Talk:Silesia/Archive 7

Back to reversion war. Page is protected again. Earlier talk archived. Kosebamse 11:55, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

State of the debate (list of issues)
I think this topic holds the record for "most archives of a talk page". Isn't there any area of argeement? Please, someone just list all the disputed points. Then we can go through them one by one. I can help, if people want me to. --Uncle Ed 18:28, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * (That was fast! It only took 14 days for an answer to appear to my question... ;-) --Uncle Ed 16:22, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

In my opinion there are 2 main areas of the dispute: the intro paragraph and the history section.
 * (1) Should this article and the introduction paragraph be focused on modern or historical Silesia


 * (2) The boundaries of Silesia: is Silesia part of Poland and Czechia only, or Germany too.
 * (2a) Is the Goerlitz area part of Silesia or part of historical Lusatia and Saxony now
 * (2b) Are the historcial duchies of Siewierz, Oswiecim, Zator and Zywiec part of Silesia or not. This is imprortant because they were part of Poland since the 15th century
 * (2c) Is the Czech Silesia: Ostrava/Opava/Karniow/CeskyTesin area part of Silesia?
 * (2d) Is the Klodzko area part of Silesia?


 * (3) Were the ties of Silesia with Poland, Czechia, Austria, Germany decreasing/increasing? What are these ties (political, eclessiastical, economic, ethnic, cultural)?
 * (3a) What was the ethnic majority of Silesia in various times (prevailing ethnic ties)?
 * (3b) What were the prevailing political belonging of Silesia in various historical periods?
 * (3c) What were the prevailing eclessiatical (also educational/religious) ties?
 * (3d) What were the prevailing economic ties of Silesia?
 * (3e) What were the prevailing cultural ties of Silesia?


 * (4) Should the Silesian name (&#346;lunsk, &#346;lonsk) be also mentioned?

I think that everybody should answer these questions before we can proceed. CC, 19:37, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)

The discussion is held in are also below
 * Talk:Silesia/archive6

Silesia: other encyclopedias
Nico, how do you dare to erase the definitions I pasted here, and insert olny those you like? How do toy dare -- CC, 21:34, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I haven't erased anything. Why are you lying? Nico 21:35, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

reinsert section deleted by CC

The article should not be totally different from that of other encyclopedias.

This is the introduction of the Silesia article at http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/s/silesia.asp

Silesia, Czech Slezsko, Ger. Schlesien, Pol. S´la?sk, region of E central Europe, extending along both banks of the Oder River and bounded in the south by the mountain ranges of the Sudetes?particularly the Krkonos e (Ger. Riesengebirge )?and the W Carpathians. Politically, almost all of Silesia is divided between Poland and the Czech Republic. The Polish portion comprises most of the former Prussian provinces of Upper Silesia and Lower Silesia, both of which were transferred to Polish administration at the Potsdam Conference of 1945; the Polish portion also includes those parts of Upper Silesia that were ceded by Germany to Poland after World War I and part of the former Austrian principality of Teschen. A second, much smaller part of Silesia belonged to Czechoslovakia since 1918, and became part of the Czech Republic with the dissolution of Czechoslovakia in 1993.

And here is another article (Catholic Encyclopedia): http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13790b.htm

And the Britannica: http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article?eu=403975

Historic region, east-central Europe. It now lies mainly in southwestern Poland, with parts in Germany and the Czech Republic. [...] -- Nico

Feel free to find more articles. Nico 15:14, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Two proposals of the intro section
Now we have 2 proposals of intro about Silesia, one supported by John, Nico and Szopen, the other by Wik and CC

History of the current introduction
See Talk:Silesia/History of introduction

Debate
How about:


 * Silesia (Polish &#346;l&#261;sk, German Schlesien, Czech Slezsko) is an historical region in east-central Europe, located along the upper and middle Oder/Odra River, in what is now southwestern Poland and the northeastern Czech Republic. The historical region belonged to Poland in the middle ages. Ties with Poland gradually decreased in the later Middle Ages, and the province was a Habsburg domain from the 16th to the 18th century. In 1742 most of Silesia was seized by Frederick the Great of Prussia in the War of the Austrian Succession. This part of Silesia composed the Prussian provinces Upper- and Lower Silesia until 1945. After World War II most of Silesia was annexed by Poland, and the German population was expelled. The remainder of Silesia remained under Austrian control, and today forms part of the Czech Republic.  In the Polish dialect spoken in Silesia, the region is also known as &#346;lonsk or &#346;lunsk.

