Talk:Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia/Archive 12

Source removed
Why was this source removed (Michał Klimecki (born 1952) - Polish historian )? - GizzyCatBella  🍁  17:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC) He earlier clarifies that there are many Poles in both German police and Soviet partisans. It seems that Klimecki is writing about the AK, but the ethnic conflict is more general than that.
 * The source is quoted as stating, "Polish forces engaged the Ukrainian Insurgent Army in a series of offensive combat actions. One of the first such confrontations was on January 10–15, 1944." (Klimecki, p. 5) But that's hard to square with 10,000 Ukrainian civilians killed by Poles in 1943, according to Snyder—how can Poles kill so many Ukrainians without engaging the Ukrainian Insurgent Army frequently? (Perhaps Klimecki is defining "Polish forces" very narrowly, but that would go against how it was perceived on the ground at the time, according to Snyder.) The IPN is at best a biased source; it has a better reputation for accuracy than its Ukrainian counterpart but its publications on this subject go against the academic consensus (eg. on the genocide question). (t &#183; c)  buidhe  00:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Again. Snyder DOES NOT say 10,000 Ukrainian civilians were killed by Poles in 1943.  Volunteer Marek   00:19, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Anyway, you can’t remove a source because you don’t like what it says, just like you can't remove a source just because you think it “made an error”.  Volunteer Marek   00:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Anyone who is citing a source has to justify that it is reliable for a particular claim. The burden is on you to show that. I don't think either the IPN or the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory is a great source for this topic. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Again. Snyder does NOT say that Poles killed 10,000 Ukrainian civilians in 1943. Yet that is the claim you’re basing your original research on to say that another source is wrong. And this is like the third time you repeat this false assertion despite the fact that it’s been pointed out several times.
 * Btw, this should be fixed in the table as well.  Volunteer Marek   02:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Both institutes have as one of their main goals to promote state-sponsored versions of history that portray their country/people in a good light. There are ample sources for this on the varying article pages. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  02:44, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Your argument was that the source was “wrong” because Snyder said Poles killed 10,000 civilians in 1943. Snyder did not say that.  Volunteer Marek   02:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , you maintain that that's hard to square with 10,000 Ukrainian civilians killed by Poles in 1943, according to Snyder. While 's objection is that Snyder did not say that. Not to be pedantic, but the WP:BURDEN to confirm the veracity of your claim actually rests on you. VM should not be expected to prove a negative. That is not a thing. El_C 03:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * As I said above, I do not think that IPN is a great source for this topic in general. Sadly, IPN does not always function as a disinterested research institute.
 * Technically, what Snyder says is "Over the course of 1943, perhaps ten thousand Ukrainian civilians were killed by Polish self-defence units, Soviet partisans and German policemen: only a fifth of the number of Polish victims, and not killed in the name of the Polish nation, but enough to create the image of massive and senseless suffering and violence.87 The UPA found itself with new recruits: 'I was in the woods', as one Volhynian Ukrainian woman later recalled before her death at Auschwitz, 'to avenge my family'. (p. 224)"
 * Technically, what Snyder says is "Over the course of 1943, perhaps ten thousand Ukrainian civilians were killed by Polish self-defence units, Soviet partisans and German policemen: only a fifth of the number of Polish victims, and not killed in the name of the Polish nation, but enough to create the image of massive and senseless suffering and violence.87 The UPA found itself with new recruits: 'I was in the woods', as one Volhynian Ukrainian woman later recalled before her death at Auschwitz, 'to avenge my family'. (p. 224)"
 * There are different estimates, but it doesn't seem that any reliable source questions that there were thousands of Ukrainians killed by Home Army and other Polish groups, and a revenge element to many of the killings. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:38, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Right. “Technically” Snyder says something different. That the 10,000 killed in 1943 were killed by Poles, AND Soviet Partisans AND Nazis. You omitted the last two groups. You were questioning whether the it was possible for the first major engagement between UPA and Polish partisans to have occurred in early 1944 based on your misreading of Snyder. This is exactly we don’t do original research and start going around saying “well, I think the source got it wrong”. I hope we can put that to rest.  Volunteer Marek   03:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And btw, Klimecki is specifically referring to organized Home Army units (the Volhynian Division) and specifically to its fight against UPA unit. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this source.  Volunteer Marek   04:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , okay, I can see now why you advance the premise of 10,000 Ukrainian civilians killed by Poles in 1943. But from that passage, I still think is right that Snyder is not actually saying that. First, he is saying "perhaps," which I am reading as "as high as" 10,000. Then there's the matter of the two non-purely-Polish forces he includes: Soviet partisans and German policemen. Further, he completely neglects to provide (at least in that passage you cite) any qualifications about the relative scale of all three. Like relative size of each force, number of civilians killed by each, and indeed, also the number of Poles in each. And, yes, I'm seeing you trying to bolster your position by saying that Snyder earlier clarifies that there [were] many Poles in both German police and Soviet partisans. But I hope you also see the problem in trying to quantify "many." I mean, 50 percent is many. So is 80 percent. Thus, taking the logical leap of: Poles (per se.)