Talk:List of ethnic cleansing campaigns

Criteria for including events in this list

The criteria for the inclusion of events in this list have been developed after discussions on the list's talk page. They should not be altered unless further discussion establishes a consensus for any change. Inclusion criteria All entries must meet the requirements of Wikipedia polices in particular the three core content polices of no original research, verifiability, and a neutral point of view. Inclusion in this list is based solely on evidence in multiple reliable sources that an event or series of events have been described as "ethnic cleansing", "religious cleansing", "population cleansing", or "murderous cleansing", or similar, in multiple reliable sources. In line with WP:PRESERVE, try to find sources to complete an entry that is incomplete before removing it and consider tagging any example you think is not complete to allow other editors time to complete it. However if an entry is removed the burden is on the editor wishing to restore the entry to show that multiple sources support the events and the claims that the events are an example of ethnic cleansing. Format All entries should contain in-text attribution of who considers the event to be "ethnic cleansing" if there are lots then choose one or more of the most authoritative. All entries should include a brief description of the events including a link to any more specific Wikipedia articles about the events. All entries should include alternative views providing those views are not given undue weight. All entries must contain inline citations to reliable source to support the first two points and point three if it is mentioned. Notes Examples These fictitious examples illustrate how the test of if an entry should be included in this list. Text in the source Source Include? Explanation The ancient empire forced the the natives to leave the conquered territories to make room for settlers. Multiple reliable sources mention the events. No No reliable sources call the actions of the empire ethnic cleansing. This example fails No original research. The forced removal of the green people by the majority backed government is according to historian Marin Jones an example of early modern ethic cleansing. Multiple reliable sources back up the events, but only Martin Jones's book describe the events as ethnic cleansing. No The events are covered by multiple sources, but only one source describes the events ethnic cleansing, so it fail under the neutral point of view policy by giving undue weight to a minority point of view. The forced removal of the green people by the majority backed government is according to genocide scholars Marin Smith and John Jones a "classic example" of early modern ethic cleansing. Reliable sources that back up the events and multiple academic sources describe as ethnic cleansing. Yes The text and the accusation is covered by the sources, so using a quote by Smith and Jones is representative of an academic view. The forced removal of the green people by the occupying blue force is according to a representative of the green people a clear case of ethnic cleansing. Reliable sources are given for both the removal and the representative making the claim. No In some cases where accusations of ethnic cleansing have circulated, partisans have fiercely disputed such an interpretation and the details of the event. This often leads to the promotion of vastly different versions of the event in question. This example fails to provide a neutral point of view because the view is partisan (it may also fail under undue weight). The removal of the green people by the occupying blue force is according to a representative of the green people a clear case of ethnic cleansing a view endorced by a spokes person from Camfam (a respected Indian humanitarian aid charity), however a spokesman for the blue force deny this stating their actions within those permitted under international law. Independent third party reliable sources for the events, sources supporting the accusation and rebuttal. Yes Note the deletion of the word "forcible" from "forcible removal", as well as a balanced in comments. The forcible removal of the green people by the occupying blue force was condemned by the United Nations Security Council as a clear case of ethnic cleansing. A spokesman for the blue force deny this stating their actions are within those permitted under international law. Independent third party reliable sources for the event, sources supporting the accusation and rebuttal. Yes Note the reinsertion of the word "forcible" in "forcible removal". Presumably the representative of the green people would still be stating it was ethnic cleansing, but it is preferable to attribute the statement to the more authoritative source. The clear implication here is that the "blue force" is now in the minority so the phrase "forcible removal" is justified as to leave it out would give undue weight to the blue force's point of view. Colonel white was found guilty by the international tribunal of multiple crimes against humanity for his part in the forcible removal of the green people by the occupying blue force. Independent third party reliable sources for the trial result. No No explicit accusation in the sources that the forcible removal was ethnic cleansing. Colonel White was found guilty by the international tribunal of being a member of a joint criminal enterprise for his part in the forcible removal of the green people by the occupying blue force, but found him not guilty of the specific war crimes. The president of the court stated in a press conference afterwards that the evinced clearly showed that Colonel White issued orders to have the area ethnically cleansed, of all members the green ethnic group, and did not stop his men committing war crimes when he became aware of them. Independent third party reliable sources for the trial result. Yes If it is a judgement by an international court then it is notable even if it is the only source for that view. Colonel White was found guilty by the international tribunal of being a member of a joint criminal enterprise for his part in the forcible removal of the green people by the occupying blue force, but found him not guilty of the specific war crimes. In a minority judgement Judge Purple described Colonel White as the primary instigator of a brutal ethnic cleaning campaign and that he was guilty of several of those war crimes. Independent third party reliable sources for the trial result. Maybe If it is a judgement by an international court then it is notable even if it is the only source for that view. However it not the view of the majority of judges that ethnic cleansing took place and if the minority view is not widely discussed in third party sources, then discussion on the talk page may be necessary to reach a consensus over notability.

