Talk:Persecution of Christians

Failed verification

Currently the article states:

A massacre of 6,000 Vendée prisoners, many of them women, took place after the battle of Savenay, along with the drowning of 3,000 Vendée women at Pont-au-Baux and 5,000 Vendée priests, old men, women, and children killed by drowning at the Loire River at Nantes in what was called the "national bath" – tied in groups in barges and then sunk into the Loire.

The primary source is:

• Anchel, Robert (1911). "Vendée, Wars of the" . In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 27 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 980–981.

I have appended a {{failed verification}} to that citation because what EB1911 states is:

They re-formed at Le Mans, where they were defeated by Westermann, and the same officer definitively annihilated the main body of the insurgents at Savenay (December 1793). Regular warfare was now at an end, although Turreau and his "infernal columns" still continued to scour the disaffected districts. After the 9th Thermidor attempts were made to pacify the country. The Convention issued conciliatory proclamations allowing the Vendeans liberty of worship and guaranteeing their property. General Hoche applied these measures with great success. He restored their cattle to the peasants who submitted, "let the priests have a few crowns," and on the 20th of July 1795 annihilated an emigre expedition which had been equipped in England and had seized Fort Penthievre and Quiberon. Treaties were concluded at La Jaunaie (February 15, 1795) and at La Mabillaie, and were fairly well observed by the Vendeans; and nothing remained but to cope with the feeble and scattered remnant of the Vendéans still under arms, and with the Chouans ('q.v.). On the 30th of July 1796 the state of siege was raised in the western departments.

The citation and most of the text was added to Wikipedia in 2008 (Revision as of 16:31, 27 October 2008 ) by user: Atomicdor who is blocked two days later a sock master. So I suggest that people interested in this article spend some time checking the paragraphs on the Vendée making sure that the facts all have reliable sources to back them up. -- PBS (talk) 15:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I removed the sentence.Cinadon36 (talk) 07:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Citing Nero

In the current version, ref 9. and ref 11 are citing "Nero". But there is no Nero at the source section. Cinadon36 (talk) 07:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

"Persecution" in the Europe section

Note by a "neutral" editor: the second following subsection here is a recent discussion here primarily between two editors that appears to be about this representative addition to the section. This is in response to a Third opinion request. If the parties don't mind, I have added a new subsection (immediately below) for "Comments from other editors" such that new comments can be noticed quickly. Further, I will place my own opinion there. Cheers, Facts707 (talk) 13:06, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Comments from other editors

1. Viewing the Youtube video "Francesca Stavrakopoulou, Tom Holland: Speaking freely about religion (World Humanist Congress)", at 23:10 Stavrakopoulou begins her comments, first saying "It is a major point of reference in contemporary Christianity, particularly Protestant forms of Christianity, that to be treated Christian is to undergo persecution or experience some kind of persecution...". She then goes on to describe an EU court of human rights case where a woman working for British Airways was not permitted to wear a crucifix with her uniform while on duty which Stavrakopoulou described with "...she tried to say that she had been persecuted for her beliefs." Stavrakopoulou soon follows with "Those Christians aren't being persecuted..." She indicates there is a perception of persecution by some Christians in Europe but not actual persecution. Describing a perception of persecution is in my opinion insufficient to warrant inclusion here as proposed. However, if consensus warrants it could be added under a "Perceived persecution" subsection if sufficient RS show this. Although I don't think Stavrakopoulou's brief comment here is enough to argue for a perception significant enough and among sufficient numbers of Christians to warrant inclusion here either. Cheers, Facts707 (talk) 13:06, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

2. I've watched the video in the link, read the discussion, and given a very cursory glance at the page history but I may be missing some context. As far as I can tell there are two questions being discussed:

1) is Stavrakopoulou a RS for the assertion "It is a major point of reference in contemporary Christianity, particularly Protestant forms of Christianity, that to be treated Christian is to undergo persecution or experience some kind of persecution..." I don't see any reason why she would not be. To demand sourcing to a published academic paper on the subject seems excessive to me in the absence of reliable sources that contradict her claim. There are certainly no shortage of leaders and scholars within contemporary Christianity making that assertion about their own beliefs (see google results for "christians will be persecuted". My quick glance indicates that while opinions vary as to whether anti-Christian attitudes in the West count as persecution, there is no shortage of claims that the expectation of persecution is a Christian tenet.)

2) assuming the claim that the expectation of persecution is a Christian tenet can be reliably sourced, does the perception of persecution in the West merit inclusion in this article? I think we run into trouble here due to not having a split between attitudes and action like we do at Islamophobia/Persecution of Muslims, and by the contrast in scale of "persecution" in the contemporary West versus persecution in other times and places. In an article with a scope ranging from Nero's Rome to the Tokugawa Shogunate to blasphemy laws in contemporary Asia, we have to decide how to handle instances of minor harassment or complaint. I don't have an opinion to offer here, as I can see benefits to including it and to leaving it out.

