Talk:Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians

Kosovo

The sources do not connect events in Kosovo with anti-Orthodoxy sentiments. The destruction of churches might happen for a variety of reasons, for example identification of them with an oppressing governmental force or a particular ethnic group. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, particularly if it might be that buildings other than churches are included as well. Having said that, if only churches are being destroyed, that might maybe be included in some article if that article is the one a separate article on the burnings, if that theoretical article were created and proposed for merger, might be merged into the one the material is actually being added to. John Carter (talk) 22:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

• I would like to inform all editors of this article that in the past few days user @Ktrimi991: made several failed attempts to remove entire sections in three different articles: Persecution of Christians and Persecution of Christians in the modern era, and also Anti-Orthodoxy. All those sections were relating to one subject: crimes of Muslim Albanians, committed against Christian Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija. The same user tried to delete all those sections unilaterally, before initiating this discussion on the talk pages. I would urge all editors to take a good look at the nature of all those deletions, since they were rightfully reverted by several editors. Sorabino (talk) 00:20, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I think, with respect, that this is a slight misrepresentation. On this article, all Ktrimi991 has done as far as I can see is restore the 2 January version by Joefromrandb after the insertion by one anonymous editor of some (rather un-encyclopedic) text, cut and paste from other articles. The inserted material is dubious, because it attributes sectarian violence during a civil war situation to a particular motivation "Anti-Orthodoxy" without citing a single reliable source that suggests this motivation. So, instead of ad hominem attacks on an editor, perhaps Sorabino you could give us the case why this material should be in the article?BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:29, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Also, you talk about Ktrimi991's "failed attempts", but from glancing at the edit history it looks like they "failed" because you insisted on reverting and refused to discuss on the talk pages. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:32, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@John Carter: @Bobfrombrockley Apart from churches, the target included shops, offices, cultural centers and institutions. The conflict in Kosovo, before, during and after war was caused by a mixture of nationalism and disappointment from economy and corruption. The UN secretary-general's report of April 30, 2004 described the events as "ethnically motivated violence". Sorabino is not replying so I think the section does not have to stay any longer. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ktrimi991: I am removing the section here. These tendentious attempts to misrepresent nationalist conflicts as religious ones needs to cease as they help absolutely no one on Wikipedia or in the real world either.--Calthinus (talk) 07:01, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

What is anti-Orthodoxy?

This article does not cite a single source which uses the term "anti-Orthodoxy". It has been tagged as needing verification since 2015. Each of the sections relates to bad things that have happened to Orthodox Christians, but does not give a reason why they should be understood as part of something called "Anti-Orthodoxy". The section on the Ottomans, for example, explicitly notes that Orthodox and other Christians were not differentiated, so why is it in this article? The whole article seems like an example of WP:OR and WP:SYN. Unless decent citations are added, I will nominate the article for deletion.BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley: I agree. I reckon we should wait for a reasonable time, maybe one or two weeks. If nobody makes some improvements, the article can not sustain itself. Ktrimi991 (talk) 13:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

...@Bobfrombrockley and Ktrimi991: a lot of 3000 or so Google results [[1]] seem to suggest that the word has a different definition -- meaning "sentiment that opposes established thought", not the Orthodox Christian faith. These seem much more common in books and other preferable sources actually [[2]][[3]][[4]]. Results are also including a large percentage of links about hostility to Orthodox Judaism (like this [[5]][[6]]). And the main actually reputable sources that are using this term use it in the Soviet context it seems where you have atheists of the same ethnicity and nationality persecuting Orthodox Christians for clearly non-national reasons, which is curiously entirely absent from this page. --Calthinus (talk) 07:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

I came to exactly the same conclusion. I specifically checked Google Scholar and Google Books, and I am more convinced than ever this is a made-up neologism. Will go to AfD.BobFromBrockley (talk) 18:06, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Done. Add your thoughts here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anti-Orthodoxy BobFromBrockley (talk) 18:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

A Google search shows that "anti-Orthodox" primarily hits on this subject. On the first three pages, I receive exactly 22-vs-8 in favour of anti-Orthodoxy as in anti-Orthodox Christianity. "Anti-Orthodox sentiment" as per other examples?--Zoupan 01:33, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Zoupan- feel free to add reliable sources to the page then. BobFromBrockley (talk) 17:39, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Actually a majority of hte first set of results are about Orthodox Judaism, see here [[7]] (you need to remove Wikipedia, Wikia and Wiki from the search). On hte first set, 5 are about Judaism, 2 about Christianity and 1 about... botany. It needs to be clarified to be against Orthodox Christianity. I also note that the first one of the sources that actually referred to Christianity is this [uhhh... "academic" work which claims Anti-Orthodox conspiracies by Ukraine] which is an overwhelmingly Orthodox country itself, while the second is about views associated with Russian fascism accusing certain literature of being "anti-Orthodox" and therefore burning it (Orwellian, huh) [[8]]. Interesting results, to say the least. --Calthinus (talk) 04:14, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

We actually could have Anti-Orthodox Christian sentiment. However this page, especially a lot of the recent additions by Zoupan, are not describing sentiment they are describing actions that are (allegedly) based on such sentiment -- hence Persecution of Orthodox Christians seems to describe it better (if it was about anti-Orthodox Christian sentiment, I would expect to see polls which I doubt exist). A lot of these additions are dubious. I removed the Ukraine "anti-Orthodox" conspiracy theories that were added. I also take issue with this sentence: The Albanian nationalist movement of the 1981 protests in Kosovo had an anti-Orthodox focus, but this was due to identifying Orthodoxy with the Serbs. which explicitly acknowledges that the motivation isn't really religious-- so why is it here? Actually ironically calling this anti-Orthodox ignores the fact that many Orthodox Albanians from Albania proper cheered (and still cheer) for UCK and hold similar feelings toward Serbian Orthodoxy because it is Serbian, clearly not because it is Orthodox (their own faith). Indeed Orthodox Albanians like Klodian Sotir Gjika rushed to Kosovo and took up arms to fight the Serbian army alongside their Catholic and Muslim kin. Likewise these Albanian nationalists in Kosovo have no negative feelings towards Albanian Orthodox (indeed they revere Orthodox figures like Fan Noli, even Sotirovic will admit this). The sentence about the Kosovo Catholic church being anti-Orthodox in the view of some Serbs is a lot more acceptable to me, because it attributes the viewpoint rather than stating it as fact. --Calthinus (talk) 05:51, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Polls, really? You are implying the opposite, but in my view, organized attacks and campaigns towards the Orthodox, such as in destroying church property, terrorizing clergy, etc., motivated by ethnic hatred or not, should count and be included in the article. I see destruction of churches and mosques, murders of priest and imams, be it state-organized or in civil unrest, the same way.--Zoupan 18:20, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Actually, it is different. Once upon a time in the land of America, a boy named Dylan went on a rampage against a church. Under your view, that should automatically be viewed as anti-Christian. It was anything but. The assailant himself was a Christian. It was, in fact, anti-Black. Just like anti-Serbian Orthodox actions of the Ustasha are anti-Serb, not against the Orthodox faith. --Calthinus (talk) 23:31, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

