Talk:List of anthropogenic disasters by death toll/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 ← Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18

Question

On the precisions of numbers: For instance, the casualties of WWII are listed as

  • lowest estimate: 65,000,000
  • highest estimate: 85,000,000
  • geometric mean: 74,330,344

It makes no sense to give a computed mean of two estimated numbers with a higher precision than the original numbers. A number like 65,000,000 means "anything between 64,500,000 and 65,500,000" thus the computed mean should have a similar low precision, in this case: 74,000,000. This applies to all the computed means. 217.210.147.163 (talk) 00:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Why:

  • almost every section has its text written in italics
  • laughable "events" like smoking are even mentioned
  • many events are called "holocausts" instead of "genocide" or sth like that? its called overuse.

Looking forward for improvements.Ernio48 (talk) 20:00, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ernio48. I don’t have any opinion on the italics in the section introductions.
The “laughable event” you mention and the overuse of the word “holocaust” come from a massive number of edits from this sock farm beginning in mid-June (and may be ongoing [1]). These edits:
  • restructured the article
  • added a huge number of often overlapping entries,
  • probably involved some original research (such as combining events into e.g. the “Hutu and Tutsi Holocaust”)
  • introduced some quirks (such as the semi-separation of “Siege of Fort Pitt” from similar events, which may also be original research)
  • caused the loss of about a dozen references.
On the other hand, the editor seems to be fairly knowledgeable about the subject, and many of the new additions have been referenced and/or are probably good to have in the article.
I don’t have a strong opinion on what should be done about it. I was inclined to re-add the removed citations rather than do a full-scale revert, but the current article would require a lot more cleanup than just adding the lost citations. This would at least entail:
  • adding citations for a large amount of the new material,
  • removing some original research,
  • probably splitting many groups of sub-events into separate articles
  • a good amount of general cleanup.
Maybe this could be done piecemeal as editors take an interest?
You might take a look at the prior version [2] of the article to get an idea of the changes and which version you find preferable.
User:Iryna Harpy and @User:Bbb23 - do either of you have an opinion?
--Wikimedes (talk) 03:42, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
I could provide a protracted answer, but I'll stick with keeping it short and terse: the 'list' has been turned into a massive piece of OR and COATRACK. I watched it unravel and was going to leave a similar comment to your own. Is this Wikipedia or Ripley's? 10 deadliest man-made events!!! Human sacrifice and ritual suicide!!!??? It needs to be well and truly lopped back to the earlier version.
As regards the use of a 'geometric average', I presume that I hadn't really looked at this article properly and it came to my attention due to chasing that sock around. I expressed my position on the use of WP:CALC in this manner a couple of months ago on Talk:List of genocides by death toll when a sock/meat tried to introduce a 'median' figure in the same manner, and I stand by that evaluation. If this is by death toll, then it should follow the same format of using reliably sourced minimum to a reliably sourced maximum figures per instance. Creating a 'median' figure is not CALC, it's a breach of WP:NOR. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
I glanced through the editing history for the last few months and almost all the edits were from the sock farm or cleaning up the changes made by the sock farm. The one exception I found was this [3], adding a death toll for conflict in the Kashmir (and improperly marked as a minor edit). This could be re-added after the reversion or left out given the relatively small death toll. The upshot being that if the sock farm's edits are seen as a net negative, a reversion will cause very little collateral damage.--Wikimedes (talk) 20:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm for a reversion. Having followed the content increments myself, I'm in agreement that there'll essentially be no collateral damage to to article. The additional content was either entirely OR sections, or sections created using text and sources from other articles and lists specifically dedicated to the subject. This article has now become a repository for everything that's ever been recorded in history (and much that hasn't been recorded, simply speculated on). --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:56, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I made an attempt to clean things up but gave up half way - now I'm strongly supporting a full rollback, which should be the most appropriate way to repair the damage the sock farm has caused. In addition to what Wikimedes has mentioned above, the farm has also come up with a series of naming quirks in blatant violation of Wikipedia's conventions ("Asian Holocaust"), inappropriate linking ("Ottoman Empire Holocaust" - that's a lot of effort), wanton capitalization, missing spaces, repeating entries (essentially the whole top 10 list section, which I have removed and have references returned to the body) and so on. With these in mind I'm in for a speedy resolution. --Morningstar (talk) 05:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
@Morningstar and Wikimedes: I despair of the WP:BEANS this has been turned into. It's still out of hand... and growing. I'm all for a major rollback. Can I take it that we've formed consensus for this? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:40, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm OK with a rollback. 2 weeks seems enough time for editors to register objections. Better to roll it back sooner than later at this point so that people don't waste more effort on the current version.--Wikimedes (talk) 02:56, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
As an infrequent editor of this article, I've compared the present content with the proposed roll back version noted above, and the result of a roll back would be a net improvement. (I'll personally be happy to see that OR-mess involving Fort Pitt get rolled away...) Xenophrenic (talk) 05:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Support. A speedy rollback would also encourage further contributions being made to the article - I hate seeing potentially positive edits being rolled back or editors holding off contributing for fear of that. Morningstar1814 (talk) 03:34, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Are plagues anthropogenic?