Archives (Index)

1 2 3

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Accuracy of 1948 Nakba

Why is the 1948 Nakba the only 1940s ethnic cleansing campaign that isn't directly cited, and instead posed as a kind of question. The other entries don't question why the ethnic cleansing happened or if its contentious, but that it happened, and a reader can read more. This seems like a deliberate revisionist history. the 1948 nakba was ethnic cleansing under the Wikipedia definition. Multiple sources cite this. raisecain (talk) 01:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

I've un-couched the language. Israeli historians on both sides of the Zionism divide - from Ilan Papper to Benny Morris - concur that an ethnic cleansing took place in Palestine. I've added Morris. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:00, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Edict of Expulsion

Britain removed all its jews in 1290 Edict of Expulsion. 2601:C6:8400:E280:9A40:D493:918D:ADD5 (talk) 03:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Darfur

the RSF and remnants of the Janjaweed are widely reported and confirmed to have committed ethnic cleansing in Darfur 2023 Masalit massacres )https://undispatch.com/ethnic-cleansing-has-returned-to-darfur-is-genocide-next/ https://www.state.gov/war-crimes-crimes-against-humanity-and-ethnic-cleansing-determination-in-sudan/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-67020154https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/27/sudan-new-mass-ethnic-killings-pillage-darfur#:~:text=The%20Rapid%20Support%20Forces%20killed,of%20atrocities%20against%20Massalit%20civilians. Monochromemelo1 (talk) 05:33, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Rwanda

There is no entry for the 1994 Rwandan genocide. 73.25.217.113 (talk) 16:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

I was also wondering why this was the case. At first I thought maybe genocides were classed as a separate category, but the Holocaust is included so there is no reason for Rwanda not to be. Djehuty98 (talk) 21:58, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Gaza

There is no description of what the ICJ has ruled as a plausible campaign of genocide in the Gaza Strip carried out by Israel. 184.103.143.73 (talk) 18:16, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I added the below paragraph but it was deleted for being "undue POV, highly disputed, WP:EXCEPTIONAL, list for actual cleansing campaigns, not random statements by deranged politicians like Smotrich":

• Israel's actions during the Israel–Hamas war (2023–24) have been described as aimed at ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. Israeli ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have made statements said to support the removal of Palestinians from the strip: Smotrich said, "If there are 100,000 or 200,000 Arabs in Gaza and not two million Arabs, the entire discussion on the day after [the war ends] will be totally different." Israel has been claimed to be aiming to expel the Palestinian population of Gaza to Egypt or Europe, and to resettle the strip with Israeli Jews.

How could it be improved? I think it deserves a place in the list. Sheila1988 (talk) 13:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Pictures must be blurred

Wikipedia is open to anybody including children.

It is not appropriate to show violent images to anybody without any warning.

Therefore, i propose blurring of the pictures in this article. 31.206.142.86 (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Please see WP:NOTCENSORED. Uness232 (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

could I add the recent American deportations?

yes or no? Domogames1 (talk) 22:32, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't see why not. They are a form of forced displacement. Dimadick (talk) 08:35, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Deportations are based on citizenship - or lack thereof - not ethnicity. I don't see how it can be ethnic cleansing when people of the same ethnicity can stay in the country (not be deported) so long as they are citizens. Brian Willoughby (talk) 22:07, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Surely the first question is: do you have an RS that characterises them as ethnic cleansing? ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 22:23, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

US citizens are being expelled due to their ethnicity, cultural identity, or beliefs. There are many incidents of this being officially stated policy, recited by arresting officers. There are hundreds of victims who have lawyers, and countless others who do not. Close to 80% of them have not been accused of a crime, note that entering the country illegally is not a crime under the law, it is a civil violation, like littering or double-parking.

Making matters worse, government agents do not have to be identifiable in any way when making arrests, and are easily impersonated: as was the case when elected members of congress opened the door for a fake cop, who killed them. Many of the US citizens who are taken are never seen again, like hundreds who disappeared during Trump's first term, in suspicious circumstances after being threatened by him. The supreme court has even gone so far as to suspend *the concept of precedent*, opting instead to decide all cases 1 by 1, and requiring anyone harmed by the government to seek redress individually... if they can afford to, and if they recieve any warning before being thrown into cruel and unusual conditions without access to a lawyer.

Also consider that a majority of supreme court justices have unequivocally and formally, in writing, declared they have no duty to the constitution or laws thereof, as written by congress, and can decide however they want on the whims of donors. 2601:1C0:5002:2480:D4E8:DC15:B6D5:55FA (talk) 18:32, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

That is all possibly true, but what we list here is determined by whether reliable sources call it ethnic cleansing. You need to provide sources who say that. Bondegezou (talk) 10:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)