Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Algerian genocide


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. This is NOT the first AFD for this topic, merely under other names. It's a clear POV fork, and a clear attempt at re-creation of past deleted articles. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 09:55, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Algerian genocide

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is a POV fork of Algerian war, designed to attach the label "genocide" to the French actions during that war (1954-62), and in the Sétif massacre of 1945.

The article has a complex history including previous deletions, but this version is sufficiently different not to be a G4 speedy deletion candidate, and should be considered on its merits (but see this AfD for the deletion in 2006 of an earlier article on the same lines).

Genocide is a powerful and emotive word, and like other such words is often misused for rhetorical purposes, but we should be correspondingly careful about using it. Authoritative definitions such as that used by the UN's Genocide Convention include an element of intent to destroy a people or a group.

There are two questions to ask of the article: does it present reliably sourced evidence of genocide? if not, does it present evidence that the accusation is seriously made, and seriously considered by those with no axe to grind?

Evidence of genocide: the article's assertions come under two headings: use of torture and large casualty numbers. There are four paragraphs about torture; it is not to be excused, but it is not the same as genocide, and evidence of torture is not evidence of genocide.

The casualty numbers quoted are exaggerated. The lead paragraph gives an upper figure of 1,500,000, cited to Alistair Horne's A Savage War of Peace, the main English-language history of the war. That book nowhere gives such a number: its conclusion (p.538) is that the figures "do not justify the total of one million."

The article later asserts confidently that "Approximately 1.5 million Algerian Muslim Arabs were tortured and massacred." The source this time is onwar.com which in turn quotes unnamed "Algerian sources" for the figure; but it also quotes estimates of 300,000 from the FLN and 350,000 from the French, and agrees with Horne that if the actual figure is substantially higher than those, "it does not reach the 1 million adopted by the Algerian government."

The article gives the impression that these numbers are all Algerians killed by the French, but that is far from the case. This was a savage and confused conflict, and total casualties include Frenchmen, Algerians serving with the French forces, civilians killed by both sides, internecine fighting on the Algerian side, and massacres in the immediate post-war period of the "Harkis", Algerians who had served with the French or were identified with them.

No evidence is presented of any French intent to destroy the Algerian population as a group.

Evidence of the accusation: the specific Algerian accusation cited is by President Bouteflika, who is quoted as saying "Colonisation brought the genocide of our identity, of our history, of our language, of our traditions." This accusation is of "cultural genocide", a much vaguer concept covering the whole colonial period, and one which could be made by most colonised peoples.

Other accusations cited are from Turkish sources, and are related to disputes about the Armenian genocide of 1915. Although this is generally accepted as genocide, the Turkish government does not agree, and the accusation cited from the Turkish Prime Minister Mr Erdogan was in retaliation for a French law (since blocked as unconstitutional by the French Constitutional Council) which would have made it a crime to deny that the Armenian killings were genocide. The Turkish accusation was not welcomed by the Algerians, whose Prime Minister asked the Turks to "stop trading in the colonisation of Algeria... No one has the right to make use of the blood of Algerians."