The "European colonization of the Americas" death estimates seem to be based on estimates of the population of the Americas. This would imply a near 100% population reduction. It's agreed that 90-95% of the native population was wiped out by smallpox. Taking this into account, shouldn't the Mongol conquests estimate be raised to 65,000,000 to include the casualties of the Black Death? Woogasnerk (talk) 19:18, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

It depends on what reliable sources say. Enough sources consider the population decline of the Americas following contact with Europeans to be genocide (now in the "armed conflict" section), even though most of the decline was due to disease, so the disease casualties are included. If enough reliable sources include plague deaths in their Mongol death toll estimates, then these can be included in the higher estimate, along with a comment that these include the Black Death.
A few related points: The 1918 flu pandemic used to be included in the upper estimate of WWI casualties, but now explicitly excludes these deaths. Many, and I think the majority prior to the 20th century, of war deaths were caused by disease and are probably included in the totals without being explicitly mentioned. Similarly, disease causes quite a few famine deaths; lack of calories and poor nutrition often weaken the immune system and make the victims more susceptible to disease rather than killing people directly.--Wikimedes (talk) 09:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

This article is awful

I am specifically looking at #List of dictatorships by death toll. It throws the term "Holocaust" around a lot, and has nonsense such as [[Armenian Genocide|Ho]][[Assyrian Genocide|loc]][[Greek Genocide|au]][[Great Famine of Mount Lebanon|st]], which produces Holocaust. One part says "Extrapolate as you will." – I'm fairly certain Wikipedia readers are not supposed to extrapolate anything for themselves. I also have no idea how Roman emperors from two millennia ago are related to the rest of the events, which happened in the late 19th century at the earliest.

I'm not very well informed on the topic, and I don't have access to any of the sources, so I can't fix it myself. ~barakokula31 (talk) 16:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

The Residential Schools event is misplaced

JamesStanley (talk) 12:07, 23 March 2017 (UTC) There is no evidence to support the inclusion of the Canadian Residential School events in a section describing events in this way: "Event that entail the intentional mass murder of individuals on the basis of ethnicity, religion, or race, or death caused by the forced eviction of individuals on the basis of race, religion or ethnicity." There is no evidence that this description at all applies to this event. I have already removed it once, but it was added by CorbieVreccan on the grounds that it violated "conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies" and that "Mass graves of children" are "still being found." There are no mass graves nor has any evidence surfaced verifying that there is. Similarly, removing an entry because it is not supported by any sources at all does not conflict with wikipedia's "neutral point of view and verifiability policies"--though I must confess, it may conflict with CorbieVreccan's personal policies.

If anyone has any evidence that this entry belongs in this list as this list if described, please provide it. Otherwise, leave the change.

@CorbieVreccan: This might be of interest to you. I am happy that @JamesStanley: you decided to talk over it here. Hope a consensus is reached over this matter. Best wishes to all! P.S. Please don't involve me in this matter as I am not interested in discussing this topic. Thanks! Yashovardhan (talk) 05:35, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

This article is poor

There are many estimates without sources, with some of them just plain wrong (e.g according to this article, civilian deaths caused by the Nazis are only slightly more than the Holocaust on average), the layout is generally poor with references all over the place, poor descriptions and some events are questionable or worded wrongly. The deeper you go, the worse it is. Should an article like this even exist in such a manner? Mellk (talk) 22:59, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 22 external links on List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:34, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Israeli genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine

