Talk:Genocide/GA1

Comments

Some preliminary comments for now, before I dive in deeper.

1. What is the reliability of EJIL: Talk!? I don't have doubts about the reliability of other sources - books appear to be from reputable publishers, journals are peer-reviewed, while TC and TG are reputable news organisations.
   • It's the academic blog of the European Journal of International Law, with legal academics serving as its editors. (t · c) buIdhe 16:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
2. Optional nitpick: some publishers are wikilinked, some are not. If you plan on taking this to FAC (which would be great), you should make this consistent throughout the article.
   1. Another nitpick - use {{sfnm}} where applicable.
3. There are too many images.

I'll continue once the first and third comments get resolved. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

• Thanks so much for reviewing. I'm not in a hurry so take your time, but could you be more specific about which images do you think fail MOS:IMAGEREL? (t · c) buIdhe 16:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
  • On another look, I'll withdraw that comment. I thought that the Methods section had three images, that's why. There does not appear to be any issues in regards to MOS:IMAGEREL. All of the sections are short, so one to two images per section is, in my opinion, enough. I'll now continue reviewing this article. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:43, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I'll start from the body and then come back to the lede to check whether everything is properly sourced. After finishing the article, I'll take another look to see if there is any missing context. If you want to reply, please do it under each bullet point. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• The article uses American English spelling. Therefore, there are occurances of false titles throughout the article.
• Is there a reason why genocide is italicised in the first sentence of the Origins section?
  • MOS:WAW Buidhe alt (talk) 16:15, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

  Good to know. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

• "As a law student, his interest in the subject was initially sparked by the Armenian genocide" – from what I get, he is also the founder of the subject?
  • Lemkin coined the word "genocide" but I'm not sure it's so clear-cut that he invented the subject of genocide, which was arguably invented by its perpetrators (some languages such as Polish and German have words for genocide with a different etymology that predate Lemkin). Buidhe alt (talk) 16:15, 19 December 2025 (UTC)
• "to the publisher" – should we mention the publisher in this case? are they relevant to the article?
  • No, removed Buidhe alt (talk) 16:15, 19 December 2025 (UTC)
• "Lemkin's proposal" what did he propose? I would briefly mention this in a sentence or two.
  • Done
• wikilink mass slaughter.
  • Done
• wikilink Nazi criminality.
  • I don't think this is a good wikilink because the entire invention of crimes against humanity (and to a lesser extent genocide) was to internationally criminalize certain actions even without a nexus to war (classically, Nazi terror against German Jews, which was excluded from the jurisdiction of the Nuremberg trials). Buidhe alt (talk) 16:15, 19 December 2025 (UTC)
• Nuremberg trials seem to be wikilinked twice within the same section. Same goes for International Criminal Court.
  • I'm not seeing the overlink to Nuremberg trials. Buidhe alt (talk) 16:15, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

  "legal instrument" and "International Military Tribunal" both redirect to Nuremberg trials. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

  I see, the Nuremberg Charter is an independently notable topic, but it doesn't have an article at present so it redirects to its section in the Nuremberg trials article. I think this is an OK link because that way when an article is created it will go to the right place, but no big deal either way. (t · c) buIdhe 14:47, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

• "The powers prosecuting the trial were unwilling to restrict a government's actions against its own citizens" why?
  • I think this is mostly answered by the following paragraph. Is there a change in wording I could do to make it clearer? Buidhe alt (talk) 16:29, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

  Okay, now it makes sense. No, you don't have to reword it. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

• "Some of the most powerful states in the world, such as the United States, China, India, Russia, and Turkey, have not joined" why?
  • The cynical answer is because they want to be able to commit various international crimes without any external oversight on their actions - see above. Buidhe alt (talk) 16:29, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

So far, these are mostly nitpicks as I was not able to find any major issues within these two sections. The article reads well so far. I'll continue the review in a few days. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• Thanks for your comments so far! Buidhe alt (talk) 16:29, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

  Looks good... thanks for the changes. I'll continue tomorrow. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 22:25, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Continuing. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

