A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 2, 2009, February 2, 2010, February 2, 2011, February 2, 2012, and February 2, 2013. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have removed the following sentence from the article as it seems POV.
"At the time the United States viewed the Muslim Brotherhood as a threat and turned a blind eye to many of the Syrian's governments actions."
In what way did the US specifically turn a blind eye, compared to the rest of the world? TigerShark 22:44, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I removed the line "Unfortunately, Rifaat al-Assad is enjoying the luxury life and freedom in Europe unprosecuted, and is currently running an opposition TV station and a newspaper."
Whether or not this is fortunate is external to the topic at hand, and only serves the bias of the author.
Is it true that the entire city was destroyed, bulldozed, and salt was poured over the ground before a whole new city was erected in its place?
A more nuanced treatment of this conflict is necessary. The sobre accounts of serious scholars depict this as an insurrection in Hama. It was a battle between the legitimate government of Syria and insurgents. Casualties included about 1000 soldiers.
This is an article that is unfairly hostile to Syria. What's extraordinary about this article is the lack of serious sources. RZimmerwald ( talk) 18:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Something's missing here. Chesdovi ( talk) 01:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Casualty figures of 17,000 – 40,000 are given here, based on an article from "Globalsecurity.org". Could someone please provide some evidence that suggests that "Globalsecurity.org" are a reasonably unbiased and reliable source of information? Prunesqualer ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC).
I removed the 20,000 casualty figure referenced to 'the Independent' newspaper, because the actual article was by the same Robert Fisk of the previous sentence, who repeated his estimate of 10,000 and mentioned the other figure as being from the New York Times (without referencing the article) before dismissing it. UnexpectedTiger ( talk) 23:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Foreign Policy published a report declassified by the US DIA after 30 years counting the Hama city casualties. Accoding it the total casualties for Hama incident probably number about 2,000, 300-400 out of which were the members of the Muslim Brotherhood's elite apparatus. As far as I see this figure includes government officials and their families, Syrian Army men fallen and security officers. DIA-Syria-MuslimBrotherhoodPressureIntensifies.pdf -- MercyMaker ( talk) 10:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Ted Koppel of the BBC mentioned the Hama massacre on US Network's Meet the Press on 27 March 2011. Mentioned 80,000 as a number? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.93.94 ( talk) 16:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Is the (informative) stuff about 2011 appropriate in this article? Should it be in the Hama article instead? Kdammers ( talk) 08:14, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
The article titles needs to be changed. Events in Hama in 1982 are not characterized as "massacre" in the mainstream historiography and reporting in Syria. It's recommended to rename this article "Hama Revolt (1982)" or "Hama events (1982)."
Concerning western reporting about the conflict, articles from Time Magazine and New York Times are quite helpful. None of them use the term "massacre", but emphasize that Syrian Government was fighting against a rebellion which Syrian Government says was assisted by foreign forces.
The New York Times summarized on 24 February 1982, "At least two full brigades of soldiers, special security units and member sof a new party militia were sent to fight the insurgents. Since then, army tanks and artillery have pounded the old quarter of the city, where the rebels barricaded themselves. Casualties are believed to be heavy on both sides."
Claims of 10,000 to 25,000 are cited saying that a "massacre" took place. Amnesty International published this in a 1983 report. However, it did not say that the government committed a "massacre" of 10,000 to 25,000, but that casualties from all sides fell into this range of figures:
"When order was restored, estimates of the number dead on all sides are from 10,000 to 25,000."
When order was restored, estimates of the number dead on all sides r d from 10,000 to 25,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.51.168.190 ( talk) 01:48, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
It would make more sense to rename this to the Hama Uprising. -- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 19:20, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
I think it would be wise to change the infobox to that of a battle - the Hama massacre afterall was part of the Islamic Uprising, and although the majority of casualties were civilian (which can also be portrayed in a battle infobox), it was primarily a military operation seeking to expel the Muslim Brotherhood from the city. MrPenguin20 ( talk) 20:29, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Would anyone oppose if I moved this to the more appropriate title, Hama Uprising? Or would they prefer a vote be held?-- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 16:30, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
For the aforementioned reasons I have gone ahead to rename this article under the a more general and what I believe to more accurate title. The events of February 1982 began with the Muslim Brotherhood rising against Al-Assad in Hama; they targeted government officials and there is little evidence to suggest that their plans were not grounded in violence. Al-Assad's regime, however, cracked down on the insurrection with brute force, using indiscriminate shelling and targeting individuals and people who were not necessarily supporters of the uprising. Thousands died, it is true, but this was not a one-sided killing. Civilians were killed by both sides as Robert Fisk's dispatch makes clear. Since these events coincided with one another during a short frame of time, and one event could be said to be the cause of the other, it seems to me that uprising is a far more neutral title than massacre, which would perhaps imply that the killing was done solely by one side (as it is more appropriate for articles like Lidice or the Malmedy massacre, etc.).-- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 16:59, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
The Malmedy massacre (1944) was a war crime in which 84 American prisoners of war were murdered by their German captors near Malmedy, Belgium, during World War II.
