainly been convicted of many, many counts of murder. Even if he didn't personally pull the trigger or give the injections, he is still responsibile for the murders. The Jonestown massacre fits all of the definitions below of a "mass murder" listed in the article. The article doesn't list any specific definitions of a "mass murderer," but if Jones was responsible for a mass murder, then why isn't he a mass murderer?
 * "the act of murdering a large number of people, typically at the same time, or over a relatively short period of time. Mass murder may be committed by individuals or organizations"
 * "involves the actual killing of a large number of people."
 * "refers to the killing of several people at the same time."
 * ""...[involving] the murder of four or more victims at one location, within one event.""

Fredwerner 20:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Serial Killers are mass murderers too - in the UK at least
In UK usage the killings do not have to be over a short space of time (Harold Shipman would qualify as a mass murderer) - so I would like to point this out somewhere, preferably a caveat in the first paragraph. The reason why it needs to be pointed out is that a) it's common usage over here on our side of the pond and b) people remove 'mass murderer' from articles such as Shipman's (see edit on 23:14, 7 March 2007) due to this wikipedia page's narrow definition, which only reports (I presume) US usage. I'll add something unless there are objections. Malick78 16:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


 * This is probably a disadvantage of being globally connected -- there is a distinct difference between "mass murder" and "serial killing" as it's taught in our educational system (and commonly viewed in our criminal justice system). I'll be glad to provide citations for such, if needed, but I also have no doubt that you could do the same for your viewpoint.  What is appropriate?


 * I don't know. I am in the UK and was pretty clear on the mass murderer/spree killer vs serial killer distinction. The press might use the terms more loosely but what I remember he was called things like "Britain's biggest serial killer." Unless you have specific resources showing an official (police/academic) definition then I'd say leave it be. (Emperor 00:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC))

Magneto?
I'm just wondering if you think Magneto can be considered a mass-murderer. I asked this on the appropiate pages and was told to come here. For the record, Magneto has sunken submarines, knocked down mountains and once did a world-wide EMP that disabled technology, including planes falling from the sky.--CyberGhostface 00:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Just so everyone knows the context of these incidents: the first two cases were in direct response to the humans trying to kill him.
 * Third case; it's not his fault the UN created the "Magneto Protocols," preventing him from going back to Earth. It's not like he intentionally did it to hurt people; that the was the only way to get back to Earth. --DrBat 01:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You should ask at the reference desk not here, as it has nothing to do with the article but the subject of the article. Nil Einne 06:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Pinsk massacre
Does this event, the Pinsk massacre, belong at, or should it be added to the mass murder by State section? It has been reverted once. I would like the general community's opinion on whether it qualifies. Dr. Dan 18:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Start by find a source that qualifies this event as a 'mass murder', to satisfy WP:V/WP:OR.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The great butchery of Iraqi people
I am now laughing of what I read here..Mass murder..do you name the murder of 67 Jews or 35 of dublin and monaghan Bombings a mass murder or..or..then what you can name what happen in Iraq every houre and every day...there are in average 50-150 iraqi people murder every day by the american troops and their arab savage terrorist friends..it's a big game to annihilate the iraqi people until some day we will be in your history books and websites like the naitve indian of america...every morning we start our day with collecting the bodies of the unknown iraqis victims..there are every where..in the streets..in the revirs..in the markets..every where..every day we die by car bombs  and mortars and your soldiers bullets..our women..our childs..more then one million iraqi killed in four years..and another one million people were killed by the provious america friend saddam...four million iraqi were homeless in every part of this world...our butchery was not happened also in the darks ages of the humanity..there is no thing like the butchery of our small nation in the history..what by the hell you can name it..and no one care...it become a normal news to hear every day and to count in your websites and TV...the cheapest blood in the world is the iraqi blood..and i think that our mass butchery must not list here in your pages to be equal for your dear 67 jews or 35 english golden blood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.15.30.253 (talk) 23:52, 9 July 2007
 * After you've done cherry-picking, maybe you should read about the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings and work out what the nationality of the victims actually was. Nick Cooper 08:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not against Jews or English people and I don't want to read about another mass murder because I sow it myself many time before, but mybe becuase what I see every day I become more respect for all the humen lives, I saw many died people from difference sect and they all had the same blood, humen blood is humen blood no difference between iraqi or English or Jews but what happen in Iraq is more then anyone can imagine and you can't compare it with any other mass murder.
 * mass murder may happened one time in other countries but it continuous every day in iraq.
 * I can't understand it, why killing us is very easy and why our blood is very cheap..I can't understand it because we live in the 21 century. There was another mass murder before 3 day in Amorli in Iraq and there were 150 victims and it was a big massacre in a small village and I don't know when this butchery will stop it got worse and worse and here is examples from a very quick search, only write "iraq news" in any search engine and you will find hundreds of mass murder of our innocent people:


