Talk:Jewish partisans

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shelby1996, Tori1921.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Mordechaj Anielewicz a partisan?
I question the inclusion of Mordechaj Anielewicz as a partisan. He is firmly associated with the Jewish underground, whereas I know of no evidence that he was associated with or took part in partisan combat, nor does this appear (explicitly, anyway) in the Wikipedia article about him. -- Deborahjay 08:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If we are using the definition of partisan (military) as meaning guerillas or those who engage in guerilla warfare, then those in the ghettos, and the parachutists may not belong in this article or in the list. heqs 12:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

A distinction is made in writing about the Jewish resistance movement, between underground in the ghettos and camps, and partisan activity in the forests; see partisans. I strongly support maintaining this distinction and avoiding overlaps that risk detracting from the integrity of existing articles' content. -- Deborahjay 13:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Bielski
I'm editing the link for the Bielski partisans to that article, rather than The Bielski Brothers. I'm familiar with both articles, having edited them. The former is more comprehensive, while the latter is about a particular book on the topic. -- Deborahjay 12:23, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I was thinking of the list as a list of people rather than groups, in which case the "noted" or "famous" of the Bielski partisans are the Bielski brothers themselves... I think. That's why I had the link pointing to Bielski partisans but piped to show Bielski brothers. heqs 12:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Family camps
It seems there is a question about family camps. AFAIK, they mostly existed in in the deep forests of Ukraine-Belorussia-Poland-Lithuania area. Surely the elderly, the children and the wounded Jews could not live in the Nazi-occupied villages. ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Citing sources
I would like it if we could try to only add cited facts to this article. In this way, building a new article from the ground up we can easily maintain a high level of quality throughout. heqs 10:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Heqs, thanks for being diplomatic. I'll try better. ←Humus sapiens ну? 02:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Fought British?
"...who actively killed British service persons in Palestine during the Second World War and thereafter"

Is this a typo or did the author mean "German" or "Nazi". Did the British have a role in supressing the Jewish in Palestine?


 * Since the events in the Mandate for Palestine (which see) are irrelevant to the topic at hand, I took the liberty to remove the newly added phrase. ←Humus sapiens ну? 20:57, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Relations with AK and local population
I will within few weeks prepare edits about relations with AK and local population. Stay tuned, because it is controversial topic, I will first post proposed changes here, before I will move them into the article. Szopen 07:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Zygmunt Boradyn, Polish-Soviet partisan war - quotes
Because I will base my edits on the refereces to this book, I will post the vast quotes from it.

Here is the first portion of the quotes from the Zygmunt Boradyn: Niemen, rzeka niezgody: Polsko-sowiecka wojna partyzancka na Nowogrodczyznie 1943-1944 (Niemen, the river of disagreement/conflict: Polish-Soviet partisan war on Nowogrodek region 1943-1944) Warszawa 1999, 1st edition. Page 84-86

Translation is mine. EDIT: forgot to sign Szopen 10:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC) Please post comments below, not inside the quotes.

-- quote start -- The most brutal requisitions were done by Jewish units and groups. In the Baranowickie group there were two so called "siemiejne" Jewish units: of Bielski (named in the honour of Kalinin, named of Ordzonikidze) and Zorin (nr 106). In the end of June 1944 the first one fo them had 941 people, from which 162 were armed, and the second 562 (73 armed). Those units were created by Jews hiding in forest and escapees from ghettos in Minsk, Nowogrodek, Iwie and other towns and townlets. There were also numerous groups of Jews in the forest of Nacka, Lipiczanska and Bytenski woods. Those units were not included in soviet group, that why in the archives there are no documents about their activities. It was those units which were most impacting the population, since their main tasks were "economical operations"

In the raport from military operations since beginning of German occupation to the 12th 11.1943 Bielski reported that his unit killed 14 Germans, 17 policemen, 33 German spies and provocateurs, burned 5 wooden bridges, blown up 1 rail bridge, destroyed 8 state estates and one (tartak: place where wood is cut.. forgot the name.) About the requisitions there is no mentioning in the raport. And in reality in the beginning of the december this year partisans of Bielski amassed 200 tons of potatoes, 3 tons of cabbage, 5 ton of (buraki: red large vegatables), 5 tons of grain, 3 tons of meat and 1 ton of kielbasa.