There is no mention of Israel's campaign of systematic ethnic cleansing and genocide of the Palestinians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.185.235.188 (talk) 05:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Not much of a surprise there. We do not have any articles covering either "Israeli genocide" or "ethnic cleansing of Palestine". We have an article on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which estimates that there were about 21,500 casualties between 1965 and 2013. The source is "Major Episodes of Political Violence 1946-2012" by Monty G. Marshal. Dimadick (talk) 21:28, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

European colonization of the Americas = not appropriate

Why is this designated as a "war/anthropogenic disaster"? This is a two century time span. It was a unique migration of the human species. To compare it to warfare and other conflicts of that kind is completely apples to oranges.

Because this "unique migration" resulted happened to result in the death of probably at least 50% of the population of the continent. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 00:43, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Do we have any sources calling it a wars or anthropogenic disaster? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:35, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Actually, this whole article has suffered from original research since its inception. Wars are one thing that can be verified; the "Anthropogenic disasters" aspect has been WP:POV from the word go. There are, however, realistically plenty of sources that attest to the European colonisation of the Americas as having wiped out pre-colonisation peoples and cultures in the process, ergo it is no more or less WP:OR than the majority of the article. If you have issues with one particular aspect, I suggest that you consider the other examples with the same diligence. Either the article in encyclopaedic and should exist, or it is original research and should be deleted. Personally, I've never encountered an academic discipline that covers such a broad range of subject matter... then parses it by death toll. WP:ITSINTERESTING, but it's WP:BOLLOCKS. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

European Migration to the New World Entailed a Single War?

Lumping "European Conquests of the Americas" into one event is ridiculous. This would cover natives from Tierra del Fuego to the Arctic in conflicts fro 1492 past Wounded Knee in 1890. Why not list all victims of Communism as a single event? Or better yet, all forms of socialism, communism and National Socialism? Why not all European colonial events worldwide as a single event or all central African conflict in the late Twentieth Century/Early Twenty first? Yep, this article's pretty bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:32CB:4BE0:25D9:382E:EF72:EB3B (talk) 00:15, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Spanish colonization split-up is both unnecessary and contradictory

Whether the colonization is listed under "genocide" or "war" is up for debate, but the estimates for the European colonizations don't make any sense when you compare them. The minimum estimate for the Spanish colonization is greater than the minimum estimate for overall European colonization, and when you add up the Aztec and Incan conquering values, it's greater than the mean estimate for total Spanish colonization. Neither of these latter two have sources, either. I would suggest we either merge all the Spanish sections into one, and find new minimum estimates that don't contradict each other, or remove the European/Spanish differentiation entirely. I Knew Him Horatio (talk) 00:51, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Agree. Came here to say this. Iasonaki (talk) 15:13, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:25, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2017

unless it is a quote you have someone killing then torturing people. How many times must someone be harassed? 2605:E000:9143:7000:8137:276C:2FA4:A843 (talk) 15:42, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 16:14, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Torturing of killed people

Messing with a body after it is dead is molestation not torturing. Someone should either change torture to molestation or reverse the order.2605:E000:9143:7000:8137:276C:2FA4:A843 (talk) 16:29, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Terrible, terrible sources

This page has tons of entries based on absurdly poor sources. I'm going to remove two of them: the An Lushan Rebellion and the Gothic War. The former gets its numbers from a pop-history book and a dead link to some random website, and the latter gets its figure from a history book published more than two hundred years ago. Anyone who has access to up-to-date, scholarly sources on these topics should not hesitate to re-insert them with proper citations and more accurate figures. Chamboz (talk) 21:19, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Agree with Major changes needed

So Hitler killed 17 million exactly? Come off it! Stalin killed way more! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.208.60.57 (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Well Hitler killed 6 million Jews and many other groups in large numbers. Not 17 million though. Unless you include war deaths 8 million soldiers 12 million civilians but he didnt do that directly.

Stalin killed a lot through neglect. Partially intentional famine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skamay (talk • contribs) 18:41, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I agree Stalin was bad, but what that's got to do with the Nazi death toll? This is about the Nazis, not the whataboutism. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 01:04, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Extensive edits to the Japanese war crimes entry

80.216.213.167 made extensive edits to this on Sept 14. I have little knowledge on this topic, so I only fixed the bad English, but it seems to be written from a biased point of view based on the wording. If someone with more knowledge could look into it, that would be appreciated. Even if all the information is correct, it is still clunky, although now in proper English. lukini (talk | contribs) 16:45, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Major changes needed

Major changes are needed, the lower estimate of the "European colonization of A" is lower than the "Spanish colonization of A" which in turn is lower than the "Spanish conquest of the Aztec Emp", that defies any logic.