What if there was rampage on over 100 Orthodox churches? What if priests were kidnapped and executed? What if civilians were executed if they did not convert? You know I am talking about wars in former Yugoslavia and the strange thing called "The Balkans", not some pissant pill popper racist psycho. You imply some sort of coincidence. Very bad example from your side. Not buying your efforts to have anti-Serb/Orthodox campaigns removed from the article. At all.--Zoupan 03:11, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

If there was a rampage on over 100 Black Protestant churches, it would be 100% anti-Black, and 0% anti-Protestant, and yes, I would remove it from a page about anti-Protestantism, absolutely. I think it is an excellent example which you still aren't engaging. Serb does not equal Orthodox although it often implies it. The Ustasha happen to also have been the definition of "pill popper racist psychos"-- they had a lot of hatred towards Serbs, plus Jews and Roma. In fact, if you notice, with regard to Jews, tehre are two concepts, anti-Semitism (ethnic) and anti-Judaism (religious) -- note how our page for anti-Judaism does not include the ethnically-motivated Holocaust. -Calthinus (talk) 03:44, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Calthinus, are you really denying that there were religious aspects of the Holocaust? Such claim would be preposterous! We have special article on Religious antisemitism with entire section on the Holocaust. Somehow, you failed to mention that. Correlation between racial and religious aspects of Holocaust, and other genocides and ethnic conflicts, constitutes an entire field in social studies, with thousands of scholars working on those subjects. Holocaust did have both racial and religious aspects, that is a well established scientific fact. So, please, educate yourself! Sorabino (talk) 18:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorabino Um no, racial and religious aspects were by no means equal contributors in the event itself, in that the motivation for the Nazis was almost entirely "racial" (note I am not endorsing this view, actually my view is that all "races" are made up fantasy categories when humanity can't really be separated into discrete groups...), even though the history of how it arose involved religious aspects. If you actually read the section you're referring to, you'd realize it says this : Interviews with Nazis by other historians show that the Nazis thought that their views were rooted in biology, not historical prejudices.. "As for anti-Semitic attitudes and actions, he insisted that 'the racial question... [and] resentment of the Jewish race... had nothing to do with medieval anti-Semitism...' That is, it was all a matter of scientific biology and of community", and the conclusion of American Jewish scholars -- Nazism was not a Christian phenomenon. Without the long history of Christian anti-Judaism and Christian violence against Jews, Nazi ideology could not have taken hold nor could it have been carried out. This very accurately sums up the general view on what motivated the Holocaust. Religious aspects such as age-old prejudices and Luther's polemics and etc played a role in how such an ideology arose but they were not decisive motivators in the event itself as perpetrated by the National Socialist Party. However, the point is not for us to discuss the Holocaust of all things. Anyhow, this section is actually pretty well done, so I will propose an offer based on it. --Calthinus (talk) 00:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Rename

Can I draw everyone's attention to the result of the AfD mentioned above: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anti-Orthodoxy There was a strong consensus for the article to remain, but also a strong consensus for a name change to something like Persecution of Orthodox Christians. BobFromBrockley (talk) 17:10, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Anti-Orthodox sentiment and Persecution of Orthodox Christians are not synonymous though. The latter is a subset of the former.--Zoupan 17:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley: Feel free to make a WP:move request. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:10, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I probably will at some point if I can work out how, unless someone else does. Didn't want to preempt the discussion emerging in the section above - but if anyone else wants to, they should do ahead.BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:29, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Source falsification?

I just removed the Czech Orthodox section. It had only one source, this (google translated [[9]]) and the translation... doesn't even mention the string "Orthodox". Looks like source falsification to me. I have removed it.--Calthinus (talk) 16:58, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

You did good. There are a lot of issues with this article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:28, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 22 February 2018

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

---

Anti-Orthodoxy → Persecution of Orthodox Christians – The current name actually doesn't typically refer to what this page discusses, but instead refers to anti-establishment views or hostility to Orthodox Judaism (see google results [[10]] and Wiktionary [[11]]. This AfD had the vast majority of people agreeing that the current name of the article was unacceptable [[12]]. Persecution of Orthodox Christians much more accurately describes the contents of this article.--Calthinus (talk) 02:57, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

English Wikipedia recognizes two main branches (denominations) of Christian Orthodoxy (with capital O): Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy. This article deals with persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians, and therefore it should not be renamed to "Persecution of Orthodox Christians" since that would be an ambiguous title, that also applies to the persecution of Oriental Orthodox Christians. Consequently, this article could be renamed to "Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians" or to some similar title that acknowledges the denominational difference between Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy. Also, it should be noted that official FBI terminology on the animosity towards Eastern Orthodox Christianity is quite clear: FBI officially uses the term "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" (basic Google Search currently shows more than 800 hits for such use of term "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" (in relation to the FBI terminology). Therefore, this article could also be renamed to "Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment" or to some similar title. Sorabino (talk) 03:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorabino Could you please explain why "Persecution of Orthodox Christians" would be an ambiguous title, as opposed to simply an article whose topic is more broadly focused than one about a particular denomination? For example: there would be nothing wrong with an article entitled, "Persecution of Christians", it just would have a larger scope than this one, and likely would have to be a summary style article for that reason, but there's nothing wrong with that. Mathglot (talk) 06:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I see it does exist, well, good then; so how is that article not ambiguous? Mathglot (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

The term Persecution of Orthodox Christians is ambiguous since it may refer to different subjects, like Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians and Persecution of Oriental Orthodox Christians. It can also refer to the persecution of any other Christian community that self-identifies as orthodox. Sorabino (talk) 19:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't get why this is such a vexing issue but I would be fine with Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians, personally.--Calthinus (talk) 20:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

It is quite an important issue, since Oriental Orthodox Christians have been severely persecuted throughout history, and that is a different subject - here are some relevant articles: Persecution of Copts or Armenian Genocide. Quite soon, we might also have a distinctive denominational article on the persecution of Oriental Orthodox Christians and therefore the title of this article should include unambiguous denominational terminology. Sorabino (talk) 20:30, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

You may have an argument in favor of your desired title, but stating that "The term Persecution of Orthodox Christians is ambiguous" is certainly not it. That's no more true than saying that Persecution of Christians is ambiguous. Both topic titles are perfectly unambiguous, and have different scope; that is all. If you want to support your view, I'd go more with the argument that others are making for you, namely that that's what the article appears to be about now. Although, that does beg the question of why the article is not currently named Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy. Mathglot (talk) 00:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Mathglot the term "Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy" is a mouthful and sounds unnatural in the English language to my ear (imagine using it in a sentence: compare "Wow man, that's some crazy Anti-Catholicism" versus "Wow man, that's some crazy Anti-Eastern Orthodox...y). To compound this somewhat OR-ish reasoning, Google gives it, with Wikipedia removed, only [3 results]. --Calthinus (talk) 00:59, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