→10,000 killings, ends up stretching matters — maybe by a little, maybe by a lot. But some. I realize the problem of making sense of wartime historical demography. That's why all of you need to find a way to gauge those different estimates to arrive at something which you all can live with and is coherent to you. And if you need to go with very broad strokes and then qualify the shit out of that, then that's what you do. Absolutely agree with everything you say about the IPN. Hopefully, everyone treads carefully as far as using it as a scholarly resource. El_C 04:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * El C, with regard to IPN, the changes to the law which governed the institution were made in 2016 []. While it's possible to argue that after these changes IPN's "one of their main goals (became) to promote state-sponsored versions of history" this is not true before 2016. There have been several discussions regarding IPN, particularly pre-2016, over the years, including at WP:RSN and they are considered a reliable, source. The authors of their publications are almost all scholars and academics. In that regard they're no different that, I don't know, the Smithsonian or Yad Vashem etc. which are also all government funded (and Yad Vashem has become very politized in current political climate ).
 * Klimecki's paper was published in 2002. Well before the current conservative government in Poland took over. Indeed, this was during the tenure of Leon Kieres at a time when the institute was very highly regarded and if anything was criticized for being "anti-Polish" (by the right wing), mostly for affirming Jan Gross's findings with regard to the Jedwabne massacre.
 * Also please keep in mind that "biased" does not make a source unreliable . Honestly, ALL sources have some bias of some sort or another. If that bias is strong then the text should be properly attributed to that source. But by itself the possibility of "bias" is not a grounds for excluding a source.  Volunteer Marek   04:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , right, I should have noted that pre-2016 is better and that 2002 (sorry, I didn't pick up on that publication date) is actually alright. I should stress that the IPN is not an organ with which I am too familiar, overall. And I am even less familiar with the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory, which Buidhe is probably right about needing to also be wary of. Perhaps there's a way to offset its data to that of the IPN so that the two meet somewhere in the middle — well, with WP:FALSEBALANCE in mind and with the aid of any other estimates... It'd be an ambitious feat by any measure. El_C 04:47, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , right, I should have noted that pre-2016 is better and that 2002 (sorry, I didn't pick up on that publication date) is actually alright. I should stress that the IPN is not an organ with which I am too familiar, overall. And I am even less familiar with the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory, which Buidhe is probably right about needing to also be wary of. Perhaps there's a way to offset its data to that of the IPN so that the two meet somewhere in the middle — well, with WP:FALSEBALANCE in mind and with the aid of any other estimates... It'd be an ambitious feat by any measure. El_C 04:47, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Not sure how applicable it is to this discussion, but I just wanted to make sure everyone noticed my note about the APL sourcing requirement — in that it is not currently in effect for this page. El_C 01:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * El_C -.... the exact text of the motion from 22 September 2019 reads ---> quote: "to cover all articles on the topic of Polish history during World War II (1933-45), including the Holocaust in Poland.” link to motion --> This article is about the Polish history during the World War II. I believe you were correct in a first place and not mistaken. This motion applies here....see below for the full text -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  18:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh sorry El_C, you meant this motion does not apply from May 2020 .. Yeah..this does not...it reads ..articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. but the first one and sourcing expectations do apply. -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  18:23, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Argh! They don't make it easy to find, do they? Either that, or I suck at finding things, which... fair point. Now where's that Any key? (Please, someone get that reference.) El_C 18:34, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Not at all Smiley.svg I just realized that myself and was digging and digging... Here is the beginning from NeilN * Only high quality sources may be used, specifically peer-reviewed scholarly journals and academically focused books by reputable publishers. English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. * Anyone found to be misrepresenting a source, either in the article or on the talk page, will be subject to escalating topic bans. link to that diff ---> (note  - I'm not quoting NeilN to "get Buidhe", it's just for reference, although I seriously think Buidhe should be warned about the consequences...maybe she is not aware.) I believe all of the above should be put together and in one place to be simple to find and avoid confusion. -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  18:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * All this computer hacking is making me thirsty, I think I'll order a tab. I'd have also accepted they have the internet on computers now. Anyway, thank you for your pity. El_C 18:00, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * LOL! Homer .. :) -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  00:07, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Infobox
Is there anyone who thinks that the article is better with the infobox? So far, no one has expressed such an opinion. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I honestly think the info-box is useful Buidhe.... - GizzyCatBella  🍁  23:30, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * If you can convince people to get rid off infoboxes from other similar articles I might consider it. Maybe ask at WP:MilitaryHistory Project.  Volunteer Marek   04:17, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I think infoboxes are aesthetically pleasing and informative. Just like the abstracts (leads). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:52, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