Spanish colonization of America supposedly lasted 50 years! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.138.4.83 (talk) 21:40, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. Belgian atrocities in the Congo are listed twice on the page. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 01:45, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

One thing more about Slavery. Thinka about ancient roman times and during the viking age in Scandinavia and so on the amount of slaves must be lost in numbers. Maybe some sort of note of slaves trades that happend for such a long time ago that there are no good numbers. Like for example the name slave comes the word for slavic peoples in Europe. Please mention this in the slavery session. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.205.180 (talk) 20:27, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Significant figures in mean values

The mean values in the tables do not obey significant figure rules, leading to a sense of false precision. These values should be corrected to obey significant figures, using statistician's rounding. This is Statistics 101! --2601:547:A00:ADC4:75CD:97F2:B76B:EDA3 (talk) 06:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Average of estimates of death tolls - geometric mean

Can anyone tell me why this article uses the geometric mean of the estimates of death tolls, rather than another measure of average such as arithmetic mean, harmonic mean or median. Other measures of the averages of estimates, that is median and modal values, are more clearly unsuitable than arithmetic mean.

Agreed! The geometric mean seems highly inappropriate for this purpose. While modal values would be ideal, the arithmetic mean should be good for this article.--2601:547:A00:ADC4:75CD:97F2:B76B:EDA3 (talk) 06:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Major Changes -- Removal of Duplicates

Concur with the gist of the above comments on needing major changes. A huge chunk of this list includes duplicates; European Colonization of Americas, Spanish Colonization of Americas, Spanish Conquest of the Inca, all are subsets of each other and the numbers don't make any sense. The Second Sino-Japanese War should just be added to World War II and removed from the list as well. All of this duplication makes it look like there have been more separate destructive conflicts of that scale than there really was. Also, why in the world is "anthropogenic" included at all in this title? First, looking at wars on scale of destruction shouldn't be muddled in with man-made disasters. This is two totally different subjects. European Colonization of America, for example, wasn't a war. There were several wars involved, but there was a great deal of not-war that happened during that whole period as well. You wouldn't include the Black Death with the Hundred Years War, and frankly the Hundred Years War wasn't just one war either. There is no need to inflate this list with extra stuff. Make it a separate list. Secondly, simply use the phrase "man made". If you have to use fancy terms you aren't doing a great job of writing for an audience. This is Wikipedia, not your anthropology assignment.

Any objections to these major changes actually being made? Velostodon (talk) 22:11, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

No objection. This article is far too long and very hard to navigate, among other serious issues.--2601:547:A00:ADC4:75CD:97F2:B76B:EDA3 (talk) 06:51, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Can I suggest that Darkest Hours by Nash not be used as a source as well during the cleanup? His claim on only 15m died in WW2 flies in the face of basically every other historian and his claim on only 1.5m dead in China borders on genocide denial. Kylesenior (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Native American genocide, and other contentious issues.

There is significant debate over whether the various wars and massacres between different European colonies and Native American tribes constitute a genocide. There was no unified goal among Europeans to eliminate the Native American population over the course of many centuries. While some genocides may have occurred, it is highly debatable whether the totality of interactions together constitute once genocide.

Indeed, at least some of this debate derives from Anglo-Saxon narratives on Spanish and Latin American history, such as the Black Legend. In the meantime, I have added notes on the Native American genocide regarding its contentious status, given the similar caution attached to the entry on the Holodomor. Perhaps the article should stick to the legal definition of genocide from the UN Genocide Convention, as in the list of genocides by death toll article, along with a cleanup warning.--2601:547:A00:ADC4:75CD:97F2:B76B:EDA3 (talk) 07:09, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Merging

Wouldn't it be better if we merge this page with the pages "List of genocides by death toll" and "List of wars by death toll", and call it "List of anthropogenic disasters by death toll"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GS-216.1993 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Missing many many examples