Does anyone have any problems with this? john 08:35, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

This seems fine to me, although I think also the German part (the Görlitz area) of the region should be mentioned (and with parts in Germany and the Czech Republic), as the Britannica does. -- Nico 08:47, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Silesia (Polish &#346;l&#261;sk, German Schlesien, Czech Slezsko) is an historical region in east-central Europe, located along the upper and middle Oder/Odra River, in what is now southwestern Poland and with parts in Germany and the northeastern Czech Republic. Silesia belonged to Poland in the middle ages. Ties with Poland gradually decreased in the later Middle Ages, and the province was a Habsburg domain from the 16th to the 18th century. In 1742 most of Silesia was seized by Frederick the Great of Prussia in the War of the Austrian Succession. This part of Silesia composed the Prussian provinces Upper- and Lower Silesia until 1945. After World War II most of Silesia was annexed by Poland, and the German population was expelled. The remainder of Silesia remained under Austrian control, and today forms part of the Czech Republic.  In the Polish dialect spoken in Silesia, the region is also known as &#346;lonsk or &#346;lunsk.

Not that I don't love arguing about this stuff, but couldn't everyone try to take a look at the revised opening paragraph presented above, and present an opinion on it? john 09:17, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Okay, how long do we have to wait to see if people object to the suggested new version? I think all of the folks who've been involved in the debate have made some change to this page in the last 24 hours or so, which suggests they've seen it, and none has commented, other than Nico. So, is this good? Would this meet everyone's objections. One would note that it has the virtue of not mentioning the very disputed ethnic composition of Silesia in the pre-1945 period, and that it at no point calls Silesia a part of Germany (as opposed to Prussia), while at the same time not denying any German claims. It also managed to be more specific than the previous version in other ways, mentioning the war of the Austrian Succession (Silesia's most famous moment on the world scene, surely) and the expulsion of the Germans after 1945. So, any problems? The language, can, of course, be modified if people object to any of the statements made. But this page is getting to be ridiculous, with numerous people checking in to continue fruitless historical arguments, and nobody actually commenting on what we're supposed to be doing, which is writing an encyclopedia article. If nobody has any objections in the next day or so, can we get someone to unprotect the page and then implement these suggested changes? john 09:22, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I have feeling that "ties with Poland decreased in Later middle ages" should be changed into "ties with Poland decreased over time". Ties with Poland were present even in XIX century. Also, don't youw ant to mention that Germans were majority in most of Silesia pre-1945? Also, not all German population was expelled in 1945/6- most of them.Som estay until 60s, some until today (although large part of today's 100.000 strong German minority is in fact descendants of those, who in 1945 were positively verified as Poles and only later found their Germannes anewszopen

Newest revision, incorporating Szopen's suggestions:


 * Silesia (Polish &#346;l&#261;sk, German Schlesien, Czech Slezsko) is an historical region in east-central Europe, located along the upper and middle Oder/Odra River, in what is now southwestern Poland and with parts in Germany and the northeastern Czech Republic. Silesia belonged to Poland in the middle ages. Ties with Poland gradually decreased over time, and the province was a Habsburg domain from the 16th to the 18th century. In 1742 most of Silesia was seized by Frederick the Great of Prussia in the War of the Austrian Succession. This part of Silesia composed the Prussian provinces Upper- and Lower Silesia until 1945. After World War II nearly all of Prussian Silesia was annexed by Poland, and most of the German population (which had formed a majority prior to the war) was expelled. The remainder of Silesia remained under Austrian control, and today forms part of the Czech Republic.  In the Polish dialect spoken in Silesia, the region is also known as &#346;lonsk or &#346;lunsk.

john 03:58, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Maybe we should remove "which had formed a majority prior to the war" and "The remainder of Silesia remained under Austrian control", and describe that in the history section instead? Nico 21:30, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Silesia (Polish &#346;l&#261;sk, German Schlesien, Czech Slezsko) is an historical region in east-central Europe, located along the upper and middle Oder/Odra River, in what is now southwestern Poland and with parts in Germany and the northeastern Czech Republic. Silesia belonged to Poland in the middle ages. Ties with Poland gradually decreased over time, and the province was a Habsburg domain from the 16th to the 18th century. In 1742 most of Silesia was seized by Frederick the Great of Prussia in the War of the Austrian Succession. This part of Silesia composed the Prussian provinces Upper- and Lower Silesia until 1945. After World War II nearly all of Prussian Silesia was annexed by Poland, and most of the German population was expelled.  In the Polish dialect spoken in Silesia, the region is also known as &#346;lonsk or &#346;lunsk.