"Unreliable source" tags
Buidhe, I don't want to be a "pain in the butt", but why you just tagged Bogusław Paź from Wrocław University /his book about the Volhynia massacres and Lucyna Kulińska/ her book about the Volhynia massacres as "unreliable sources"?

- GizzyCatBella  🍁  06:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , again, TextDiff is nice, but do you have an actual diff for that revert so that I could see what its edit summary says? I looked for it but was unable to immediately locate it. :( El_C 06:54, 26 December 2020 (UTC)


 * User:El_C, I believe it's the last diff in Gizzy's sentence.
 * And yes, this is a strange one. The book edited by Paz is most certainly reliable. Just looking through the list of authors in that volume, it's basically a who's who of experts in this area: Himka, Rudling, Zajac... all of whom we already use in the article . The publisher itself (Arkeus) is an academic press, basically if I'm not mistaken "Wroclaw University Press" (though they may also cover several other unis). Wroclaw University is one of top unis in Poland.  Volunteer Marek   07:16, 26 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Weird. I guess I was looking for an exact visual duplication to the TextDiff above. TextDiff which therefore doesn't precisely reflect what actually happened? How confusing (for me!). El_C 07:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Other, um, "weird", thing about that edit is that Buidhe added the text "Exact perpetrator not specified" to the end of the description of another source, the IPN one from 2011 which says ""It is estimated that about 60, or even 80 thousand people of Polish nationality were murdered in Volhynia." But... the source is pretty unequivocal about  "exact perpetrators"
 * Easiest way to see it is to search the page for number "80". Then it's the fourth hit, first entry under "Inne zbrodnie przeciwko pokojowi, ludzkości i zbrodnie wojenne" (basically "other crimes and war crimes")
 * The bolded first sentence of that section is "Śledztwo w sprawie zbrodni ludobójstwa, popełnionych na terenie byłego województwa wołyńskiego w latach 1939 - 1945 przez nacjonalistów ukraińskich"
 * Google translate: "Investigation into the crime of genocide committed in the former Volyn voivodeship in 1939 - 1945 by Ukrainian nationalists" (whether "ludobojstwo" should be translated in this context as "genocide" is a bit of a judgement call)
 * So right there you have it: perpetrators = Ukrainian nationalists.
 * It then goes on. "Fakt podjęcia przez przywódców OUN-UPA decyzji o usunięciu ze wschodnich terenów II RP, a w przypadku Wołynia o wymordowaniu wszystkich Polaków zamieszkujących sporne ziemie ..."
 * Google translate: "The fact that the leaders of the OUN-UPA made a decision to remove from the eastern territories of the Second Polish Republic, and in the case of Volyn, to murder all Poles living in the disputed territories..."
 * So right there: perpetrators = OUN-UPA
 * It then goes on. "Antypolskie akcje, mające na celu fizyczne zniszczenie (eksterminację) ludności polskiej z terenu Wołynia, zostały zaplanowane i przygotowane przez polityczne i wojskowe gremia przywódcze OUN - UPA, a wykonane przez podległe im oddziały zbrojne ..."
 * Google translate: "The anti-Polish actions aimed at the physical destruction (extermination) of the Polish population from the Volyn area were planned and prepared by the political and military leadership groups of the OUN - UPA, and carried out by their subordinate armed units..."
 * So right there: perpetrators = OUN-UPA
 * It then goes on. "Morderstwa i wytępianie ludności cywilnej na Wołyniu podjęte zostały w celu zniszczenia Polaków jako grupy narodowej, traktowanej jako przeszkoda w utworzeniu „Wielkiej Ukrainy”. Szacunkowo zamordowanych na Wołyniu zostało około 60, a nawet 80 tysięcy osób narodowości polskiej."
 * Google translate: "The murders and extermination of the civilian population in Volhynia were undertaken in order to destroy Poles as a national group, treated as an obstacle to the creation of "Great Ukraine". It is estimated that about 60, or even 80 thousand people of Polish nationality were murdered in Volhynia."
 * Purpose: creation of "Great Ukraine"
 * It then goes on. "Akcja nacjonalistów ukraińskich objęła setki miejscowości, wsi, kolonii na terenie województwa wołyńskiego, nie licząc miejsc i obszarów nie zamieszkanych, gdzie również dokonano licznych mordów. "
 * Google translate: "The action of Ukrainian nationalists covered hundreds of towns, villages, and colonies in the Volyn voivodship, not counting uninhabited places and areas, where numerous murders were also carried out."
 * Perpetrators right there - Ukrainian nationalists.
 * It then goes on. "...istnieje prawdopodobieństwo ustalenia sprawstwa niektórych osób, szczególnie usytuowanych niżej w hierarchii wojskowej i politycznej OUN - UPA i skutecznego ich oskarżenia"
 * Google translate: "there is a chance of establishing the perpetration of some people, especially those situated lower in the military and political hierarchy of the OUN - UPA, and of successfully prosecuting them"
 * So not only are perpetrators named but it says who might actually be prosecuted.
 * Obviously I can read Polish. But I am purposefully using Google translate here to show that even someone who doesn't speak Polish who tries to take a look at the source using Google Translate would have absolutely no problem figuring out that the source repeatedly and explicitly and unequivocally states WHO the perpetrators it's discussing are. OUN-UPA.
 * I have no idea how someone can read this source (even with Google Translate) and then write "Exact perpetrator not specified" in the corresponding Wikipedia text.
 *  Volunteer Marek  07:44, 26 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Well, in fairness, the original did read killed by Ukrainian nationalists, 1939–1945? (bold is my emphasis). So, why was that stated with the uncertainty of a question? I wonder. Regardless, VM's translation above shows that the source's actual view about this is unambiguous. Indeed, flattening this somewhat uncertain description (question) into the pure agnosticism of exact perpetrator not specified is a strange turn. One which I am struggling to explain. El_C 08:26, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, the phrasing could be improved. The source is discussing ethnic cleansing of Poles by OUN/UPA, no doubt about it. But it is not clear on whether this casualty figure is exclusively  these killed by OUN-UPA, or does this figure possibly include, i.e. Poles killed by Ukrainians working in German police which happened also at the same time? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Sorry, this isn’t about “improving the phrasing”. The source is about as clear as a source can be about who the “perpetrators” were. Your attempts to evade that fact by claiming these could be “Poles killed by Ukrainians working in German police units” is not only original research but also wrong - by this point Ukrainian policemen had deserted German service and went over to OUN/UPA with their weapons. In fact, this was the prelude, a kind of “Step 1” in OUN’s extermination plan, to the massacres.  Volunteer Marek   23:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I thought if they meant to include only the Poles killed by OUN/UPA, it would be stated directly: OUN/UPA killed XX number of Poles.
 * BTW Snyder states that Ukrainians were still a majority in the German police well into 1943. And that they were pacifying Polish villages during this time. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:43, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * BTW Snyder states that Ukrainians were still a majority in the German police well into 1943. And that they were pacifying Polish villages during this time. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:43, 26 December 2020 (UTC)


