Talk:Jan Grabowski

New opinion piece
This new opinion piece may be useful to document what Grabowski’s positions are: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/29/opinion/holocaust-poland-europe.html Jehochman Talk 00:32, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

The WP-thing
Generally I'm skeptical about including an article-subject's WP-whatevers in their article, WP:NAVELGAZING often applies. However, there are several in depth sources on this, and it may deserve a sentence or two. I was going to compare to Warsaw concentration camp, but I see WP is no longer mentioned in article-text there, it used to be. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Given that the subject here is relevant to both WP:BLP and the Arbitration topics listed at the top of this talk page, it seems to me that anything on the WP-Grabowski issue would have to rely on high-quality WP:RS.For anyone interested, the current arbitration is clearly a serious issue within Wikipedia, and is being prepared at Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland. In case anyone needs a warning: Arbitration is not a WP:RS for a Wikipedia article.To any journalists reading this, I would recommend that you be patient and wait a few months for this process to work itself through. I would say that the only fair summary that you could make at the moment is "Wikipedia is treating this issue seriously". Boud (talk) 14:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree about only the best quality sources. The "WP-thing" is not really a pure academic research, but rather a part of political activism by the subject and yet another controversy and should be probably treated as such. I agree with Gråbergs Gråa Sång that the "WP-thing" should be probably included to the page. My very best wishes (talk) 16:50, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source for the assertion that this source "is not really a pure academic research, but rather a part of political activism by the subject" ? Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 19:08, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I will be interested in a source for "not really a pure academic research, but rather a part of political activism". This is a BLP. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Indeed, after looking at sources, it appears he is usually described as an academic, not an activist, although he is definitely involved in a huge political controversy. My very best wishes (talk) 21:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Number of supporters
Yes, I agree about only the best quality sources. For example, see the phrase in the end of the page: As On 19 June 2017, about 200 historians of Holocaust and modern European history... [refs]. Where this 200 number comes from? One of the sources says >100, another says >170. What exactly letter(s) are we talking about and what is the exact number? Having such discrepancies in the number is a red flag. My very best wishes (talk) 16:28, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * This section was for something else. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Where did you get 170, though? The AP feed says >180. About 200 is a very reasonable approximation. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:44, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It appears that 181 is the number. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:49, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Was this letter published somewhere? If it was, we can provide a link and verify the number.My very best wishes (talk) 16:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Peruse this edit. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:25, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Great, that fixes it! There is another remaining issue in the same para. We are saying in WP voice: "the Polish League Against Defamation (PLPZ) published a statement signed by about 130 Polish scholars — none of them, historians of the Holocaust..." Is it a fact that none of them was a historian of Holocaust? If we had a similar source or a link to the letter on the other side of the controversy, perhaps a reader could judge himself who the signatories on the other side were. My very best wishes (talk) 18:30, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That statement is sourced from Barbara Engelking, Jacek Leociak and Dariusz Libionka, who I presume, had done their homework. You are welcome to verify the accuracy from the list. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Great, but which RS say that none of them was a historian of Holocaust (I do not see it from the letter), and can we use this source for a statement of fact in WP voice? My very best wishes (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia criticism
Grabowski and a co-author have recently published a big rant criicizing Wikipedia's coverage of Holocaust history. Maybe someone can add it to the article:

Jan Grabowski & Shira Klein (2023) Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust, The Journal of Holocaust Research,.

I came across these via a Hacker News post but other than that, I'm unfamiliar with the biography subject and I don't edit in the topic area. 2602:243:2007:9990:FC12:23ED:462:65F4 (talk) 16:09, 19 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Quite unnecessarily rude to call it a "big rant". 2A04:4A43:8B8F:F4D7:9E17:2843:2509:9193 (talk) 13:13, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Added: Oh my, I see the article above is a few months old and is already the topic of a bunch of discussion including in the ongoing arbitration case. Anyway, I will leave the link here and defer to the article maintainers about what to do with it. What a mess. 2602:243:2007:9990:FC12:23ED:462:65F4 (talk) 19:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)


 * IP, I'm trying to update the article about information about the Wikipedia holocaust controversy as of right now. Feel free to make edit requests if you want to - I will look over them and accept if necessary. -- Shadow  of the  Starlit Sock  02:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)