Incorporating bohemian crown etc.

 Silesia (Polish S´la?sk, German Schlesien, Czech Slezsko) is an historical region in east-central Europe, located along the upper and middle Oder/Odra River, in what is now southwestern Poland and with parts in Germany and the northeastern Czech Republic. Silesia belonged to Poland in the middle ages. Ties with Poland gradually decreased over time, and the province became a possession of the Bohemian crown, and thus part of the Holy Roman Empire, in 1335, and passed to the Austrian Habsburgs in 1526. In 1742 most of Silesia was seized by Frederick the Great of Prussia in the War of the Austrian Succession. This part of Silesia composed the Prussian provinces Upper- and Lower Silesia until 1945. After World War II nearly all of Prussian Silesia was annexed by Poland, and most of the German population was expelled. In the Polish dialect spoken in Silesia, the region is also known as S´lonsk or S´lunsk. The Polish portion of Silesia, which forms the bulk of the historic region, is now divided into the voivodships of Lower Silesian Voivodship (capital: Wroclaw), Opole Voivodship (capital: Opole), and Silesian Voivodship (capital: Katowice). The latter two are sometimes called Upper Silesia. The small portion in the Czech Republic is joined with Moravia to form the Moravian-Silesian Region of that country, while the Görlitz area now is a part of the German state of Saxony. '''

False statements in the John-Nico-Szopen version
Silesia (Polish &#346;l&#261;sk, German Schlesien, Czech Slezsko) - BIASED title


 * the first line should also mention the region name in the Silesian language: &#346;lonsk, &#346;lunsk -- CC 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * I am indifferent on this issue.john 21:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * When we not list the "Silesian" names first, it is because they are totally unknown, and because they are not mentioned at all in any other encyclopedia, e.g. Britannica or Encyclopedia.com. Other encyclopedias mention the English, the German, the Polish and sometimes the Czech name. I've already told you this, Grzes. Look at the Gdansk article! 12 names (Sic!) are mentioned in the introduction. It's idiotic, but at least they are not mentioned in the first sentence, as you demand. Slonsk and Slunsk are mentioned in the current version of the intro. -- Nico 22:44, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * I think this is because these on-line encyclopedias were written/published before the 2002 national census, when the Silesians could declare their language and nationality for the first time ever. 170,000 people in Silesia declared Silesian nationality and 70,000 of them declared the Silesian as the first language (National census of 2002). In my opinion Wikipedia's goal is to be better than other outdated encyclopedias. I see no reason to exclude the Silesian people and the Silesian language from the Silesia article. -- CC, 07:53, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * 70,000 out of 10 Million people? Why should a dialect version used by 70 000 people be listed before the Polish name used by almost 10 Million Silesians and 38 Million Poles, and the German name Schlesien used by about 125 Million German-speaking people and about 20 Million Scandinavians etc, totally almost 150 Million people? Nico 18:34, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

'' is an historical region in east-central Europe, located along the upper and middle Oder/Odra River, in what is now southwestern Poland and with parts in Germany and the northeastern Czech Republic. '' - FALSE and offending statement


 * Silesia is not olny historical but also a geographical and ethnographical region. Silesia lies in Poland and Czech Rep. and not in Germany (the goerlitz portion of Lusatia was only temporarily joined to Silesian province). Silesia lies IN Poland and Czechia, and not WHAT IS NOW - offending words. -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Since Silesia is a historic region, which has not always been part of Poland and the Czech Republic, it makes sense to say what is now. Especially since Polish borders have changed so much... john 21:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Silesia was always a divided region. It was divided between Poland and Czechia(Bohemia) in the middle ages and in modern times (boundaries changing). After 1742 it was divided between Prusssia, Czechia and Poland, after WWI it was divided between Germany, Poland and Czechoslovakia, after WWII it was divided between Poland and Czechoslovakia, and now it is divided between Poland and the Czech Republic. I see no reason why why this article should concentrate on what Silesia WAS in Prussian times. This is ridiculous. Anyway the words what is now are bery offensive, and not used by any other reliable sources. -- CC, 08:00, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

