Talk:Algerian War/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Le barrage électrifié sur les frontières Est de l'Algérie.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

@2A02:ED0:52A6:3300:406D:F2D0:A2FF:FB51:

Your previous IP was blocked for disruptive editing. Coming out of a block to continue the disruption by misrepresenting the sources is not a good idea.

The result in the Infobox has been stable ever since it was the subject of a RfC. In other words, this has been discussed and the community has decided to keep the infobox as it is. Should that change, then there will be no reason for me not to add "Decisive FLN victory"± at the top of the Infobox (where it rightly belongs). M.Bitton (talk) 16:25, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

• I'll just add that the IP editor claimed that this book somehow proves a "French military victory": that is absolutely incorrect. Drmies (talk) 21:53, 8 March 2021 (UTC

Decisive FLN victory? you sound so ridiculous.... And it can be seen in your talking with other users before. Why? How much divisions or aircraft's the FLN had then or even now? the BBC is not good enough source? [1] because if not here some more [2]

The French army controlled the territory there: [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Holy Joker (talk • contribs)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 March 2021

I think that there is a need to improve the "result" on this page and add more sources. What is written there it's unreasonable! And it's going for some time by a user who I think just want to put his own agenda here. I have many sources that I think would help to give more realistic story about this war. Dr Holy Joker (talk) 19:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Please provide those sources and the specific prose you'd like to change, and how you'd like to change it. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:23, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

1) I have already explained to you that the Infobox has been the subject of a RfC and that no change should take place without consensus. As for the sources, check out the RfC and help yourself to raft of rock solid secondary reliable sources. 2) As for your uncalled for personal attacks, I will ping an admin who's also familiar with the IP hopping edit warrior whose personal attacks led to their block. @Drmies: could you have please have a word with "new" editor? Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 19:44, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

personal attacks? I just said that there is need to add true facts on the page... I put the sources above and if you call the BBC unreliable source, so your sources and claims are? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Holy Joker (talk • contribs)

Yes, personal attacks that you keep repeating. Is this blocked IP yours? M.Bitton (talk) 19:58, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

So what you're saying is it's a whole thing? I don't like getting involved in whole things, generally take too much time and effort. As there's already a consensus I'll leave this be. Thanks for the heads up. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:29, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

when you try to put your personal and incorrect agenda on issues like wars, what do you think the other side will tell you?!? you are trying to put here unreasonable things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Holy Joker (talk • contribs)

ScottishFinnishRadish, yes there is a Big Whole Thing, and I guess I have to have a look at it--but piecemeal. Drmies (talk) 22:59, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Drmies, and thanks you for the welcoming message :) and now, can you please put this thing done with some of the sources I brught? the result of this war should be a military victory for the French and a political victory for the Algerian side. Like in the case of the Suez Crisis for example. Dr Holy Joker (talk) 05:48, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2021

Can someone tell me what will be done here please? As I just said above, there is a need to fix the result here.... also, I don't understand what is that "end of the French colonial Empire thing? France still had colonies until the early 1980s.... almost 30 years after the war in Algeria. So what is that? Dr Holy Joker (talk) 02:22, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:14, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Result/edit war