Also unit of Zorin was not suffering the hunger. Ex chief of HQ of this unit (AD: Anatol Werthejm, "Jewish partisans on Belarus", "Zeszyty Historyczne", Paryz 1986, z.86 page 144) wrote: ".. The food was in the abundance, we have even gathered the surplus. In the day of joining with the Red Army we took from the lake sunked few hundred of bags with wheat (...) The food surplus was even sent to Moscow. Once a week a plane landed in field air landing in the forest- it brought newspapers, propaganda materials and took back the alcohol, (slonina) and kielbasa which we were making in the camp (...)". In Jewish camps there were manufactures for making weapons, boots, clothes, mills, bakeries, hospitals, which were working for neighbouring soviet brigades.

The commanders of mentioned units received from their work material gains. Bielski was getting rich at the cost of his compatriots, from whom he took the money on the pretext of buying the weapons. In this case Stiepan Szupienia wrote the letter to gen. "Platon": ".. Bielski is not concerned with military actions, he was speculating in units. He was taking the gold from his partisans for buying the weapons and then he was keeping it for himself, while he had not giving any weapons. I would sugest to propose Bielski to giving the gold to the state (he has few kilos of tsarist golden coins) and then arrest this Bielski and put on trial...".

The greedy nature of Bielski is underlined in his memories Jozef Marchwinski (AD: Polish communist which was temporarily in the camp): "... Bielski loved the money and good life more from his compatriots, whom he govern in the camp. Lusting for power, and even more for money, he was robbing his compatrios without any scrupples for all small savings they have when coming to the camp ... this money were getting to the private pocket of Tewje Bielski and his company... " From the words of Anatol Werthejm describing the "breakfasts" and "weddings" of commander it seems that Zorin also lived quite well (AD: weddings according to the once read interview in newspaper were the raids to neighbouring villages, were ZOrin picked up the prettiest girl, "married" her and lived with her for few days before returning to the camp).

The behaviour of Jewish groups in the terrain was creating the dislike not only from local population, but also amongst other soviet partisans. Cpt Kowalow, sent from Moscow, in June 1944 reported to Czernyszow: "...Population does not like the Jews. When Jewish group passes the Niemen there were accidents of disarming them by our partisans, who were giving the taken weapons to the peasants and they are beating the Jews screaming >>Beat the Jews - save the Russia!<<"

Describing the attitude of commanders of soviets partisans from southern part of Nowogrodek region to the Jews, author of the "Partisans. General overview" writes, that in some units they are accepting Jews, while in other they are expelling them or even shooting.

After capturing again Icek Rubiezewski from unit of Bielski after robbery, commander of Frunze brigade, (some soviet military rank: st. lejt.) Kluczko wrote a letter to Tewje, threating him with shooting in place bandits and robbers if they will appear again on the territory controlled by his unit. Sometimes there were even armed conflics. When June the 1st 1943 accidentaly partisan from diversion group from Zukow brigade was killed by Jew from unit "for soviet Belarus" from Nalibocka forest, in revenge there was raid to Jewish camp, during which it was burned and 7 people were killed.

