Talk:Moroccan Goumier

Untitled
I am just in the process of removing a lot of stuff unrelated to WW2 which seems to be the primary subject, and stuff related to/derived from fiction/gaming sites.

Does anyone know the relevance of the dates November 17, 1942 to July 14, 1943, which I have just removed from the text until they are clarified? Grant65 | Talk 09:10, 31 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I have now dramatically rewritten as most of the previous content was either incorrect (including the spelling "goumiere") and/or marginal to the actual Goumiers. A lot remains to be done. Grant65 | Talk

I've just reverted an edit which dwelt on the defense of the Cassino monastery which I didn't think was relevant to the Goumier article. Hope no one if offended! Stephen Kirragetalk - contribs 09:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Dear user,

I hope this is going to the correct place.

The article "Moroccan Goumier" has a minor error. The first entry under "Notes and Citations" does not have the author's last name. 'Edward L.', should be 'Edward L. Bimberg'. To verify this, please refer to the first entry under "References" and the first entry under "External Links".

Thank you, Terry

P.S. I have made some minor changes to other Wikipedia articles, but I could not find how to edit this item, which is some type of reference list. If you could teach me, I would be very happy to learn. You can reach me via Email at "terrychesney@msn.com". Any other changes you would have for how I do things like this, are solicited and will be greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.109.138 (talk) 23:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by a journalist regarding exaggerations of atrocities
Considering that here we try to report facts, and not rumors, what is the sense of adding this phrase?


 * On the other hand a British journalist commented, “The Goums have become a legend, a joke… No account of their rapes or their other acts is too eccentric to be passed off as true.”

My thoughts exactly - I wouldn't have a problem with it if it weren't being used as a 'balance' to the allegations mentioned above it ("On the other hand...). If it were just put there as 'one report from some British journalist' among other contemporary accounts that'd be fine but due to the context of the wartime censors in Great Britain and other belligerent countries it is of dubious impartiality. I hardly think that a British journalist reporting on the war in Italy would be given ANY leave to write about or investigate claims of large-scale atrocities by the colonial troops of an allied nation. Journalism in Britain - particularly regarding the war - was subject to heavy oversight. It'd be the same as using a quote from an Italian-language Nazi propaganda newsletter claiming "TENS OF THOUSANDS OF ITALIAN WOMEN, MEN, AND CHILDREN - INCLUDING PRIESTS BRUTALLY RAPED AND KILLED BY COMMUNIST FRENCH AFRICAN MOSLEM FIENDS" and I have no doubt German propaganda DID make a field-day of it in an attempt to divert attention from their own crimes and get an edge on their enemies in the crucial war for the hearts and minds of Italians caught between the two warring parties, propaganda was especially prevalent during the Italian Campaign because of its nature as a civil war, the existence of various (often infighting) groups of partisans, and the necessity to recruit local villagers to act as scouts and guides in the rough and confusing mountain passes of central Italy, which is all the more reason no censor worth their discerning scowl would let such a propaganda coup for the Axis forces be published in the British press.

It absolutely needs to be reworded, and I'd argue it should be removed altogether once more credible information is found that balances the reports of allegations, if that is what Wikipedia would really require (not to be hyperbolic but I don't think this website would much oblige the use of a quote by a German wartime journalist discrediting claims that Jews in occupied Eastern Europe are being mistreated for the sake of 'balance' in an article, so why would you have it in this case?) - I think subsequent scholarship has come to the consensus that crimes did occur during this part of the war and this particular group of soldiers, at more prevalent rates than other allied units, as evidenced elsewhere in this same article, but I will let people on this website who actually have a name instead of a random IP judge and adjudicate for themselves on the matter. At any rate I'm putting a 'disputed' tag on the statement. 2601:87:4400:AF2:FD12:4C2E:6FB2:23DB (talk) 22:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I would agree that the comments by a British journalist should be removed if substantiated research establishes that the Moroccan goumiers were responsible for mass atrocities during the Italian campaign. Unfortunately this does not, as yet, seem to be the case. Accordingly we are left with charges and rebuttals that sometimes reflect racial and political attitudes of the time. I think that the article as it stands tries to provide a balanced overview. Buistr (talk) 00:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The Moroccan Goumiers of the FEC in Allies and Italians under Occupation, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013: "Chapter 3 on soldier crime included rape, but not the mass rapes carried out by French colonial soldiers. Work has been done on this by Italian historians using both  oral  testimony  and  documentation  (Tommaso  Baris  and  Vania  Chiurlotto  among  others),  but  this  chronological  account  based  mainly  on  documents  illustrates  very  well  the  occurrences  and  the  culpability  in  detail."--Le Petit Chat (talk) 06:39, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Moroccan Goumier. 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/20100105140300/http://www.france-phaleristique.com/lh.htm to http://www.france-phaleristique.com/lh.htm

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) 02:58, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Moroccan Goumier. 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/20090304233736/http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7CFran%C3%A7ois to http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7CFran%C3%A7ois
 * Added tag to http://www.bluespader.org/uploads/SicilyTranscript.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100315032803/http://www.france-phaleristique.com/fourrag.htm to http://www.france-phaleristique.com/fourrag.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120307051017/http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7C to http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7C
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120307051017/http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7C to http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7C
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120307051017/http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7C to http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7C
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090304233736/http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7CFran%C3%A7ois to http://www.farac.org/php/article.php3?id_article=64%7CFran%C3%A7ois
 * Added tag to http://www.bluespader.org/uploads/SicilyTranscript.pdf

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) 13:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:31, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Forces auxiliaires.jpeg