Talk:Responsibility for the Holocaust/Archive 2

Why is the Holocaust denial propaganda maintained?
Much has been written about the pogroms in Eastern Poland, it's well outlined even in the linked Wikipedia pages. Why are the conspiracy theories about Germans and einsatzgruppen maintained when they're demonstrably false? These are clearly against Wikipedia rules on fringe theories, a neutral point of view, and reliable sources. If it's reverted to the Holocaust denial again I will file a complaint against the editor. 176.227.241.20 (talk) 16:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC) sock puppet of banned user - see - wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Icewhiz
 * You've deleted academically supported content in its entirety, while adding incomplete (missing page number citations) content. There is no Holocaust Denial going on at this page and anyone who thinks such has obviously not read the page. Make whatever complaints you feel necessary, but rest assured, your argument is not well-founded or substantiated. If you wish to add any of the recently deleted content, which states that specific atrocities were committed by Polish nationals (which this article already supports BTW) without German provocation, then state as much using academically respectable sources with page numbers and follow the citation format used in the article. Do not delete material and then cast aspersions that have no basis in reality; particularly when one evaluates the overall content of this article. What was added was not properly cited...period...and you deleted material from a leading scholar like Timothy Snyder (I guess he's a Holocaust denier too, right?)--Obenritter (talk) 17:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Absolutely nowhere does it say in academic history texts that Jedwabne and Radziłów were carried out by einsatzgruppen because it didn't happen. This has been done to death, and the linked pages themselves go into detail that directly contradicts what's written here. As I previously explained in the edit, the Snyder quote about Belarus is out of place and used as a means of minimizing the crimes that are simultaneously being denied. These are mutual exclusivities; one cannot say that Poles didn't commit these pogroms, but also locals in other places committed worse. Implicit in the whataboutism is that it in fact occurred. There's no casting aspersions when this is so glaringly antisemitic Holocaust denial. Truly shameful.176.227.241.20 (talk) 22:19, 5 June 2020 (UTC) sock puppet of banned user - see - wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Icewhiz
 * Your editing was incomplete and dismissive of other scholarly content. Your addition has been improved upon with citations that follow the rest of the article's format and additional content from the Gross work added as well. The other sources contributed nothing since page numbers are not included and would be redundant as one academic source like a Princeton University Press work is sufficient. What's shameful here is the quality of your editing and how you've misconstrued content and the article's purpose. By the way, here is the Timothy Snyder contribution verbatim concerning this subject:


 * German police forces from all sides could not compensate for the absence of the political resource. The Germans provoked about a dozen pogroms, and local Poles killed several thousand Jews. These results were far inferior, from the German perspective, to the killing in southeastern Poland, where politically motivated Ukrainians were at work.


 * The scale of the murder was also inferior to what the Germans were already achieving to the north and east, as they drove Soviet forces from Lithuania and Latvia and occupied these countries themselves. Indeed, the return visit of German forces to northeastern Poland in early July 1941 was probably an attempt to match the results already achieved in Lithuania and Latvia. The pogroms in northeastern Poland began after Germans and Lithuanians were already killing Jews in Lithuania, one whole country to the north and east. For that matter, the pogroms in northeastern Poland began after Germans and Latvians were killing Jews in Latvia, two whole countries to the north and east. The killings in northeastern Poland, in this broader perspective, represented a de-escalation rather than an escalation, since murder in the region was much less widespread than in Lithuania and Latvia. And it stopped after a few weeks. Pogroms without a political resource were a blind alley.--Obenritter (talk) 23:51, 5 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm not an editor, I don't have an account, I don't know how to use the edit tools particularly well. But you're proving my point with the quoted passage that what was written about Einsatzgruppen massacres in these villages directly contradicts what was written in the referenced texts as well as the linked Wikipedia pages to the pogroms. That should plainly be obvious that what was written was nationalist revisionism and Holocaust denial, and I don't have any problem with your latest edit. I didn't want to edit the page at all, which is why I wrote the initial comment on this talk page about whitewashing the pogrom. I figured an experienced editor would take care of it, but they didn't so I did the best I could with my limited skill set here. I thought it disgraceful that someone coming to this page in good faith would find Holocaust denial. If the quality of my editing bothered you more than the brazen distortion and denial, I don't know what to tell you, that's for you to think about, but I appreciate you cleaning the article up regardless. 202.143.110.36 (talk) 00:12, 6 June 2020 (UTC) sock puppet of globally banned user
 * Wrong again. Stop feigning expertise here from reading a couple of sources. Here is noted scholar Peter Longerich:


