Talk:List of convicted war criminals
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Slobo
As Slobo had not actually been convicted as a war criminal at the time of his death, should be actually be classified as a war criminal, or only an alleged/accused one?
- MSTCrow 06:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Definition of War Criminal
Frankly, I think this list is suspect. Is there no presumption of innocence for an indicted war criminal? If there is, in fact, a presumption of innocence, then only those convicted of war crimes may be listed here. Furtheremore, I do not think that all of these people have even been indicted for war crimes. I fail to see how an unindicted, untried, and unconvicted person can be labelled a war criminal, a legal term of art, with a sufficient degree of certainty to include in an encyclopedia. I personally think this list could do with a listing on AfD, but I am willing to be convinced otherwise before actually taking it there if someone would care to respond to this message sometime in the next few days. Indrian 16:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with you. 200.163.12.243 00:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] War Crimes
I received a message from Wikipedia (from "Jamott") saying that I had vandalised the "List of War Criminals" page by adding the names of all the postwar U.S. Presidents, which is factually correct when using the website's definition of a war crime. Does Wikipedia have a policy regarding war crimes when committed by American Presidents?
- The acts may well amount to war crimes, but no one is a war criminal until they have been tried by a court of competant jurisdiction and been found guilty. As the header of the page clearly states, this article is supposed to be for convicted war criminals. I am concerned by this list as you can tell from my comments above, and I have also not perused this list to make certain that only convicted criminals appear on the page, so please don't respond with "X is on this page so you are wrong," becasue that is supposed the purpose of the list and so the U.S. presidents do not belong. I hope that helps. Indrian 17:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I have an idea. One could include an unconvicted war criminal (according to The United Nations definition) on the Wikipedia List Of War Criminals page with the word "unconvicted" after the name. This would mean that the opening paragraph would need to be modified, though. What do you think?
[edit] Ariel Sharon
Is not a war criminal. 72.75.74.21 05:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- I would agree with that assessment, however the confusion may lie in weither the Kahan Commission tried him for war crimes or that he was mearly neligent. This might be attributed to the Ariel Sharon article:
- "On the other hand some of his critics have sought to prosecute him as a war criminal for alleged crimes related to the Sabra and Shatila massacre during the 1982 Lebanon War, for which the Kahan Commission held him indirectly responsible."
MadMax 06:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- Sharon was never tried or convicted for war crimes. An independent Israeli comission did find him indirectly responsible but that's the extent of it. If someone doesn't present a rationale for his inclusion in theά list I will delete his name. - Pyro19 06:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] References
I've since added one of the main sources for originally compiling this list. Regarding the addition of Josef Heissmayer (or Josef Heiszmaier), I ask that future editors please read the heading as well as to use the talk page before removing entries. MadMax 02:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- Please note, Robert Jay Nash's Encyclopedia of World Crime series is only one of serveral sources used to complile this list. Despite the credibility concerns of Nash's work it is supported in several other book I have used (Nash's Encyclopedia of World Crime being the only available resource I have the copyright reference to). Unless there is a source which can disprove the existance of a Josef Heissmayer (beyond the scope of a Google search), I respectfully ask the entry not be removed (see the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule). MadMax 15:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
- "Unless there is a source which can disprove the existance of a Josef Heissmayer (beyond the scope of a Google search), I respectfully ask the entry not be removed" Are you stupid? Let's add an article about the Elfen Holocaust, too. Can't disprove elfocide either, can you? Let's find a reliable resource that _proves_ the existence of a Josef Heissmayer and your silly "Übergestapo", and then you can add him. Savvy?Kar98 16:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
- Per this, the source you provided is not acceptable as a reliable source. For that matter, "Ubergestapo" does not appear to exist in German or in English as an actual organization. I will remove the offending probable hoax on sight, and will also recommend that all entries on this list that are redlinked be deleted, unless you can find a source known for reliability that includes them. Please also note, MadMax, that the burden of proof is on you to show that the person in question exists, per WP:V. Captainktainer * Talk 10:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- Captainktainer,
- With all due respect I believe you are misunderstanding the situation. First I am well aware of the status concerning Jay Robert Nash as a primary resource, having brought the issue up several months ago on WikiProject Organized Crime and further asking future contributors, as I have done, to provide another resource apart from Nash. Secondly, as I have already stated, I have used two other references as primary sources (having already clarified Nash as the only source with copyright information available to me at the time), my primary references being Sheldon Glueck's War Criminals: Their Prosecution and Punishment (Glueck, Sheldon. War Criminals: Their Prosecution and Punishment. New York: Kraus Reprint Corporation, 1966.) and Victors' Justice: The Tokyo War Crimes Trial by Richard H. Minear (Minear, Richard H. Victors' Justice: The Tokyo War Crimes Trial. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1971. ISBN 05645-5) as well as partial information from Nuremberg and Vietnam: an American Tragedy by Telford Taylor, U.S. Chief Council at Nuremburg (Taylor, Telford. Nuremberg and Vietnam: an American Tragedy. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1970.).