• Why was {{Genocide}} removed from the article?
  • There is a dispute over its content, so it's not currently stable. (t · c) buIdhe 14:47, 20 December 2025 (UTC)
• "In contrast to earlier researchers who took for granted the idea that liberal and democratic societies were less likely to commit genocide, revisionists associated with the International Network of Genocide Scholars emphasized how Western ideas led to genocide" what about non-Western ideas? Do Japanese war crimes fall under the genocide criteria? Japan during that time was neither liberal and democratic.
  • I think this is a misunderstanding—INGOS researchers aren't arguing that non-Western states don't commit genocide, but that ideas that originated in the West (such as nationalism and the modern state) are associated with a disproportionate number of genocides—including in non-Western societies—and that liberal and democratic societies sometimes commit genocide. Is there a rephrase that it would make it more clear? (t · c) buIdhe 16:58, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

  Okay got it. No, you don't have to rephrase it. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

• "political and social groups were also excluded from the Genocide Convention" why?
  • this is covered in #Development section earlier in the article (t · c) buIdhe 16:58, 20 December 2025 (UTC)
• Genocide justification is wikilinked several times.
• The Notes section is blank, suggest removing it altogether.
  • Done both (t · c) buIdhe 16:58, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Will continue in a few days. The next section is Perpetrators. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Continuing. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

• Is the Wounded Knee Massacre considered to be genocide? If not, maybe we could find a replacement image?
  • The picture was mainly included because of an editor who was very vocal and convinced that myself and others were deliberately omitting anti-indigenous genocides in the United States. I'm not sure I would describe it, by itself, as an act of genocide but there are some sources that argue so, eg.: An alternative might be this.
• elites in what sense? the political ones?
  • Sources don't specify, I think the meaning is pretty general.
• what does Great Fire of Smyrna.jpg picture? Maybe you could clarify it in the caption, like heow you did for the image above.
  • done
• what is the purpose of File:Ezidi Peshmerga soldiers at their base in the Sinjar Mountains, under the command of Qasim Shesho 02.jpg?
  • Added to illustrate how victims of genocide (in this case Yazidis) organize militia to fight against the perpetrators.

From a quick skim over the article. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

• Should we mention in the lede that there are multiple definitions of a genocide and then list the one that is agreed up on the most?
  • The first sentence is a stab at the latter. Previous versions of the lead spend most of it detailing various definitions of genocide, but that seemed excessive. The current version, in my opinion, alludes to multiple definitions, but perhaps this could be made more explicit without expanding the length too much.
• Is it correct to label the Soviet Union as an empire?
  • Surely the Soviet Union didn't see itself as an imperial power, but there are 82,900 results for "Soviet empire" on Google Scholar, about equal to those for "American empire", so...
    • Seems like also we have an article on that - Soviet empire. Nevertheless, I'll make sure to spotcheck this.
• I've also noticed that the article tends to be critical of the Genocide Convention and that there seems to be an emphasis on colonialism. Not sure if that's a good or bad thing.
  • both of the books written about the Genocide Convention that I'm aware of (besides purely legal commentaries) are quite critical and a quick look at any book that purports to be a world history of genocide shows that most genocides mentioned there are the result of imperialism and/or colonialism.
    • Okay thanks.
• Why is the author of the MIT Faculty Newsletter listed as Lewis, David when in the article it says that it's Balakrishnan Rajagopal?
  • Must have been a citer glitch, now fixed.

I'm going to perform a spotcheck in a few days, so the review will be completed before the end of the year. I'd say that the article is in a good condition now and that it will be in an even better condition once these minor issues get resolved. If you plan on nominating this later for FAC, my recommendation would be to get it through PR first to get feedback from a couple of editors on whether the article is comprehensive enough and neutral enough for FAC. I plan on revising Far-right politics in Serbia first and I then plan on putting it up for a PR before nominating it for FAC - during the PR I would appreciate feedback and if it is okay with you, could I ping you then to review the article as you seem to have expertise in similar concepts to far-right politics? Cheers and happy holidays. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

• Sure, feel free to ping me when you open that PR although I admit to not knowing much about Serbian politics. (t · c) buIdhe 02:11, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Spotcheck

This table checks 20 passages from throughout the article (9.8% of 204 total passages). These passages contain 23 inline citations (8.7% of 263 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

More information Reference #, Letter ...