 * http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6279864.stm
 * http://www.rationalreview.com/content/31906
 * http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6698093.stm
 * http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/06/28/iraq.main/index.html


 * I can list hundreds of such mass murders in the last four years.


 * I am very angry and may said some things that I must not say and again I repeat that I respect all the humen lives from any nationality becuase if I don't do this it mean that there is no difference between me and the murderers of our people but you must make a separate page for what happen in Iraq because it's not fair to summarize everyday iraqi mass murder in two or three incident and if my english language was good enough I was doing it myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.15.30.253 (talk) 11:24, 10 July 2007

1929 Hebron massacre
I see the 1929 Hebron massacre listed as "mass-murder", and I question whether that is the case. "Death from mob violence", or "killed in riots" are apt description, but "mass-murder" suggests either psychosis (temporary or permanent) or a profit-motive. I don't think either of those explanations can really be defended. Only if race/religion-hatred speech induces a diseased state of the mind would the words fit - and we know that the riots were triggered by an actual event, the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem being seized by 100s of demonstrators, many of them weilding batons. The phrase "Mass-murder" could better be applied to, say, the Deir Yassin massacre - except I'm not aware of anyone trying to do that either.

There is a further problem, since the section is entitled "Mass murder by terrorists", and all the other cases listed are indeed terrorist based. Only if we label all Palestinians as terrorists (which would be a pretty outrageous thing to do) should this massacre be listed here. PRtalk 13:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Omagh bombing removed
"In recent years, terrorists have performed acts of mass murder to intimidate a society and draw attention to their causes." Sorry, but it doesn't fit under that description. The target of the Omagh bomb was a courthouse, but due to incompetence and bungled telephone warnings an incorrect location of the bomb was given, and people were moved towards the bomb rather than away from it. That's the official, reliably sourced version of events, so it doesn't fit that description. One Night In Hackney 303  08:02, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * it would be helpful if you provided a link to this reliable source. Anastrophe (talk) 00:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The onus would technically be on other people to prove that the bombing meets the criteria, rather than me to disprove it. Nonetheless, no direct link but Black Operations: The Secret War Against the Real IRA by John Mooney & Michael O'Toole (ISBN 0-9542945-9-9) gives you all the information you need. One Night In Hackney  303  07:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * you said in your first post "That's the official, reliably sourced version of events". but you're citing a publication that certainly doesn't sound like an official, reliable source, based upon the title. furthermore, from your description, "The target of the Omagh bomb was a courthouse". whatever bunglings may have occurred are irrelevant - or are you saying that the target was perhaps slated for demolition by the city? if not, then under what scenario is a courthouse bombing not a terrorist act? Anastrophe 08:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Have a read of reliable sources, it's a perfectly reliable source and if you'd read it before criticising it you'd know the authors certainly aren't fans of the Real IRA. My removing the item from the list was clearly explained above, it's nothing to do with whether it's a terrorist attack or not. The text underneath the heading states "In recent years, terrorists have performed acts of mass murder to intimidate a society and draw attention to their causes" - who says that was the motivation behind the Omagh bombing? One Night In Hackney  303  08:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Dividing mass murderers section into nationalities
Anastrophe, you sent me a message regarding the unnecessary use of national flags added to a listed mass murderer. I understand the irrelevancy of this, though I'd like your approval or disapproval on the concept of dividing the list of mass murderers into single subsections for each of their nationalities. I'm just wondering if this concept would be out of boundaries for Wikipedia. Thank you.

(LeatherEngine (talk) 04:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Leather Engine)


 * i'm unclear how this would improve the article. note that my or any other editors approval/disapproval per se is never required for edits, but they must stand up to policy and other editors opinions of their validity. Anastrophe (talk) 08:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Have at it.
There is an effort to clean up the List of massacres page, leaving it only for Political killing, military actions, ethnic massacres, etc. I'd love to drop this into you lap.

>===Criminal and non-political massacres===
 * See also school massacres and "going postal".