There are almost no examples given of deaths caused by empire and aggressive colonization and invasion of indigenous peoples. 2 million in Australia. More in north America. Many more perhaps in central and south America. Also USA is skipped entirely. Caused deaths of 1000s in Philippines. Occupation of Hawaii and deaths resulting. Also in south and central America. South American right wing dictators missed Pinochet, Brazils military junta, Argentinas brutal regimes, almost every country needs covering here. Armenian genocide by Turks and Russians. Chinese on weigar people in west. Indias govt sanctions massacres of muslims. Burmas activities including recent assault on Muslim ethnic group in west rahinga people. Has massacres in aceh in Indonesia been included. Plus indo in west Papua or irian jia as they incorrectly call it. Belgium's failed and brutal to the extreme empire in central Africa. Israel's continued strangling of food and medicine to Gaza and wars against west bank as well. Uzbekistans current dictator who the us was close to until he kicked them out - he is worse than Saddam was. Agh. How many more entries is that? I count 19 possible entries I just suggested. Most significant in numbers and important to world history. Can some people help me do some. Because this page is a bit embarrassing and has potential to highlight atrocities to hopefully reduce the regularity. Please send me message or something. I'm quite new to editing wikipedia. Skamay (talk) 18:55, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Did you even read the page? Many of the things you refer to are included (the genocide of indigenous Amerindians are included, so is the Belgian Congo Free State horrors, and the US isn't skipped entirely there are several entries for it). Many of the things you mention are included under blanket terms since the page would be way too long if they were listed separately. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 01:01, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


Djinghis Khan need to be included some estimates that he killed 40 million at the time. Probably overestimating but still he should be included. Also The nazis started ww2 so almost all civilians casulties can be blamed upon Hitler. At least the massive massacres of Slavs in Russia at geometric mean of 23000000 million. We include Mao Because of crop failure and imperial japans similiar crimes should not wehrmacht indiscriminate murdering of civilians slavs be included also? You just mention extermination camps here not war Slavic civilians killed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.194.78 (talk) 17:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

It is not underestimated at all think of the Black Death it is thought to have reduced European population by 2/3 in some place. And ove rhalf in total. Like the Europeans in America the mongols spread their diseases withn them. Without the mongols most likely the black death would not have happend. Thats well above the people killed by the native americans 200 -75 million people according to reliabale sources mainly in Europe and in the middle east. Reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.151.141.59 (talk) 19:28, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Citation for Upper limit for First World War casualties is a random CDC URL that doesn't seem at all relevant

Nearby Owl (talk) 20:11, 18 July 2019 (UTC) Nearby Owl

Riots cutoff

The riots section said "Riots and incidents where at least four people died are listed here". The wars section only includes wars with a death toll (higher estimate) of at least 100,000. The war crimes section doesn't have a cut-off, but the least deadly event has 204 deaths. The genocides &c. list also doesn't have a cut-off, but the least deadly event has 878 deaths. Political purges, again no cut-off, but least is the lowest estimate for Tianamen Sq at 241 deaths. Forced labour, no cut-off, lowest is 1200. Famines, no cut-off, lowest estimate is 0-275,000 or 50,000. Floods, no cut-off, lowest 2,209. Sacrifices, no cut-off, lowest 804. Prisons &c., no cut-off, lowest 1,032. Regimes, no cut-off, lowest is 327-1,500. In that context, it seemed odd to me that we were listing riots down to 4 deaths. I implemented instead a cut-off at 100, although 200 would be justified compared to the other tables. We are never going to get a complete list for smaller riots.

However, Jack90s15 reverted saying, "its fits with the page its showing the high and the low for the Riots in history". I don't follow the logic of how a cut-off of 4 shows the low...? But, anyway, as per BRD, I throw the question open to the Talk page. Should we continue with a cut-off of at least 4, or increase to 100, or increase to 200, or use some other cut-off? Bondegezou (talk) 18:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

@Bondegezou: or we could have another list for deaths from Riots that are under 100?Jack90s15 (talk) 18:30, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't understand your suggestion...? Can you explain? Bondegezou (talk) 20:02, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
@Bondegezou: what if we have to lists one for deaths under 100? and one for deaths over 100?Jack90s15 (talk) 20:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't see any advantage in having two lists with the same content, taking up the same amount of space. I am suggesting we shouldn't include riots with 4-100 deaths because there are far too many of them and they are not notable compared to the other events described on this page. Bondegezou (talk) 20:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
@Bondegezou: After looking over it what if we do death tolls that are 100 and up?
That sounds good to me. I'll wait a little bit of time in case anyone else wants to chip in. Bondegezou (talk) 19:12, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Soviet Leaders