That is not true. Term "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" is quite common. Google Search shows more than 1600 hits for the term "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" and therefore this article could be renamed to Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment. Sorabino (talk) 12:27, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

• Support some change Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy perhaps current title in GBooks refers to Anti-Orthodoxy (Judaism) In ictu oculi (talk) 10:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
• Support renaming to Persecution of Orthodox Christians Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians. The current title is ambiguous; that has already been explained. As for Eastern Orthodoxy vs Oriental Orthodoxy - I agree with Mathglot - the article doesn't have to focus only on EO. byteflush _Talk 12:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

EO is obviously the subject. Those are two different and separated communions. Btw, "Orthodox Christianity" in common usage is the Eastern Orthodox Church.--Zoupan 15:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Slightly changed my !vote per Sorabino and Zoupan comments above. Agree, we should keep the two denominations separate. byteflush _Talk 20:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

• Support -though still am open to discussion - The name proposed by @Calthinus: Persecution of Orthodox Christians encompasses what the content of article is really about. @Sorabino:, i would not be against it having a more narrower focus in its title but would need to have the word Christian in it so its precise like Anti-Eastern Orthodox Christian sentiment. Also on the first proposal, how about something like Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians ? One of these can be the article page title, while the other can be a redirect - whichever editors go with in the end for either option. Best.Resnjari (talk) 13:44, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

"Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment" in your example would suffice. The subject includes Persecution (and that word would be bolded in intro).--Zoupan 15:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@Zoupan:, it needs to have the word Christian in it. I know this is a bit generalised what i say here, but many places (i.e most of Africa, Asia etc) around the world don't know what Eastern Orthodox is (as Orthodox Christian populations are not found there) and for a sizable amount of them, various denominations of Christianity come of as being the same. Hence my comments above for the needed additional wording. In the end however i support the proposed move with the additional word of Eastern being in it.Resnjari (talk) 11:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Resnjari, are you implying that title Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment would be ambiguous? Basic Google Search shows that term "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" is used only in reference to Eastern Orthodoxy (see more than 1600 hits). As I stated before, the term "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" has been adopted by the FBI as official designation for negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodoxy (see more than 800 hits on Google Search). Therefore, we could and should rename this article to Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment. Sorabino (talk) 19:48, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

• Support the proposed rename of the article into Persecution of Orthodox Christians. -- ❤ SILENTRESIDENT ❤ 15:38, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

SilentResident, do you really think that the title, and consequently the scope of this article, should be reduced to "persecution" only? Comparative denominational examples, here on English Wikipedia, are quite clear: Persecution of Catholics is just a redirect, correctly pointing to Anti-Catholicism, and Persecution of Protestants is also just a redirect, correctly pointing to Anti-Protestantism. So, why should we reduce only this denominational article to persecution? Sorabino (talk) 20:01, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose, as article subject is anti-sentiment and persecution, the former terminology not necessarily meaning the latter. As Persecution of Catholics redirects to Anti-Catholicism, I do not see a point in having this article in a different style.--Zoupan 15:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

"Anti-Catholicism" is not an ambiguous term.--Calthinus (talk) 17:02, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

The term Anti-Eastern Orthodox is also not ambiguous, and therefore it would be best to use that term, and preserve the basic style of the title by renaming this article to Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment. Sorabino (talk) 20:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

• Support The current name is confusing, and the proposed name solves all issues. Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:45, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
• Support move to Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians as original poster, but this version seems to have wider support.--Calthinus (talk) 21:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

• I support this version proposed by @Calthinus: with the word Eastern in it.Resnjari (talk) 11:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

• Support the proposed rename of the article into Persecution of Orthodox Christians, as per proposer. It removes the problems of the current title. If people really think that's ambiguous, I guess the addition of "Eastern" would be fine, but I don't see why it'd be confusing without it; it could surely encompass both, as Persecution of Christians covers persecution of all Christian denominations. BobFromBrockley (talk) 21:19, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

This article deals with persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians - that is the subject of this article (by its very content) and since title of every article should reflect its content it is quite clear that standard denominational terminology should be followed here. Proposed title "Persecution of Orthodox Christians" would not reflect the content of this article, since persecution of Oriental Orthodox Christians is not dealt here - that is a different subject, related to Oriental Orthodoxy as a distinctive Christian denomination with its own set of articles, including articles on persecution, like Persecution of Copts or Armenian Genocide. Sorabino (talk) 22:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

• Comment The scope of this article should not be reduced only to "persecution" since article deals with various negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodox Christians, and therefore this article belongs to the same class of articles as Anti-Catholicism, Anti-Protestantism, Anti-Mormonism or Anti-Judaism. Also, we have titles like Anti-Hindu sentiment. As I noted above, one of several possible solutions for renaming this article, without the reduction of its scope, would be based on official FBI terminology on negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Google Search shows more than 800 hits for term "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" in relation to FBI terminology and more than 1600 hits for its use in general. Therefore, this article could be renamed to "Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment" without unnecessary and unjustified reduction to "persecution" only. Sorabino (talk) 23:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
• Support a move to Persecution of Orthodox Christians. Per User:Resnjari, I'm open to discussion about narrowing the scope to Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians, but wanted to be clear that the argument that "The current title is ambiguous" is mistaken; the current title isn't ambiguous, it just refers to something other than what move proponents wish it to. Likewise, the argument that the proposed title, Persecution of Orthodox Christians is inappropriate "since that would be an ambiguous title" is also mistaken, because that title is not ambiguous, it just has a different scope than some wish for this article; i.e, from their vantage point, it is "wrong", not ambiguous. Mathglot (talk) 10:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

In English language, term "Orthodox Christians" is ambiguous, because it can refer to different Christian denominations and their adherents, for example: Proto-orthodox Christians or Eastern Orthodox Christians or Oriental Orthodox Christians. In general, term "Orthodox Christians" can refer to any group of Christians that self-identifies as orthodox. Sorabino (talk) 12:18, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorabino, what you haven't done in all the times you repeated this point, is explain how such ambiguity -- i.e. the grouping of Oriental Orthodoxy with Eastern Orthodoxy -- is "bad". After all, they are all Orthodox Christians in that they are not members of the branches of Western Christianity (Cath./Prot.). It also doesn't seem you think grouping Ethiopian Orthodoxy with Russian Orthodoxy is really so bad after all outside of this page, seeing as you included both in the category "Anti-Orthodoxy" (creation of Eastern Orthodoxy incl with cat "Anti-Orthodoxy": [[13]] and the same for Oriental Orthodoxy here [[14]]. Why is the grouping bad here, but not when you did it for Category pages? --Calthinus (talk) 15:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Calthinus It is you who should explain (since you proposed the move) why do you want to reduce the scope of this article to "persecution" only? For example Persecution of Catholics is just a redirect, correctly pointing to Anti-Catholicism, and Persecution of Protestants is also just a redirect, correctly pointing to Anti-Protestantism, so if you want to be consistent here why don't you propose reducing "Anti-Catholicism" to "Persecution of Catholics" or reducing "Anti-Protestantism" to "Persecution of Protestants"? Somehow, I think that you wont make such proposals, because it is quite obvious that such proposals would also be problematic, so you should explain to the community why do you want to reduce only the scope of this article? So far, you did not say a word about that. The content of this article covers the entire scope of negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodox Christians and therefore it could be renamed to "Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment". That would be a proper title, correct in terms of content and unambiguous in terms of denomination. As I said above, Anti-Eastern Orthodox is commonly used - Google Search shows more than 1600 hits. Sorabino (talk) 18:48, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

