Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Evidence

Socking
Loosmark banned 29-Nov-2010. Sockpuppet investigations/Loosmark/Archive: Poeticbent likely Loosmark, confirmed to 14-Sep-2011 socks.

- IPN sockpuppetry, Polish institution that promotes revisionism in Polish-Jewish relations.

Poeticbent: anti-Jewish hoaxes
'''Poeticbent has created a number of anti-Jewish hoaxes (generally also downplaying/obfuscating Polish-Jewish incidents), which have persisted for years in the topic area. Other editors have enabled this: Piotrus believes Poeticbent deserves an apology, and Volunteer Marek has defended/reverted some hoax content.'''


 * 1) Jewish Welcoming: commons, wiki1, wiki2. Citation doesn't support. Polish/English mismatch. Contradicted by: sign's text, image composition, source. fixedCommons(+on-wiki!)
 * 2) 1941 pogroms: Outside coverage. On EnglishWiki 1941 anti-Jewish pogroms carried out by Poles (with possibly limited German involvement) were turned into Jewish persecution of Poles followed by German action against Jews. Two examples:
 * 3) Stawiski:PB-sock: Unsupported by citations. Sources in fix(+others) contradict. PB reverted a few times 2013-5, e.g.: . GizzyCatBella "sourced and stable version", again + after request to self-revert: TBANed at AE. Note VM:  "there's nothing wrong with GCB restoring a previous stable version."
 * 4) Radziłów: Poeticbent introduced. PB-sock. Not supported by citations, contradicted by sources in fix. VM aware of Levin misuse per GCB AE above. VM "Restore Dov Levin", "not a misrepresentation" although "Lithuanian peasants". Eventually self-reverted. In fact, misquote ("local Poles"/"Polish families"), WP:CHERRY, lacking context, different (unknown) location. (PolishWiki reasonable)
 * 5) Extermination-camps:
 * 6) Chelmno: Poeticent Jews and Poles from all nearby towns: citation contradicts, USHMM too. Fixed.
 * 7) Belzec: In article for years, Poeticbent: 2013, 2014, 2015, 2015. This misrepresents citation as students cleaned in the 90s, not 50s + "second half of the 1950s ...drew the first serious attention": counter-source: 1945 investigation (passed to Germans in 50s) +  gravedigging publicity/investigations. See talkpage. ( PolishWiki extensively treats wartime/postwar gravedigging.)
 * 8) Jewish immigration: PB-sock. VM reverted+ again as "well sourced", absent in talk. Mostly absent in citation + contradicted: page 70 quotation on economic hardship hampering immigration, page 72 Ben-Gurion rejected proposals. Other sources discuss anti-Jewish violence, such as the Kielce pogrom, as a trigger for immigration.

Volunteer Marek's harrassment of Icewhiz
'''Volunteer Marek has hounded me and hurled insults at me. I have requested them to stop: December 2018, April 2019.'''

Personal attacks:
 * 1) "dishonest":
 * 2) "your bigotry":   (following fiction removal)
 * 3) "your prejudicial proclivities":
 * 4) "Sleazeball":
 * 5) "nonesense...peddling":
 * 6) "racial/racism/racist":
 * 7) "extremism/extremist":
 * 8) WP:ASPERSIONS:

Hounding: 15-30/5 on ~38 articles. Articles VM edited for the first time right after Icewhiz: (more available)

Faraway from Poland: (dup-cat: CFD)

Volunteer Marek POV/FRINGE
While Volunteer Marek has generally reasonable views in other topic areas, in Poland he's been advocating that Polish Jews not be described as Polish, espouses the fringe "radical negation" in relation to Polish communism, and views sources/academics/editors discussing Polish antisemitism as racist.

MOS:ETHNICITY:
 * 1) : Was Catholic."clarify it":  Catholic absent. See Talk:Stanisław Ostwind-Zuzga. : "No idea what a "former Jews" means"
 * 2) : removing "Polish". : "Polish" ethnicity, not nationality (contrast Dutch (Uri Rosenthal), French (Robert Badinter)).
 * 3) : removed "Polish".
 * 4) : doubling-down: "...people who were both Polish and Jewish...leave both out....". Counter: WP:MOSETHNICITY.

POV:
 * 1) : Singling out Jews in diverse unit. Note Lamoth citation is photograph unrelated to massacre.
 * 2) ,,: RS/BLP. RSes+IWP support.
 * 3) : "still a rival government": in 1968... Older:: 1989 independence.  - NPOV means communist/communist/NKVD/Stalin (commie trifecta?) in each clause of single lede sentence. (PolishWiki avoids such tagging in much longer lede)
 * 4) : "remove some gratuitous and off topic Pole bashing". Also:
 * 5) : "COATRACK ... disgusting and racist "Poles are anti-semities" POV". Haaretz ties, as others.
 * 6) Issues with sourced popular/widespread prevelance of object:  "nonsense",  "what does "popular" mean?",  While survey editorialized (limited/not-popular) +misrepresented.. (PolishWiki notes 21st-century popularity lede+body)
 * 7) "photographer", "rant", "stuffed full of inaccuracies, falsehoods...".  Again. Peer-reviewed publication by literature historian/cultural anthropologist.