If we now divide leaders/regimes after the death toll then why not include Brezhnev and Khrushchev in the death toll and not just Stalin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.227.83.185 (talk) 21:50, 7 November 2019 (UTC)


Pinker list

BenjaminScales added a section consisting of a list sourced to Pinker, with an adjustment for the population at the time. Right on time kid removed it, arguing it was "redundant". I would like to argue in favour of including this section (although happy for it to be edited or moved to lower down in the article). What's good about this list is that it is directly sourced, whereas the rest of the article is us creating an ordering from individual citations for different rows. Wikipedia should always respect sources and a sourced ranking is thus valuable. I would also that the list is not redundant because it does something different in including an adjustment for the population at the time. [[User:Right on time kid|]] (talk) 15:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Bondegezou I believe it is redundant as some of the estimates that were used contradict current numbers. like for World War II since the estimates range all the way up to 75 million. And also for Joseph Stalin since Matthew white, uses the 20 million figure which originates from The Great Terror 1968 by Robert Conquest and in the new addition he revised it down to 15 million. Maybe we can do something similar Since the population statistics very dramatically, especially with what estimates people are using and when they were made.Right on time kid (talk) 15:59, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Right on time kid Why would you remove a list simply because a few of the estimates are contested? By that logic, you might as well delete the whole page. Pinker's data is important, because it adds another level of statistical analysis. Global population is a key factor that cannot be ignored - with increasing sizes of civilisations comes increasing size of armies. By presenting World War 2 purely as the largest anthropogenic catastrophe, is misleading and masks the underlying trend - battlefield deaths as a proportion of army size have been in decline for centuries. The distant past is already at a disadvantage in being honestly assessed compared to the 20th century, because the documentation of wars and anthropogenic atrocities before the 20th century is dwarfed by the huge volume of data across multiple media that we have from the wars of the last century. This creates historical myopia. In the middle ages, mortality rate for soldiers during battle was towards 50% according to Pinker, whereas in World War 2 soliders had approx. a 15% chance of dying, despite the mechanisation of war. See OurWorldInData.org for further details on the decline in battlefield deaths, as the data is clear on this. By not including some kind of effort to acknowledge the influence of global population on absolute death toll figures in your page, you are ignoring the fact that with larger civilisations and populations, both regional and global, come larger armies and more organised wars. It is quite staggering that over 30 million died in china in the 7th century in the An Lushan revolt given the much smaller global population, and smaller corresponding armies/military forces. Wikipedia should be a forum for honest and rigorous presentation of facts and statistics, not ignoring clearly significant variables such as population size. You really should be including Pinker's table. I am happy to change the World War 2 and Stalin figures, if that is a compromise you are willing to make.

My Sources World War II: Infographics 1st Edition 2019 page 146-147. Robert Conquest The Great Terror: A Reassessment: 40th Anniversary Edition, Oxford University Press, USA, 2007. p. xviii.

I apologize for being a bid dramatic with this but I except the compromise. We should use the sources for the two Figures since those two are hot topics. Bondegezou I put links to the pages that discuss both topics extensively, with multiple sources for the two subjects are you ok with this?Right on time kid (talk) 18:12, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

BenjaminScales I see now that you responded to me next time can you please sign your post so people will know its from you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signatures?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiTn-yc9_7mAhUPv54KHQS5Cf4QFnoECAsQAg#How_to_sign_your_posts Right on time kid (talk) 20:47, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't think the current version works. It drifts into WP:OR. We need to have clear attribution. I would suggest sticking as closely as possible to what Pinker says, with maybe footnotes or additional text pointing out when more recent sources are substantially different. If Pinker is substantially incorrect across multiple rows, then don't use. Bondegezou (talk) 21:29, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Bondegezou I rephrased it a little so it doesn't come off as original research. what do you guys think?Right on time kid (talk) 22:44, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Queen Victoria