'' Silesia belonged to Poland in the middle ages. '' - FALSE statement


 * Silesia belonged to Poland in Middle Ages and in modern Times and it belongs now. Portions of Silesia belonged to Poland all the time. -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * What portions of it belonged to Poland all the time? It belonged to it in the middle ages.  By the early modern period, connections to Poland were quite limited.  A small part of Silesia returned to Poland in 1920, and the rest in 1945.  We already noted that it is currently part of Poland, largely, so this is obviously not saying it is not part of Poland now. john 21:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Silesia was divided into several (up to 17) duchies under Polish Piast dukes (upto 1675) with Czech crown fedal overlordship (from 13/14 century), so this time can be called dual Polish-Czech rule. Various Polish Piast dukes were appointed to be governors-general for all of Czech-Silesia. Various Polish kings and dukes were kings of Bohemia, governors-general of Silesia, and dukes in partuicular duchies. Duchies of Siewierz, Oswiecim and Zator were part of the Polish crown from 15th century. Duchies of Oswiecim and Zator were part of the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria - the Polish part of the Habsburg Austrian Empire.

Ties with Poland gradually decreased over time, - FALSE statement


 * Silesia had many ties to Poland (political, economical, eclessiastical, ethnic and cultural) and it is not true they were decreasing. It is true the ties were decreasing in some times, increasing on other times. -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Hmm...so ties with Poland were the same in the 12th century as they were in the 19th? that's nonsense. john 21:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Ties were changing: increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing. The statement that they were only decreasing is obviously false. I am asking now: WHAT TIES to Poland were decreasing? Just explain it. -- CC 08:15, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Political, cultural and ethnic ties. In 1905 Silesia had been German and German-speaking for centuries, and 3/4 of the population were German. The remainder of 1/4 were Czechs, Poles etc. Nico 19:35, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

and the province was a Habsburg domain from the 16th to the 18th century. - FALSE statement


 * Although it is true that most of Silesia belonged to the Habsburs, it fails  to say about the Czech Kingdom. Significant portion of Silesia belonged to POland. -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * The Czech kingdom has been added to a trial version above, I believe. That's fine with me.  None of Silesia remained part of Poland after 1335, though, except in the Polish ecclesiastical province.


 * You are wrong. Auschwitz, Zator were seized in XV century and belonged to Poland up to partitions. Also, in times Polish kings with Polish everything administrated vast areas of Silesia (in XV-XVI entury) szopen

After 1st partition of Poland 1772, the duchies of Oswiecim and Zator fell to the Habsburgs, and were part of the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria - the Polish part of the Habsburg Empire. the Polish kingdom ceased to exist, but Poland stayed there under another political name. -- CC, 08:27, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

In 1742 most of Silesia was seized by Frederick the Great of Prussia in the War of the Austrian Succession. - FALSE statement


 * Silesia was seized in the three Silesian wars - this statement is misleading. -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * It certainly was not. Frederick was given the whole of Silesia (except for Austrian Silesia, which he never got) by Maria Theresia after the first war ended in 1742.  She tried to recover it in two further wars, but was not successful.  (Actually, it's possibly he won somewhat more territory in the 2nd Silesian War, but the conquest was definitely complete by 1745. john 21:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I can agree that large portion of Silesia was seized in the 1st Silesia War -- CC, 08:28, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

''This part of Silesia composed the Prussian provinces Upper- and Lower Silesia until 1945. '' - FALSE statement


 * this part of Silesia was called the Silesian province until WWI. After WWI it was divided into the provinces of Lower Silesia and Upper Silesia. portions of both provinces were ceded to Poland and Czechoslovakia. -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * None of it was ceded to Czechoslovakia, which was formed entirely out of Austro-Hungarian territory. Part of Upper Silesia was ceded to Poland.  I was not aware that any of Lower Silesia was.  In any event, this is a minor issue. john 21:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * You are wrong - the Hulczin/Hlucin area of Upper Silesia belonged to Prussia-Germany and in 1921 was ceded to Czechoslovakia. -- CC, 08:30, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

''After World War II nearly all of Prussian Silesia was annexed by Poland, and most of the German population (which had formed a majority prior to the war) was expelled. '' - FALSE and BIASED statement


 * It is false to say about the German majority, which cannot be proved at any time. Although before WWII there was a German majority in the German portion of Silesia, there was a Polish majority in the whole region. Additionaly it very biased to ignore Poles and Jews expelled and murdered ny the Nazis during WWII -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * The German census of 1905 certainly says there was a German majority. And we are not talking about things that happened during WWII - we specifically say the Germans were a majority before the war (as you previously demanded). john


 * Actually I've earlier proposed not mentioning the expulsions of the Germans in the introduction, and I still have no problems with moving this to the history section. It was szopen who proposed to mention this. Nico 22:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * There was no German census for the whole region, there was only census for the German portion of Silesia. Ouside the German Silesia was also the Polish and Czech Silesia under Austrian rule with more that 1 million population -- CC, 08:32, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

There was no nationality statistics in the census for the German Silesia, there was only the language statistics. There was probably a German speaking majority in the German portion of Silesia.