@Sorabino:, i did say this alternative: Anti-Eastern Orthodox Christian sentiment as a pagename taking into account what you said. Didn't hear from you though.Resnjari (talk) 11:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

The term Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment is not ambiguous, since it is used only in reference to Eastern Orthodoxy, and therefore no further clarification is needed. Since the term "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" has been officially adopted by the FBI as designation for various negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodoxy (see more than 800 hits on Google Search), it is quite clear that it would be best to apply that terminology, and rename this article to Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment. Sorabino (talk) 19:37, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Not everyone knows what Eastern Orthodox is on its own. Sure many from Europe, parts of the Americas, Africa, the Middle East and Oceania have to varying degrees awareness of what Eastern Orthodox means. For the rest of the world like most of Africa, a large chunk of Asia etc that have increasing numbers of English speakers using platforms like Wikipedia they don't know what Eastern Orthodox connotes, hence the need to have the word Christian in it. For now i am going to agree with the current proposal for the page name change as it addresses to some extent what the article is about. Some more work on the content and structure of the article could allow for a name change your suggesting in the not to distant future done via a proper page move process. I would be open to that. Best.Resnjari (talk) 12:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

There is no need to question general knowledge and cognitive abilities of users from those regions. Any user interested in subjects on Christianity can easily inform himself about English denominational terminology.Sorabino (talk) 20:01, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

I often socialize with people from that part of the world due to university, and many of my friends only after some time when introduced to someone with that background (i.e: Orthodox Christian) then become aware. That's the vantage point i had in mind when it wrote my comment. Anyway Wikipedia also has in its policy (WP:NAMINGCRITERIA) on naming recognizability saying" "The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize." In the end with Calthinus' proposal the word Eastern will be added to the end result -if passed in the page move and with your proposal if done in future, it will need the word Christian in it. Best.Resnjari (talk) 20:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Resnjari: The scope of this article can not be reduced to "persecution" only, for the reasons I stated several times above in this discussion, and besides that, we did not so far hear a single word of explanation of why should only this article be reduced, wile articles like Anti-Catholicism or Anti-Protestantism are left with their full scope. Reducing the scope of this article to "persecution" only would be clear example of double standards, and therefore contrary to several Wikipedia policies and rules.Sorabino (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

• Comment It seems that that we have consensus, in principle, to change the current title of this article, but on the other hand, it is clear that the proposed title did not receive support, on the grounds of style, scope and denominational ambiguity.Sorabino (talk) 20:01, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

WWII persecution of Serbs

I don't think Calthinus' removal of WWII persecution of Serbs from the article is the least warranted. Why is the campaign against the Serbian Orthodox out of scope? Isn't forced conversion within the concept of anti-sentiment/persecution? The Vatican–Ustashe relations are known, as are Catholic clergy's involvement in concentration camps and mass conversions of Orthodox adherents (which may have saved their heads). The NDH's open hostility and hate towards the Orthodox, as part of identification with Serbdom or not, is a fact.--Zoupan 17:55, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Zoupan Because it wasn't a campaign against Serbian Orthodox, it was a campaign against Serbs. If it was anti-Orthodox, why was the Croatian Othodox Church founded? Serbian atrocities against Croats are not considered "anti-Catholic" in the same way. It was horrific, and yes, genocidal, but it wasn't based on their religion. The Vatican has had fucked up stances but it is a Catholic institution not an "anti-Orthodox" institution so it's irrelevant unless you thihnk this page is actually "Persecution by Muslims and Catholics" rather than "Anti-Eastern Orthodox" or whatever its name will be in the end. This all gets confusing because it just so happens that some 99% or so of Orthodox in Croatia happen to be Serbs.

That being said, you make a fair enough case regarding the forced conversion and whatnot-- I'm fine with returning the part about forced conversion but only if it is made clear the context that it arose in (i.e. Orthodoxy viewed as "Serbian" and thus a fifth column). Sometimes I'm hasty. Comes with having limited time. --Calthinus (talk) 19:51, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Religious animosity goes back centuries. The Croatian Orthodox Church was only established in 1942 by the Ustashe government as a gateway to Uniatization and Croatization. The Orthodox Serbs were still persecuted and murdered. The Orthodox faith was foreign and incompatible with the Ustashe Croatian nation-state. If Chetniks or Partisans issued a "one-third-converted/killed/deported" on Croats and systematically targeted the Catholic church, clergy, and adherents, I would consider that anti-Catholic.--Zoupan 03:30, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

• Calthinus, are you denying that there were religious aspects of the Holocaust in the Independent State of Croatia during the Second World War? Such denial would be inappropriate and even offensive, as was your removal of the entire section. Why are you continuing to make such disruptive edits? Regarding the subjects in question, we have special articles on World War II persecution of Serbs and Catholic clergy involvement with the Ustaše. Connection between ethnic and religious aspects of anti-Serbian policies of Croatian Fascists (Ustaše) is very well researched by historians and other scholars, including many Croatian scholars, like Viktor Novak, who wrote the famous work "Magnum Crimen", classifying the Croatian Ustaša movement as typical clero-fascist movement. Persecution of Serbs by Croatian Fascists did have both ethnic and religious aspects, that is a well established historical fact. There are literally hundreds of scholarly works on the subject. So, you can easily educate yourself. Can you produce any scholarly reference that would actually support your claims? Sorabino (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Umm I guess I must be a self-hater then? Interesting take on my internal mental life :). Anyhow, yes, most scholars would consider the Holocaust as motivated by racialized anti-Semitism which was a pinnacle of the National Socialist ideology. It had very little to do with the tenets of Judaism as a religion and unsurprisingly it isn't mentioned on the page Anti-Judaism which covers hostility specifically against the Jewish religion -- there is even a literature clearly delineating which views are associated with which ("Jews as 'Orientals'" -- anti-Semitic, "Jews killed Christ" -- anti-Judaic, and so forth). You can read all about it if you like. This page, whatever its name is, is about hostility to the Orthodox Christian faith. Just like with Dylan Roof who attacked a Black Protestant church was anti-Black not anti-Protestant. As I have said before to Zoupan, I am actually fine with restoring the part about forced conversions, and perhaps the part about Catholic clergical involvement. But there is an issue regarding the clergy -- even on the page Catholic_clergy_involvement_with_the_Ustaše I see nothing that explains the origins and characteristics about "anti-Orthodox Christian sentiments" among the clergy -- indeed, instead the page seems to suggest the clergy was motivated by nationalism and profit (while other elements of hte Catholic clergy firmly opposed Ustasha violence).--Calthinus (talk) 20:25, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Have to modify my statement -- to be fair, here is one thing that could definitely belong on this page -- "In a meeting with Stepinac, Pius XII reiterated the words of Pope Leo X, that the Croats were "the outpost of Christianity", which implied that Orthodox Serbs were not true Christians. Pius XII foretold to Stepinac, "[T]he hope of a better future seems to be smiling on you, a future in which the relations between Church and State in your country will be regulated in harmonious action to the advantage of both." --Calthinus (talk) 20:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposal -- model on Religious antisemitism#The Holocaust

