Battle of Meligalas has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones Date Process Result June 25, 2024 Good article nominee Listed March 15, 2025 WikiProject A-class review Not approved A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 2, 2018. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that after the withdrawal of German forces, left-wing partisans defeated and summarily executed some 400 to 2,500 Nazi collaborators in Meligalas, Greece? Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on September 15, 2018, and September 15, 2020. Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Balkan / European / World War II B‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history B This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale. Associated task forces: /  Balkan military history task force (c. 500 – present) European military history task force World War II task force Additional information: /  This article has failed an A-Class review. Greece: Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreece Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Politics and politicians task force. Death Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I don't see how Meligalas can be considered to be in southeastern Greece when it's in the southwest of the Peloponnese, which isn't to the east of the rest of Greece, even if one excludes all the islands. --184.248.4.100 (talk) 00:17, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, corrected. Constantine ✍ 08:27, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that in addition to military leaders being executed, others were too, for personal reasons. Can we provide a source for the 'personal reasons' part? Thirdstream (talk) 06:03, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are references already there. #17 and #86 cover this part. --Constantine ✍ 12:52, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The event is often called "massacre of Meligalas" in english and other european languages, and in greek (Σφαγή του Μελιγαλά), and by Greeks writing in english. These terms do not contradict each other, as both happened. However, it was not only a battle because many victims were civilians, and even children.

User:Ιπποκράτης2020 repeatedly deletes sources mentioning "massacre", either with no explanation or with the false excuse that the source "are not reliable". The deleted sources are the following (I omit the talk of Mr. Hogg at the UK Parliament in 1944).

• DH Close · 2012 — Schism in Greek society under Axis occupation: an interpretation. Modern Greek Studies (Australia and New Zealand), 1 (1993), p. 1. "According to convincing sources, about

1,800 people were massacred by ELAS at Meligala".

• Elaine Thomopoulos, The History of Greece, ABC-CLIO, 2012 p. 204: (Contents) "Meligalas massacre by ELAS, [p.] 123"
• STARBUCK, KATHRYN. “SINGING FOR PATRICK LEIGH FERMOR.” The Sewanee Review, vol. 122, no. 4, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014, pp. 664–69 (p. 668): "my father's family being slaughtered by the Nazis in the massacre of Miligala on September 12, 1944". Here the mistake is "Nazis" instead of "ELAS". It is clear that the Germans had departed from the area a week ago. The phrase is historically inaccurate (maybe the person who talks really thinks that the massacre was executed by the Germans) but the term exists and cannot refer to anything else.
• Iakovos Anyfantakis, "Patterns of recollection and historical testimony in Thanasis Valtinos' Orthokosta", Hellenic Studies, Volume 18, No 1, 2010, p. 132: "... there is the use of the massacre of Meligalas, the battle of Athens ...". Here the author interestingly put side-by-side as equally understandable the titles of two major events of 1944.

May I remind that the title of an event is not necessarily the result of historical investigation, and any discussion of its accuracy is off topic. What it matters in WP articles is that the title is used, even by a minority of authors.--Skylax30 (talk) 14:08, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The whole issue with this particular contribution is the fact that none of the provided sources utilize the term "Massacre of Meligalas" . This was discussed extensively in the History of the article and user Skylax30, when questioned about the bad quality of his sources said that "Some of the sources may be discussable, but in the history of the revisions" , changing his narrative of "reliable sources using the term Massacre of Meligalas".

If we do an extensive analysis of his sources provided in his edit we find that

# Source n.3. states that people were MASSACRED at meligalas. 
# Source n.4 is a dialogue in the british parliament and it is completely irrelevant, much less a reliable source
# Source n.5 States that "his family was massacred by the NAZIS" and the word "Meligalas" is nowhere to be found
# Source n.6 is A greek author with 0 expertise on the subject 

The new book he apparently provided , by Greek Author Elaine Thomopoulos , comes from an author with a total of 0 citations and has no expertise on the subject whatsoever. User skylax30 claims that However, it was not only a battle because many victims were civilians, and even children. Can you provide a reliable secondary source for the children part?

