Srebrenica massacre: Revision history


For any version listed below, click on its date to view it. For more help, see Help:Page history and Help:Edit summary. (cur) = difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m = minor edit, → = section edit, ← = automatic edit summary

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

11 August 2024

10 August 2024

9 August 2024

6 August 2024

5 August 2024

2 August 2024

1 August 2024

30 July 2024

  • curprev 18:1018:10, 30 July 2024122141510 talk contribs 270,553 bytes −15 Removing androcide – per conversation! Please don't pick and choose what parts of a conversation and consensus you'd like to implement in an article, it potentially vio Information in infobox should reflect information in the article (and in turn sources). Best I ever found when I was looking to it was non-committal suggestions from some that it might technically qualify as androcide, and information explicitly acknowledging murder of women. No one was murdered 'because' they were male, as such. undo
  • curprev 17:5817:58, 30 July 2024Pincrete talk contribs 270,568 bytes −64 →‎top: per agreement on talk . Does anyone really want a source for the killing of 8000+ males being androcide? If so simply remove undo
  • curprev 17:5817:58, 30 July 2024122141510 talk contribs 270,632 bytes +63 Undid revision 1237621991 by Pincrete (talk) disruptive revert. rationale given contradicts and mischaracterizes the conversation on talk page. undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 17:5517:55, 30 July 2024Pincrete talk contribs 270,569 bytes −63 Undid revision- the source used actually describes the event as a massacre at which genocide occurred, but that is irrelevant since this text uses the word 'killing' which is clearer, more explicit and is the long-term stable version to be used until a new consensus is reached. Please read the text and talk before reverting. undo Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 16:3416:34, 30 July 2024122141510 talk contribs 270,632 bytes +63 Undid revision 1237605610 by Pincrete (talk) The source explicitly identifies it as a genocide, not massacre. You need to make a case on the talk page – your claim that sources claim the event was not a genocide is not credible. Consider formal venues such as RfC. undo Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 16:1816:18, 30 July 2024Pincrete talk contribs 270,569 bytes −63 Undid revision The source used explicitly refers to the event as the 'massacre' at which the crime of genocide occurred, but regardless, this is the long-term stable version pendng a new consensus and the 'edit-warred' version is a bad faith attempt to circumvent the failure to move and is dreadful English. undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 04:4804:48, 30 July 2024122141510 talk contribs 270,632 bytes +71 Undid revision 1237410796 by 50.101.2.157 (talk) Regardless of what might have been stable in the past, we can't in good faith leave up a statement when it has been identified that the source doesn't support it. undo Tag: Undo

29 July 2024

28 July 2024

27 July 2024

26 July 2024

14 July 2024

13 July 2024

12 July 2024

11 July 2024

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)