 * "the murder of several hundred Jews in the town of Jedwabne on 10 July 1941 by—according to Gross—their Polish neighbours. Some of the victims were killed immediately, others burned alive in a barn. Even if the murders were carried out by local people—or more precisely by a group of forty or so men, distinct from other members of the indigenous population, mostly not from the town itself but from the surrounding area—closer analysis of the crime has now demonstrated that the pogrom was engineered by a unit of the German Security Police. This was probably a commando from the Gestapo office in Zichenau that had been assigned to Einsatzgruppe B as an auxiliary troop and which had organized several pogroms in the western part of the Voivo-deship of Bialystok (in which Jedwabne was located); it had recruited local Poles as auxiliary ‘pogrom police’ for this purpose.28 This was also in accordance with Heydrich’s order of 1 July in which he had described Poles as an ‘element...for initiating pogroms’." Peter Longerich, Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), p. 196.


 * So much for your "brazen distortion and denial" and your erroneous claims that "Absolutely nowhere does it say in academic history texts that Jedwabne and Radziłów were carried out by einsatzgruppen because it didn't happen." Before you make such sweeping claims, do a tad more research. --Obenritter (talk) 00:19, 6 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Might I remind you of WP:CIVIL. Nothing you wrote contradicts what I said, perhaps keep the animus to yourself next time. 202.143.110.36 (talk) 00:29, 6 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Perhaps, this demonstrates your lack of understanding of Holocaust history. What makes you think that an atrocity being masterminded/engineered (perhaps with death threats if these Poles did not participate for all we know) by the Order Police assigned to Einsatzgruppe B takes away their culpability for the massacre? Sure, it was already clear in the text that some Poles participated, but the fact remains it was instigated by the Nazis. Not sure you ever had much of a point other than to excuse Einsatzgruppen from any involvement in this particular crime (which turns out to be wrong)--if that's what you meant to do?--Obenritter (talk) 00:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The article should certainly state that in several cases, most infamously Jedwabne, Polish people participated in the massacres of the Jews. The question who "organized" the massacres is still being debated by scholars, and although some had made sweeping statements one way or another, there is no consensus, as the debate is ongoing. The truth, likely, lies somewhere in between the extremist views ("no Poles" vs "only Poles"). I concur that removing information on the German involvement would create a bias here that goes against NPOV, just like removing information that some Poles participated in those events would skew it in the other direction. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  00:47, 6 June 2020 (UTC)


 * That is not what I meant to do, Oberitter, I am not referring to the factual German directive to instigate violence among local populations in Poland. If you'd read what was originally written, it said that the violence itself was carried out by the einsatzgruppen. That is what I took issue with, as I've said many times. The pogroms, particularly Jedwabne, were self-organized by the local Polish government, even if encouraged by the Germans (which in all likelihood took place). I'd ask that you please stop misrepresenting my words and accusing me of bad faith, as truth-telling is not the same thing as absolving the Germans of guilt, these are not mutual exclusivities. I'm not sure what the purpose of your comments regarding my familiarity with the Holocaust is, as I have an extensive background in Holocaust research in addition to both sides of my family having been exterminated. Again, please stop with your assumptions and accusations. 202.143.111.212 (talk) 01:46, 6 June 2020 (UTC)