The commanders of Baranowicka group many times tried to regulate the methods of providing the foods to their units. Regions of supplies were appointed to brigaes and units. In case of proper attitued to local population gen. "Platon" 20 June 1943 issued an order, and March 6th 1944 order of (pplk of national security?) "Donskoj", in which there were warnings of most severe punishments for robberies, rapes and drinking. It seems however that this was carried on only on paper. The behaviour of soviet partisans had not changed. But the situation of inhabitants of Nowogrodek region was steadily worsening The number of Soviet partisans, the amount and the method of taken food threatened the biological existence of the peasants liiving in territories controlled by Soviet units. Local peasants had to working the miracles, so for example in winter 1944 hide the pork from the robbing partisans. Helena Kapciuk living in village of Olchowka (county of Lida) brings back the memories of hwo she was hiding the pork behind the wood. To not allow the animal to be summoned by Soviet partisans, the hand-made stoppers were put into the ears of the pork. (The author continues with the examples of the robberies and rapes of soviet partisans)

Page 89 (Naliboki massacre is mentioned twice in the book. This is first mention, second, more detailed is given later..) one must be warned that statistics given by gen. Platon (AD: about the numbers of killed Germans - supposedlu 70.000 Germans were killed by soviet partisans in his region) must be treated with care. The example may be Soviet action in Naliboki. The destruction of local "samoochowa" (AD: Belarusian word for self-defense units?) armed with 26 rifles and two automatic rigles, joined with murdering of 128 civilians, was presented by commande of Iwienieckie group like a great military operation, in which 250 "samoochowcy" were killed, four heavy machine guns and 13 automatic rifles, 4 grenade rifles 260 rifles and 20.000 of ammo. In the memories of Czernyszew the garrison of "Samoochowa" counted already 500 people, and amongst the spoilts he enumerats 8 heavy machine guns, 6 smaller artilery pieces, 23 automatic rifles, 40 automatic hand pistols and 100 rifles.

Page 223: (AD: author gives one of examples of local negotiations between AK and soviets) As it is reported by ex-commander of the "druzyna" (AD: no idea how to translate it. I think it is the smallest part or one of the smallest parts of a military unit either below or just above the platoon level.) from this unit (AD:5th batallion of 77 pp of AK) Ryszard Kiersnowski, soviet units which were garrisoned there (AD:in Rudnicka forest) were organising raids for robbing the north-western part of the county Lida, which was controlled by batallion of cpt. Stanislaw Truszkowski "Sztremer". During those raids they robbed and burned villages of Koniuchy and Niewoniance, murdering part of their inhabitants. As a revenge Poles (AD: AK soldiers) have organised the raid to the forest and burned the settlement of Wisincza. (AD: later author discusses the agreement according to which Poles were giving the food for 2500 soviet and Jewish partisans in exchange for stopping the robberies and giving some ammo and weapons) -- quote end --

Zygmunt Boradyn, part 2
Z.Boradyn "Niemen. Rzeka niezgody" Page 58: First partisan groups appeared in summer and autumn 1941. One of the first partisan units, which were acting on the territory of Nowogrodzkie voivodship during German occupation, was Jewish unit of Tewje Bielski. Bielski reported, that in July 1941 already, he together with his family members and collegues organised the 20-people strong group, with which he went to forests near Nowogrodek.

Page 60: Small units of "okruzhency" and "wostoczniki" (..) thought rather about the survival than about militaru actions. It is clearly stated in quoted already history of brigade of Lenin Komsomol: In the period from November 1941 to November 1942 all groups basing in forests were not carrying any military or diversion activity". Similarly the situation was also in the unit of Bielski.

Page 72: Unfortunately we have no full informations about the nationality of the members of Baranowickie group. Only the mentioned data from May the 15th 1944, according to which there were 11185 partisans, from which 6732 were Belarussians, 2552 Russians, 988 Jews, 556 Ukrainians, 150 Poles, 217 others. Belarussian historian Jaugien Siamaszka stated, that in whole group of gen. "Platon" there were 500 POles. There were just 2% of soviet partisans acting in Nowogrodek region. (AD: in the region Poles were from 40 to 50% of population; and majority of Belarussians in Soviet units came from eastern Belarussia, not from local population)

Page 79: .... Every even the smallest unit had two doctors - Jews or professionals - "wostoczniki" ....