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status	Notes
Polish-Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin coined the term genocide between 1941 and 1943.
4	a	Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 7.
5	a	Kiernan 2023, p. 2.
He saw genocide as an inherently colonial process, and in his later writings he analyzed what he described as the colonial genocides occurring within European colonies as well as the Soviet and Nazi empires.
6	c	Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 14.			The source does not refer to either the Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union as empires, therefore I'd suggest this to be changed to their WP:COMMONNAME names (Nazi Germany and Soviet Union, respectively). The rest of the sentence checks out. But that wouldn't be accurate, since most of Nazi violence (including, for example, the murder of many of Lemkin's relatives) was carried out outside the borders of Germany. As the source points out, this was "part of this history of European colonial empires". (t · c) buIdhe 19:09, 25 December 2025 (UTC) I'll let this go through. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 25 December 2025 (UTC)
Additionally omitted was the forced migration of populations—which had been carried out by the Soviet Union and its allies, condoned by the Western powers, against millions of Germans from central and Eastern Europe.
24		Weiss-Wendt 2017, pp. 267–268, 283.			I don't have access to this source. It's on TWL; I'd quote it here but the relevant passage is too long not to worry about copyright. (t · c) buIdhe 19:09, 25 December 2025 (UTC)  Done Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 25 December 2025 (UTC)
Intent is the most difficult aspect for prosecutors to prove;
34		Kiernan, Madley & Taylor 2023, pp. 4, 9.
35		Ochab & Alton 2022, pp. 28, 30.
Authorities have been reluctant to prosecute the perpetrators of many genocides, although non-judicial commissions of inquiry have also been created by some states.
45	a	Stone 2013, p. 150.
In contrast to earlier researchers who took for granted the idea that liberal and democratic societies were less likely to commit genocide, revisionists associated with the International Network of Genocide Scholars emphasized how Western ideas led to genocide.
54		Kiernan et al. 2023, pp. 23–24.
Some scholars and activists use the Genocide Convention definition.
19	b	Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 22.
Alternative terms have been coined to describe processes left outside narrower definitions of genocide. Ethnic cleansing—the forced expulsion of a population from a given territory—has achieved widespread currency, although many scholars recognize that it frequently overlaps with genocide, even where Lemkin's definition is not used.
79		Shaw 2015, Chapter 5.
Most genocides are not associated with extreme political ideologies such as Nazism.
95		Maynard 2022, p. 97.
A large proportion of genocides occurred under the course of imperial expansion and power consolidation.
100		Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, p. 49.
Another debate concerns whether genocide is caused by aberrant political ideology, or if there is in fact a great deal of continuity between genocidal and ordinary political ideologies.
111		Maynard 2022, p. 95.
The military is often the leading perpetrator as soldiers are already armed, trained to use deadly force, and required to obey orders.
129		Pruitt 2021, p. 90.
Destruction of the environments where they live has been argued to be a form of genocide of indigenous peoples.
148		ejiltalk.org
The combination of killing of men and sexual violence against women is often intended to disrupt reproduction of the targeted group.
149	b	Basso 2024, p. 33.	"stemming from heteronormativity, select perpetrators believe they can biologically and culturally destroy groups by disrupting a group’s natural reproductive cycle via the extermination of men, the rape of women, and the destruction of social institutions"
It encompasses attacks against the victims' language, religion, cultural heritage, political and intellectual leaders, and traditional lifestyle,
152	c	Tiemessen 2023, p. 15.
160	b	Basso 2024, "Cultural Destruction".
Researcher Gregory H. Stanton found that calling crimes genocide rather than something else, such as ethnic cleansing, increased the chance of effective intervention.
175		Ochab & Alton 2022, p. 43.
imperial rule could lead to genocide if resistance emerged.
191		Häussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, p. 220.
The Cold War included the perpetration of mass killings by both communist and anti-communist states, although these atrocities usually targeted political and social groups, therefore not meeting the legal definition of genocide.
198		Naimark 2017, pp. 86, 104, 143.
Genocide does not only affect victim and perpetrator groups, but seeks to reshape an entire society and also involves those who observed a genocide or benefited from it.
208		Spencer 2025, pp. 257–258.
Studies of genocide survivors have examined rates of depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, suicide, post-traumatic stress disorder, and post-traumatic growth. While some have found negative effects, others find no association with genocide survival.
210		Lindert et al. 2019, p. 2.

Close

@Buidhe: Okay... the conclusion: the article is in a good shape and meets the GA criteria. I'll go ahead and promote it once the last two books get downloaded. Cheers and happy holidays, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 25 December 2025 (UTC)