 * , It wasn't clear to me whether the sources are reliable, so I added a tag which displays as with a question mark. If you are convinced they are, please remove the tags, and add enough source information so that it can be verified. However, these casualty figures are outliers, which made me suspicious. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:11, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * If it “wasn’t clear to me whether the sources are reliable” then you should have brought it up on talk rather than spuriously tagging them.
 * Since you added the tags, and since these are clearly reliable, please remove the tags yourself.  Volunteer Marek   23:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * (Catching up on the discussion). For what it's worth, I think it's ok to add a tag to the article, but as you say, simultaneously, the best practice is to also start a discussion on talk. And yes, I think the sources are reliable too. No argument has been presented as to why they might be in the first place. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:55, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Polish killings of Ukrainian civilians was a trigger of the Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia
User:Buidhe, regarding this edit summary of yours --> quote: "restoring deleted information about Polish killings of Ukrainian civilians, which is essential to understanding the context and trigger of this event" as well as your edit and other edits to this article. Please note, none of the sources present in this article and no historian (I'm aware of) claim that "Polish killings of Ukrainian civilians was a trigger of the Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia". I mentioned you in my comment here. Please take note of that and be informed of it moving forward. Thank you. - GizzyCatBella  🍁  23:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , Please don't misquote me. I imprecisely used "this event" to refer to the later massacres in summer 1943, not the entire subject of "Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia". I agree that the word "trigger" gives the wrong impression, however. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem is that you’re trying to treat the massacres in the summer as some kind of separate “event” from the overall massacres, which, per sources, started in February/March. Again, this is unsupported by sources and original research.  Volunteer Marek   23:19, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Buidhe, I quoted you in full above. Here is the link to your edit summary again --> -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  23:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , Your quote for this talk page section is "Polish killings of Ukrainian civilians was a trigger of the Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia". I never wrote that. However, it seems a waste of time to argue over an edit summary. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Buidhe, I don’t understand....talk page title section is not quoting you; I clearly stated in my comment where I’m quoting you.... and why you revised my comment and then collapsed the conversation!? Please Buidhe...what's going on here? - GizzyCatBella  🍁  23:56, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , If it's not quoting me that what on earth is it a quote of? And what's the point of arguing over an edit summary??? Why not work on improving the article? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  00:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Buidhe, look, the tile section is not a quote...where you got the idea from that it’s a quote is beyond me... Again, I CLEARLY stated in my initial comment where I'm quoting you; is this clear? - GizzyCatBella  🍁  00:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, these ---> " marks puzzled you?? I used them to indicate that that was not true what is written... nothing else comes to mind Buidhe... - I removed them now .... -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  00:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I think pacification was much earlier in 1930, and OUN killed several Polish politicans who supported this. But I would like to mention that not only UPA killed Polish civilians, but also AK killed Ukrainian civilians, and the article shows the event from one side, it can be said, anti-Ukrainian. It is clear that Polsih wanted to look like victims after WW2 end, so there are much more sources of UPA's crimes than of AK's crimes. Both should be judged equally. (t &#183; c)  Dim.yttrium  19:14, 02 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No, the article discusses both. But the two were not equal.  Volunteer Marek   17:39, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
 * They should be judged equally, and I think they had and are. Hence the consensus is that they were, as VM says, not equal (which is why this article is titled Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia and not Massacres of Poles and Ukrainians in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia). That said, retaliation atrocities committed by AK should be mentioned and are (see Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia). Whether this topic merits a stand-alone article is interesting and I am inclined to think it does, but the general context should not be obscured (that the number of Ukrainian victims is much smaller, and that it was the Ukrainians who escalated the situation into full blown genocide/ethnic cleansing). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

"zagłada" and "Zagłada" - when Capitonym happens
Text:

"others, including Waldemar Rezmer, use the word "Zagłada", originally applied to the Final Solution, to describe them.[179][180]"

clarification of sources:

"others[179]," (who?)