Sorabino has brought up this section. I think this is a much better model of what should be done. I think Zoupan has convinced me that, although there are not many sources explicitly saying this, there may have been some anti-Orthodox sentiment involved in the whole Ustasha affair -- so, just like the excellent section linked above, the section here, if there is to be one should discuss the role attributed to such sentiment by authors, if sources can be found discussing such, rather than just summarizing the event itself. In the section Religious anti-Semitism#The Holocaust it does this pretty well, discussing some alternative views like that of Davidowicz, and also making clear what the mainstream view is on the issue. Since this is a controversial issue, I think this is the best route for us to take. Also, I regret that the conversation between us three has become somewhat of a minefield, and I want to say that if I have offended anyone I am sincerely sorry -- it is hard for us all to talk about such topics while having differing opinions.--Calthinus (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

You are avoiding the main issue, and still not producing any scholarly reference that would justify your actions and deletions of entire sections. Sorabino (talk) 00:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

No, I do not need to "produce scholarly references" to justify deleting sections that are based of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH after consensus agreements in discussions you opted not to participate in. You've been around long enough to know how wiki works -- you can't shift the burden of citation like that.--Calthinus (talk) 19:07, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we need "scholarly references" or other reliable sources showing the persecution was targeted at them because Orthodox (or more precisely, Eastern Orthodox I guess?) to include it here. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Lede

Barely weeks ago, we had a CFP about a name change, with about a dozen participants, and a strong consensus for an article title change to "Persecution of--" while two editors argued for "Sentiments", so an admin duly changed the name to the one agreed. Wording the lede to reflect the personal views of the two dissenting editors goes against that consensus, so please can we keep the lede corresponding to the actual title. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:14, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I agree with you. The lede should be in line with the article's name and content. Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 8 March 2018

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. Especially considering that the last RM that resulted in the present title closed just days ago, I don't find a consensus in this discussion to move to either the proposed title or other suggestions. Cúchullain ^t/c 13:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

---

Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians → Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment – To broaden the scope of this article to match Anti-Catholicism and Anti-Protestantism. Both Persecution of Catholics and Persecution of Protestants are redirects to their respective "Anti-" articles, in order that the articles' scope be broad enough to encompass both hostile sentiment and actual persecution. I respectfully submit that this is what should be done here, as well. Aervanath (talk) 10:47, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

• Support. That would be an appropriate solution, since this is general denominational article on negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodox Christians. Proposed title would fairly reflect the full scope of this article. Since we already have full-scope articles on Anti-Catholicism and Anti-Protestantism, it would be fair to ensure and acknowledge the same full scope of this article. Similar subjects on all denominations should be treated equally. Regarding the proposed style, it should be noted, as in various previous discussions, that the proposed term "anti-Eastern Orthodox" is also used by the FBI as official designation for negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodox Christians (see more than 800 hits for such use of the term on Google Search). Therefore, same terminology should be applied here. Sorabino (talk) 13:06, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose proposed rename; however, support rename sans "sentiment". "Sentiment" is not used in the examples and probably should not be used here. I would support to Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy Anti-Catholicism (Eastern Orthodox), Anti-Eastern-Orthodox-Catholicism or something similar.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  18:09, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Paine Ellsworth, are you serious? :) Why would you use the term "Catholicism" in title of this article? :) This article is about Eastern Orthodox Christianity, not about Catholic Church (see: Catholicism is redirecting to the Catholic Church). And also, the term "sentiment" is commonly used for this type of articles. For example, article on animosity towards Hinduism is titled Anti-Hindu sentiment and there are many similar examples, just look a the list here: List of anti-cultural, anti-national, and anti-ethnic terms. The title style "Anti-(X) sentiment" is commonly used for this type of articles, so why shouldn't it be used here? Sorabino (talk) 19:24, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

The term "Catholicism" is used because the article, to which you link, tells us that the Eastern Orthodox Church is "officially" known as the Orthodox Catholic Church.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  01:40, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Officially, but not commonly. Though they're both pretty much the same to me, I think I read somewhere that right after the Schism both considered themselves Orthodox AND Catholic (depending on the context). Not in the modern common usage, though. The official name is probably an archaic leftover. byteflush _Talk 02:05, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Just a second, you are mixing two terms here. The user Paine Ellsworth has proposed the term "Catholicism" and that term is not related to the Eastern Orthodox Christianity, because there is huge terminological difference between Catholicism as designation for the Catholic Church, and Catholicity as theological and ecclesiological concept of all traditional churches, including the Eastern Orthodox Church. Therefore, term "Catholicism" can not be applied here in any form. Sorabino (talk) 02:11, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Okay, then in order to maintain the larger scope of the article, why not rename it to just Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy? (not entirely certain if there should or should not be a hyphen between "Eastern" and "Orthodoxy" – probably not.)  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  02:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

I actually agree that "Catholicism" can not be applied here. Also, as far as I know, the common name of the EOC doesn't mention Catholicism or Catholicity. I only mentioned the adjective Catholic, which could refer to both of those nouns; however, since the common name doesn't refer to any of these, it's a moot point. To make myself clear: I oppose to Paine Ellsworth's rename suggestion. byteflush _Talk 02:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