Page 100: (AD: earlier author gives numerous example of murdering AK members and their whole families, as well as common Polish civilians by Soviet units) The greatest tragedy in Nowogrodek region was May the 9th 1943 in Naliboki, when partisans from Brigade of Stalin and from unit of Bielski, under the pretext of liquidation of local self-defense forcefully created by Germans, murdered 128 person, mainly men. It must be stressed that Soviets were perfectly oriented that large part of so called self-defense was part of Polish conspiration and was preparing to leaving with gun in hand into the forest. From the discussion, which Waclaw Nowicki carried with one of commanders of Naliboki "samochowa", Eugeniusz Klimowski, it seems that in half of April 1943 there were negotations between that self-defense unit and Soviet partisans. Soviets proposed the posored destruction of the self-defense, and then, after taking the oath, incorporation of its members into partisan soviet units (AD: common way to protect the families of partisans. Sometimes for example the volunteers were beaten in front of whole village to create impression they were no volunteers, but forcefully drafted, so Germans or Soviets would not execute their families). Poles accepted first condition, proposing carrying the action May the 3rd, But they refused taking the oath and starting the open fight with Germans. So massacre in Naliboki may be treated as activity of Soviet partisans openly directed at destruction of local AK conspiration. (Later description as Polish AK finally organised units and started to kill or disarm Soviet robbing bands)

Page 152 In October-November 1943 actions of AK were more often, because more often were "economical actions" of Soviet partisans, which were nothing more short of robbery. In those actions especially were active the Jewish units of Bielski and Zorin. Poles were disarming the robbing groups and giving them to Soviet HQs. But this, just as giving the informations about the incidents of robbing the population, was bringing no effects. (...)

Page 166 (AD: Mentioning, that some of Polish AK soldiers from destructed group of Milaszewski were forced to join Bielski unit.)

Page 206-210 (AD: AK was not innocent either. Boradyn gives examples of Polish revenge actions, which also included sometimes killing the civilians. The example of exxageration of Soviet reports:)

"White Polish bands" burned villages of Turejsk and Zaborze. According to the (soviet) report, AK burned 350 houses, killing many civilians. From Polish statistical data it seems, that those villages had no more than 30 houses each. It's hard to believe they grown tenfold during 20 years. And from March the 15th order of "Krasnogwardiejski" unit it seems that 100 "White Poles" hide on roofs of houses of village of Turejsk - the same, which was burned 3 weeks earlier, according to report of Szupienia - shooting to Soviet partisans returning from economical operations. (AD: other example: village Lukasze) According to Soviet intelligence, Poles burned 7 houses and shot 25 people. According to Polish data, that indeed April the 3rd Polish units (squadron of cavalry, squadron of heavy machine guns and 2nd company of infantry from Stolpeckie group of AK) were in Lukasze. In one of the houses uhlan Jan Czujko was killed. In revenge, 6 people tied to Soviet partisans were shot, and "kolchoz was burnt".