There seem to be several individual entries in other sections of the article, particularly the anthropogenic famines, for disasters caused and exacerbated by the political decisions of British governments, colonial governments, and viceroys on her behalf, but she's not in the 'leaders and regimes' section. Is there a source somewhere for an estimate of the overall death toll of her reign? Adam Dent (talk) 10:33, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Or maybe the Hanover dynasty overall Adam Dent (talk) 10:57, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Missing wars

The Franco-Prussian war of 1870 is missing from the list. See the Wikipedia page "Franco-Prussian War" for reference. 74.57.16.12 (talk) 00:09, 28 May 2020 (UTC) Simon Rivest

Proportionality

Especially for the political leaders, it is important to list not just the absolute number of people killed, but the rough portion of their population who died. Seen in this way, Mao at 70 m./500 m. is just 2 times, Stalin's rate, at 15 m./200 m. (using the high-end death estimates for both). But Mao is more than 4 times Stalin's absolute numbers.

Seeing it this way, it looks like Queen Ranavalona I of Madagascar may get the bad prize: 2.5 m./5.0 m.Stodder (talk) 01:06, 27 March 2020 (UTC) Jim Stodder

Harrying of the north? 72.77.116.250 (talk) 02:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

More wars that should be added here.

Miao Rebellion of (1854-1873) 4,900,000 deaths.

Red Turban Rebellion of (1854-1856) 2,000,000 deaths.

Punti-Hakka Clan war (1855-1867) 1,000,000 deaths.

Boxer Rebellion (1899-1901) 100,000 deaths.

Chinese revolution (1911) 120,000 deaths.

Bosnian War (1992-1995) 100,000 deaths. TaipingRebellion1850 (talk) 17:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

European colonization of the Americas - highest estimate

The 'highest estimate' for the death toll of the European colonization of the Americas in the current revision (138m) should be removed because the source cited does not support that estimate. The source says that the population of the Americas declined by 138m from 1491 to 1691, but a population decline over multiple centuries is not equivalent to a death toll. Scleractinian (talk) 20:17, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Pandemics are not part of war death

Someone included Spanish Flu death toll as part of World War 1 deaths which is absurd. Its like listing a random person who died of heart attack (which kills over 30 million everywhere) in his apartment in NJ, as part of the US-Iraq war just because his death occured at that time. This is absurd. the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic death toll is not part of WW1 death toll, pandemics are natural disasters, death tolls here are for those killed in action, if you include pandemic, then the Black Death pandemic can be added to the Mongol Conquests which would bring death toll above 200 million. Pandemics are never considered part of war death, no WP:RS ever considers them as part of the war. Please have common sense, and deliberately continuing to make this change despite explanation would be obvious disruptive editing. Dilbaggg (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 December 2020

Can someone add contemporary human trafficking, including sex trafficking, to the section on slavery?

A good source is Safe Horizon which uses ILO numbers from 2017.

https://www.safehorizon.org/get-informed/human-trafficking-statistics-facts/#statistics-and-facts/ CraigoPVD (talk) 00:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 22:01, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Hyderabad Massacre

Should probably be included. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 23:57, 12 December 2020 (UTC).

New Section/event

With the 2019 pandemic and the strong political reaction to curbing its spread, there are reports of high death tolls which we will get more official numbers in the years/decades to follow. But with some estimates [1] being as high as 132 million people it seems like a list topper event. Currently an event like this isn't really fit into any of the sections since it is a world wide politically driven event, but no unrest or violence. Any thoughts about how this event will be included into a list like this? [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

70.189.254.172 (talk) 23:20, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

TRUMP needs his OWN subcategory for HIS knowingly, intentionally killing of Americans. Or would that go under Mass Murderers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:CA80:1A0:6540:2BD2:D139:30C6 (talk) 16:10, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/07/13/890398347/u-n-report-says-pandemic-could-push-132-million-people-into-hunger
  2. ^ https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-pandemic-could-kill-more-through-hunger-than-the-disease-itself-warns-oxfam-12024300
  3. ^ https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20200627-unicef-2-4m-children-in-yemen-at-risk-of-starvation/
  4. ^ https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/06/coronavirus-millions-of-people-expected-to-fall-ill-with-tuberculosis.html
  5. ^ https://unglobalcompact.org/take-action/20th-anniversary-campaign/covid-related%20hunger-could-kill-more-people-than-the-virus
  6. ^ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/31/people-are-going-to-go-hungry-pandemic-effects-could-leave-54m-americans-without-food

Why isn't Egypt and Jordan on here with a death toll number?