Discussion with a sockpuppet
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I have been viewing the talk page and edit history and is there not any way for a compromise? Perhaps class the military result as disputed as there are sources that state a french military and sources that state a military stalemate. Something like “military stalemate or french military victory both are claimed” could be added to the info box so both sides are happy and their view/claim is represented. Wowlebureh (talk) 21:25, 16 March 2021 (UTC) I agree, it has always been my understanding that this was a French military victory, but De Gaulle realized that the situation was unsustainable and negotiated the French withdrawal. Mztourist (talk) 03:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC) Yh I don’t really understand the military stalemate outcome the FLN only had around 5,000 soldiers left with many of them out the country and De Gaulle announced on tv that fighting had virtually ended in 1961 a year before the actual ceasefire which shows the FLN as a fighting force had been rendered redundant (similar to the Indonesian war of independence and Portuguese colonial wars in Africa). However others will claim that because France failed to capture or kill every single FLN fighter that it’s a military stalemate (I don’t agree with that view personally) but Wikipedia is a site where users can contribute so I think both views should be listed in the result box so both sides are happy. It’s also obvious the result was an FLN political victory. Wowlebureh (talk) 09:09 17 March 2021 (UTC) @Mztourist: because it was a military stalemate, the FLN didn't beat the French and the French couldn't eradicate the FLN is what you said when you reverted Omar Hall's edit less than 2 months ago. @Wowlebureh: The ottomans failed to capture Vienna and conquer Austria like they planned but did gain land so... is what you said when changing the result of the Austro-Turkish War (1663–64). So, given France's plans to keep Algeria, the result here should obviously be "FLN Victory" if you follow your logic; and in this case, we don't even have to resort to misrepresenting the sources (like you did in the other article) since we we have tons of sources supporting this undisputed fact. I don’t really understand Luckily for us, this encyclopedia is not based on people's lack of understanding, otherwise editors such as "Derbyboy2890" (a banned user with whom Drmies is familiar) will turn this project into a joke. If we are to rely on targetted Google search results and stick everything in the Infobox, including conflicting information, then there is a lot more we could add, including "FLN military victory"; but as anyone would have actually read books about this war would tell you, the military stalemate is what led the French to ask/beg for a ceasefire (that never materialised), before surrendering unconditionally to the FLN's demands. For my part, it has always been my understanding (based on what is acknowledged in every reliable source about this war) that this was a FLN victory and that there is no reason, none whatsoever, not to display this undisputed fact in the Infobox, just like we do for similar wars, such as the Vietnam War. M.Bitton (talk) 12:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC) @M.Bitton: Yes the FLN did achieve their goal in the war as Algeria became independent but they achieved it through political means not through military strength. Like how the Dutch military was successful in the Indonesian war of independence and the Portuguese were successful in their colonial wars in Africa, the French military was successful in Algeria. All three of these conflicts were won militarily by the occupying power but lost politically by their politicians. So I think it is important to include both the military and political results in the information box so people get a clear understanding of how Algeria became independent which was at the negotiating table and not through military strength. But as I said you like others will disagree and believe that the conflict was a military stalemate (which is obviously fine) so both the view of a military stalemate and french military victory should be included in the info box. I am glad you replied but your bias is clearly showing considering De Gaulle offered the FLN a ceasefire in 1959 but the FLN refused so he ordered the army to crush the FLN and the Évian Accords was a ceasefire so saying the calls for a ceasefire “never materialised” is wrong considering the Évian Accords was a ceasefire. Also the fact you even contemplate an FLN “military victory” shows you do not really understand what the term military victory really means. Also there are many sources which state a French military victory. Wowlebureh (talk) 15:46 March 2021 (UTC) saying the calls for a ceasefire “never materialised” is wrong considering the Évian Accords was a ceasefire Utter nonsense! Anyway, I see that you managed to avoid addressing your double standard that I highlighted above, just like you did with your source misrepresentation that you used to push your POV in the other article. M.Bitton (talk) 15:52, 17 March 2021 (UTC) @M.Bitton: We can discuss the Austro-Turkish war edits in that pages talk page where we have already started a discussion. Yes the Evian Accords was a ceasefire as it even states it in the article. Algeria wouldn’t gain independence until July 1962 when a referendum was held and the Évian Accords were signed in March 1962 which is officially seen as the end of the conflict. It’s like how the armistice that ended fighting in World War One was signed in 1918 but the treaty of Versailles wasn’t signed until 1919. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wowlebureh (talk • contribs) 18:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC) Instead of cherry picking what suits you, I suggest to take your time to read and hopefully understand what I wrote about the ceasefire (which is obviously about France wanted before the negotiations could take place and what the FLN refused. This is elementary and time wasting). Anyway, you still haven't addressed your double standard with regard to this war. M.Bitton (talk) 18:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC) @M.Bitton: Ok I will address my so called “double standards” and then we can actually get back to discussing the military result properly. The reason I put the following edit summary “The ottomans failed to capture Vienna and conquer Austria like they planned but did gain land so...” is because the Ottoman armies were pretty decisively defeated at the Battle of Saint Gotthard (1664) meaning that the war resulted in an “Austrian military victory” as they defeated the ottomans in battle and stopped Vienna from being captured. However you miss out the fact I also added “Ottoman diplomatic success” to the result box because in the Peace of Vasar the ottomans gained some territory and Austria agreed to pay annual tribute. This means that the Austria’s successful defeated the ottomans in open battle of stopped Vienna from being captured which means the result of the war is an Austrian military victory however the ottomans won a diplomatic victory as they gained some land and got tribute payments despite being defeated in battle. In the Algerian war result box I am trying to say that France won militarily while the FLN won diplomatically. This is not double standards as in both of these pages I never claimed an all out victory for either side. I never said “Austrian victory” or “Ottoman victory” I said “Austrian military victory” and “Ottoman diplomatic victory” as you can see the results show that both sides were victorious in different elements of the conflict. Austria on the battlefield and the Ottomans at the negotiating table. Just like how the French won on the battlefield and the FLN won at the negotiating table. I never claimed an all out victory for either side on both pages. Now can we get back to the discussion. Wowlebureh (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2021 (UTC) The ottomans failed to capture Vienna and conquer Austria has only one meaning that you cannot change, regardles sof how hard you try (just like the source that you misrepresented, it's there as a testimony to how you approach certain subjects). As for the Algerian war, I will simply repeat what I said previously. For my part, it has always been my understanding (based on what is acknowledged in every reliable source about this war) that this was a FLN victory and that there is no reason, none whatsoever, not to display this undisputed fact in the Infobox, just like we do for similar wars, such as the Vietnam War. M.Bitton (talk) 18:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC) Wowlebureh, I suppose we need to watch these talk pages more quickly so that socks like you don't get to spread their venom and disrupt the editing process. Drmies (talk) 19:12, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I know the discussion it's over, but I just wanted to add that I also agreed with the current "military stalemate. It would have been curious, to say the least, to characterise as a colonial victory a war ending with the decolonisation of the country. If anything (if one had to change the current box) simply "independence of Algeria" would have been an alternative as a result, given that that was what was at stake. Barjimoa (talk) 23:28, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree on what you added about "Algerian Independence" but how it could be a military stalemate with a political victory for one side? It doesn't work that way... because a stalemate mean that no side had won. To claim that it was a victory for the FLN it's like to say the the Americans achieved their goals in Afghanistan... so i need to change the "military stalemate" to a French military victory by also adding many sources that straight it, and keep the political victory for the Algerian side. Because that was the true result here 176.12.209.30 (talk) 02:58, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Sétif massacre.jpeg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