Proposal of the changes
Here is my first version "alfa" proposal: something like (but a LOT to polishing it!): "The problem of food provision was growing over time. Local population was increasingly resistant to provide food for the partisans, due to both poverty of population and also in effect of antisemitism present in part of the population. Especially in the 1941/42 "kresy" were plagued by different bands, consisting of Polish, Jewish and deserting soviet soldiers, as well as partisans which were different sometimes only in name. Just as other soviet partisans, after thoughtless destruction of state farms (as on of method of "fighting with fascism") Jewish partisands had to start to rely on robbing the local population for securing the food. Desperate peasants formed self-defense units, and in turn soviet (including Jewish) partisans reacted with heavy-handed retaliations, including murdering the families of resisting peasants, burning the villages (Naliboki, Koniuchy). In addition since Jewish partisans were associating mostly with Soviets, they became a side in merciless Polish-Soviet partisan war, during which Polish AK forces and Soviet and Jewish units often clashed. In the result the subject of Jewish partisans is very controversial in Poland, since Polish account accuse most Jewish and Soviet units of activity consisting mostly of robbing, terrorising local population and attacking Polish AK units while avoiding direct confrontation with German units" Szopen 11:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I considered that at some point as the article was expanded a ==Controversy== (or similarly titled) section would be appropriate to cover these kinds of events. Specific events that involved large numbers of Jewish partisans like Koniuchy massacre would be mentioned. Some of it should be seen in the context of the controversies of the larger Soviet partisan movement, while some is specific to certain groups like the Bielski partisans and most of the details about their actions should probably go in that article. In trying to understand the nature of the controversy, put yourself in the shoes of peasants/farmers who for years are having most of their food and supplies requisitioned or taken by brute force, by Nazis from one side and Soviet (in some cases Jewish) partisans on the other - in some cases both would have been equally despised. (Not just in Poland - Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine too) heqs 11:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I would abstain from the changes until all contributors will be able to comment. Anyway, I think the "controversies" part would be nice, though we would have to be careful with balancing the section and remembering, that what Jewish partisans did, what nothing that unusual (heck, even POlish AK though formed from local peasants sometimes did rob some heinous things) Szopen 07:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Nazi or Germans?
Nazi was "only" a members of the Nazi Party.They was a politicians.It was German Wehrmacht Army not a Nazi army from Mars. :/

Sorry for my English :( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.242.104.9 (talk) 08:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC).


 * But our text is "the Nazis and their collaborators". ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes but why not is a "Nazi Germany and their collaborators" or "Third Reich.."?Soldiers of German Wehrmacht was not "Nazi collaborators"(this is nonsense).
 * It was a(unfortunately)GERMAN army.German army and Jewish partisans (not a mysterious Nazi and Anti-Nazi partisans)


 * P.S. I know it was also a Nazi Party paramilitary group like SS but It was only a part of German units in occupied Poland.


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborationism


 * Sorry for my English :/

Non-Soviet Jewish partisans in Eastern Europe
Aside from ghetto organizations, were there any non-Soviet aligned Jewish group of partisans in Eastern Europe? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Irene Gut Opdyke
She is listed among the Notable Partisans, but she was a Catholic girl. Could anyone check this? --Meister und Margarita (talk) 17:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jewish partisans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/jpart.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120718034701/http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~sarmatia/406/262choda.html to http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~sarmatia/406/262choda.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:51, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Presenting New Changes
With the help of our secondary source “Jewish Resistance and Passivity in the Face of the Holocaust” by Bauer, we found this article troublesome because it does not describe who the specific partisan groups are. What we will do to improve this article is go into detail on specific partisan groups from different countries. We will do this by adding to the section “Notable Partisan Groups” and then creating sub-sections under it with specific groups. We plan to add sub-sections on groups in Lithuania, Poland, Soviet Union and Prussia. With these additions we hope to thicken and enrich the existing article. If anyone wants to comment on these changes, please let me know on this Talk Page or on my Talk Page.Shelby1996 (talk) 01:18, 27 April 2017 (UTC) , this looks promising, but what reference exactly will you be using? Full info of reference would have been helpful (year, book article appeared in), in case Wiki users want to verify this source.Chapmansh (talk) 22:39, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jewish partisans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050908123127/http://www.fatherryan.org/holocaust/partisia/ to http://www.fatherryan.org/holocaust/partisia/
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20121218141825/http://yad-vashem.org.il/about_holocaust/documents/part3/doc187.html to http://yad-vashem.org.il/about_holocaust/documents/part3/doc187.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20121218153657/http://yad-vashem.org.il/about_holocaust/documents/part3/doc211.html to http://yad-vashem.org.il/about_holocaust/documents/part3/doc211.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20121218135827/http://yad-vashem.org.il/about_holocaust/documents/part3/doc210.html to http://yad-vashem.org.il/about_holocaust/documents/part3/doc210.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:36, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Poland
The subsection seems strange to me. Facts are: Xx236 (talk) 10:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Some Jews were memebers of Armia Krajowa, eg. Stanisław Likiernik.
 * Some Jews were members of GL, later converted to AL.
 * GL murdered about 100 Jews in Ludmiłówka.