This number of Germans speakers includes: There were also significant groups of Poles, Czechs and Slavs(Silesians) who could not speak German and were classified so. The eclessiastical statistics of the German portion of Silesia show the Catholic majority, and most of the historians agree that most of them (but not all) were indeed the German speaking Slavs (Poles, Czechs and Silesian) - many of them were bilingual. We have no strict and reliable data for nationality and ethnic matters in the German portion of Silesia, but if you add the Austrian-Polish-Czech portion it is clear there were no German majority in Silesia. -- CC, 08:40, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * German speaking Germans
 * German speaking Poles
 * German speaking Czechs
 * German speaking Silesians
 * German speaking Jews

The remainder of Silesia remained under Austrian control, and today forms part of the Czech Republic. - FALSE statement


 * There were portions of Silesia outside the Prussian controll which belonged to Poland and Bohemia (in personal union with Habsburgs Austrian ). The Habsbug part of Silesia was called the Czech/Bohemian Silesia long into the 19th century. In 1920 it was divided between Poland and Czechoslovakia. Additionally Czechoslovakia took part of the German Silesia. -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * None of it belonged to Poland. In any event, it was certainly called Austrian (as opposed to Prussian) Silesia.  And Czechoslovakia did not take any of German Silesia.   john


 * As said before Duchies of Oswiecim, Zator and Siewierz were parts of Poland, and later the Polish province of Austria. The name of Czech Silesia was officialy used until 1849, and then renamed the Austrian Silesia. The Czech-Austrian Silesia of the 19th century is NOT equal to the modern Czech Silesia --CC, 08:44, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

In the Polish dialect spoken in Silesia, the region is also known as &#346;lonsk or &#346;lunsk. - FALSE statement


 * In standard Polish and Polish dialects in Silesia the name of the province is always &#346;l&#261;sk. These names nentioned here: &#346;lonsk and &#346;lunsk are the names of the region in the Silesian language, which is constanly ignored and vandalised by Nico. -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Again, I absolutely don't care about these Silesian language/dialect issues. john 21:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * No one except Silesian consider it separate language. In fact linguists are saying that some old-Polish features are better preserved in "Silesian" than in standard Polish.szopen


 * 170,000 people in Silesia declared Silesian nationality and 70,000 of them declared the Silesian as the first language (National census of 2002). The Silesians do have the status of etnic minority in Poland, their situation is much better in the Czech Republic where they have the higher status of national minority and their language is recognized. In the Nazi Germany and in Communist Poland and Czechoslovakia it was forbidden to declare to be a Silesian. After 1990 we live in free countries, so the Silesian people and the Silesian language is gaining acceptance and recongition. Wikipedia should ceirtainly contain modern and up-to-date information -- CC, 08:52, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * While Silesian may be separate nation, this does not mean Silesian is separate language. At least not in opinion of linguists. Kashubian is separate language, but SIlesian is no more language than Poznanian. Since you are from Poznan you know what i'm talking about - when i first heard native posnanians from Wilda talking in their jargon i was unable to understand them, and was even seriously offended when one of the girls called me "szczun" szopen


 * How do you know that Kashubian is a separate language. In most of the publications in Communist Poland Kashubian was called a Pomeranian dialect of Polish, 60 years ago some people claimed that the Ruthenians in eastern Poland also speak just dialects of Polish language. Today most of the people accept the Ukrainian, Belarussian, Kashubian and Silesian are separate languages. Opinions of linguists are divided. Some linguists say that Slovak can be classified as a southern dialect of Polish. -- CC, 09:34, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

To summarize: ALL statements in the Nico version are FALSE and should be removed -- CC, 13:31, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * It's not a Nico version. it was my version (editing a compromise version worked out by Szopen and Nico).  And your definition of false is highly subjective. john 21:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * I do not care who is the original author. I am discussing with the wrong opinions, not with the people. No matter who is the author/co-author/consultant/acceptor/supporter or anything else position wrong statements remain wrong statements -- CC, 08:16, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Silesia intro proposal by Wik and CC
This is the current version of the intro, based on earlier discussions, introducing all important and non-controvercial facts, accepted at least by Wik and cc.