"including Waldemar Rezmer, use the word "Zagłada"[180],"

"originally applied to the Final Solution[179],"

"to describe them.[179][180]"

First problem:

important part "originally applied to the Final Solution" would be supported only by [179]

would be because:

source: "previously reserved to define the Nazi extermination of the Jews"

text: "originally applied to the Final Solution"

Do I need to explain difference of these two statements?

second problem:

"including Waldemar Rezmer, use the word "Zagłada"[180]" -

Does he really? Because source clearly says "zagłada" (lowercase) not "Zagłada" (capitalised word). There is "Zagłada Korościatyna" in the source, but that's by Fr. Tadeusz Isakowicz-Zaleski not Rezmer (And you cannot prove without doubt that he (Fr) used capitalised word, not that was just lowercase word that was capitalised by fact that it's a name of something).

The thing about source [179] here: it uses "Zagłada" very clearly with capital. Not "zagłada" which constitutes a common word (fact that the Polish language does not use articles does not help).

Wiedzosław (talk) 15:04, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Scandalous changes to the article
How can you deny that the Volhynia Massacre was a genocide if in you're very article you have the following statement:

''The decision of ethnic cleansing of the area east of the Bug River was taken by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army early in 1943. In March 1943, the OUN(B) (specifically Mykola Lebed[162]) imposed a collective death sentence of all Poles living in the former east of the Second Polish Republic, and a few months later, local units of the UPA were instructed to complete the operation soon.''

A collective death sentence of all Poles. This explicitly implies that the massacre was a genocide. Or are you going to delate this passage as well? It's scandalous what has been done with this article in the recent years. Tim Ocean (talk) 22:41, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Categories
Why is this page under "Wikipedia articles needing factual verification from July 2009"? I think it should be removed. --Gustamons (talk) 17:06, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 March 2022
The very last sentence of 'Eastern Galicia' section currently says The massacre is believed to be an act of retaliation for earlier alleged murders by Ukrainian Insurgent Army of 9 or 11 Poles in Pawłokoma and unspecified number of Poles killed by of the UPA in the neighboring villages. "by of the UPA" should be changed to something that makes sense, either remove "of" and just leave "by the UPA" or add some clarifying words, like "by forces of the UPA" or whatever is appropriate here. OlezhkaG (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:49, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 March 2022 (3)
Change "by of the UPA" to "by the UPA" in this sentence: The author of the book, IPN's historian Romuald Niedzielko, documented 1341 cases in which Ukrainian civilians helped their Polish neighbours, which caused 384 Ukrainians to be executed by of the UPA. OlezhkaG (talk) 16:53, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:56, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 March 2022 (2)
Change 'knowingly' to 'knowing' in the following sentence: Many of their victims who were perceived as Poles, even despite not knowingly the Polish language, were murdered by СКВ along with the others. OlezhkaG (talk) 16:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:57, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 March 2022 (4)
Please remove "of" before "Sarny" here, probably can remove the capital C from "Counties" as well: According to Ukrainian sources, in October 1943 the Volhynian delegation of the Polish government estimated the number of Polish casualties in of Sarny, Kostopol, Równe and Zdołbunów Counties to exceed 15,000. OlezhkaG (talk) 17:01, 27 March 2022 (UTC)


 * ❌ It's not clear what changes you want to make. Remember to specify changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cool guy (talk • contribs) • he/they 01:51, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ This was a simple copy edit., not sure what was unclear? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:49, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Didnt find sarny Cranloa12n / talk / contribs / 18:55, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Please Change Article Quick Facts Picture
I do not know how to do this, but I find it disturbing that the first picture I see in this article is one of dead people lying on the ground from a massacre. This picture should at least have a content warning, as it can be deeply alarming, uncomfortable, and unsettling to some people. Please consider either removing the picture altogether or fixing it so that it is not the first thing that is seen on the desktop version of this article. I believe it to be deeply disrespectful to both the dead, and to survivors of this event and the families of both. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.219.147.105 (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2021 (UTC)


 * It was 80 years ago. Prinsgezinde (talk) 10:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not censored - this is why one can find photographs of actual corpses, nudity, conditions that most will be disgusted by, symbols of fascism and hate groups, and other potentially disturbing or offensive images. Besides, as Prinsgezinde said, this is a photograph of a historical event. You may find similar pictures in history books (especially those not aimed at children). Your response to the image is natural, we should all feel this way upon seeing victims of genocide. --Samotny Wędrowiec (talk) 19:24, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Please be reasonable
Hello Kashmiri, there is no need to include lots of exclamation marks in your responses. I don't know if you have family members who were killed in these tragic events, or if you even belong to the same ethnic groups, but if you do not then I see no reason why you should feel so strongly about a differing opinion here. Moreover, I did not shout at or offend you, so I am asking you to please treat me with the same respect. Thank you.

As for the article itself, it deals with more than just what happened in Volhynia - as the very name of the whole page says, it is tackling "Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia". This is more than just Volhynia; we are speaking here, again as the article itself clearly states in the first paragraph, of: "Volhynia, Eastern Galicia, parts of Polesia and Lublin region". Volhynia is only one part of this cruel and bloody puzzle.