 * At least that's finally cleared up. Had you came to the discussion more civilly in the beginning, instead of casting aspersions of Holocaust Denial—which this Wiki-page is the direct opposite of and you know it—a more directed and intellectual discussion could have occurred around the content. Read how you started this Discussion thread and the edits again to get a truer perspective. If your background is all that extensive you would know that this is a hotly contested arena and that tweaks to the wording and edits more along the lines that occurred in the end were in order and that "Holocaust Denial" was inappropriate and offensive. That's not a civil beginning in any way and was instead LOADED with assumptions and accusations. By the way, the epitome of "bad faith" editing is calling out content as Holocaust denial in an article about the Holocaust itself. You should have approached this more along the lines, "there is an inaccuracy in the text, as at Jedwabne, scholars now contend that the majority, if not all of the violence was carried out by local Poles." But nope -- straight to Holocaust Denial you went. --Obenritter (talk) 02:13, 6 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't know it, in fact this is famously not the case. Seeing as it targets Jews and not German-Americans, I am well acquainted with Holocaust denial, and what was written prior to the edit is exactly that, textbook Polish nationalist Holocaust denial. I don't know who was responsible for it, but saying that the Einsatzgruppen carried out the massacres is one of the most ubiquitous ways that nationalists avoid cognitive dissonance by whitewashing the history. I also saw what you wrote on Piotrus' talk page, and perhaps you both should know that you don't engender goodwill when any time a Jew revises the rampant revisionism and Holocaust denial on Wikipedia that has been written about before, they're accused of being sock-puppets or part of a coordinated conspiracy against you. The truth is as simple as many people seeing these pages and the problems on them and naturally taking issue with it, and the more you react with condescension, obstinacy, and conspiracy theorizing, the more scrutiny these pages face (including the Wikipedia rules pages in order to see if any action can be taken). I am not an experienced editor, I am not nor have I ever been an editor on here, nor do I have the faintest interest in being one. You can believe me or not, I'm already certain which one you'll choose and that's the problem in and of itself, that knee-jerk assumption of bad faith (which itself is against Wikipedia rules for this reason). The pages concerning the Holocaust are closely policed in such a way as to ensure an implicitly biased viewpoint that precludes, stigmatizes, and demonizes Jewish input as a conspiracy against Wikipedia and the editors. The site is worse off for it. I had no intentions other than setting the record straight as it is even reflected on other pages because what was on here will always be considered Holocaust denial. It's your own blind spot if you refuse to understand that and respond with lecturing on something you neither understand nor are qualified to. I already said everything I had to say, take care.-- 202.143.111.212 (talk) 02:39, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Stalking perhaps? Nobody said you were involved in a conspiracy against either one of us. Following editors around makes it appear as though you are looking for provocation. Back to the point, nothing about this page is reeking of Holocaust denial and one's ethnicity has nothing to do with objectivity on this matter. This page and many like it have been carefully edited to reflect the scale of the European tragedy known as the Shoah. The fact that you want to take a single point within an exhaustive page and denigrate the quality work that has went into it does not reflect positively on your approach. Assuming people are unqualified to tackle this subject simply because of their ethnicity, which is what you've implied, is troubling as well. For the atrocities committed against your family, I hope that you can find some peace in knowing that plenty of people have a profound and deep concern with ensuring that this terrible history remains truthful, accurate, and at the forefront so as never to be repeated. Read this page in its entirety and you should recognize that the "spirit" of the content is indicative of a widespread European culpability, and not an effort to protect or obscure any national histories. Good faith should be obvious to this end and it should be clear that this Wikipedia page is not constructed to "target Jews" in any way. Since you cannot see this, it makes me believe you have not read the page in its entirety or with an open mind. Perhaps as a generational victim, you cannot be as objective as you'd like. I hope and pray you find peace. Nevertheless, any and all revisionism that risks removing responsibility for the Holocaust deserves scrutiny, but not necessarily under the immediate auspices of Holocaust denial. It could be outdated or incomplete information. It can also be inaccurate. We can correct it without the vitriol and accusations, however. Please be cautious in casting perhaps one of the most serious accusations possible against the content within such pages as it automatically assumes "bad faith" of the worst kind upon the contributors. Taking a page from your book, that's all I have to say.--Obenritter (talk) 03:16, 6 June 2020 (UTC)