Also BLPs:
 * 1) : removing positive peer-reviewed sources, inserting negative WP:PRIMARY nationalist organization. On talk: VM inverts negative/positive (Poland/BLP-subject?).
 * 2) : restoring WP:BLPSPS. Subsequently removed.

Volunteer Marek: Verification
'''While Volunteer Marek creates little content himself, he routinely restore content that fails verification and doesn't engage in a constructive manner on talk to resolved the issue. He has actually admitted restoring content challenged on verification grounds without checking the cited sources.'''


 * 1) Szymon Datner PB-sock. SYNTH+mildly inaccurate. VM restores, adds source. VM reverts V-challenge, PA ("not "OR" it's just "knowing what the fuck one is talking about...rather than just making obnoxious POV edits"). The source contains nothing on Datner or commission. Indicative of VM's approach to discussion and sourcing.
 * 2) Jew with a coin: MyMoloboaccount,VM removes failed-V tag,VM reverts. Talk (VM absent). Citation + English summary of citation differ.
 * 3) Restitution: Tatzref, AE here (without prejudice to future action). 1557 citation bytes copied from Mark Paul. WikiText follows Paul, not citations. 1945 law repealed&replaced 1946. Kopciowski lacks "thousands", Klucze i kasa chapters by Skibińska and Krzyżanowski read differently. Skibińska and Krzyżanowski summarize(English) differently.
 * 4) Piotrus reverted: admitted no verification.
 * 5) VM reverted: admitted not checking Kopciowski. Recently, VM - "I did indeed verify the source... That source itself used another source ... I didn't have access to ... underlying sources" - seems to be admitting "verification" vs. non-RS Paul.(Rfc)
 * 6) (PolishWiki ties immigration to anti-Jewish violence, no restitution, aliyah)
 * 7) Tatzref (along with BLPVIO: "Based on no research, Michael Meng speculates".). Contains: "Based on research into court records, Lukasz Krzyzanowski concludes that "a relatively large number of properties" were returned.": unreasonable summary of page, WP:CHERRYPICKED, removed qualifications (two small cities, "possession, not ownership", "on the basis of court records, can", previous sentence "impossible to determine"). Krzyzanowski's English self-citation differs.. See talk page with quotations from source. Krzyzanowski reintroduced: MVBW, Piotrus, VM (17 edits), VM's only talk comment PA/ASPERSIONS + while agreeing to other Krzyzanowski content, subsequent wholesale removal by VM.
 * 8) Barczewo: MyMoloboaccount 2012. 2017 challenge, VM reverts in 2019. The municipal website(!) citation missing: "both Poles and Jews were classified as subhuman and targeted for extermination" outside mainstream scholarship. Piotrus reverted + again. Subsequently resolved.

Poeticbent/Pitorus Holocaust rescue
Holocaust rescue is controversial, and is promoted to "defend the good name of Poles and to silence any commentary depicting Poles in a bad light" by communists+current government. Serious scholarship highlights other aspects.

Poeticbent created/expanded ghetto articles as WP:COATRACKs for heroic rescue narratives, examples: (stats ignoring lede+background)
 * 1) Sambor Ghetto: 628/1323 words(47.4%) on Polish rescue (Ukranian town). Dubious sourcing (Paul, Poray, etc.). Contrast USHMM's ecyclopedia: 88/2000 words (4.4%) on rescue (Polish&Ukranian) +22 words on betrayal. See discussion.
 * 2) Nowy Sącz Ghetto - 624/1258 words(49.6%) on Polish rescue. Dubious sourcing (Poray).
 * 3) Będzin Ghetto - None prior, rescue added: 527/1182 words (44.5%)
 * 4) Częstochowa Ghetto - None prior, rescue added: 427/823 words (51.8%) - using primary and dubious sourcing (Poray).
 * 5) Kielce Ghetto -  507/1611 words (31.4%) to rescue. Note "It was the location of the Kielce pogrom of 4 July 1946 in which 37 (40) Polish Jews (17–21 of whom remain unidentified) and 2 ethnic Poles died, including 11 fatally shot with military assault rifles and 11 more stabbed with bayonets, indicating direct involvement of the Stalinist troops doesn't quite check out vs. the citation... Kielce pogrom usually described differently.
 * 6) Tarnopol Ghetto - 325/817 words (39.7%) in "Ghetto history" to Polish rescue. Ukrainians (city in Ukraine) are absent from rescue, but present in: "The dug-outs for the Jews were often used by the Polish farmers themselves, whenever the OUN-UPA killing squads marching from village to village were in the area. At least 1,587 Christian Poles were murdered by OUN-UPA in the Tarnopol county (powiat) in 1944 before the Soviet takeover.".
 * 7) Sosnowiec Ghetto - Edit series. Maus removed (very notable book portraying this ghetto, disliked in very certain circles). 521/1169 words (44.5%) to Holocaust rescue. Extensive use of WP:SPS Poray.
 * 8) Radom Ghetto - Edit series. 452/856 words (52.8%) to Polish rescue. Extensive use of WP:SPS Poray.