Finally, if you scroll down to the "Estimates" section of the article you will see around a dozen sources saying that up to or more than 100,000 Poles were slain during this genocide or ethnic cleansing or whatever one calls it. The highest reliable numbers reach 200,000, though Norman Davies mentions "hundreds of thousands" which would mean anywhere from 200,000 to 999,999. However, personally I do not include Davies as a reliable source as, despite his not being Polish, he is ridiculously supportive of Polish nationalism and a raging conservative. --Samotny Wędrowiec (talk) 19:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, if I was being disingenuous then I could make the argument that the death toll is actually at well over 1 million, as the UPA and Ukrainian SS and Nazi-collaborating police killed over 800,000 Polish citizens of the Jewish faith and Soviet Jews in 1942 alone. However, this is not what I am adding to the article, as its scope is clearly the period of 1943-1945 and the focus is on gentile Poles. Besides, we have pages like The Holocaust in Ukraine to deal with this. --Samotny Wędrowiec (talk) 19:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Let's stay focused strictly on the scope of this article: the Volhynia and Eastern Galicia. While 120,000 has indeed been quoted for the entirety of Volhynia and Eastern Borderland, please keep in mind that Eastern Galicia != Eastern Borderland. Consequently, your 120,000 is not a number that applies to the geographical scope of this article.
 * Additionally – or primarily – please keep in mind that the publication is, essentially, conference proceedings while the Polish IPN is not an unbiased academic source – it's a state institution dedicated to promote Polish historical narrative. So, I suggest not to attach too much weight to it, and in any case, always attribute any and all IPN-sourced statements. Cheers, — kashmīrī  TALK  20:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Kashmiri - institution dedicated to promote Polish historical narrative
 * Where did you get that from?
 * Also, shall Yad Vashem statements be also always attributed? It’s a state institution. - GizzyCatBella  🍁  20:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yep. If you go through the law establishing the IPN, it explicitly does not include research on crimes committed by Poland on other countries. The IPN's role is to research and publicise crimes committed by other nations and regimes on Polish nationals. Can it be called unbiased research? — kashmīrī  TALK  20:28, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Nonsense. Here --> research by IPN regarding crimes committed (among others) by the Home Army on Ukrainian civilians. What was that Yep you answered with above related to? That Yad Vashem needs to be attributed? - GizzyCatBella  🍁  20:40, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your responses, Kashmiri and GizzyCatBella. I see your point Kashmiri, but the top end of the spectrum at 120,000 can indeed still be attributed to Volhynia and Eastern Galicia if you look at all the sources used. Also, although the IPN used to be a much more respectable institution, it has gotten much worse and more biased over the years. It does indeed have a Polish bias - however, just as Yad Vashem has a Jewish/Israeli bias, they can both be very useful sources for researching the Holocaust and other atrocities committed on the Polish and Jewish ethnic groups. Especially when most of the Ukrainian sources on the matter, some of which were partly funded by the CIA in an effort to cover up past crimes of the OUN-B (see Mykola Lebed, among others), either downplay or completely deny the genocide of Poles and Jews by German and Ukrainian forces during the war.


 * Sources like that conference can be extremely helpful, even more so considering the involvement of Ukraine's leading scholar on the matter Ihor Ilyushin who took part in and endorsed the conference (one of the few known and respected Ukrainian voices that focuses on discovering the actual truth instead of downplaying, negating, or exaggerating certain aspects of what happened). Furthermore, though it is not the main scope of the project, the IPN does actually investigate atrocities committed by Poles as well, as GizzyCatBella already pointed out (there are others examples too, like the Sahryń massacre, though even there the IPN downplayed crimes against civilians in favour of focusing on the combat between armed groups on both sides...). --Samotny Wędrowiec (talk) 20:47, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Polish Page
The Polish version of this page clearly has a lot more information than this one. I would actually consider the English version a stub. 82.46.71.77 (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Well, this page is of recommended size. Read WP:SIZERULE. The Polish page is bloated. — kashmīrī  TALK  15:27, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 June 2022
In this sentence, "where" should be "were":

Although Polish families, as the most numerous ethnic minority and in some areas majority, where the main target of the killings, victims also included Jews, Russians, Czechs, Georgians, and any Ukrainians who were part of Polish families or opposed the UPA and sabotaged the genocide by hiding Polish escapees Semuros (talk) 12:28, 30 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Whoever is going to respond to the above, here are some references from another article that might be added also --> This one Anti-Soviet resistance by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army and this one Anti-Soviet resistance by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army  -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  12:54, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅, leaving this open for GuzzyCatBella's request. ;;  Maddy  ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ ::  talk   17:15, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Closing this request. I've added those references mentioned in a refideas. A separate edit request should be opened with specific changes on where to put those references and for prose to add. SWinxy (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Number of Poles killed during WW2
Norman Davies claims that during WW2 Ukrainian nationalists killed between 200,000 and 500,000 Poles. This figure is surprising and rather at odds with the numbers reported in this article. I copy and paste the relevant extract here below. Davies provides sources (quoted below) that I have not been able to verify. I leave it to more competent editors to assess whether and how these numbers should be cited in this article.