Misrepresentation of the Home army's relationship with Jewish partisan and NOENG
Per WP:NOENG, English sources are preferred to non-English ones of the same quality. This is all the more true when the opposing source (a Polish book from a government lustration agency) is of an inferior quality to two academically published books by established historians. This revert - sourced to this Polish language source, which while perhaps true (there were Jews in AK, very few Jews, but exceptions did exist) - grossly misrepresents the wider picture that Jews (groups and individuals) were generally not welcome by the Home Army, and that some Home Army units actively persecuted Jews and Jewish partisans. Icewhiz (talk) 14:07, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No, this is just your newer, more sneaky version of the "Polish sources shouldn't be allowed on articles about Polish history. What that policy says is that if there is an English version of a non-English source, or if the English and non-English sources say the same thing, use the English source. It does not, as you are falsely pretending, prohibit the use of non-English sources. As to the content - well, we've been over it numerous times, right? There were high ranking members of the Home Army who were Jewish. So at this point this is just WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT on your part.Volunteer Marek (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * (and any source which describes AK as "conservative nationalist" is garbage. Yes, that applies to Christopher Browning. In fact this is a pretty good example of the CAUTION with which English sources should be treated - they're often clueless about any history that doesn't involve the British or the Americans).Volunteer Marek (talk) 15:17, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * per WP:NOENG - Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. - policy - green on white - English-language sources are preferred when of equal qualify and relevance. Books by Christopher Browning and David Cesarani are of a much higher quality than a publication by a Polish government agency (with bias and political influence concerns). Polish sources, incidentally, often overlook sources that are not in Polish that are highly relevant to the topic. The fact that there were a few high-ranking Jews in the AK (mainly in one locale) - does not change the fact that Jewish groups were almost never accepted into the AK as groups, and Jewish individuals were only rarely and reluctantly accepted. I provided clear quotes from these sources - an editor arguing that a well known Holocaust historian, such a Browning, is writing "garbage" - truly has no policy legs to stand on.Icewhiz (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, when they are of same relevance - say the same thing. This is NOT a blanket license to exclude non-English language sources as you falsely pretend. Also, please drop this constant agitation with respect to the IPN. We've been over this numerous times, it's perfectly reliable. You haven't been able to convince ANYONE otherwise.Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:42, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The reliability of the IPN is variable between departments (historical research vs. prosecution/lustration and education) and period (per the degree of political influence in the time period at question) - and it has been covered quite critically in RSes regarding memory politics and policies. However, even when one has an IPN source on the better side of the range, it is still inferior than a reputable publisher (journal or book) and in any event per NOENG we would prefer such a source even if it were equal in quality and in English.Icewhiz (talk) 19:58, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll also note that the my reading of page 281 of the Polish language government agency source does not support the text it is referencing.Icewhiz (talk) 16:06, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Jewish partisans
The page does not explain that some Jewish groups wanted to survive rather than to fight. They accepted civilians unable to fight. Typical guerilla was military. Xx236 (talk) 07:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