Piotrus restored Poeticbent rescue material, using WP:PRIMARY & dubious sourcing (below).

Pitorus dubious sourcing
Piotrus has advocated for use and used sources that fall under WP:QS and/or WP:SPS: 
 * 1)  suggesting use of  iUniverse book by Ewa Kurek (KUL rejected this dissertation). Known for far-right discourse and distortion, compared to David Irving.  Piotrus contrasting Kurek with mainstream scholars based on "Polish far-right media".
 * 2)  - supporting use of self-published Mark Paul.  - advocating use of self-published Anna Poray. Both known for "ignoble ungrateful Jew" myth..
 * 3) : Citing www.savingjews.org(Poray).
 * 4)  - edited+self-published by SPLC-profiled individual. Radzilowski asserts Neo-Stalinism of BLPs + academic field.
 * 5)  - Asserting notability (ergo: reliable+secondary) by 1937 article by politician known for "Jewish question"+expulsion discourse.
 * 6) Piotrus: pamiecitozsamosc.pl(Rydzyk/Lux-Veritatis) use -"The second area of activity for the extreme right has been the public media... role of the media group owned by the Catholic foundation Lux Veritatis and led by the charismatic Father Tadeusz Rydzyk. .... criticized by both Polish and international media, notably for the use of Catholicism as a political tool, and accused of the promotion of conspiracy theories and anti-Semitic propaganda.". Also: Rydzyk/rescue coverage

Volunteer Marek: false statements, misrepresenting source at ARBCOM
Volunteer Marek stated: "Worse, the sources are misrepresented. BLP subject did NOT "assert that "neo-Stalinism" is dominant since the 1960s in American social sciences. The historian criticized a particular "school of Polish historical study” (quote from source) NOT "American social sciences" or "most American historians" as Icewhiz falsely pretends".

Cited source (can e-mail): "The study scrupulously states that “neo-Stalinism” has certainly been dominant in the American social sciences since the 1960s..

In diff, removed "might put these back later" VM asserts BLP-vio vs. Tomasz Strzembosz (died 2004), whose radical-negationist views are well-covered.

mini-Rebuttal
My opening statement did not address any editor, but was a general introductory statement addressing general currents outside of Wikipedia. I addressed VM much further down in the statement, as VM creates little content and is not the original author of any of hoaxes I presented.

Claims of WP:BAIT by VM (and MyMoloboaccount - contrast source) in respect to the effects of the "Holocaust law" on media reliability (contrast - BBC, still a civil offense(fine) post-amendment), or antisemitism and Jew killings by by the AK - reflect on VM's ability to edit the topic area neutrally.

Nazi killings of Poles: USHMM highlights "the Germans killed many of the nation's political, religious, and intellectual leaders." (=elites).

BLPVIO claims by VM: (Arbs: please examine diffs, not VM's assertions)
 * 1) Chodakiewicz discussed in June 2018 AE. WP:ABOUTSELF situation.
 * 2) Wildstein: WikiArticle
 * 3) Gontarczyk: sources further up in thread. Also:
 * 4) Davies: Atlantic book review is reasonable source. Tenure: NYT, book.
 * 5) Krajewski: Did not say was accused, provided sourced context for period.
 * 6) Snyder: source:  "prominent Polophile".
 * 7) Musial: Sources cover the Holocaust/religion stmt. Dewiki has 1023/1300 words(78.7%) on controversies.

Others -
 * 1) Yaffa Eliach: WaPo obit: "according to Dr. Eliach, Polish partisans shot her mother and baby brother, an account that was challenged by some Polish American groups."
 * 2) Polonsky at Koniuchy massacre(+"Quadrifecta"): RS-101: We prefer Polonsky's academic book (English) over passing sentence (out of context) in a non-English interview by Piotr Zychowicz (Pact Ribbentrop - Beck).
 * 3) : Der Spiegel isn't "right-wing", 2nd source actual interview reported on by DS.