Gitz (talk) (contribs) 21:26, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 December 2022
In "Classification as genocide - Polish view"," On 22 July 2016"should be " On 8 July 2016". Both resources were written on 8 July 2016. MINQI (talk) 00:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lemonaka (talk) 17:51, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done, with sources from article. Lemonaka (talk) 17:54, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Ambiguous lede
Lede consists of 3 paragraphs, mid paragraph currently reads:

"According to Timothy Snyder, the ethnic cleansing was a Ukrainian attempt to prevent the post-war Polish state from asserting its sovereignty over Ukrainian-majority areas that had been part of the prewar Polish state. Henryk Komański and Szczepan Siekierka write that the killings were directly linked to the policies of Stepan Bandera's faction of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B) and its military arm, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, whose goal as specified at the Second Conference of the OUN-B on 17–23 February 1943 (March 1943 in some sources) was to purge all non-Ukrainians from the future Ukrainian state. The massacres led to a conflict between Polish resistance and Ukrainian insurgency in the German-occupied territories, with the Polish Home Army in Volhynia responding to the Ukrainian attacks, on a much smaller scale."

My reading of it is as an attempt to contrasts two views of the massacres.


 * 1) Snyder; "a Ukrainian attempt to prevent the post-war Polish state from asserting its sovereignty over Ukrainian-majority areas that had been part of the prewar Polish state."
 * 2) Henryk Komański and Szczepan Siekierka; "to purge all non-Ukrainians from the future Ukrainian state"

I don't see how these views contrast nor how there is anything contentious in either statements. If they don't contrast and are not contentious, I don't see the need to namecheck authors or present them as such.

The purpose of the lede is to summarize.

Can we simplify to .....=>

"The ethnic cleansing was a Ukrainian attempt to prevent the post-war Polish state from asserting its sovereignty over Ukrainian-majority areas that had been part of the prewar Polish state. The massacres led to a conflict between Polish resistance and Ukrainian insurgency in the German-occupied territories, with the Polish Home Army in Volhynia responding to the Ukrainian attacks, on a much smaller scale."

(It is already stated clearly in paragraph 1 that UPA were perpetrators of these atrocities). --Jabbi (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 February 2023
"Many Ukrainians perceived the 2016 resolution as an "anti-Ukrainian gesture" in the context of Vladimir Putin's attempts to use the Volhynia issue to divide Poland and Ukraine in the context of the Russian–Ukrainian war" Because this is just a feeling/opinion of a closer unknown person. The source was also not given Bukajsamesz (talk) 22:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: It is sourced. The Sejm’s resolution was interpreted by many Ukrainian politicians and journalists as an “anti-Ukrainian gesture” [19] adopted in the particularly unfavourable moment of the military conflict in the Donbas region and conscious attempts of the Kremlin to use Volhynian topic to further complicate Polish-Ukrainian relations. The source even sources it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2023
Remove sentence as Failed verification/WP:SYNTH: "Others, including Waldemar Rezmer, use the word "Zagłada", originally applied to the Final Solution, to describe the massacres." - cannot attribute to Rezmer in the sources - note clear use Zagłada in source for "originally applied" but (source) instead says "previously reserved" -. Also note that Rezmer is alive so this can be considered defamatory.

Please look into Archive(12): " "zagłada" and "Zagłada" - when Capitonym happens ".- for more Wiedzosław (talk) 22:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ I have removed the unverifiable attribution. To be clear, I don't think the content in question would constitute defamation. If you disagree, consult WP:OS and WP:RFO asap. Actualcpscm (talk) 14:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia slowly becoming the source of polish propaganda?
This article is literally appalling and misses out on every point literally. There are so much of disinformation here whitening out polish occupation of western Ukraine and hundreds of years of enslavement of Ukrainians by Polish invadors, no mentioning of the crimes and cleansing of Ukrainian people on Ukrainian lands occupied by Poland in 1918 by AK starting from 1941. Poland was nothing more than an invador who deprived Ukraine a chance to get independence in 1918. Polish people were not just a minority enhabiting our land but the occupants who exploited Ukraine. It doesn't mentionthe confirmed facts of Russians pretending to be Ukrainians conducting the acts of violence neither mentions the influence of nazi on this tragedy. it is a fully bias polish propaganda not worthy even one minute of attention. Let's start from the point 1 polish people were occupants on the territory of Ukraine same as Russians in Crimea now. You raising up this tragic history in a distorted way will bounce back on you, many countries have historical questions to Poland indeed. i request the authority of Wiki to investigate and protect the global intellectual community from the influx of polish propaganda on your website.

And lastly Wolyn tragedy Has never been acknowledged by any country as a genocide.and you claim that it is. 81.66.219.75 (talk) 15:35, 10 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes. Yes it has become that. This article is really bad. I remember when editors specifically censored some of the stuff you said, saying "if you dont like it make a new article". It got out of hand enough that I think a lot of people stopped trying to fix it. LeVivsky ( ಠ_ಠ ) 04:17, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * You guys needs to be more specific, I'm currently rewiriting the article and updating it to the current knowledge Marcelus (talk) 08:05, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * History is Polish propaganda!
 * Clown alert... Galehautt (talk) 00:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Infobox deaths
A major article section surveys estimates of 10,000 to 30,000 Ukrainian dead among victims, yet they are absent from the infobox, which treats the subject as a one-sided attack and not a conflict with mass killing of civilians by more than one side. Even if that were deemed acceptable, the text tells us that a very large number of Ukrainians were among the victims of UPA, but they are omitted.