- My concern lies in the problem the Kar98 twice removed the article, neither stating a reason why he believes both Josef Heissmayer (or Heiszmaier) and Ubergestapo or willing even to discuss the matter as I attempted to on the talk page. To his credit, Kar98 may very well be correct in his conclusion neither in fact exist. In my opinion however, I believe Kar98 is mistaken both in the belief if he cannot find a name or organization on a Google search, that they if fact cease to exist (for example, assuming Ubergestapo to be a typographical error meaning Gestapo, one could simply look up the official listing of defendants as the Nuremburg Trial) nor do I believe I am out of line by asking why he feels that is the case. Is he an accredited scholar on the Third Reich, or perhaps picked an odd sounding organization in a Google search, I haven’t any idea beside his message "no such person, no such organization". I have no wish to become involved in a pointless edit war and I have may every attempt to do so. MadMax 20:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- That's lovely, but does the particular entry that is being disputed exist in those other sources? For that matter, a person's status as a scholar means exactly nothing on Wikipedia (as Larry Sanger famously pointed out). Everyone has to play by the same rules, including WP:V and WP:RS; a recent Arbitration Committee decision clarified that very accurately. Now, if you're willing to vouch for the accuracy of the particular entry and can provide the page number in one of those works where he exists, that's awesome; he goes right back in. Right now, the only specific reference is a source with a reputation for falsifying facts, and a very suspect name, or at the very least a typo. You're perfectly within your rights to ask why a person believes something doesn't exist, but without a reliable source to back up its existence, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia namespace. Captainktainer * Talk 00:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- "he cannot find a name or organization on a Google search" That doesn't have anything to do with Google or not. You do realize documents have existed outside of Google for millennia. I'm not a "accredited scholar on the Third Reich" by any means, but an avid student of German history, not limited to this particular 12 year period. Trust me, there was no "Übergestapo". "nor do I believe I am out of line by asking why he feels that is the case". Well, I don't "feel" something to be case, I know there was no such organisation. It has not ever been discussed, portrayed, described, referenced or otherwise made mention of in any material I've read (that would be books, articles, period material, documentaries and studies. You know, printed matter). Yes, you are way out of line. I could entertain you with the most obscure and irrelevant details about the Third Reich. There was no "Übergestapo". The only two available "Heissmeyer" war criminals are August H., already listed, and Dr. Kurt H., a Nazi doctor who had been conducting medical experiments with Tb on children at KL Neuengamme and was subsequently tried and sentenced to life in prison by an East German court in 1966.Kar98 21:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- That's lovely, but does the particular entry that is being disputed exist in those other sources? For that matter, a person's status as a scholar means exactly nothing on Wikipedia (as Larry Sanger famously pointed out). Everyone has to play by the same rules, including WP:V and WP:RS; a recent Arbitration Committee decision clarified that very accurately. Now, if you're willing to vouch for the accuracy of the particular entry and can provide the page number in one of those works where he exists, that's awesome; he goes right back in. Right now, the only specific reference is a source with a reputation for falsifying facts, and a very suspect name, or at the very least a typo. You're perfectly within your rights to ask why a person believes something doesn't exist, but without a reliable source to back up its existence, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia namespace. Captainktainer * Talk 00:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Per this, the source you provided is not acceptable as a reliable source. For that matter, "Ubergestapo" does not appear to exist in German or in English as an actual organization. I will remove the offending probable hoax on sight, and will also recommend that all entries on this list that are redlinked be deleted, unless you can find a source known for reliability that includes them. Please also note, MadMax, that the burden of proof is on you to show that the person in question exists, per WP:V. Captainktainer * Talk 10:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Iraq War
Should Steven D. Green be classed as a war criminal? He shot four members of an Iraqi family dead and raped their daughter during the combat, so that is in theory crimes against humanity.
- Was he convicted for a war crime? If yes, he should be in this list, if no, he shouldn't. -- int19h 08:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- The list claims to be a list of charged and/or convicted war criminals... The "and/or" means that someone who is charged but not convicted may go in the list. In fact, the list, as currently defined, may include people who were found innocent. Ken Arromdee 17:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Valerian Trifa
Valerian Trifa is on this list and while he was indeed involved in the leadership of an anti-semitic organization/party during WWII (the Iron Guard), it seems he was not convicted nor formally charged for war crimes (his NYTimes obituary utterly fails to mention such a thing). bogdan 22:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Defn.
I have changed the displayed defn from "charged or convicted" to "charged and not acquitted". This does not agree with the defn in the comment however. Rich Farmbrough, 19:22 6 November 2006 (GMT).
[edit] Cleanup tag
I added the cleanup tag because I think this article should include for each person listed the name of the court of justice which sentenced/charged them. I know there are some persons listed which were never even charged. bogdan 11:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Shiro Ishii
Shiro Ishii commited war crimes, but he was never charged because of a deal with the United States. He does not fits the description in the lead section. bogdan 11:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Frank Walus
While Frank Walus was convicted of war crimes he won an appeal before he died. He shouldn't be included in this list if this information is correct. 67.182.250.16 00:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removing Karlis Detlavs
See "A federal immigration judge says prosecutors failed to prove a case for deporting Karlis Detlavs (..)"here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Doc15071969 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] It's all Axis - where are the Stalinists?