-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knulclunk (talk • contribs) 03:24, 17 December 2007

Knulclunk wrote above "There is an effort to clean up the List of massacres page, leaving it only for Political killing, military actions, ethnic massacres, etc."


 * This is not true there is a move to clean up the List of massacres article so that it only contains events that are described as massacres in reliable third party sources (see WP:PROVIT). If one looks at the above section that was copied from part of the list before it was zapped, it is clear that very few of those incidences carry citations from reliable third party sources stating that the event was a massacre and as such constituted WP:OR. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 22:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

state-sponsored mass murder
The current introduction to this section. has a problem with the source:
 * The concept of state-sponsored mass murder covers a range of potential killings. Some people consider any deaths in combat to be mass murder by the state (http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM), though this is not a generally held position. Clear examples of state-sponsored mass murder include:

Because Rummel explicitly excludes battle deaths in his definition of Democide Death by government DEATH BY GOVERNMENT Chapter 2 Definition of Democide: "I have to again be absolutely clear on this since so much takes place in time of war. War related killing by military forces that international agreements and treaties directly or by implication prohibit is democide, whether the parties are signatories or not. That killing explicitly permitted is not democide. Thus, the death of civilians during the bombing of munitions plants in World War II is not democide. Nor is the death of civilians when through navigation or bombing errors, or the malfunction of equipment, bombs land on a school or hospital, unless it is clear that the bombing was carried out recklessly in spite of a high risk to such civilian buildings. Nor is the death of civilians in a bombed village beneath which has been built enemy bunkers. Nor is the death of civilians caught in a cross fire between enemy soldiers, or those civilians killed while willingly helping troops haul supplies or weapons. Seldom is it easy to make these distinctions, but the aim here must be clear. I discriminate between democide in time of war and war-deaths. The latter are those of the military and civilians from battle or battle related disease and famine. The former are those victims (which may include the military, as when POWs are massacred) of internationally prohibited war-time killing, what may be called war-crimes or crimes against humanity." --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Home Freak the mighty rodman philbrick sulfline vieo would wer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.251.116.24 (talk) 02:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

"Not Yet Determined" Should Be Removed
Put it back if this is an issue, but not yet determined is hardly a conclusive encyclopedic entry. The events themselves may be notable under a news that heading, however, under the pretense of legal issues and assumptions of innocense and known facts, this is more trivia than anything else - at this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Detroitnews9 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree. -- Crohnie Gal Talk  12:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

See also section
I have removed some of the entries there because they are already in the main article such as Genocide. There were others but off the top of my head I can't list them all. An editor has been adding to the See also sections in different articles in the criminal sections and I have been checking them against the articles and removing the duplicates with another editor. Please do not keep returning them to the See also section prior to checking the article for duplication, thank you. -- Crohnie Gal Talk  12:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Removed image
I removed the image in the "Mass murder by individuals" section for a couple reasons: 1) The caption did not explain its relevance to the article, and 2) it is related to the Balangiga massacre; however, moving it to the "Mass murder by a state" section would squish the text between it and the nav box. I also tagged the article as needing more citations. momo ricks  03:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

The definition of mass murder should be for more than 4 or more people
I think that four or more is not enough to be mass murder. Four is a small number of people to have been killed and to qualify that term massive is quackery at best. The term massive murder should be larger than at least one hundred thousand dead at a the very least to be significant. Even one hundred thousand dead is still a small amount and not massive.At a very minimum the mass murder number should be larger than a bakers dozen. (GeneralMandrakeRipper (talk) 12:40, 21 November 2010 (UTC))


 * What a nice thought you have but fortunately we go by definitions from reliable sources. What do they say?  -- Crohnie Gal  Talk  14:53, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The number in the article is supported by a citation to a national police agency. GMR, you're welcome to cite sources. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:15, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

First lets look at the word mass and the word massive.

At Answers dot com the definition of mass includes along with other things large in comparison with the usual amount. At dictionary dot com the definition of massive along with other things says large in scale, amount, or degree: a massive breakdown in communications; massive reductions in spending.

Now in the current mass murder article it reads that mass is 4 or more. Using the definitions of the word massive as a guide to one could say the following. 4 four more than the usual amount is not massive or mass 4 is just 4 more. A massive amount of toilet paper packages was purchased from by a discount store warehouse national chain. One would assume that the national discount chain store bought more than a minimum of 4 toilet paper packages. One would assume that the national discount retailer bought hundred of thousands of toilet paper rolls to be distributed nation wide to all it's discount store warehouses.

