Talk:Polish Auxiliary Police

Redirecting duplicate article
I have redirected this article, Polish Auxiliary Police, to the existing older article Blue Police. This is not meant as a judgment of the merits of the contents of either article, nor of the appropriateness of either title. It is simply the case that both articles evidently deal with the same subject, and we can't have two articles on the same topic. I don't suppose the duplication was intentional (if it was, it would have been a "POV fork"). In cases of such accidental conflicts, it is always the case that the younger article gets redirected to the preexisting one. This is not "deletion". The new contents can be merged into the old article in whichever way editors feel appropriate. Here is a link to the version of this page prior to redirection. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

This should be discussed. The Blue Police make up only a portion of the different types of Auxiliary Police in Poland. Keep in mind that Poland was broken up and administered differently in different juristictions. The Blue Police were just one of these Auxillary Police forces.

IMHO, if there is a need for redirecting, it would be more beneficial to direct the off shoot into the general articel. Bandurist (talk) 17:54, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The word is "auxiliary". The article was not about auxiliary police(s) in Poland" but rather the "Polish Auxiliary Police" which was commonly known as the Blue Police. Also there are numerous other problems with the article, namely the first part completely lacks inline citations, and in fact comically mixes the German Selbstschutz units (which were composed mainly by ethnic Germans) with the Polish Auxiliary Police which is absurd. Dr. Loosmark  18:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Furthermore there are a lot of problems with sources, for example where the article says: "In the second-half of the 1940’s these groupings were very active and undertook massive arrests of ethnic Ukrainian, Belarusans and Jews and interrogations using brutal methods" The source actually states that the "massive arrests" and "brutal methods" were used by the COMMUNIST AUTHORITIES against ANTI-COMMUNIST UNDERGROUND - not by the wartime police against "ethnic Ukrainian, Belarusans and Jews". Dr. Loosmark  20:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I can confirm what Loosmark says: that passage is misquoted, and in a very misleading fashion. It is also quite nonsensical: how should the Hilfspolizei still have been active "in the second half of the 1940s"??? To make matters even worse, substantial passages of the text are evidently plagiarised: I found parts of the text from the book referenced in footnotes 1 and 2, but also large parts of this article. But falsifications of these plagiarised passages are systematic and guided by a POV agenda: just as Bandurist has stolen the sentence about the "massive arrests" and "brutal methods" in the "second half of the 1940s", but arbitrarily exchanged the references to the perpetrators and victims making it appear that Poles were the perpetrators and Ukrainians the victims, he also employed the same method with the other text: says: "Upon the entrance of German troops into the regions of Western Poland, small groups of Volksdeutsche came together and formed local milita groups". Bandurist has turned this into: "With the September 1939 attack on Poland, small groups of Poles came together and formed local militia groups".
 * This is an outrageous case of malicious, POV-driven source abuse. I am blocking Bandurist indefinitely. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you are overreacting. Bandurist is a respected editor and a gentleman. And I actually know him in real life. Eastern Europe is POV-driven, inexorably. by definition. -Galassi (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope, he has been systematically and maliciously falsifying sources. Here's another example: the original said "It is thought that a total of 45000 ethnic German-Poles served in the Selbschutz before it was ordered to be disbanded". He turned this into: "It is thought that a total of 45,000 ethnic Poles served in the Selbschutz before it was ordered to be disbanded". There is just no way this could have been done for other than utterly malicious motives. It is completely inexcusable. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * If there were other units beside the "Blue Police" that can be subsumed under "Auxiliary Police", then I'm still not seeing that this article is effectively covering any of them. The main body that this article is treating is quite obviously the same as the one treated by the other article.
 * If you wish to have an article covering the Blue Police together with other related units, may I suggest the correct course of action would be not to write a new article, but to expand the old one and then, if necessary, move that to a more comprehensive title. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd agree that the articles should be merged, and then organized by "color".-Galassi (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There's unfortunately nothing worth merging in this article. It's all either plagiarised or falsified, or both. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)