If Trump is on here then so is every political leader that miscalculated as well. The US is a place where we have these rights to choose our path. Many people chose unwisely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.143.11.6 (talk) 01:27, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

There is no mention of Trump in List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:40, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

What about the centuries until more recent times that women were essentially forced to be a housewife and kept from getting an education. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.143.11.6 (talk) 01:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

What does that have to do with List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:40, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Purges in the Soviet Union should be listed here - around 20,000,000 dead.

I am a newbie - but it seems to me that the Purges in the Soviet Union should be listed here. I believe the number is around 20,000,000. For my source, I am using: White, Matthew (2011), Atrocities: The 100 Deadliest Episodes in Human History, W. W. Norton & Company, ISBN 978-0-393-08192-3 8.9.86.109 (talk) 16:59, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

removed fake news site humansarefree.com

https://www.cjr.org/fake-beta --Espoo (talk) 12:00, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Let me start by saying this: I completely agree with dropping the source. However, the phrase "fake news" I think is far too politically charged, and lacks Neutral point of view. We should be discussing this in terms of "Is the source reliable or not?" I have not really dug into it, but I would agree humansarefree.com does not seem reliable. Rklahn (talk) 19:00, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Czechoslovakia

This list mentions 65000 victims of communist regime in Czechoslovakia using some blog (https://scottmanning.com/content/communist-body-count/) as a reference. Source listed by that blog for this number is: Rummel, R. J. (1997). Statistics of democide: genocide and mass murder since 1900. Charlottesville, Virginia: Transaction Publishers.

Quite an old book. Not an issue (even older books may be useable), but its author uses muuuch older sources:

  • Hodos, George H. SHOW TRIALS: STALINIST PURGES IN EASTERN EUROPE 1948-1954. New York: Praeger, 1987.
  • Szulc, Tad. CZECHOSLOVAKIA SINCE WORLD WAR II. New York: The Viking Press, 1971.
  • Pelikán, Jirí (Ed.). THE CZECHOSLOVAKIA POLITICAL TRIALS 1950-1954: THE SUPPRESSED REPORT OF THE DEBCEK GOVERNMENT'S COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY, 1968. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1971.
  • Stowe, Leland. CONQUEST BY TERROR: THE STORY OF SATELLITE EUROPE. New York: Random House, 1951.
  • Carlton, Richard K. (Ed.) FORCED LABOR IN THE "PEOPLE'S DEMOCRACIES." New York: Praeger, 1955.
  • Glaser, Kurt and Stefan T. POSSONY. VICTIMS OF POLITICS: THE STATE OF HUMAN RIGHTS. New York: Columbia University Press, 1979.
  • Chalupa, V. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF A TOTALITARIAN STATE. Leiden, Holland: H. E. Stenfert Kroese N. V., 1959.
  • Stewart-Smith, D.G. THE DEFEAT OF COMMUNISM. London: Ludgate Press, 1964.
  • Culbertson, Todd. "The human cost of world communism." HUMAN EVENTS (19 August 1978): 682-683.
  • Schmid, Alex P. SOCIAL DEFENSE AND SOVIET MILITARY POWER: AN INQUIRY INTO THE RELEVANCE OF AN ALTERNATIVE DEFENCE CONCEPT. REPORT PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT GROUP SOCIAL DEFENCE. Leiden: Center for the Study of Social conflict (C.O.M.T.), State University of Leiden, 1985.
  • Herling, Albert Konrad. THE SOVIET SLAVE EMPIRe. New York: Wilfred Funk, 1951.
  • Prpic, George J. FIFTY YEARS OF WORLD COMMUNISM: 1917-1967: A SELECTIVE CHRONOLOGY. Cleveland, Ohio: Institute for Soviet and East European Studies, John Carroll University, 1967.
  • Paul, David W. CZECHOSLOVAKIA: PROFILE OF A SOCIALIST REPUBLIC AT THE CROSSROADS OF EUROPE. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1981.

Note none of these books/papers were published after 1989, so without access to the primary documents in the Czech/Slovak archives or really fruitful recent research about this topic. Shouldn´t be a problem to find a better source. Pavlor (talk) 20:57, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll/Archive_16&oldid=1135643210"