The Mỹ Lai Massacre (Vietnamese: thảm sát Mỹ Lai [tʰɐ̃ːm ʂɐ̌ːt mǐˀ lɐːj], [mǐˀlɐːj] ( listen); /ˌmiːˈlaɪ/, /ˌmiːˈleɪ/, or /ˌmaɪˈlaɪ/)[1] was the Vietnam War mass killing of between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians in South Vietnam on March 16, 1968.
Need fix something on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.100.154 ( talk) 00:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
1982 Hama Islamic uprising. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:56, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Returned to 1982 Hama massacre - Initiate a serious discussion (RM or RFC) before moving away from this long-standing title. Article is currently move protected indefinitely. Mike Cline ( talk) 11:36, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
1982 Hama Islamic uprising →
Hama massacre – page renamed in an ad-hoc manner and no consensus on rename (already discussed on talk page) –
Gizmocorot (
talk) 12:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
1982 Hama massacre. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:53, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1982 Hama massacre. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
A discrepancy in dates that arose after a comment at WP:ERRORS, as this was about to be used in WP:OTD. Infobox says it began 2 Feb 1982. NYT reference seems to agree. Article (based on an offline reference) says it began 3 Feb. No other listed sources are online to break the tie. Also (and this isn't the article's problem, but OTD's problem) the OTD blurb claimed bombing started on 2 Feb, but it appears bombing started some time after initial ambush/raid? -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 23:14, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 2, 2009, February 2, 2010, February 2, 2011, February 2, 2012, and February 2, 2013. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have removed the following sentence from the article as it seems POV.
"At the time the United States viewed the Muslim Brotherhood as a threat and turned a blind eye to many of the Syrian's governments actions."
In what way did the US specifically turn a blind eye, compared to the rest of the world? TigerShark 22:44, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I removed the line "Unfortunately, Rifaat al-Assad is enjoying the luxury life and freedom in Europe unprosecuted, and is currently running an opposition TV station and a newspaper."
Whether or not this is fortunate is external to the topic at hand, and only serves the bias of the author.
Is it true that the entire city was destroyed, bulldozed, and salt was poured over the ground before a whole new city was erected in its place?
A more nuanced treatment of this conflict is necessary. The sobre accounts of serious scholars depict this as an insurrection in Hama. It was a battle between the legitimate government of Syria and insurgents. Casualties included about 1000 soldiers.
This is an article that is unfairly hostile to Syria. What's extraordinary about this article is the lack of serious sources. RZimmerwald ( talk) 18:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Something's missing here. Chesdovi ( talk) 01:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Casualty figures of 17,000 – 40,000 are given here, based on an article from "Globalsecurity.org". Could someone please provide some evidence that suggests that "Globalsecurity.org" are a reasonably unbiased and reliable source of information? Prunesqualer ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC).
I removed the 20,000 casualty figure referenced to 'the Independent' newspaper, because the actual article was by the same Robert Fisk of the previous sentence, who repeated his estimate of 10,000 and mentioned the other figure as being from the New York Times (without referencing the article) before dismissing it. UnexpectedTiger ( talk) 23:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Foreign Policy published a report declassified by the US DIA after 30 years counting the Hama city casualties. Accoding it the total casualties for Hama incident probably number about 2,000, 300-400 out of which were the members of the Muslim Brotherhood's elite apparatus. As far as I see this figure includes government officials and their families, Syrian Army men fallen and security officers. DIA-Syria-MuslimBrotherhoodPressureIntensifies.pdf -- MercyMaker ( talk) 10:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Ted Koppel of the BBC mentioned the Hama massacre on US Network's Meet the Press on 27 March 2011. Mentioned 80,000 as a number? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.93.94 ( talk) 16:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Is the (informative) stuff about 2011 appropriate in this article? Should it be in the Hama article instead? Kdammers ( talk) 08:14, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
The article titles needs to be changed. Events in Hama in 1982 are not characterized as "massacre" in the mainstream historiography and reporting in Syria. It's recommended to rename this article "Hama Revolt (1982)" or "Hama events (1982)."