• Support "Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy". Chicbyaccident (talk) 01:12, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, such title would also solve the main problem here, in regard to the scope of this article, but since that term can also be used as common designation for theological opposition to particular doctrines of the Eastern Orthodoxy, it seems to me that for the sake of clarity it would still be best to use the proposed title: Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment. Comparative analysis of complex titles of articles on animosities towards various communities shows that term "sentiment" is being added in such cases precisely for the sake of clarity (see the list of of anti-cultural terms). Sorabino (talk) 02:59, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Sorabino:, as i said in the previous renaming discussion, unless your proposal has the word Christian in it (so it is: Anti-Eastern Orthodox Christian sentiment) i wont support it because its still vague. Just having Anti Eastern Orthodox on its own in the pagename does not tell a reader (who is not familiar with the internal divisions of Christianity) what they are looking for when searching and wanting to further their knowledge on the topic. If your willing to add the word Christian to it, i'll support it, absent that i wont. Best.Resnjari (talk) 13:06, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Resnjari:, there is no ambiguity regarding denominational terms like Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy. Term Eastern Orthodoxy has only one meaning and redirects to Eastern Orthodox Church. Term Oriental Orthodoxy also has only one meaning and it is actually used as a title for the article on Oriental Orthodox Christianity. Do you have any proof for the claim that term Eastern Orthodox is ambiguous? It has only one meaning and redirects to Eastern Orthodox Church. So, there are no basis for your claims. Sorabino (talk) 19:57, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Sorabino:, agree to disagree. The current pagename has the word Christian/s + Eastern Orthodox in addition to the word Persecution in it making a reader able to find the page in the searchbox or if one was to google for it on the web based on name of group and topic. So in the end mine is a vote of oppose to your current proposal as it does not satisfy those parameters contained in the current name.Resnjari (talk) 20:07, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Resnjari:, it seems that you have no real evidence for your claims. There are no other meanings for the terms Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Orthodoxy since they point directly to the Eastern Orthodox Church and the community has acknowledged that in practice. Literally all uses of terms "Eastern Orthodox" and "Eastern Orthodoxy" on English Wikipedia are referring to the Eastern Orthodox Church. So, you are in odds with reality. Sorabino (talk) 20:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Sorabino:, my views are known on the issue (as with the previous pagename move discussion) and as such i am going with the reality of the current pagename, as it meets requirements of topic and group notability.Resnjari (talk) 20:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose: It's literally a week since we closed a CFP with a strong consensus for the current title, in which two editors proposed this name as an alternative and it was opposed by strong consensus, so this feels like a bit of a vexatious CFP. I just think that "persecution" is something concrete that happens in history that we can easily find sources for and create a decent encyclopedic article, whereas "sentiment" is very nebulous and hard to pin down and leaves the page open to edit wars and to original research as we try to establish motivation. BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

"Persecution" narrows the scope, and detaches it from related articles Anti-Catholicism and Anti-Protestantism. I suggest Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy, as a mirror of those.--Zoupan 15:45, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley:, your claims are factually not true. There was no "strong consensus" for the current title, as was explained by the closer in subsequent discussions, and certainly there was not any kind of consensus for the scope reduction of the content to persecution only. Precisely because of the lack of such consensus the reviewers decided to reopen this process, since they realized what was happening here and acknowledged that all denominations should be treated equally. In February, you wanted to delete this entire article, and now you are making claims that are totally unsubstantiated. So, why are you doing this? Sorabino (talk) 20:15, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure @Sorabino: why you would want to make this personal, but this is not an accurate representation. On the talk page above, I questioned whether there was such as think as "anti-orthodoxy", suggesting the article might be deleted if that's the case. Other editors agreed. I waited a week. Nobody put an opposing view, so I nominated for deletion. There was a strong consensus for keeping the article, but almost everyone who argued for keep suggested a name change. You, Sorabino, opened that discussion with this: "There is not a single reason for DELETING this article. The subject of this article (persecution of Orthodox Christians) is quite valid... Since we have general article Persecution of Christians, the title of that article could be also used as a model for possible solutions in this case. For example, present title of the article in question here (Anti-Orthodoxy) could be changed to "Persecution of Orthodox Christians" or something like that." You persuaded us (I said "I think that renaming would probably address my concerns equally well.", and the article remained. So, following your suggestion, another editor proposed a name change to the one you suggested. Eight editors supported a move to a formulation with "persecution"; one opposed. The discussion centred mainly on whether it should specific "Eastern", and so a variant of the proposed renaming was used, with the full support of the proposing editor (and me). That was closed 2 March, and then on 8 March you propose another name change. BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:58, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley:, that is not true, I was referring to the previous title of the article, in relation to the title that was used in the time of the proposed deletion, you should look at the history of moves! In other words, you should inform yourself before making assumptions, but who knows - maybe it is better that everyone should see here how far are you still ready to go after your failed attempt to kill this entire article. It is quite clear that you are trying now to wash it off. You did not have any arguments for the deletion then, as you do not have any arguments now for your opposing vote to the proposed title. And also, you are imagining things: I did not initiate any change of title, not the first time, and not the second time! Both proposals were made by other users, look it up, on this same talk page! And both times I clearly stated my preference for the wide-scope title Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment. You voted against it, both times. During the previous discussion, there was no consensus for the reduction of scope to the "persecution" only. Sorabino (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

• Support move to "Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy" rather than "Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment", as it includes the spectrum of criticism and opposition to doctrine, to persecution of its adherents (a very interesting topic). I also suggest to have "Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians" bolded as secondary later in an expanded lede. I don't see Resnjari's point, as the article has a lede, is categorized, and redirected. If a similar title or concept exists, a hatnote suffices. "Eastern Orthodoxy" is the common name.--Zoupan 15:45, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Pagename ought to have easy to find terms reflected in its title that allow a reader to search/find the topic/page easily as well. Anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment on its own does not do it. Needs the word Christian. Without that addition its an oppose on my part, especially as @Bobfrombrockley points out there was a very recent CFP about the pagename with a strong consensus over the now new title of the article.Resnjari (talk) 16:00, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Resnjari:, that is not true. There was no "strong consensus" on the reduction of scope to the persecution only and precisely because of that it was decided by reviewers to reopen this process, since it was clear what was happening here. And also, there is nothing ambiguous with the proposed title containing terms "Anti Eastern-Orthodox" since it is officially used, as stated above, by the FBI (see 800 hits for such use of the term on Google Search). But, since you have some problem in acknowledging those facts, maybe you should complain to the FBI directly and make them interested in your case. Sorabino (talk) 22:05, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Sorabino:, it was mainly myself that was ok with a new pagename move (after some time -didn't expect it to be this quick -its ok though) and was also ok with either name provided they have certain qualifiers -like the word Eastern was incorporated with the previous pagename move and for this one -if it has the word Christian in it- i'll support it. Yeah sure Anti Eastern-Orthodox is used by the FBI, gets the hits on google from sites based in Europe and the Americas to an extent, so the topic is notable with those terms within parts of the West that is English speaking. Say one does not come from that area but is one of the new English speakers from other parts of the globe, what does Anti Eastern-Orthodox sentiment mean ? Its got the word Eastern + Orthodox but that does not signify that its about Eastern Orthodox Christians when a person who might be for the first time doing a search on the topic they are not acquainted with before. That's my angle on it. For now my vote is oppose unless there is an addition.Resnjari (talk) 22:30, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