"The partisans engaged in guerrilla warfare and sabotage against the Nazi occupation, instigated teens and freed prisoner"-not really correct
Jewish partisant units didn't play frontline role in resistance. This role was given to Soviet soldiers who were left behind German lines after 1941 offensive. Jewish units due to fact that they were poorly equipped, had little combat experience and often consisted of people with poor health and refugees, were given secondary supportive roles by Soviet command like tending to hospitals, operating field kitchens, and gathering resources from local population. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 21:37, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It depends. Some units were independent of the Soviets. Some units had crack detachments. And some Jewish partisans were integrated in front-line Soviet units (and in some cases - e.g. in Volhinya - with the AK). Your assertion above is correct in regards to "family camps" - groups which had a large detachment of refugees (women, children, old folk) - it isn't correct in regards to every Jewish unit.Icewhiz (talk) 08:37, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Which units were independent of the Soviets? Name a few please. GizzyCatBella (talk) 15:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Icewhiz decides and invents
pl:Kazimierz Krajewski is a historian, Dr. in Humanities. Biuletyn IPN isn't "for schools" only. Xx236 (talk) 11:30, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Per - The Post-Communist Condition: Public and private discourses of transformation (chapter - Power, knowledge and faith discourse) - since at least 2006, it "has been full of the language of moral values", it promotes heroes, "language characteristic of a religious discourse appears in the Bulletin"., and The audience of its message is mostly the youth and its teachers: 12,000 copies from the 15,000 circulation go (for free) to all types of secondary schools throughout Poland. The rest of the circulation is available at a moderate price and can be found in bookshops among the social-cultural journals. It is also distributed via these post offices. and per Behr, Valentin. "Historical policy-making in post-1989 Poland: a sociological approach to the narratives of communism." European Politics and Society 18.1 (2017): 81-95. as Research at the IPN differs from academic work in several respects (Behr, 2011). First, researchers do not only conduct scientific projects; they are also required to take part in educational and public outreach initiatives such as exhibitions, short publications designed for lay readers and youth (like the monthly IPN bulletin), websites, and even board games. The purpose of this deliberately synthetic history, reduced to a playful and attractive format, begs the question: does it seek to popularize knowledge about the past, or to turn it into a political tool?. Icewhiz (talk) 12:03, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You keep parading these two cherry picked (and biased) source everywhere.... everywhere except WP:RSN, which is the appropriate venue for it. Can you explain why you are afraid to bring this issue up at WP:RSN? Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:18, 2 July 2018 (UTC)