In summary, I think the sourcing issues are unfounded but the inclusion/exclusion decision must ultimately be made on stylistic/scope-defining grounds. Is there another article where the state of Christian and anti-Christian perceptions in the West might be better addressed? -- LWG ^talk 17:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

3. ...next editor please comment here...

Original discussion between OP and a disputing editor, with minor involvement of a third editor

I listened to the link and it doesn't really support the recent addition - lots of qualifications, the context is that some mainly protestant individuals think they are being s=persecuted by secularism but compared with Christians in the Middle East its nothing. Its a throwaway comment in an specific audience which is not a RS anyway. The Addition of the Castelli quote (an excellent article by the way) doesn't really work either as that looks at a very specific political context in the US (not Europe). I've removed it again and please don't reinstate without agreement here first please -----Snowded ^TALK 05:25, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Snowded it is my burden to establish consensus in the talk page, and I was really happy to see that you had the good will to open the discussion on Stavrakopoulou. So thank you. As for edit, I can not understand what your objection really is. a)Do you think the speech by Stavrakopoulou is not a RS? b)Do you think that there is a disassociation between the source and the text? As for Castelli, would you be ok to let her as a source and re-word the text, claiming that Persecution Complex exists only in the US, until we solve this out? Cheers! Cinadon36 (talk) 09:31, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

We generally don't take casual remarks in a conversation as a RS - if she seriously advocated it then it would be published in a reliable source. In any event it is so heavily qualified as to not support the text you use here or elsewhere. Castelli might support a statement in another section -----Snowded ^TALK 09:33, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Well I do not think that is a casual remark, it is a formal debate she is taking part. And, which section would you suggest for Castelli?Cinadon36 (talk)

Its a series of discussion points and she picks it up in the context of (i) its a small number of people and (ii) they are not really being persecuted. Given that she is an academic she would have pubished the material if it was serious enough and that would be a reliable source. I take part in a lot of academic debates and I only consider myself held to pubished material. It doesn't support the text you are trying to use. As to Catelli its in the context of the US and if you read the article its a lot more nuanced than you imply in your use here. If you think its valuable then I suggest your draft a text here with the full context of her paper and we can look at it. -----Snowded ^TALK 10:01, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I do not have access to the whole academic work of Stavrakopoulou. But that particular speech seems enough to me per WP:RS As for Castelli, her work supports the same narrative. Cinadon36 (talk) 12:33, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I repeat - if it was a serious and researched point then it would be published. It is also not a speech - its a short response in an series of conversations. That is not good enough. Please read WP:RS where for a strong assertion in wikipedia's voice we really need a properly refereeed paper. Otherwise in respect of Castelli had your read the paper? I have and its very specific to a US political situation so it has no place in the Europe section and it doesn't supprt the general statement anyway.-----Snowded ^TALK 22:55, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I have read many times the WP RS, but thanks for pointing out. "For strong assertion in wikipedia voice"-->there was attribution. It was not WP Voice. Cinadon36 (talk) 06:28, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

If you had read and understood the Catelli reference then you would not have inserted it to support a statement in a section on Europe when it relates to a particular situation in the US. A recording of a brief asnwer to a question (the Stavrakopoulou reference) in a different context (are they really being persecuted) does not provide an authorative reference to support the statement you inserted here (which is the meaning of Wikipedia's voice). If you can answer those questions rather than simply saying that things were "enough to me" then we can return to the question otherwise I think this is over. Your insertion on another page of the same poorly sourced material can be addressed there. -----Snowded ^TALK 08:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I think that you should see The Myth of Persecution. Tgeorgescu (talk) 08:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

its a better source but not uncontroversial - look at Radner's response (who if anything is better qualified). Our job is to reflect the balance of sources not one -----Snowded ^TALK 09:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll grant you that: there are sources on both sides, since Christians are a diverse bunch and do no think the same. Tgeorgescu (talk) 09:26, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Snowded, you cited RS policy. RS policy, as you have said, "strong assertion in wikipedia's voice we really need a properly refereeed paper. And I have explained that it was not WP VOICE as the text was attributed.Cinadon36 (talk) 09:10, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

You didn't attribute a text, you made a statement in Wikipedia's voice and used the reference to support it. The best that can be said is that Stavrakopoulou said during a discussion that she thought .... and thats it. -----Snowded ^TALK 09:13, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't know precisely what you seek to affirm, anyway, there are better sources for your claim. Tgeorgescu (talk) 09:14, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I am sure about that dear Tgeorgescu, if you wish you can add some of them. I seek to affirm that "Advances of secularism in Europe and the west in general, are seen by some fundamentalist Christians as persecution. According to Stavrakopoulou, it is a core belief of Christian Faith, that if you are a Christian, you should expect to suffer and be persecuted." Snowded, would it be ok if we turn these 2 sentences into one, and attribute it from the beginning? Cinadon36 (talk) 09:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