Concerning western reporting about the conflict, articles from Time Magazine and New York Times are quite helpful. None of them use the term "massacre", but emphasize that Syrian Government was fighting against a rebellion which Syrian Government says was assisted by foreign forces.
The New York Times summarized on 24 February 1982, "At least two full brigades of soldiers, special security units and member sof a new party militia were sent to fight the insurgents. Since then, army tanks and artillery have pounded the old quarter of the city, where the rebels barricaded themselves. Casualties are believed to be heavy on both sides."
Claims of 10,000 to 25,000 are cited saying that a "massacre" took place. Amnesty International published this in a 1983 report. However, it did not say that the government committed a "massacre" of 10,000 to 25,000, but that casualties from all sides fell into this range of figures:
"When order was restored, estimates of the number dead on all sides are from 10,000 to 25,000."
When order was restored, estimates of the number dead on all sides r d from 10,000 to 25,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.51.168.190 ( talk) 01:48, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
It would make more sense to rename this to the Hama Uprising. -- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 19:20, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
I think it would be wise to change the infobox to that of a battle - the Hama massacre afterall was part of the Islamic Uprising, and although the majority of casualties were civilian (which can also be portrayed in a battle infobox), it was primarily a military operation seeking to expel the Muslim Brotherhood from the city. MrPenguin20 ( talk) 20:29, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Would anyone oppose if I moved this to the more appropriate title, Hama Uprising? Or would they prefer a vote be held?-- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 16:30, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
For the aforementioned reasons I have gone ahead to rename this article under the a more general and what I believe to more accurate title. The events of February 1982 began with the Muslim Brotherhood rising against Al-Assad in Hama; they targeted government officials and there is little evidence to suggest that their plans were not grounded in violence. Al-Assad's regime, however, cracked down on the insurrection with brute force, using indiscriminate shelling and targeting individuals and people who were not necessarily supporters of the uprising. Thousands died, it is true, but this was not a one-sided killing. Civilians were killed by both sides as Robert Fisk's dispatch makes clear. Since these events coincided with one another during a short frame of time, and one event could be said to be the cause of the other, it seems to me that uprising is a far more neutral title than massacre, which would perhaps imply that the killing was done solely by one side (as it is more appropriate for articles like Lidice or the Malmedy massacre, etc.).-- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 16:59, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
The Malmedy massacre (1944) was a war crime in which 84 American prisoners of war were murdered by their German captors near Malmedy, Belgium, during World War II.
The Mỹ Lai Massacre (Vietnamese: thảm sát Mỹ Lai [tʰɐ̃ːm ʂɐ̌ːt mǐˀ lɐːj], [mǐˀlɐːj] ( listen); /ˌmiːˈlaɪ/, /ˌmiːˈleɪ/, or /ˌmaɪˈlaɪ/)[1] was the Vietnam War mass killing of between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians in South Vietnam on March 16, 1968.
Need fix something on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.100.154 ( talk) 00:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
1982 Hama Islamic uprising. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:56, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Returned to 1982 Hama massacre - Initiate a serious discussion (RM or RFC) before moving away from this long-standing title. Article is currently move protected indefinitely. Mike Cline ( talk) 11:36, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
1982 Hama Islamic uprising →
Hama massacre – page renamed in an ad-hoc manner and no consensus on rename (already discussed on talk page) –
Gizmocorot (
talk) 12:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
1982 Hama massacre. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:53, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1982 Hama massacre. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
A discrepancy in dates that arose after a comment at WP:ERRORS, as this was about to be used in WP:OTD. Infobox says it began 2 Feb 1982. NYT reference seems to agree. Article (based on an offline reference) says it began 3 Feb. No other listed sources are online to break the tie. Also (and this isn't the article's problem, but OTD's problem) the OTD blurb claimed bombing started on 2 Feb, but it appears bombing started some time after initial ambush/raid? -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 23:14, 1 February 2017 (UTC)