On top of that, the same user claims that the Greek wikipedia suffers from "Made in Greece Stalinist agiography" (Greek: Made in Greece σταλινική αγιογραφία,final sentence of the 2nd paragraph), claims that a communist conspiracy controls the Greek Wiki, hence his contributions are not allowed. It is the most clear and pure form of vandalism combined with POV , and it should be regarded as such . Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 14:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, read the quotes above. You may see clearly the term in question. The rest are irrelevant here, including the personal political characterizations against me and another user, in greek. Also, relax and use your signature.--Skylax30 (talk) 14:28, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As i said before , i read them ONE BY ONE. NONE are accetable. You have no issue of putting a book from a completely anonymous author, but you want to do a complete analysis of Meyers sources because it doesnt fit your ideological narrative. Can you quote the political characterization that i used? The only thing i quoted was the term "stalinist agiography" that you coined 4 years ago. Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 14:32, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And before you say about the Anyfantakis post-doc he says and i quote presented first and the narrators’ earlier decision is reported in the story as its result. In other cases, certain events are falsely chronologized to reinforce the desired scenario. In addition to the above, there is the use of the massacre of Meligalas[referring specifically to the executions and not to the event as a whole], the battle of Athens in December 1944, and the Civil War to confirm ELAS’ evil ambitions and its decision to execute anyone who might stand in its way. . Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 14:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And for Ιπποκράτης2020: Yes, I have seen this page. Yes, I have seen your POV-pushing. And yes, I have already requested a page protection to stop this edit war. The Banner talk 17:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Οk so i am the POV pusher now? Ok The Banner talk . Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 21:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May I remind everybody that the deleted phrase in LEAD says (it can be stated more explicitly) that the Battle of Maligalas is also called massacre of Meligalas. It doesn't say whether this title is justified or not. Therefore, the arguments about the "expertise" of the authors who use it are irrelevant. Does anybody here claim that the therm "massacre of Meligalas" is not used by some authors in various languages? Personally, I claim that I can read the term clearly in many publications of various disciplines.--Skylax30 (talk) 11:37, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Μay i remind you that you did not provide a single reliable source justifying your edit? May i remind you that the term massacre is already mentioned in the text? We dont care about what you claim. You failed to provide even a single reliable source. Can you bring a historian which uses the term "massacre of Meligalas" referring to the entire event and not solely to the executions? Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 11:48, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure that you don't care discussing, Ippokrates. Just state here if you can see or not the term "massacre of Meligalas" as alternative for the "Battle". Here are some more sources. This French source actually links the "massacre of Meligalas" to the present article, therefore some are aware for the equivalency of the terms and use both because they like so. This is the kind of "reliability" you are asking for. And since the rest of the article does verify this title, you have one reason less to argue against it.

• Slate: "Chaque année, celle-ci commémorait le massacre de Meligala de septembre 1944 ...", with link to WP article.
• Guerras Gregas, by Adeilson Nogueira (in Portuguese), p. 508: "o massacre de Meligalas".--Skylax30 (talk) 12:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So , your sources Skylax., are once again , one journalist, and one book by an author with 0 expertise on the subject. Fantastic sources, i would like to see what you would say if i used the same quality of sources for the article on the Communist Party of Greece. Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 12:14, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: We need to have multiple RS (Sources linking to WP do not qualify) that are referring to the event as "the massacre of Meligalas". I see none of them. The link from Slate links to WP. The Portuguese book is published by Clube de Autores which is "a major self-publishing platform in Latin America" according to WP article. Cinadon36 12:16, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

None of these is reliable? [1], [2] The Banner talk 12:55, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The question is if the term "massacre of Meligalas" or "Meligalas massacre" is used or not in texts that can be encountered by a reader. "Expertise" is irrelevant, especially when nobody disputes that a massacre did happen. Repetition of arguments about "reliable" sources shows either bad faith or ignorance of rules.--Skylax30 (talk) 16:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is bringing coals to Newcastle. For what it's worth, the word "massacre" already exists in the lead both of the original Greek article, written by then undersigned and reviewed as a FA article in the Greek version of the encyclopedia, and of its English translation by Cplakidas. Were the proposed edit, the one Skylax30 pushes for, to be accepted, the article's lead, in its very first sentence, would speak of "The battle of Meligalas or the massacre of Meligalas [etc]". This, however, would mean that two closely interrelated, but distinct both qualitatively and in time series of actions (i.e. [i] the three-day battle between the resistance army ELAS and the collaborationst Security Battalions from the 13th till the 15th of September 1944 and [ii] the mass executions of prisoners -- mostly Nazi collaborators -- that ensued after the battle with ELAS concluded) are presented as identical. How can this be justified? It is repugnant to logic purely defined. I think that the only thing that one could reasonably propose is for the first instance of the word "massacre" in the lead to be rendered in bold, in acknowledgment of the importance placed by those discussing the events in Meligalas to both the battle and the executions that occurred after the battle had ended. Ασμοδαίος (talk) 18:11, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Attributing my opposition to bad faith seems like a personal attack. I have said there are not enough reliable aourcea naming the battle as massacre. The two sources The Banner is asking me to comment do not seem strong RS to support inclusion.The first one is an article on Golden dawn, not on the battle of Meligalas. It is not a historical article. The second one is a book covering many thousands years of history and therefore suffers from over-generalizing and over summarizing.looks more like a tertiary soyrce rather a secondary one. I do not ditch it, but such a strong claim deems stronger sources. Cinadon36 18:46, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Meligalas/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Ashmedai 119 (talk · contribs) 19:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: PearlyGigs (talk · contribs) 11:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ashmedai 119, I'll review this as one of my "two-for-one". Although I'm a member of WP:GOCE, this is actually my first GA review. I'll do some reading and then come back to you, hopefully soon. Best wishes. PearlyGigs (talk) 11:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to beat about the bush, or indulge in nit-picking, because this is clearly an exceptional article, let alone a good one. Although the FAC process doesn't appeal to me, I would think this article must stand a very good chance of passing if you are interested in nominating it there. I've listed the six GA criteria below and provided comments.