Now if the retailer said that it bought a lot of toilet paper on might think that they had purchased more than 4 packages of paper easily.

4 is a small amount. Before mass or massive is used first you have all the sizes that come before like tiny, small, medium, large, extra large, jumbo, grande size, family size, party size, massive size.

For example on a scale of 1 to 10 what size was the murder?

If one used number 1 one would think tiny and if number 2 was used small and so on. 1=tiny 2= small 3=medium 4=large 5=extra large 6=jumbo 7=grande size 8=family size 9= party size 10= massive or mass size (GeneralMandrakeRipper (talk) 22:10, 21 November 2010 (UTC))

I contest that the mass murder min amount is not mass or massive but rather at best medium murder. (GeneralMandrakeRipper (talk) 21:56, 21 November 2010 (UTC))


 * Your original research on this (or mine, or any other editor's) can't be put in the article. Cite a reliable source. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:05, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree wih Gwen. I think you need to read policies, again if you did already.  There is a source for how mass is being used in this article.  Sorry but what you're saying doesn't matter and is wp:OR.  Sorry, -- Crohnie Gal  Talk  00:05, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

2011 Norway attacks?
Absolutely this is an act of mass murder, and what aggravates the situation is the fact that the killings were committed by a single man (at least according to what has been reported till now). Maybe it should be added to the list although it states that "the list includes attacks with at least 100 victims". I think this case is exceptional and that it would be more rational to lower the number of victims as a criteria for inclusion in the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecad93 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Examples of American mass murderers
Since Wikipedia English has an international scope the examples should cover mass murderers of other nationalities as well. At least those of English speaking nations. SpeakFree (talk) 19:46, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Carpet bombing
I am removing the claim that strategic bombing (especially during World War 2) constituted mass murder, since this is a highly POV claim (specifically, pro-Nazi and anti-Allied POV). 67.169.177.176 (talk) 06:21, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * We go by RS sources, if it is sourced then it belongs 21:58, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Aurora, Colorado
70 were shot, and circa 12 killed, and this is more than the 100 or more shot and killed in the Mountain Meadows massacre by Mormons in 1858? Maybe if you limit it to "by a single shooter." The one reference is per se not a reliable source if they totally ignore history in their hyperbole. Per WP:BLP adjectives such as "alleged" or "accused" are required when no one has been convicted in the slayings. Edison (talk) 02:28, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Do Armed Citizens Stop Mass Shootings? A history of intervention attempts.
This article presents an interesting history, by a mainstream media source, one not known for conservative bias. Cheers. N2e (talk) 23:01, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Do Armed Citizens Stop Mass Shootings? A history of intervention attempts., Slate, 18 Dec 2012.
 * Information from that article is suited for the Mass murder article. Flyer22 (talk) 23:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Atomic Bombings ?
Why doesn't the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki figure as mass murders ? I guess Truman should be added as one of the mass murderers
 * They are in there; see Mass murder. --WikiSlasher 23:50, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

They have been removed. No mention of Agent Orange and other actions responsible for massive civilan deaths in Vietnam. Similarly, over a million civilian casualties in Iraq? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.50.94.222 (talk) 00:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Aside from the fact that you're responding to a thread from 2006, Wikipedia works on the principle of WP:NPOV and WP:RS. What this means is that there must be citations from reliable secondary sources calling events "mass murder". Please read the no original research policy. If you can find reliable sources for this, by all means add them. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:28, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Mass murder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160102114658/http://fullspectrumottawa.com/exposure/exposure_mass_murder.php to http://www.fullspectrumottawa.com/exposure/exposure_mass_murder.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✔️ Capture pointing to redirect to top level. Replaced with a working earlier capture. Thanks, Cyberbot II. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