result

So, what will be done here? I wonder who much others were blocked because they disagree with "Mr.Bitton"... and now, when my blocking time has ended, can we discusse again "the result"? Because there was no military stalemate as can be seen in what is written in other sections of the article and the sources that I provided before. 2A02:14C:3A1:2F00:3D4D:9B4C:3C9F:7F0B (talk) 18:45, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• La battaglia di Algeri screen.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:42, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• La battaglia di Algeri screen.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:24, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Harkis

The numbers in the new harki section seem highly controversial:

"The term also came to include non-fighting Muslim Algerian who supported a French Algeria, as well as their families." - when? I've never seen it used that way, nor does harkis.com seem to use it that way.

"According to the United Nations, in 1962 there were 476,000 Algerian Muslim fighting for the French army, and 50,000 non-fighting Muslim overtly supporting a French Algeria (mostly Arab and Kabyle rich elite)." - can you point out an exact source? This contradicts even the harkis' own website, which gives 263 000 [8] - and ignores the fact that many harkis switched sides to the FLN before the end of the war.

"Including their families, they numbered at least 1 million, or about 10% of the total Algerian population." At most would be more accurate - can you cite any neutral sources for this figure?

- Mustafaa 18:37, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

MNA side

IT'S known that MNA fought against FLN and they were supported by France to get rid of FLN, so why you put MNA and FLN in the same side ? Mohammed 2976 (talk) 03:36, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2021

I don't understand why this thing here should go again and again... what is written on the article itself it's not the same as the result in the infobox. The sources that i provided to IMPROVE the matter are not good enough? The BBC and others? If it was a "military stalemate" can someone tell me please how much tanks and aircraft's the FLN had? And how could a "stalemate" transformed into a victory?? It doesn't work that way, to say that they achieved their goals and by that, it was a "victory" it's like to say now that the Americans achieved their goals in Afghanistan... the case was not the same as here. 2A02:14C:11D:7400:D18C:E19B:6964:7BC (talk) 05:10, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 07:09, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

I want please to change the "military stalemate" in the infobox to the fact it was a "French military victory" and here are the sources I want to put:[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]http://www.nids.mod.go.jp/english/event/forum/pdf/2017/07_tachikawa.pdfhttps://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/military-review/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20081031_art012.pdfhttps://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/557506/Kellou_georgetown_0076M_11824.pdf;sequence=1https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a429272.pdfhttp://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/Vol17/no2/PDF/CMJ172Ep5.pdfhttps://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1820&context=all_theseshttps://nllp.jallc.nato.int/IKS/Sharing%20Public/Counterrevolutionnary%20Warfare%201945-62.pdf]

And keep the political victory for the Algerian side. Because if we consider it really was a "Stalemate" it doesn't work that way. 2001:4DF4:31B:6500:D18C:E19B:6964:7BC (talk) 07:55, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] 109.253.196.10 (talk) 08:47, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

•  Note: 1) This IP is a sock of Dr_Holy_Joker, the indeffed editor who refuses to get the point and keeps wasting everyone's time. Please see the previous discussions with them and their string of IPs. 2) Also worth noting is the fact that this is the same person who added a comment to an archived discussion yesterday in which they compare this war to the War in Afghanistan and (try not to laugh) the FLN to the Americans. M.Bitton (talk) 16:10, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah true, it's me again :) did you thought that I will go so quickly?? The FLN and the Americans were at the same side back then, and even now. And the result in the infobox here deserve some fixings. 176.12.239.207 (talk) 05:19, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

So you don't want to have a natural point of view and fix the result? Or you just want to keep this article as a C class article by all meanings??? 89.139.209.70 (talk) 15:11, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2021

So, I ask again, is there no one here who want to take a serious look and fix the matter? Where is the "natural point of view"? The sources are on the request below. TheGhost31X (talk) 08:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 08:44, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Please look on the previous request and discussion on the talk page. TheGhost31X (talk) 09:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 16 April 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 15:48, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

---

Algerian War → Algerian War of Independence – Why is this the primary topic for Algerian war, when the Algerian Civil war has a specific name? Jishiboka1 (talk) 05:23, 16 April 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:00, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

• Strong oppose "Algerian War" is the WP:COMMONNAME of this primary topic. This is overwhelmingly attested in RS. M.Bitton (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May 2022

The recent change to the number of displaced came as a bit of surprise given that the 2 million estimate is repeated in all reliable sources. In fact, even 2 million is low, as today's historians[24] (with access to the declassified archives) speak of more than 2.5 million Algerians displaced (these are the people that were interned in concentration camps). In any case, I checked the sentence that was contradicting what's cited elsewhere in the article and found that of the cited sources actually support the "2 million" (including the one that was moved from the article's body to the infobox), while the third failed verification. I updated them using the recent source, removed the one that failed verification (from the body and the infobox) and the 1960 official report (it mentions 2 million interned in 1960, i.e., two years before the was over). I also updated Horne's estimate and added a couple of supporting sources. M.Bitton (talk) 01:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

References

Edit request

Can anyone change OAS' flag to the one used in every other article (File:OAS Flag.svg)? 2804:431:C7C4:9702:3184:F1D:2CDA:6113 (talk) 09:25, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done SSSB (talk) 12:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2022

Change “As the war dragged on, th French public slowly turned against it” to “As the war dragged on, the French public slowly turned against it” Adamci (talk) 00:01, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done (@Adamci) lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい 12:34, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

WW II -> WW I

"Algerian Nationalism Both Muslim and European Algerians took part in World War II ..." should have been "... World War I..." 2A01:CB1D:653:8300:1945:8188:1288:85F6 (talk) 17:15, 21 September 2022 (UTC)