TL;DR conclusion: in regard to the events of 1945 and 1954-62, this article produces no evidence of genocide, nor of any serious accusation of genocide except those made for political motives by the Turks. The Algerian war was a savage one with atrocities on both sides: we have a reasonably balanced article on it, and this one is a biased POV fork introduced for political motives. It should be deleted, not merged or redirected, which would perpetuate the "genocide" label. JohnCD (talk) 22:41, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * keep and remove the POV I have an opinion over whether this horrible series of events can be properly called "genocide", but that's irrelevant. Most of the AfD nomination above is devoted to arguing the point, and that too is not relevant. The question is whether there were notable accusations of genocide. I think even the nominator admits that the Turkish government did call it  genocide, and that was widely reported. That the accusations were made as ammunition in context of another dispute is certainly proper material for the article, but not a reason for deletion. The Algerian accusations also are relevant, though they need to be handled carefully with respect to the meaning, and I agree with the comments of the nom. that the article is not sufficiently clear.  The entire section  proving the French used torture widely, and killed about a half million civilians should be removed--a single sentence of background is sufficient. The emphasis is prejudicial POV, prejudicial enough that I can fully understand the justification for the nomination.  DGG ( talk ) 23:38, 20 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete This isn't commonly reckoned to be genocide or attempted genocide, and therefore it fails Wikipedia policy on the naming of articles: atrocities were certainly committed by both sides in Algeria, and they are already discussed in other articles. Furthermore, most of the article isn't about literal genocide (actual or alleged), and it heavily overlaps with Torture during the Algerian War and other articles.  Renaming is not a solution because if you renamed it to something more neutral, then it would be even more clearly a duplication of other articles.  If you want to name it Turkish allegations of genocide in Algeria you would still have to prove that's a notable topic rather than just a single news event. --Colapeninsula (talk) 00:12, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - already been deleted once. Nothing has changed since then. Leng T&#39;che (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep — Article is relevant just because it has a real basement. Historical period since 1945 till 1962 in Algeria was one of the darkest and most terrible periods of the world history in XX century. The darkest — because France is blocking the disclosure of the truth of that period. Terrible — because of ethnic cleansing carried out by France in Algeria. Why article named Muslim terrorism is allowed, but "Algerian genocide" is not? Because Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia? Wertuose (talk) 08:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Obvious POV fork Nick-D (talk) 22:35, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep — sure some POV but that can be fixed with edits by users so I think this article can be saved.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:04, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * above !vote fails to address which notability criterion is met. LibStar (talk) 22:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep The term Genocide can be accepted under Lemkin definition.User:Lucifero4
 * Comment/probably delete It's not up to us to come to some kind of independent judgment as to whether all this can or cannot, or should or should not, be described as genocide based on our own analysis and reasoning or even on the word sometimes cropping up in conjunction with these events in half-decent sources in some contexts. The bar is at once higher and easier to make a call on. The only issues when it comes to whether WP should have a page under this title are: a) whether there is some specific and coherent thing or topic commonly referred to as the "Algerian genocide" in reliable and authoritative sources; and b) whether it is actually about anything that we do not already have covered under another, more commonly seen name (or other titles plural). I'm finding it hard to avoid concluding that it fails on both counts and is probably not much more than a POV fork.  N-HH   talk / edits  22:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   16:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Relister's comment: I'm relisting this because the discussion above is unsuitable for assessing a consensus for the reasons noted by N-HH. The question is whether we should have an article about this topic according to our inclusion guidelines (WP:N, WP:POVFORK); and not issues of content such as whether there was a genocide or what Wikipedia should say about the historic events at issue. Accordingly, a closer would have to discount most of the above contributions. Could we have some more opinions by experienced editors, please?  Sandstein   16:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Blatant POV fork.  Sure, there were grave and serious atrocities.  But that doesn't prove that the government in Paris really wanted to annihilate the Algerian people.  Also, this is not the commonly accepted term for the conflict.  Note that even the Saddam's onslaught against the Kurds is not explicitly called one in the lede, merely referenced and alluded to as "genocidal".   dci  &#124;  TALK   04:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Calling the efforts made to resist Algerian independence "genocide" is a misuse of the term. Genocide means killing a whole race (or attempting to).  There may have been massacres (I do not know), but I would be very doubtful if it was on a scale to consitiute genocide.  I will add that this appears to be a POV of the Turkish government, which is trying to pretend that two wrongs make a right ot to escape French arguments about the genocide of the Ottoman regime by suggesting that the French were as guilty in Algeria.  The Ottoman regime undoubtedly was guilty of genocide against Armenian and other Christian minorities, whose rebellion they feared during WWI.  This is a case where history as taught in school is wilfully blind.  I suspect that my own country also tends to be blind as to its military defeats.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:41, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment by nominator: N-HH has pinpointed the important issues, but I believe the article fails both.


 * (a) Is some specific and coherent thing or topic commonly referred to as the "Algerian genocide" in reliable and authoritative sources? Searching, e.g with the links at the head of this AfD, finds almost exclusively Turkish sources, or reports of Turkish sources, at dates clustering around 2006 and late 2011, the two occasions when the French parliament debated bills to criminalise denial of the Armenian genocide. Those were also the dates at which versions of this article were introduced here. The subject of the accusations, as of this article, is French actions during the war of independence.


 * (b) Is it actually about anything that we do not already have covered under another, more commonly seen name? No, there is a full article at Algerian war, and more specific ones at Sétif and Guelma massacre, Battle of Philippeville, Torture during the Algerian War etc, plus coverage of the background at French Algeria, Nationalism and resistance in Algeria, Foreign relations of France.


 * Altering the title to "Accusations" has been tried before: after the 2006 article was deleted at AfD it was re-created as Accusations of French genocide against Algerians which was deleted, DRV'd, sent to AfD and redirected to Foreign relations of France. JohnCD (talk) 23:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.