There’s a disconnect, belying WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE “to summarize. . . key facts that appear in the article.” It’s like an infobox summarizing some other article, or restricted to only selected parts of this one. —Michael Z. 13:38, 21 May 2023 (UTC)


 * That depends on how we define the article's topic, and by whom these Ukrainians were killed. I assume the article tells about the massacre of Poles by UPA. If those Ukrainians were killed by UPA, then these figures definitely should be included. If those Ukrainians were killed by Poles, then we need to carefully think how to represent these facts.
 * We mush avoid a broadly discredited concept of "Second Polish-Ukrainian war", which is being actively pushed by some Ukrainian sources, and which is totally rejected by the international scholarly community. Paul Siebert (talk) 16:44, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This is about the infobox reflecting the article’s current content, not re-determining and changing the topic. —Michael Z. 13:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not proposing to change the topic, I am asking how the topic is defined. Paul Siebert (talk) 15:25, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, the article’s coverage of the topic explicitly includes subsections on “Polish casualties” and “Ukrainian casualties,” with detailed surveys of both of their numbers in sources. The infobox lists “Deaths” of Poles and Czechs. So the summarizing of “key facts that appear in the article” has a very different emphasis by omitting part of that, without any rationale. Clear?
 * You seemed to be implying that “by whom” someone was killed makes their deaths not key facts. Does the article or sources support such an assessment? —Michael Z. 16:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think the key logic is that retribution killings are a part of this subject, and not divorced from it. Even if there were a complete article on them, it would remain part of this broader subject in summary style. There is no reason to omit them. —Michael Z. 16:17, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The question is simple: the infobox provides a list of perpetrators, and it is exhaustive. Therefore, if those 10,000-30,000 Ukrainians were murdered by someone from this list, these deaths should be included. However, if they were killed by somebody else, we cannot add them without expanding the list of perpetrators.
 * However, if the we adjust the perpetrator list, the article's scope (and probably a title) should be probably modified too. However, before discussing that, please, answer who murdered those Ukrainians. Paul Siebert (talk) 16:41, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * You have the right to decline discussing this. —Michael Z. 21:29, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I find this your response aggressive and unfriendly.
 * In addition, you are missing the point: as I explained, the lists of the victims and perpetrators must be consistent: we must include all victims (irrespective to their ethnicity) provided that they were murdered by the perpetrators listed in the infobox. However, if we include some category of the victims that were killed by someone else (except by Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, Ukrainian Insurgent Army, Mykola Lebed, Roman Shukhevych), then the perpetrator list should be updated accordingly.
 * If several thousands of Ukrainians were murdered by the same perpetrators that were killing the Poles (again, their list is: "Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, Ukrainian Insurgent Army, Mykola Lebed, Roman Shukhevych"), then I agree that these Ukrainian victims should be included. However, if they were killed by somebody else (e.g. by Polish self-defence), then the latter must be added to the list of the perpetrators.
 * In the latter case, I anticipate a huge problem: if we list both UPA and Polish self-defence in the perpetrators list, and we list both Ukrainians and Poles in the list of victims, then a reader may be completely confused: who was being murdered and by whom? Instead of providing a clear and brief summary, such an infobox would just confuse a reader. Paul Siebert (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 * This article is clear what it is about: massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia Galehautt (talk) 13:50, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The title is not the article, and it is clear what the article’s content includes. and WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE is also clear: “to identify key facts at a glance.” It is non-NPOV to selectively omit facts you don’t approve of. —Michael Z. 17:11, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * You seem confused. Galehautt (talk) 12:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * You seem something too, but I think we should stick to the subject and not indulge in innuendo about other editors. —Michael Z. 13:38, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * In addition, the estimates vary from 2 to 30 thousands, not 10-30, as you say. And many sources say that some of them were killed in 1946-47, whereas the infobox define the time of the event as 1943-45. All of that should be specified too, but, again, that may require an adjustment of the article's scope. Paul Siebert (talk) 17:51, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 2 thousand is an estimate for Volyn only. But I suppose if you want the infobox to offer the full range of estimates then you’d want to amend the “c. 100,000” in the infobox as well, right? —Michael Z. 21:34, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * By whom they were killed? Paul Siebert (talk) 21:07, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Totally rejected? Timothy Snyder and many other regarded western historians refer to it as a Polish-Ukrainian civil war. It's actually wacky revisionism to suggest otherwise at this point. LeVivsky ( ಠ_ಠ ) 04:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Lvivske why did you change the death toll from c. 100k to 50-100k? It goes against the cited source. Also 40-60k is a deathtoll of Volhynia massacres only. Marcelus (talk) 08:06, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * When has Snyder ever said that? You're lying. Timothy Snyder has condemned Bandera as a genocidal war criminal outright. Find better heroes, high time Galehautt (talk) 00:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Galehautt I see you just received a contentious topics alert short days ago. Please respect WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF. —Michael Z. 04:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)