• Ditto Support for "Anti-Eastern Orthodoxy"; would accept "Anti-Eastern Orthodox Christianity" or something that points the word "orthodoxy" to the religion specifically. This does change the scope of this article, but I support that as a parallel subject to Anti-Catholicism and Anti-Protestantism, which do not need "Christianity" in their titles to fully disambiguate the topic. "Sentiment", in my view is inappropriate; persecution is not a sentiment. "Anti", however, is capable of expressing all levels of opposition and action. Evensteven (talk) 17:45, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Evensteven:, the actual scope of this article was same as in Anti-Catholicism and Anti-Protestantism, but recently an attempt was made to delete the entire article and when that failed, the same users who wanted to delete the article initiated its reduction to "persecution" only. Just take a look at the recent history of this article and you will see what was really going on here. Precisely because of that, reviewers decided to reopen this process, since they realized what was happening here and acknowledged that all denominations should be treated equally. And regarding the terms Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Orthodoxy, they have only one meaning and point directly to the Eastern Orthodox Church. That is also acknowledged by the community in practice. All uses of terms "Eastern Orthodox" and "Eastern Orthodoxy" on English Wikipedia are referring to the Eastern Orthodox Church. So, there is no real ambiguity here. Sorabino (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorabino, I am no stranger to the prejudices on WP against Orthodoxy, nor to the gangs who insist on promoting various biases and resist neutrality. They have the numbers to constitute what has come to be called "consensus" here, though in fact it is nothing but domination of the majority. I'm actually pleasantly surprised to see this discussion be as even-handed as it is. But rest assured, I fully support a name change here. There is material enough for a full-fledged article on persecution of Christians in the world. But there is also more than enough for an "Anti-" article. I think both should exist. My only point is that this article, for whatever reasons, now says "persecution". Failure to have an "Anti-" article because of disagreements over article names is unacceptable, because "persecution" then becomes a limiting definition that censors material that is less "anti". "Anti" needs to be included first in WP in order to fill a gap that is permitted for the other Christian groupings. Then, when enough material has been collected to support the splitting off of persecutions, the persecution article can be created to handle the volume. That is the way to grow the encyclopedia, and preventing it for Orthodoxy is nothing more than another attempt to silence Orthodox contributors here. So you can see that I am quite in favor of the direction this proposal is pointed in. I just don't like the word "sentiment" in the title; that's too limiting also. And I don't really care if "Christianity" is in the title or not. I agree it's unnecessary. But it's not an impediment either, and if including it will salve others, I'm willing to go that way. Real redundancy changes nothing. Or am I beginning to repeat myself? ;) Evensteven (talk) 22:55, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Evensteven:, yes, you are right, and I agree with you on all three accounts. In time, this article will certainly continue to develope, in spite of disruptive editing by some users. It was rightly recognized by the closer of previous discussion, and also by reviewers, that there are some serious problems here and that is why this new discussion was initiated, in order to resolve all issues on scope and terminology. Sorabino (talk) 23:12, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

I certainly hope that this naming proposal can end up in a resolution of the article name. And I tend to think there is a solution waiting that will prove acceptable. My greater concern, however, is for resolution of the principle of neutrality towards Orthodoxy. Fixing an article title will not be enough if it doesn't accord Orthodoxy parallel space. The west has been too long ignorant and biased by its own history and traditions. The Christian religion itself has been sadly divided for centuries, and it is way past time for the branches to engage with each other constructively. WP is not itself immune to the ravages of history, and their continuance into the present. But if good faith prevails, some ground can be gained on all sides. Evensteven (talk) 23:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose The current name does not narrow the scope of the article. Every case of persecution due to victims being Eastern Orthodox Christians is rooted in anti-Eastern Orthodox Christian sentiments. Thus, "Persecution of Eastern Orthodox Christians" and "anti-Eastern Orthodoxy" are one and the same. In this case, the first is a better name for the article due to many meanings of "anti-Orthodoxy" and similar terms. That those terms are problematic and give wrong impressions to readers is showed by the comments above. The current name is very good, it shows what the article is about without misguiding readers. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ktrimi991:, everything you wrote there actually counters your claims. Since you are one of few users who previously supported the possible deletion of this entire article it is clear that something else is at play here. Not to mention your constant disruptive editing by removing referenced content from this article. Sorabino (talk) 23:28, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

How does that counter my claim? Tell me. On the deletion process and removal of material whose references did not back it, my actions were in line with both my own opinion and Wikipedia's policies. A discussion was held and all participating editors, except of you, supported the removal of that material. You were warned by several editors due to your battleground mentality and large scale canvassing while you were trying to force your personal opinion on other editors in that time. I do not have much interest in this article, and religion in general, as my editing history shows. Hence, "something else is" not "at play here". Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:42, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

And my vote at the AfD discussion was "Delete or rename", not "Delete". Do not say the opposite. Anyway, there is no reason to redirect the topic of the current discussion. Ktrimi991 (talk) 00:00, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Well, something is at play if you're replaying old hurts, even if it is simply continuing a fight. Such behavior is not discussion, and has no place here, no matter whose opinion is what, or who agrees. Stick to the subject. Evensteven (talk) 23:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, about your vote. The subject here is the claim that the current article name does not narrow the scope of the article. There are many ways to be "anti", or opposed to someone or something. Persecution is a particular, and extreme, method of expressing that opposition, in action, and in many cases to the point of injury, maiming, and death. The current article title restricts the scope to those particulars, while "anti" leaves open the inclusion of the variety of oppositions. You're entitled to your vote, but your claim about scope does not hold water. Evensteven (talk) 00:22, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ktrimi991:, exactly as I said previously: you supported the possible deletion, and that can be seen here. That was your preferred option and you can try to wash it of here, but to quote Yoda: "Revealed your opinion is". Sorabino (talk) 00:42, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

^This looks like a personal attack... --Calthinus (talk) 04:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Are you accusing me of "personal attack" for stating facts about public voting of a user? :) Please, report me on this! Sorabino (talk) 06:31, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorabino "Stating facts"? No that is not my criticism, as your behavior has also included non-AGF speculation on the motives of other users (including, now predictably myself, as you have done with literally everyone who has taken an opposing stance to yourself), on top of general bludgeoning of the process and demonstrating a battleground attitude. This, on top of edit warring, SYNTH edits, inappropriate campaigning on specifically chosen Wikiprojects, among many other unacceptable behaviors.... yes a report on you would be easy to make. You're quite lucky that I'm busy and also I don't really enjoy reporting people (in fact I've never done it in my life). Don't push it. --Calthinus (talk) 19:02, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Calthinus, as I said, please report me on all those accounts, so that more people can see what have you been doing here. It is you who are having obvious problems with constructive criticism of your actions, and now you are trying to divert the discussion. You wanted to delete this entire article, and when failed to achieve that you continued with your disruptive editing. Those are facts, so please - report me for stating them. Sorabino (talk) 20:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose for the simple reason that it's clunky ("wow bro that's some crazy Anti-Eastern...Orthodox.. senti...ment" is not so easy to say as if you substitute in "Anti-Catholicism") as I said on the AfD, and that "Anti-Eastern-Orthodox...sentiment" does not seem to have as much of a body of research scholarly dedicated to it, yet (unlike, say, Anti-Catholicism or Anti-Protestantism; more like, Persecution of Ahmadis, Persecution of Zoroastrians, Persecution_of_Bahá'ís etc). But its not a strong oppose, I am really fine either way. Weird theorizing of conspiracies by a certain user is widely out of line -- and anyways, frankly, the material that is getting removed is not because there is some unholy alliance aiming to change the scope, its because it was based on SYNTH and OR, as was said a gazillion times. That being said, changing it to anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment isn't really something I mind -- it simply doesn't role of the tongue given, seven syllable adjective clauses for a three syllable noun are not typical of English. As for "consistency" really this doesn't fall one way or the other, we have Persecution of Zoroastrians but Anti-Catholicism, most of the content would be the same anyways.--Calthinus (talk) 04:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