 * It took a while, but I found the location of the edit [|here] on lines 298/294, it's from five years ago. Five years this was on here. Prior to that the information had been correct, and upon looking at that user's page it seems they were banned for antisemitism, Holocaust denial, and Holocaust distortion in the service of a nationalist narrative. It would seem that my perceptions about antisemitism and its manifestations were indeed correct. Please keep this in mind the next time you wonder if one could be too close to the particularities of their own life experience and history to be able to speak about it with authority. I have no reason to think you were aware of what was written, but you should have acknowledged the problem when it was brought to your attention and you failed to do so. For millions of people this is not a hobby or a passing interest, but something that hangs over our heads every day, and every time we see the denial, distortion, and subsequent gaslighting when it's called out for what it is, it's like a knife in the gut. It doesn't seem you were involved in this, so I apologize if my anger was misdirected at you, but my objection to what was written was clearly well-justified. I can't police these pages as I have neither the time nor mental capacity to handle the upset. It falls upon those users who do put in the time, perhaps even from the benefit of emotional distance. Know that people do indeed read these pages, and objection to the work of an established old guard of editors isn't some nefarious plot against anyone on here or this site itself. The simplest answer is often the truth. Be well.--202.143.111.214 (talk) 06:38, 6 June 2020 (UTC)


 * "The pogroms, particularly Jedwabne, were self-organized by the local Polish government" - seriously? It's impressive the "local Polish government" existed under the occupation and was able to organize anything in the midst of an invasion. What source do you have for this claim, btw? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  08:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC)


 * It was organized by the mayor Marian Karolak along with the collaborationist town council and police force. It's in every source on the topic that I know of; Bikont, Ignatiew, Gross, Crago in the Encyclopedia of Camps and Ghettos, etc. It's explained and cited on the WP page for the pogrom(s) as well.--185.225.28.94 (talk) 00:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC) sock puppet of globally banned user


 * But was it a formal decision by the city council? That a mayor participated in it and even was one of the ring leaders doesn't make it an "official act by the municipal authorities". Btw, Karolak was a volksdeutsche. . --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:37, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Other countries
The introduction does not summarize correctly, so it should be removed. Two examples:

thousands of Greek and Yugoslavian Jews were deported from the Bulgarian-occupied territories
'deported' or 'deported and murdered'?
 * Later explained 'perished'. You do not 'perish' in Treblinka, you are murdered in a gas chamber.

Romania

 * 'The Romanian regime of Ion Antonescu actively persecuted Jews, and while they were inefficient, 120,000 or more Jews were killed.'
 * Romania started the Holocaust in 1941 paralelly to German Eisatztruppen but stopped to kill. Later nothing about the 'inefficiency'.

