Talk:Demographic engineering

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Ethnic groups Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

A fact from Demographic engineering appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 April 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the late Ottoman Empire has been described as "the laboratory of demographic engineering in Europe"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Demographic engineering.

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:25, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the late Ottoman Empire has been described as "the laboratory of demographic engineering in Europe"? Source: https://www.academia.edu/5726057/The_late_Ottoman_Empire_as_laboratory_of_demographic_engineering
- ALT1:... that demographic engineering can range from manipulation of census results to genocide? Source: multiple, see article

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Personal Memoirs of Julia Dent Grant ‎

Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 06:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

is new, is long enough, has an interesting hook (both are ok, the broader one slighlty more appealing I guess), is free of copyvio, QPQ done. good to go Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:29, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

journal article

Both Falk and Tilley are experts in the field. The article is published by Brill in a respected journal. There is at the very least no consensus on RSN that this source is unreliable. Ive restored it as WP:SCHOLARSHIP. nableezy - 15:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a journal article. It was reprinted in a yearbook containing UN documents, Israeli law, and a Trump speech. It was classified as "other", not as a "research article". It underwent no peer review, and the UN retracted it. There is no consensus at RSN this is reliable, and there is great concern regarding Falk and conspiracy theories at RSN. 11Fox11 (talk) 16:14, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are two authors here, and both meet the requirments of WP:SCHOLARSHIP. If they had posted this on their personal blog it would be reliable as the product of established experts in the field. And there is certainly no consensus that it is unreliable, with a majority of participants saying it is reliable. nableezy - 16:16, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is scholarship in the same manner Falk's forward to The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11, written theology professor (and 9/11 conspiracy theorist) David Ray Griffin is scholarship. Which is to say, this does not meet scholarship at all. It did not undergo peer review, and Falk's name on it is a red flag. 11Fox11 (talk) 16:28, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Falk is professor emeritus in international relations at Yale. His work on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been published in peer-reviewed journals and in books published by the most respected publishers on the planet. In the field of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict he is a reliable source. And then there is also Virginia Tilley, who you keep ignoring for some reason. She likewise has peer-reviewed works published on this topic. She is also a reliable source. nableezy - 17:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well I guess an RFC will have to be held for this. But in the meantime, Ive found an article to spend my time researching. Ive started expanding the section on Israel, will continue doing so with a number of sources. nableezy - 23:21, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am restoring Falk and Tilley, the amount of socking by Icewhiz dramatically changes the discussion at RSN here, and removing his four accounts that supported unreliable there is a strong obvious consensus the source is reliable. nableezy - 03:46, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any mention of "demographic engineering" in the Reuters article or in the ESCWA report. Alaexis_¿question? 09:19, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The actual report, will fix the citations though to cite it directly. nableezy - 09:56, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ive cited the version of the report that Brill included in the Palestine Yearbook of International Law. nableezy - 16:01, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]