Where are the Soviet political and military leaders? Practically all of them. --HanzoHattori 10:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Where's Hitler himself?
I see people that aided Hitler, but no Hitler.
[edit] Definition
I have replaced the words "not acquited" with "convicted" in the definition. Previosly the definition did not agree with the outcommented text. Also, as far as I know, people are legally innocent till proven otherwise. Simply being formally charged doesn't make someone a war criminal. This of course does not mean I think Mladić or Karadžić are innocent. --Eleassar my talk 08:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I accordingly removed General Juin from the list as he was not even indicted. I found at least one other person (Gustav Simon) who should probably be removed on the grounds of never being convicted (though he almost certainly would have been). I fear the entire list may be spiked with such cases, people either accused of warcrimes by one group, or people indicted or sought for warcrimes but never convicted... Which is why I will also support the move.--Caranorn 12:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
List of war criminals → List of convicted war criminals – {For the same reasons that Category:War criminals was deleted. See also my comment one thread above. --Eleassar my talk 10:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)}
[edit] Survey
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" or other opinion in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support, stating categorically that this is a list of convicted war criminals forestalls the problem of the addition of people who someone may consider to be a war criminal, but who has never actually been convicted of the offence. Emoscopes Talk 11:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support, per above, though creating a separate list with people charged with warcrimes (a national or international court) might be justified (not sure it would be NPOV).--Caranorn 12:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support, per above. bogdan 12:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support, per above. Mieciu K 18:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose, I believe there could be two lists. One list would contain felons convicted of war crimes and the other would be a list of persons who correctly fit the definition of a war criminal as defined by The United Nations but do not face any such conviction. Sstteevvee 20:58, 7 April 2007 (EDT).
- I doubt that would be accetable under Wikipedia rules. Since this would be using a syntheis of data it appears that this idea would vilolate WP:OR. In the end we would need a reliable source calling someone a war criminal before we can add someone to a list. --67.71.77.224 23:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- If this idea is unacceptable simply because it doesn't groove with Wikipedia's rules then the rules should be changed. Having two lists - one for convicted war criminals and the second for WC's who have not had justice done to them - is perfectly reasonable and absolutely necessary.
[edit] Discussion
Add any additional comments
I have mixed feelings about the proposed move. I must acknowledge that a title like "List of war criminals" is very broad and may lead some people to include a name only for political reasons or by mere ignorance. For instance, I have found in this list the German General Franz Halder who, to the best of my knowledge, has never been convicted and has even received the Medal of Freedom in 1961. Therefore, I could certainly agree with the fact that the page name must be changed.
On the other hand, there are plenty of people who have indeed committed war crimes but have never be convicted for many reasons. One of the most obvious examples on this list is the one of Heinrich Himmler who, for obvious reasons, has never faced a court. I also noticed that Adolf Hitler is not on the list, probably he too has never been tried. Another well known example of a person having committed war crimes but never tried is the one of Shiro Ishii, head of the Unit 731. I think that everyone will agree that he actually committed war crimes. However, for "state reasons", he never faced a court and so, was never convicted. I have however no doubt that serious historians will consider him as a war criminal. Cases like this make me reluctant to the proposed move, even if, as I wrote above, there are some good arguments as well for the proposed move.
Furthermore, since there is already a category "people convicted of war crimes", I am afraid that renaming this page will just make it become redundant with this category. --Lebob-BE 08:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
This article has been renamed from List of war criminals to List of convicted war criminals as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 11:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cleaning up the list
This list could use a lot of cleaning up and to have sources and conviction sentences (just added some new ones with sources). Anything can be added without proof as it currently is.
Also, the list could be more relevent, this is just a mess. What we should do is divide the list into subsections regarding time/place of crime, so as to have a title "World War 2" - subtitle "Europe-Germans" - list them - subtitle "Asia-Japanese" - list them, etc. for the entire list. More relevance that way. The Spanish Inquisitor 09:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Collaborating with the enemy is not a war crime
Abrial, although convicted of collaborating with the enemy, committed no war crime, as far as I can tell. If editors can't tell the difference, this page is bound to remain a mess. Chris the speller 04:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Emil Hácha?
He was not a war criminal. During the communist era he was seen as collaborator and criminal but he actually helped to save as many lives as possible. Nowadays' historians can confirm that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.70.222.228 (talk) 15:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Kurt Waldheim?
Why is Kurt Waldheim (1918-2007), Austrian army lieutenant and former United Nations Secretary General) on this list? The name of the article and the introductory paragraph indicate that only convicted war criminals should be on the list. From what I can find out on Wiki, he was never convicted, nor was he ever formally accused and brought before any court of competent jurisdiction. Without any evidence to the contrary, I suggest that Waldheim's name should be removed from the list.--TGC55 (talk) 01:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)