Xx236 (talk) 11:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, a lot of states share some degree of responsibility for the Holocaust (including even USSR and USA who fought against Nazi), and this is an undeniable fact. My very best wishes (talk) 17:04, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * This article should describe the responsibility. If it does not do it correctly, it should be perhaps removed. Complexity of the subject does not make errors acceptable.Xx236 (talk) 12:14, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Collaboration with the Axis Powers
The page defines collaboration as an unequal relationship, master-slave. Here 'collaboration' describes both 'Collaboration with the Axis Powers' and alliance with Nazi Germany. The general meaning is used sometimes as an insult 'you collaborator' rather than a precize Wikipedia term. Xx236 (talk) 06:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Deportation
Deportation is an euphemism, when it describes mass killing. I am not sure if every reader understands the euphemism.Xx236 (talk) 06:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Recent edits re: state actors
I believe that the editing disagreement was about the addition of the table titled "Holocaust victims of Nazi Germany and its allies" to the top of the section "Responsibility_for_the_Holocaust#Involved". This appears to be relevant information, but the context seems to be lacking. The section itself discusses multiple countries that are not mentioned in the table, so perhaps there's a way to integrate this material better. Note: I was pinged on my talk page, but I also watch this page and had some questions. -- K.e.coffman (talk) 02:21, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I share those concerns, and am also concerned about the use of flags which gives undue prominence to the table. I'm also concerned about the precision given in the percentages (out to hundredths of a percent). HOw are these figured? Given that the number of victims isn't precisely known, I'm afraid that the precision in these figures gives the impression of too much precision that isn't really possible. And another concern is the use of "percentages" - I can easily see that someone will start saying that "Wikipedia says that Germany is responsible for 94.2% of the Holocaust" ... which is ... wrong. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:25, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree completely that the role of Axis countries (which were certainly not extensions of Germany) should not be understated but imo the table does exactly that. For example it suggests that the Hungarian state had no responsibility for deportation/deaths after March 1944. I don't think reliable sources support that pov. In addition not just Romania but arguably Slovakia also implemented most or all of the "steps".
 * A more problematic issue is that I don't think RS support the attribution of all Holocaust deaths to one specific state actor. In many cases responsibility could be disputed and/or might fall to multiple parties including non state actors. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:36, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * For those of you who commented, I must confess agreement, which is why I reverted it initially -- after which the editor added it back. This was a good faith edit poorly executed and without considering the myriad contents of the page in the aggregate. Since I do not wish to appear to be engaged in an edit war, it would be more suitable for one of you to take necessary actions on this content. --Obenritter (talk) 19:48, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello. I am the one who added that table. I concede to its reversion now, after reading all of the above. However, I would like to say a few things.
 * I got those numbers by simply summing the values in the source table. That source not only details the victims within each country (p. 20) but also their status relative to Germany (pp. 260-261). I thus found it a waste to not use this source. The lump sum - to which those shares are calculated - turned out to be 6,212,215. I realize no source may ever truly be right about the full account, but so long as it is in the 6 million ballpark, I figure it is acceptable.
 * The state responsibility, I maintain, can only truly be divided between Germany and its 5 sovereign allies. These had and they demonstrated the power to say "no" to German deportation demands. Not so the clients/puppets. Yes, Slovakia and Croatia may have come up with means, they may be liable for the details of the Holocaust in their respective lands, but the root was not with them. If the ends ultimately came down to accepting or refusing Nazi demands, these two and others could only comply with the former. Romania, pre-occ Hungary, Bulgaria, pre-occ Italy and Finland had real control over the ends. They could refuse outright (Romania, Finland, Italy) or "close the tap" (Bulgaria) after deporting some. These 5 had real control at the source, the others did not. Thus, broadly speaking, Germany did cause 94% of the Holocaust. Transylvania1916 (talk) 15:25, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That's WP:OR - no reliable source says that "Germany caused 94% of the Holocaust" nor divides up the responsiblity in such numbers as given in the table. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:14, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Since when is doing basic math with RS OR? Transylvania1916 (talk) 16:17, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Since it presents the information in a way that no other RS presents it. I agree with the others about the table. Levivich (talk) 18:40, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That's dumb. If the RS gives two numbers, and I present one as a share of the other, I'm not adding anything original. It's like the usual rewording we do in order to make edits in the first place, but with numbers instead of words. Math with the data given by the RS ain't OR, that's just stupid. Transylvania1916 (talk) 19:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * "The RS gives two numbers, and I present one as a share of the other" isn't what that table did. Levivich (talk) 21:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello. I made a new section below and nobody replied. Not sure if anyone saw or not. Transylvania1916 (talk) 07:02, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