As stated above, describing what all Christians think is preposterous. Tgeorgescu (talk) 09:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't think that is what Stavrakopoulou says and even if she did it would be far too controversial to insert without balancing material. I've put what I think is an acceptable form of words on the other article but to be honest I don't think it passes any test of weight and the recording of an answer to a question really isn't a reliable source in any meaningful sense of the word for any substantial statement. In this article we are talking about actual persecution, not imagined (which is also Stavrakopoulou point) and speculation as to motive is questionable. All beliefs - political, religious etc., assume at some point in their history that some persecution and suffering is inevitable, it doesn't not follow that it is a core belief (and it isn't in any of the Christian traditions I have studied by the way). So at the moment I don't think you have made the case for inclusion in any form, let alone that which you propose above -----Snowded ^TALK 09:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Tgeorgescu:Of course it is, I 'd second that and we should be very clear on that. But explaining the main tenets of Christian Belief (as presented by RS) is vital for WP. Certainly, not all Christians share those tenets (I estimate that the percentage is a one figure number-that is just my pov though). @Snowded: I see that you do not agree with Stavrakopoulou-and having good reasons to do that- but she is a religious prof and we have to insert her opionion, even if it is wrong. What would you say that we delete the "persecution in Europe" section as unsourced, undue and synthesis. (see discuss it below). Cinadon36 (talk) 09:50, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

You have no idea whether I agree or disagree with her, you do know that I disagree with the way you used her statement to support your opinion and you should understand that I don't think you are using a RS or satisfying the WP:WEIGHT. Otherwise the existing material in that section seems fine so a mass deletion is not called for. If you want to be more specific then explain why, don't just make assertions -----Snowded ^TALK 09:57, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I have an idea on how I see things but lets not argue on that, I was trying to be polite there that's why I wrote about "good reasons" but I will strike it. Existing material is not based on RS, and those sources do not even mention persecution. Not every attack on a christian is persecution, that is WP:OR. Cinadon36 (talk) 10:11, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Persecution in Europe

I have read sources 385, 386, 387 (current version) and there is no mention of persecution. An attack on a Christian somewhere on planet Earth does not constitute persecution. (needless to say that I am appalled by this kind of atrocities). Cinadon36 (talk) 06:28, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Hence I suggest deleting the section on the grounds of Synthesis, Undue and unsourced. Cinadon36 (talk) 09:51, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Will you @Tom harrison: be kind enough to explain the reasoning of re-inserting the section of Europe.[1] Clearly, non of the cited references are using the word "persecution". They are rather using the word attack. An attack by one or more criminal(s), does not constitute persecution. Not every religious hate crime is persecution. Cinadon36 (talk) 12:34, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Middle Eastern Christians being attacked because they are Middle Eastern Christians is indeed persecution, by definition. Do you have anything else besides your opinion? Khirurg (talk) 15:48, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Do you have RS that talk about christian persecution in the middle east? If not, should we cite you? Cinadon36 (talk) 16:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

A random attack by a criminal is not persecution. Persecution is related to a systemic attack at a religious group. Upgrading a single attack as persecution is SYNTH and OR. Cinadon36 (talk) 16:32, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

That's just your opinion. Did you read the sources? Khirurg (talk) 02:22, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

It seems it is not just my opinion. According to WP's article on persecution: Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. According to Cambridge dictionary[2]: to unfair or cruel treatment over a long period of time because of race, religion, or political beliefs. A sigle attack is not an act of persecution. Unless a Reliable Source claims that there is "persecution", a WP editor can not "ugrade" a single criminal attack to the level of persecution.Cinadon36 (talk) 14:57, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

No, it seems, it is your opinion. Read the source. First, the RS describes multiple incidents against Christians. The source also uses the term "persecution" to refer to these events - did you notice that? Do not be so fast to edit-war to remove WP:RS and impose your POV. Remember, it is WP:BRD; it is not RRRRD. Dr. K. 19:37, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

This article is fishing - e.g. Senegal section

Under Senegal's heading, the article states:

During government protests, some crowds turned their violence against Christian churches. Some of the infrastructure was destroyed.

I didn't realise that a one off burning of 1 or 2 churches by a small group of people who were demonstrating against the Senegalese government and burning anything they could in a country which has only tolerated two religions i.e. Islam and Christianity (compared to how Traditional African religions are treated there and in many African countries) all of a sudden becomes persecution of Christianity. Really? This article is fishing. There are some countries added here which are questionable and should be removed. I am concerned this article is "stretching it a bit." I think the persecution of Christians is mostly historical. I am willing to accept that there are small pockets of cases around the world where Christians are persecuted, but not to the extend where it merits such a lengthy article. Persecution of Christians has been mostly historical. Perhaps our experience editors can weighing here, as I am concerned about the POV being pushed here. Tamsier (talk) 17:29, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

References

It is the same token with the previous section on this talk page. Cinadon36 (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

So I'm not the only one then who could see the fishing, POV and SYNTH going going on here? This is a major concern and several related articles.Tamsier (talk) 17:49, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

No Tamsier, you are not the only one but may I ask, what exactly is "fishing" in WP terms? I am aware of POV and Synth. Cinadon36 (talk) 18:50, 3 January 2019 (UTC)