"several or more"?
Surely there's a better way to word this. What is "more" than "several"? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 03:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I'm changing it. Scolaire (talk) 07:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, since we're looking at the entire sentence, 'relatively' sticks out like a sore thumb. Relative to what? Relatively, as applied to serial killers, could mean days, months or years between kills. It's all a bit awkward. Either we're pedantic about it or there's no point to the exercise. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:33, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Considering that the reference used is Aggrawal's paper on the subject, I think it's worth taking a look at at it carefully (available here as a PDF). --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:47, 17 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I had missed this discussion when I made this revert. But I agree with this edit that Scolaire made and already thanked Scolaire for it via WP:Echo. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:36, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Barack Obama
With this edit, added Obama as a mass murderer. An IP removed the material. And I reverted further, removing more of Fix bi zed rut's edits. It is an extraordinarily minority viewpoint to call Obama a mass murderer. So WP:Due weight applies here. And the sources in this article should explicitly state "mass murder" or "mass murderer" for its examples anyway. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:34, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Number is 3 not 4
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mass_murder&diff=prev&oldid=828962706 23h112e (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Recent changes
I support this revert, because I think this article should tell about the events that were real murder of many people. If we include all instances of manslaughter or even unintentional mass killing, the article will become a total mess. IMO, when one author calls some event "mass murder", that is not a good criterion for inclusion. I think, this article should tell about the events that are universally considered mass murder. We already have separate articles for "genocide", "democide", "classicide", etc., the "mass killing" article (the article about a scholarly term, not just about "killing of many people") has also been created. In connection to that, it would be more correct if the scope of this article is made reasonably narrow. It is hardly a main article for various "-cides", they all already have their own articles.--Paul Siebert (talk) 00:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Is this universally considered as a murder? I would like to see mainstream sources that say that.--Paul Siebert (talk) 01:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I removed this assertion by "some commentators" which was not backed by any sources.--C.J. Griffin (talk) 02:19, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Terrorist
I am putting a stop to this silly edit war. I am restoring the version from 19:49, 12 Feb 2004 - posted before you had revert-after-revert - as a stopgap. I suggest a compromise that leaves the US in the article, but keeps the word "terrorist." Hector should not remove the word "terrorist" until he garners enough support for his position that calling the 9/11/01 attacks acts of "terrorism" goes against Wiki policy laid out in the Words to avoid page. 172 00:22, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * I question your neutrality in this conflict. It is also absurd to include the US entry under "mass murder", as is obvious if you possess the knowledge you claim to.  You even "restored" (before protecting) a link typo.  Great call! -- VV 03:21, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * It's policy to go to the version posted before the edit war, even if it includes mistakes. Your charges of "bias" are also silly. The last version posted before the back-and-forward edit was is probably going to piss you both off. It includes both the U.S. paragraph and the use of the word "terrorist." You both could accuse me of bias.


 * Users often determine which articles they will edit randomly by using the recent changes feature. They do not want the screen clogged up by a couple of users playing a tit-for-tat edit war day after day. Since administrators are here to alleviate conflict, admins can use the protection feature to encourage compromise.


 * Now, you will have to try reasoning with Hector, rather than automatically revert all his changes and insult him. On a related note, I also left him a note urging him to discuss the use of the word "terrorist" on the mailing list. I urged him to stop unilaterally removing it from the 9/11-related pages for now. Let's see if all this works. 172 03:32, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

lifting protection
Since Hector hasn't been around for the past couple of days, I'm lifting the protection. See User talk:RickK for further details. IMHO, VV owes me an apology there. 172 08:02, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

VV: Protecting page once again. You would not get into so many ideological edit wars if you had the courtesy to explain your actions on the talk page. 172 12:00, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * I am posting the 06:03, 7 Feb 2004 version for the time being. The only proper channel for resolving these disputes is the talk page. 172 12:06, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * You're almost parodying yourself here. Neither Wik nor Tannin explained their edits on the talk page, while I did explain mine in the edit summary and on User talk:RickK.  Yet you accuse only me in this conflict, and, to further sully your credibility, you continue to call "ideological" my attempt to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia's entries (in this case, including removing a line you yourself said wasn't appropriate). -- VV 21:01, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Why don't you start discussing content issues? How does the edit war get resolved by diverting attention to me? After all, I'm not involved in the content dispute. 172 23:38, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * I am not diverting attention, I am answering your absurd charges. I already discussed the content issues, as I just said.  You just never notice my comments. -- VV 03:40, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, then resolve your dispute with Wik and Tannin. 172 04:01, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Democide
What I understand from Rummel reasoning, democide are death caused by government. However, it is not necessary that those deaths are caused by murder. Therefore, I vote for removing the democide reference from the page. Cautious 14:53, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Four is "a mass"?
Pls source this surprising FBI definition (which is clearly questionable, given the common sense of the word mass). WaldiR (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2022 (UTC)