New findings
I'm quite glad this section is still here. I found a new RS which states things pretty clearly. It's a Cambridge University Press source. I will give the Google Books link to the page, but just in case you don't have access to that particular page, I will also quote it: "The number of Jews whose deaths were caused by representatives of countries other than Germany was relatively limited, although not negligible: at least 300,000 (5%) of the total. Romanian forces destroyed about 250,000". In other words, we could still remake that table, although it would be different: it would only include Jews that were killed (rather than "deported and/or killed", like the former one), and it would only have 2 countries: Germany and Romania, with a general "Other" row for the remaining 50,000. Keep in mind that we are not talking about the ethnicity of the perpetrator here, but about sovereign governments. I still believe firmly that such a table would be a valuable addition, we need to address state responsibility for the killings as well. Transylvania1916 (talk) 14:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Sooo... Can I add this or not? They say "take it to the talk page" but nobody is talking... Transylvania1916 (talk) 07:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't much like the word "negligible" in there; it's highly subjective. We don't need to characterize the contents of the table or tell people what the table shows; and I don't think it be in the article before Hitler. Perhaps it should be down below where we already talk about other states. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 15:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It came with the RS, feel free to delete it. I also don't really object to placing the table further down in the section; I simply operated on the assumption that countries outrank individuals. Transylvania1916 (talk) 15:26, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm still not sure we need the tiny table when a single sentence, as an intro to the "Other states" section, would suffice. "Most Jewish deaths (roughly 95%) were caused by Germans and their representatives; Romanian forces were responsible for some 4%, and other states the remainder." Or something like that. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 15:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Personal choice I guess. I prefer tables because I find them more expressive than plain text. But I concede that it may be overkill in this case. Transylvania1916 (talk) 16:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The manner in which these flags are presented not only obfuscates the level of participation (willing and unwilling) by members of the participating countries, it does not line up with the aggregate information cited throughout the text. It's like somebody is trying to whitewash the other countries, when the rest of the research herein makes it clear they were highly culpable. It is not acceptable and why it has been reverted, again. These are not "new findings" but a reinterpretation and only one historian at that. Worse, the many thousands of Jews freely handed over by occupied nations (France or the Netherlands for instance) cannot and will not ever exonerate them from responsibility.--Obenritter (talk) 18:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * ... And again, I seem to be talking to the walls. The table wasn't about nations, it was about states. Poland - as a state - did not exist during the Holocaust. Neither did the Baltics. Slovakia deported, yes, but left the actual killing to the Germans. As did Bulgaria. This is what that table was: states that killed. Have I failed to make myself clear? Transylvania1916 (talk) 19:24, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure consensus is against you on this, just as it was when you first started posting that data. Not sure what your point ever was entirely, but it only makes it appear as though you want everything to focus on the Germans and not all the other participating parties (no matter the guise). The article focuses on "responsibility", which was reflected by the actions and measures towards Jews before—which facilitated its perpetration—and during the Holocaust. What you fail to understand here is that the Nazis may have been the driver, but the majority of scholars have come to see the tacit anti-Semitism prevalent across Europe as one of its facilitation mechanisms. Read the article in its entirety and stop just cherry-picking some segment you read and applying it wholeheartedly. Concerning "making yourself clear"-- the only thing "clear" here is your failure to understand the article's overarching contents. --Obenritter (talk) 10:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Again: talking to the walls. It's not the Nazis being the "driver", it's the Nazis doing the killing. It was about which states did the actual killing. It's a very simple concept, I don't know why I have to keep repeating myself. Transylvania1916 (talk) 07:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with Obenritter that this chart does not belong - it's an oversimplification of things and lends undue weight to one aspect of the responsibility issue. Ealdgyth (talk) 11:37, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Undue weight to killing? Transylvania1916 (talk) 21:08, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The whole article is about killing. The numbers are already all over the article. A table saying "look, the Nazis did most of it" adds little, and is reductive of the collaboration by other states, relatively small as it may be. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 22:19, 15 April 2023 (UTC)