Silesia (Silesian: &#346;lonsk, &#346;lunsk, Polish: &#346;l&#261;sk, German: Schlesien, Czech: Slezsko) is a historical and geographical region with over 10 million population in southwestern Poland and the northeastern Czech Republic, located along the upper and middle Oder/Odra river and along the Sudeten mountains. Upper Silesia is divided into 2 Polish provinces, Silesian Voivodship (capital Katowice) and Opole Voivodship (capital Opole), and one Czech province, the Silesian-Moravian Region (capital Ostrava). Lower Silesia is divided into 2 Polish provinces, Lower Silesian Voivodship (capital Wroclaw) and partly Lubusz Voivodship (capital Zielona Gora).

Because of its rich history the region has produced a unique cultural mix based on the local Silesian elements with strong Polish, Czech and German influences. Today the region is inhabited by Poles, Silesians, Germans, Czechs and Moravians. History of Silesia is connected with history of the four nations and countries: Poland, Bohemia and Germany.

In the middle ages Silesia was an object of Polish-Czech rivalry but also with many ethnic Germans settling here. It was a province of the Bohemian Kingdom from 1348 to 1742, although a small portion became Polish in 1443. In 1742-1763 most of Silesia was seized by Prussia in the Silesian Wars, and organized into the Prussian provinces Upper and Lower Silesia until 1945. After World War I half of Upper Silesia, and after WWII most of Silesia was ceded to Poland. During WWII all of Silesia was part of Nazi Germany and the Germans murdered or expelled most Poles and Jews (see concentration camps, Auschwitz-Birkenau, Gross-Rosen); after WWII most of the Germans were expelled from Poland and Czechoslovakia (Expulsion of the Germans).


 * I would agree to that. --Wik 20:47, Nov 28, 2003 (UTC)


 * We have also to convince others, and wait a while for the comments and maybe some improvements CC, 20:53, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Is it OK to say History of Silesia is connected with history of the four nations and countries: Poland, Czechia(Bohemia), Germany and Austria. CC, 20:54, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Lubusz voivodship is not currently considered part of Silesia, but an entity on its own. There is a reason why people were demonstrating for one Lubuskie voivodship and screaming we are not Poznaniaks, but Lubuszans.
 * Second, I don't think that intro is good. Tired of explaining why, though.
 * Third, FIVE nations: Hungary was involved (temporarily) in SIlesia too (Mathias COrvinus). Or SIX if countinng Moravia. Or SEVEN if counting PRUSSIA (after all, if separately Austria and Germany, then why not split Germany later. Mentioning Austria and Germany in pre-XIX century context is IMHO absurd) szopen

Germany and Austria - OK, I have returned to the version agreed by my and Wik.

Three books in my possession show maps and texts claiming that south portion of Lubuskie is part of Silesia today: CC, 13:37, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * Stefan Mizia, Historia &#346;l&#261;ska. Popularny zarys dziejów, Wydawnictwo Rzeka, Wroc&#322;aw 2000
 * Lech Szafraniec, &#346;l&#261;sk Dolny, Górny, Opawski, (no date/publisher)
 * &#346;l&#261;sk, in: Encyklopedia Historii Gospodarczej Polski'', Warszawa 1980

CC, the first paragraph of your proposed version is fine with me, although I know others strongly object to your characterization of Silesian as a separate language. The second paragraph is almost completely uninformative. The third paragraph has some significant problems: 1) the Austrian connection before 1742 ought to be specifically mentioned. 2) Silesia was not seized in the Silesian Wars between 1742 and 1763. In the first place, the First Silesian War started in 1740, and ended in 1742. In the second place, so far as I know, the Austrians after 1742 retained the exact same territories in the 1745 and 1763 treaties. Reed Browning in The War of the Austrian Succession says of the Treaty of Dresden (1745): "Austria retained, as it had in 1742, Cesky Tesin and Opava." This suggests that all of the seizing had already been completed by 1742, and that the 1744-45 and 1756-63 wars were Austrian attempts to regain already lost territories, rather than further seizures by Prussia. Thirdly, the discussion of Nazi horrors is absolutely unnecessary in the introductory paragraph, especially since it is not particularly specific to Silesia. And the last sentence is silly - shouldn't we be discussing the expulsion of Germans from Silesia, not from Poland and Czechoslovakia as a whole?

