Talk:Pomeranians (tribe)

Untitled
moved from the main article

reasons: NPOV, no references and particularly the accusation of a "genocide"

After 1945, and the partial extermination and expulsion of the German population resident in Pomerania for 800 years, the Polish state, which acquired this province under the Potsdam agreement, has consistently claimed that Pomerania was originally Polish territory. This is totally false. The Pomeranians were slavic, but not Polish. was a historic fusion of German and Wendish peoples, and claims raised after 1945 by successive Polish governments are attempts to justify their genocide of the resident population. --Mickey195 22:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Pomeranians

Yet another article on WP about the people whose name in English was Wends.--Termer 06:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Image used in the article
I see this painting by Gerson and I wonder how realistic this painting is or if this is simple propaganda/fantasy of the 19th century (nationalism)..? It claims "Pomeranians ousted by the Germans to the Baltic Islands", while the article states "as many native Pomeranians were slowly and gradually assimilated and discontinued the use of their Slavic language and culture.".. There is obviously a discrepancy.. And I even wonder, which Baltic Islands? If this painting has no real historical background, then it shouldn't be used here, especially for neutrality.. --Jonny84 (talk) 23:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It is historically correct that Slavs were being pushed out by the German settlers, there were numerous municipal decrees forcing them outside of towns, preventing them from engaging in certain economic activities, etc. As for the painting itself, it's a romanticized depiction and is no more accurate as many 19th century paintings of that sort. One great example of fantasy is the image of vikings wearing horned helmets, yet based on archeological evidence, no such helmet was ever found and no contemporary image of one exists. I see a lot of these romanticized paintings on many historical articles. --E-960 (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * So then you can surely provide sources.. But if this painting is unrealistic, then it shouldn't be used as an illustration of an encyclopedic article in consideration of NPOV. --Jonny84 (talk) 18:55, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * hmmm... I found a similar romanticized paining on the viking article, so as long as it says it's a painting it's fine. --E-960 (talk) 20:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It has an unsourced (historical) statement in its description, so there is nothing fine.. POV don't belong here. --Jonny84 (talk) 20:18, 1 March 2022 (UTC)