 * What about Krajewski? Not academic?
 * Funny bias - the Biuletyn is distributed among secondary schools and the rest of the circulation is available. Maybe some copies are circulated and the rest distributed? Anything the Poles publish is trash accoreding to Icewhiz and your biased trash is always academic. Xx236 (talk) 12:21, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not about the author, it's about where it was published. I actually think there is some excellent Polish work, e.g. at Centrum Badań nad Zagładą Żydów, and that there is plenty of non-RS publications of any nationality.Icewhiz (talk) 12:26, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Of course it's about the author. Who the author is has obvious relation to a source's reliability. He's a historian who specializes in this topic area. And even where it was published - the source satisfies all the criteria for WP:RS. At most you could possibly argue the source is "biased" (even that would be a stretch) but being biased is not the same as being unreliable. As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, you should ask about the source at WP:RSN. As you are aware however, last time IPN came up there, you were told that it was reliable.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Especially your 200,000 story is very reliable. Icewhiz, it's not a problem of academy, but of projection. You are unable to accept any critics of anything Jewsih. Jewish partizans were heroic, even if they produced food and shoes and robbed peasants. The Centrum is dominated by linguists and sociologists. Do you have research about LDGB life of Jewish partizans? Our great academician has published an unsourced story of homosexuality of Zoska and Rudy. Is it what you name excellent?Xx236 (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Our fellow editor here of course refers to the impressive lives of Tadeusz Zawadzki and Jan Bytnar, cut short by the war. Other than that I've no idea what he's talking about. François Robere (talk) 13:47, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Misrepresentation + NOENG
I've reverted as Due to the poor combat value of Jewish partisans, they were mostly assigned support roles in Soviet resistance movement, such as operating field kitchens, hospitals, or bakeries, while their main task was enforcing requisition of supplies from the local impoverished population, engaging in pacifications where necessary. is a misrepresentation of the cited source which refers specifically to the Zorin and Bielski family camps (groups of partisans with a very large contingent of accompanying civilians) and not to Jewish partisans as a whole. In the second instance, I replace a Polish language source of questionable quality (a publication intended for schools, from a publisher with reputation issues) with two English language source of a higher or equal quality.Icewhiz (talk) 16:22, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * - NOENG clearly specifies that if we have equal or better quality sources in English - we use them - in this case I replaced the Polish language source with two English language sources of better quality. In addition - your revert introduced a misrepresentation into the article, as the Krajewski piece in a magazine for youth (which in itself is clearly a minority opinion) refers to the Zorin and Bielski family camps and not to Jewish partisans as a whole.Icewhiz (talk) 16:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * As has been explained to you multiple times, what NOENG actually says is that if there is an English source and a non-English source which can be used to source the same information then the Enlish language source is preferred. Your revert would make sense IF you were replacing the SOURCE with an English source but retaining the information. But you are not. You are just removing well sourced info. NOENG is NOT a blanket license to remove non-English language sources. In fact, NOENG explicitly says ''"Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. "
 * Per NOENG, you are also allowed to ask for a translation (" if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request that a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page"), but you are not even disputing that.Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:24, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * And btw, I am NOT explaining this to you again, since I already have at least half a dozen times. Your WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT is extremely disruptive and indicates an unwillingness to act in good faith. As I've also already pointed out, if you think your understanding of NOENG is correct (that it lets you remove any non-English language source any time you WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT) then you do have the option of asking if that is the correct interpretation over at the talk page of the relevant policy. The fact that you have not taken this step indicates that by this point you're well aware that your interpretation of WP:NOENG is absurd.Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:26, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You reverted two edits. In the first, I replaced a non-English source with similar comtent from two English sources - per NOENG. In the second edit I removed text which misreprsented the source (a rather poor one at that) it was citing - do you care to provide a direct quotation of the passage in that source that supports this blanket stmt on Jewish partisans in general? In this instance, the source makes a stmt on the Zorin and Bielski family camps - not in Jewish partisans in general.Icewhiz (talk) 17:33, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You combined your edits. We can use your wording, if you want for the "struggling to supply" part. As far as the other part... you realize that you just admitted that the source being used is actually about Zorin and Bielski units? So why where you denying this to be the case over at the Bielski partisans talk? Your version of truth appears to be whatever happens to be convenient to justify your edit warring at the moment.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:15, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Your edit was also stylistically bad, since it repeated the phrase "in some areas" twice.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No opposition to improved syntax. I have not "admitted" anything. Different passages in this source relate to different things (though the general topic is clear) - this particular passage refers to Zorin and Bieslski. The other passage you are refering to refers to Jews and Jewish partisan groups in general. Yet other passages relate just to Zorin, just to Bielski, or other topics.Icewhiz (talk) 18:23, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * (ec) You were claiming at the other article that the passage was not about Zorin and Bielski units but some other Jewish partisan units. Here you are claiming that the passage (pg 103) is not about Jewish partisans in general but specifically about Zorin and Bielski units. How can you make two contradictory arguments simultaneously? SMH.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:27, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * pg 104. This is a long string of anecdotes which the author strings together consecutively but does not draw a conclusion from one to the other. He may indeed be insinuating something about some group, however it would be OR to rely on such a perceived insinuation. He also discusses the sausage supply in Bielski camp, the subsequent August German operation, and then the AK district command which refers to Jewish partisans in the district at large - Nowogródek Voivodeship (1919–1939) (the AK district might have been in these exact borders - but if at all it was larger (eastwards)) is a pretty a large area - around 23,000 km^2 - and several Jewish partisan groups of various sizes (as well as Jews who were part of regular Soviet units) were active there. In regards to the AK-Soviet discussion - the source itself refers to discussions with the Lenin (Komsomol) brigade from the Lipiczany forest - which included Jews as well as a Jewish otriad. The Lenin brigade had its own, at times bloody, history with the AK.Icewhiz (talk) 19:15, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Ghetto Vilinus.gif