@Calthinus:, you initially supported the deletion of this entire article, and now you are stating that subjects on negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodoxy are not sufficiently researched in comparison with Anti-Catholicism and Anti-Protestantism. Simply speaking, that is not true. There is a multitude of scholarly studies on various negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodoxy, and any search on Google Books or Google Scholar can show that. Do you have any idea how many studies there are, for example, just on the anti-Eastern Orthodox policies and practices of Nazi Germany and other fascist states during the occupation of Eastern Europe in Second World War? If you are not familiar with the subject, please inform yourself. But, I am not really surprised by your attitudes here, since it is you who deleted the whole section of this article on the destruction of the entire Czech Orthodox Church by the Nazis! And regarding the terminology, as I said several times, the FBI officially uses term "anti-Eastern Orthodox" as designation for negative sentiments and animosities towards Eastern Orthodox Christians (see 800 hits for such FBI use of the term. So, it is clear that you have no real arguments for the opposition towards the proposed full-scope title. And regarding the previous attempt to kill this article, the very history of this talk page under the section "What is anti-Orthodoxy?" shows that deletion proposal was agreed by three users: @Bobfrombrockley:, @Ktrimi991: and you! And now, all of you are opposing the full-scope of this article, not to mention constant disruptive editing by removing entire referenced sections of this article. It is clear that that you have attempted to cripple and destroy this article. The question is, why? Sorabino (talk) 06:31, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorabino Your personal attacks (insinuations about "motivations") and misrepresentations are odious, but even more so they are astonishingly poorly carried out. Literally anyone can see that despite your accusations, the reason I deleted the Czech Orthodox was because the alleged source (translation here : [[15]]) said nothing about what it was sourced for -- source falsification. Yet for you my basic cleanup activities are proof that I am a member in some nefarious plot to "cripple and destroy" this article. Actually I do not want to "cripple and destroy" this article I may add some info about Ottoman persecutions in Greece nad Albania later, but a lot of cleanup was and is necessary as much material did not meet Wikipedia standards. Your defamation of not only myself but also Bobfrombrockley, Ktrimi991 and even Resnjari who expressed sympathy to your views does not reflect badly on us, it is you who should be worried about how you come off-- you have harassed literally every user who has taken a stance opposing yours in this discussion. As I said, you're lucky I don't like spending time making reports and that I'm busy. If you continue your present course of behavior, don't be surprised with the result. --Calthinus (talk) 19:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Calthinus, are you seriously accusing me of making "personal attacks" on you and other users? Please, explain yourself and state any example of me attacking you personally or making such attacks on any other user. Since you have publicly accused me for making "personal attacks" here, I am giving you chance now to explain yourself and retract those claims, before reporting you for making such unfounded accusations. Sorabino (talk) 20:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorabino, your comments at certain points were not the best. In the end what a admin will decide he will decide. Just keep the discussion on the current topic about this pagemove.Resnjari (talk) 20:49, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Resnjari, which comments? State yourself clearly. User Calthinus has publicly accused me here of making personal attacks, including the "defamation" of four users (you are stated as one of them), so what do you expect of me, not to respond to all that? Sorabino (talk) 21:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

If some people had a previous position of wanting to delete the article, they did and that discussion was for then and resolved with a keep.People that dad a delete position their side did not carry the day, no need to revive it. Its done and dusted. Sheesh everyone, take five. Stick to the issues around this page move. Seriously take 5 before positing a comment.Resnjari (talk) 21:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Resnjari, so then, was I defamating you or not? And regarding your call for silence, it should be noted that previous discussions on proposed deletion of this article, that occurred only a few weeks ago, are relevant for this discussion, because all those discussions are part of the same process - relating directly to the questions on scope and content of this article. But, since opposing votes to wide-scope title of this article are coming only from those three users who previously wanted to delete the article, it is quite clear that final resolution of this process will be quite positive. Sorabino (talk) 22:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorabino, with me its not defaming. Remember i gave a keep vote. However if you keep bringing up the issue of everyone who wanted to delete the article over and over again, a issue that was concluded as a win for those wanting it to exist, its not in keeping in the area of good faith. Just let it go, you and i and others who placed a keep vote got the outcome we wanted. That issue is not going to be rehashed by admins. We are dealing with pagemove issues now and that's it. All discussion should be around that and that goes also for those who wanted to delete the article -your side did not carry the day and that now is wiki history. Sheesh everyone, headaches are unnecessarily created sometimes.Resnjari (talk) 16:20, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose clunky, uncommon, ambiguous title. Who are those Orthodox people and why are they Anti-Eastern? byteflush _Talk 21:56, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Byteflush, you have no real arguments there for opposing vote. Titles proposed and supported here, like anti-Eastern Orthodox sentiment or alternative anti-Eastern Orthodoxy are four-word of three-word titles, quite common on Wikipedia and therefore "clunky" is no real argument. Same goes for "uncommon" as said before, go to Google Search for anti-Eastern Orthodox hits or anti-Eastern Orthodoxy hits. And also, those terms are not "ambiguous" as you imply here. Can you produce any reference for some other use of those terms? There is non. Comparative practice on Wikipedia is quite clear: Anti-Catholic redirects to denominational article Anti-Catholicism (animosity towards the Catholic Church), and Anti-Protestant also redirects to denominational article Anti-Protestantism. Obviously, terms "anti-Catholic" and "anti-Protestant" are not treated here as ambiguous, in spite of the fact that in principle first term can designate opposition to any denomination that uses the term "Catholic" in its name, and second term can be used as designation for opposition to any group of people who are protesting. In compare to that, term "anti-Eastern Orthodox" has only one meaning, and why should it be labeled as "ambiguous", please explain that. Since we are discussing here a very important subject - full-scope title for article on negative sentiments and animosities towards an entire denomination, could you make some additional contribution and backup your vote with some arguments? Sorabino (talk) 03:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.