Talk:Destruction under the Mongol Empire

Purpose

Was looking at this article to see how copyediting could improve it. I reckon it might be best to just start over, maybe with a new page title. Do we even need this article to stand alone? Why not simply include the relevant info and quotes in the Mongol invasion of Rus and Mongol invasion of Europe articles with new articles specifically dealing with the invasions of China and Persia? The scope of this article seems too broad. Just my thoughts. Scriblio (talk) 02:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

This article was split from Genghis Khan to satisfy those people who wanted to portray him as a mass murderer while ignoring the constructive work it takes to create a functioning empire. In a way, it serves as a lighting rod to take pressure away from the real thing. Whether that is a good thing or not is once more a matter of opinion... --Latebird (talk) 09:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

He was a mass murderer and a genocidal maniac. Its easy to create a functioning empire when you massacre 90% of its inhabitants. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.139.110 (talk) 05:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

hmm ok, thanks for your prompt reply. If it is just a playpen for people nurturing a centuries old grudge (seriously, are people still angry about Genghis Khan?) then perhaps the tags should be removed. There seems little point in spending time copyediting something that is inherently POV in the way you suggest, especially if, as seems likely, the article will be deleted once the dust settles. Rather than encouraging editors in a wasted effort, perhaps this page should simply be allowed to sink without trace. Scriblio (talk) 10:15, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's just my view on things. Maybe someone else sees an actual encyclopedic purpose in it, although in that case you're right that it would need to be rewritten. And yes, some people do indeed hold "historical grudges". In the present context most often from a persian or arabian background, regions that admittedly had to suffer a lot under the mongols. --Latebird (talk) 20:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, well. Then let's also create articles on "Destruction under the Nazi Germany" and "Destruction under the Soviet Union". I'll be gladly involved in the latter one. --GenuineMongol (talk) 16:45, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Somewhat relevant articles can be found at Nazi war crimes, German war crimes, War crimes of the Wehrmacht and Soviet war crimes, respectively. Yaan (talk) 14:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

They are not as general as this topic. War crimes are not the only crimes the Soviets committed... --GenuineMongol (talk) 16:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

If you can find a better title, try and move the article. I guess it's Ok to have an article that only covers warfare, but "War crime" would be strange for an article that deals with events from before the Geneva and Hague conventions were signed. I.e. I don't think How the Golden Horde ruined the fate of Russia forever (or so) needs to be part of this article. Yaan (talk) 10:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

revert move

I moved the article back to its original title and changed the intro. I believe the destruction of cities and slaughtering of whole populations have been documented often enough, and are one of the things the Mongol conquests are associated with most often. This may or may not be unfair, but describing this as a case of disruption of farmwork or famine and diseases seems very much besides the point. Even if there are authors who blame the Black Death on the Mongols. Yaan (talk) 10:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Who the fuck wrote this article?

This has got to be the most schizophrenic copy i've found on Wikipedia in a long time. Witness especially the text under the 'Terror' heading. Terrifying, indeed.

This article should be removed from Wikipedia

This POV article is no more than a piece of propaganda against Mongols. Why not to create similar articles like 'Destructions under the People's Republic of China', 'Destructions under the British Empire', 'Destructions under USA' etc? Almost all sources here are not authoritative. Data are unverifiable, mostly old blatant rumors. Such rumors may be found about every nation of the world. It is impossible to improve this article because of its content. The article should be removed from Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.149.228.70 (talk) 13:39, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, I agree that this article is a clear POV and should be removed. Most of these accusations are historically unproved and look dubious. Actually, such accusations were addressed to almost all conquerors from different nations since the time of the Bible. E.g. what to say about the Muslim conquest of Asia? Nevertheless, this author blamed to Mongols only. This racist article should be removed.46.138.64.177 (talk) 11:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)