1. Well written. The prose is fine and there are no spelling, grammar, or syntax issues. As far as I can tell, it complies with the MOS. I like the lead which both introduces and summarises the subject very concisely.
2. WP:V and WP:NOR. The reflist is good and the citations are presented in standard publishing format. No problems in this area and certainly no evidence of original research or copyright issues. While I don't have access to the bulk of your sources, the information is presented in an authoritative and scholarly fashion, so I have no reason at all to doubt their authenticity.
3. Breadth of coverage. It is quite a large article so coverage is quite wide but I would say everything is within scope. Because of the complex background factors and the ensuing massacre, it is necessary to broaden the scope beyond the conflict on 13–15 September. Otherwise, we would not be able to appreciate the big picture and that is a problem I have seen in many articles about battles.
4. Neutral. No problems. The information is presented objectively.
5. Stability. No problems.
6. Images. These are all relevant and, as far as I can tell, there are no issues around using them.

I will promote to WP:GA now. An interesting though sometimes disturbing subject. The article provides a clear insight into WWII events that, sadly, have been largely forgotten. Very well done. Best wishes. PearlyGigs (talk) 12:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to AirshipJungleman29 for beginning the task of copyediting the article. I have some doubts about the felicity of some edits made (mainly) to the article's introduction. To be more precise, with her/his edit on May 23rd AirshipJungleman29:

(I) removed the phrase "Execution of prisoners by ELAS and local peasants" from the infobox. As becomes apparent when reading the main body of the article, the execution of prisoners by the victorious ELAS partisans and their sympathisers, was a major result of the battle and I don't think it should be omitted. I am wondering, however, if this removal was perhaps done to make the infobox comply with a WP policy that I am unaware of.

(II) s/he also deleted the description of ELAS as "military wing of the Communist-led National Liberation Front (EAM)". This, however, had been recently introduced to the article's introduction by the undersigned (see here and here) in implementation of a -imo not unwarranted- suggestion made in the process of the article's assessment that the lead should "Mention that the ELAS was a (mainly communist) left wing resistance organisation, as this knowledge is necessary to understand the last paragraph"

(III) s/he substituted the description of one of the two combatants, the Security Battalions, simply as "collaborationist" (the phrase being: "the collaborationist Security Battalions.") with the phrase "a Security Battalion garrison loyal to the collaborationist government." This along with the phrase "during the Axis occupation of Greece" as a temporal reference of when the battle occurred is not 100% accurate. For, the battle took place only after the German/Axis occupation army had evacuated the area and Battalionists, as described in the article, then declared that they pledged their allegiance to the exiled government. It seems that this battle did not take place in an occupied part of Greece, as the reader might be led to believe when reading the current forumlation of the first sentence, but during the process of the liberation of Greece

(IV) in the last paragraph of the lead, s/he substituted "establishment" in the sentence "During the post-war period and following the Greek Civil War, the ruling right-wing establishment immortalized the Meligalas massacre as evidence of communist brutality and memorialized the victims as patriotic heroes" with the phrase "military junta". This is outright misinformation, as both the portrayal of the massacre as an instance of Communist terrorism and the memorialization of the executed collaborationists as patriotic heroes antedates the 1967-1974 military junta and was promoted by right-wing Greek governments following WWII, and should be corrected.

(V) finally, the last paragraph now states that the official support for the commemoration ceased "following the fall of the junta in 1974" (a more informative rendering of the thitherto used "Metapolitefsi"). Again, this is just not true. As per the article's "Commemoration" section, "After the fall of the military dictatorship and the Metapolitefsi of 1974, [...] the New Democracy government preserved commemorations it valued as symbols of a struggle for democracy and liberty against communist totalitarianism, including that of the battle at Meligalas" and the official/government support for these commemorations stopped "In 1982, following the electoral victory of the socialist PASOK the previous year". This means that the phrase "following the fall of the junta in 1974" should be deleted and in its place we should have "following the end of right-wing rule in 1981" or something similar to the same effect. Ashmedai 119 (talk) 14:02, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

1. MOS:MILRESULT
2. You can provide complicated introductions/definitions later in the lead; please see MOS:OPEN.
3. The "temporal reference of when the battle occurred" is in the first sentence in the form of the date "13–15 September 1944". Two blue links should not be next to each other, per MOS:SOB. The phrase "collaborationist Security Battalions" holds no meaning to an uninformed reader, such as I was when I came across the article. Feel free to revise taking account of those issues.
4. My mistake, feel free to correct.
5. You would have to take that issue up with whoever wrote the sentence previously; I just made the sentence more intelligible to the general reader.

Best of luck with the article, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:45, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your informative response, AirshipJungleman29. I am wondering if you could help me regarding the third point. To be more precise, what would you think about reformulating the phrase "during the Axis occupation of Greece" into "in the immediate aftermath of the Axis occupation of Greece"? As explained in the article the battle took place in the context of and right after the withdrawal of the German occupying forces from the area. Also, do you think that replacing the phrase "a Security Battalion garrison loyal to the collaborationist government" with "a Security Battalion garrison of thitherto [or: former/ex-] collaborators" would render it meaningful to an uninformed reader? Thank you in advance, Ashmedai 119 (talk) 08:27, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]