In terms of the alternative proposal, it's definitely better, although I think some indication of the ethnic status of the province and the ethnic transfers after World War II is in order, as also, perhaps, the fact that part of Upper Silesia went to Poland after World War I... john 18:01, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * If discussion of Nazi horrors is unnecessary, then so is the discussion of expulsions. Neither was specific to Silesia. --Wik 18:09, Dec 6, 2003 (UTC)


 * I agree with Wik. The expulsions should be moved to the history section. Nico 18:11, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * The expulsions permanently changed the ethnic composition of Silesia. Nazi atrocities, while pronounced in formerly Polish Upper Silesia, were not there any different from those throughout central-Eastern Europe, and do not provide any information necessary to understand the history of Silesia.  The expulsions do. john 19:10, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Improved proposal
 Silesia (Polish &#346;l&#261;sk, German Schlesien, Czech Slezsko) is an historical region in east-central Europe, located along the upper and middle Oder/Odra River, bounded by the Sudeten mountains to the southwest, by the Beskid range to the south, and by the Kraków-Wielun plateau to the northeast, in what is now southwestern Poland and with parts in Germany and the northeastern Czech Republic. It was originally a Polish province that became a possession of the Bohemian crown in 1335 and passed with that crown to the Austrian Habsburgs in 1526. In 1742 most of Silesia was seized by Frederick the Great of Prussia in the War of the Austrian Succession. This part of Silesia composed the Prussian provinces Upper- and Lower Silesia until 1945, when most of Silesia was annexed by Poland. The Polish portion of Silesia, which forms the bulk of the historic region, is now divided into the voivodships of Lower Silesian Voivodship, Opole Voivodship and Silesian Voivodship. The small portion in the Czech Republic is joined with Moravia to form the Moravian-Silesian Region of that country, while the Görlitz area now is a part of the German state of Saxony.

Differences: Introduce more geographical information, Bohemian crown, remove expulsions and some details about the (non-Polish) remainder of Silesia after 1945. Language: "belonged to Poland in the middle ages" > "originally a Polish province", removed "Ties with Poland gradually decreased" etc.

/ Nico

This is fine with me. john 19:10, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Debate on History of Silesia
Except the intro debate there's also some confusion about the history section. Current version the history is unacceptable as it is a history of German colonization of Silesia. I have tried to make some improvements have some small successes.

Just before the page was protected I tried to add these 4 passages, but they have been reverted by Nico more than  twenty times. So I am asking you Nico for the third time: do you have anything against incorporating these sentences about historical facts into the history section of Silesia -- CC, 21:10, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Name of Silesia
According to Thietmar the name of Silesia region comes from the Mount Slez (Polish: &#346;l&#281;&#380;a, Sobótka, German: Silling, Sobbten).

State of Samo
In ca. 620 Silesia probably belonged to the State of Samo, the first Western Slavonic state, which was a federation of various Slavonic tribes in Bohemia, Moravia, Slovakia, Pannonia, Lusatia and Silesia.

Bishopric of Wroclaw 1000
In 990 Silesia was incorporated into Poland by Mieszko I (although some historians are moving the date to 999 and rule of king Boleslaus I. This boundaries of Poland were accepted by the Pope and Roman Enperor Otto III, by establishing the Silesian bishopric in Wroclaw (1000).

Mass massacres of Poles and Jews
During World War II the Nazi Germany has annexed the Czech Silesia in 1938 (part of the so called Sudetenland) and Polish part of Upper Silesia in 1939. Mass massacres, expulsions and murders of the Poles and Jews followed.

Nico, Do you have something against? -- CC, 21:10, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

For the third or maybe even fourth time, you'll still find my answer in the archive. It's not deleted, it is there! If you are interested in reading it again, then please do so! Nico 21:16, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Nico, Do you have something against? -- CC, 21:29, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * CC, most of those passages are fine - although I suspect that Nico was reverting other changes you made, as well. As far as the last one, though, it is incorrect.  Czech Silesia was annexed by Germany before World War II began. As far as the introduction, the intention is not to protect the current version forever.  The intention is to come to some sort of consensus as to an alternative way of doing it, which everyone can agree to as acceptable.  Heretofore this has been unsuccessful.

