| 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.
|