Nico, Do you have something against? -- CC, 21:48, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Traditional western border of Silesia is the Kwisa river.
 * Goerlitz (and Zgorzelec) are not in historical Silesia - they're in Lusatia (Luzyce).
 * No part of Silesia is in Germany now.
 * Polish part of Luzyce is in Lower Silesian Voivodship, and so is Kotlina Klodzka, and a couple other areas much too small to become separate voivodships.

These are the facts, and the article was falsely claiming otherwise, so I edited it. I didn't touch any controversial stuff, like Silesian language, ties with various countries etc. Taw 14:04, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Firstly, I don't think you're supposed to edit the content of a protected article, even if stuff is blatantly wrong. As far as the substance, while Görlitz may not be part of traditional Silesia, it was part of the Prussian province of Silesia, no? Given that, some mention is surely appropriate? john 18:29, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

So the rules must have changed since I was last here. Then people were supposed to be bold about editing articles. The problem was pointed out on Polish Wikipedia, I just followed interwiki links and fixed it. Just agree on whatever you want now and change the article appropriately. Taw 18:35, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The rules have not changed; Naming_conventions_(use_English) has been in place for quite some time. - Hephaestos 18:50, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

How does it relate to borders of Silesia ? Taw 18:52, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

See D. Quinlan's comment in Conflicts between users. - Hephaestos 19:00, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

According to the Briannica Encyclopedia (2002 edition) Silesia now lies mainly in Poland, and with parts in Germany and the Czech Republic. Nico 20:38, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Can we have some sort of a neutral intro (while we are discussing it) in place of this nonsense version displayed now. I cannot understand why this totally wrong and biased version should be ptotected forever -- CC, 21:07, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * I'm going to officially call a vote, as the current discussion is going exactly nowhere:


 * A vote only makes sense if everyone agrees in advance to abide by its results. I don't think that's the case here. --Wik 23:21, Dec 7, 2003 (UTC)


 * Perhaps true. But I thought, at the very least, it might be useful to separate out various issues that are in dispute and see if we can come to a consensus about any of them.  I'd appreciate your thoughts and explanations on these various questions in any case. john 23:29, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Can we revert to any non-Nico version
Can we have the Silesia article reverted to any non-Nico version, not necessarily to my version. Nico is mainly editing the intro paragraphs of hundreds articles adding German names there, and nothing else. He is seldom developing the articles and adding valuable information. He has his version protected now and he is not interested in making compromise, so he can keep his version forever by blocking any compromise here. -- Caius2ga 04:33, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Well, Grzes, you could accelerate the process as well by making some input here. After the start of the discussion here you and Nico decided to continue edit wars elsewhere instead of contributing to discussion on this page. I also realised, that you did not reply to any of my polite addresses, that I directed to you on various pages. So one could doubt, that either of you is interested in a compromise. Nico can not block a compromise here; if this really should be what he wants, we would make an article without him. But if noone participates in a discussion, it complicates the issue for sure. Of course complaining, accusing and reverting is much easier than cooperating. (And for clarification: This means Caius2ga and Nico.) -- Baldhur 07:44, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Can we revert to any non-Nazi version ??
Can we have the Silesia article reverted to any non-NEONAZI version, which is protected for the last 6 weeks. -- Caius2ga 22:59, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Current version shows the biased history of Germans, who lived peacefully in Silesia until 1945 and were victims of the Poles, Czechs and Soviets. It doesn't say anything about the German masacres of Poles, Czechs and Jews during WWII, It doesn't say anything about Auschwitz (deleted by Nico), It doesn't say anything about Germanization practices since 1744. It mentiones wrongly the German majority in place of Polish majority. It tries to erase information about the Silesian ethnic minority. If this is not Neo-Nazi, version of history, what is???. I can no longer cope with this neo-nazi propaganda at wikipedia, and I am planing to withdraw from this project. -- Caius2ga 00:10, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * You had the possibility of discussing your views with other users above. (Ed asked you a special question there.) You are constantly not replying to other users' questions, and now you are calling other users Nazis again. In the entire process you did not show a little bit of cooperative behaviour. All the compromise proposals made by me and others remained unanswered by you. My patience with your annoying behaviour is clearly over now. So, if you want to withdraw from the project, I will not hinder you. Obviously you did not understand, how this project works. -- Baldhur 09:01, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)