MyMoloboaccount:
 * 1) Naliboki: intended page 283. Village/forest issue, citations in source on village. Removed following discussion. see also:.
 * 2) bombing plot: I stated "unreliable source" - for small minority viewpoint. Mentioned following Articles for deletion/Zdzisław Zakrzewski where this was used. (AfDed during NCZAS cleanup-drive)
 * 3) "Polocaust" advanced by Polish government:.
 * 4) The Columbia Guide to the Holocaust: presents majority view followed by minority view. In their conclusion (chapter end) Niewyk&Nicosia advocate a definition that excludes Slavs.
 * 5) Occupied Poland/Ukraine/Belraus: Milhist discussion
 * 500,000 Jews - quoted(tq) source.
 * 1) "blanking": WP:REVERTBAN. "Romkowski himself taught Różański everything about torture" fails verification. dead-link sources. MOS:ETHNICITY/NPOV/SYNTH/V issues.
 * 2) Lehi: Actually said "Certainly should be in the article, however...". In diff I condensed section, retaining alliance proposal.

Tatzref hoax claims, source: "handout would correct the number of Poles that were involved in the massacre of Jews... —and dispute that they were involved at all... misinformation.... about the pogroms, particularly events like the Kielce massacre, which have been widely acknowledged"

WP:PA, false accusations
In requests for ArbCom-case Icewhiz says "As other countries, a small minority advocates Holocaust denial/distortion in Poland" He lists two users who haven't been active for years. He then lists ... me. This is clear, false, disturbing, insinuation against me. Icewhiz does not present SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE to support this. It's straight up falsehood and I got understandably angry about this smear. Icewhiz includes my angry response in his evidence (#4) here. WP:BAIT apparently successful. While I regret losing my temper I think any normal decent person would get upset at being accused of such a thing.

WP:BLPVIO
Icewhiz attacks authors, in particular scholars, who don't fit his POV


 * Has no qualms using right wing (fronda.pl) and anti-semitic (prawy.pl) sources to make false BLP attack on historians he doesn't like. Strange, since Icewhiz insists he wants to remove "fringe" and "far right" sources. Here he ADDS exactly these sources to attack subject.


 * BLP smears of prominent journalist and dissident Bronislaw Wildstein. Compares him to McCarthyism. No source. See also and obfuscation to excuse BLP attack . Below in evidence links to article section - nothing about McCarthy in there.


 * Accuses historian Gontarczyk of having "record of attacking established scholarship in the field" without sources. Asked Icewhiz THREE times to source his BLPVIO or strike it. He didn't. Instead he provided irrelevant source and claimed his attack was justified. K.e.coffman brings this up in his evidence as me "personalizing disputes". After repeating request three times and being gaslighted on talk page I was indeed fed up.


 * Attacks historian Norman Davies, claiming he's "divisive". Insinuates Davies' writings on topic caused him not to get tenure. Both claims are unsourced BLP violations.


 * Repeats attack on Davies by citing editor of American Conservative (which published far-right white supremacist Steve Sailer (apologies for link)) who says "Poles lack common sense"


 * Falsely claims historian Krajewski was "accused of anti-semitism". He was not. Icewhiz fake-backs up his smear by providing sources which discuss OTHER people. Sources don't mention Krajewski


 * Attacks historian Timothy Snyder. Source provided  says nothing of the sort (indeed, opposite) Ditto:


 * Demands other editors prove academic is "uncontroversial" rather than vice versa. Turns BLP policy on its head.


 * Falsely claims BLP's essay was subject to "scathing critique" by Israel Gutman. Nonsense. Gutman praises author


 * Misrepresents sources in BLPvio on Bogdan Musial. First source is trash, second source doesn't say what Icewhiz claims.


 * Cherry picked sources to add negative info to BLP. Some sources are misrepresented. BLP subject did NOT assert "neo-Stalinism" is dominant in American social sciences. The historian criticized particular "school of Polish historical study”

WP:BAIT
'''Icewhiz often makes claims so absurd it's hard to see them as anything other than attempts to provoke and WP:BAIT others. These claims often have ethnic aspect to them'''

These diffs should also address the accusation that I exaggerate how extreme Icewhiz's views on Poland and Poles are. Diffs speak for themselves.


 * Approves of IP calling Nazi crimes against Poles "dirty propaganda". Also here. IP editor looks like sockpuppet of indef banned neo-Nazi User:English Patriot Man.


 * Compares Poland to North Korea and Iran (!!!) where "media is muzzled, by law". Utter nonsense that Polish government "outlaw(ed) writing about complicity".


 * Insinuates it is illegal in Poland to ... edit Polish Wikipedia about Polish-Jewish topics (!!!) Just ridiculous.


 * Explicitly blames "Polish people" for … it being illegal to edit Polish Wikipedia. Except of course it’s not (obviously, sources he includes don't support that)


 * "Graciously" acknowledges that ... not "all sources in Poland are controlled by the government" (!!!) in response to uninvolved User:Dahn's observation that Icewhiz has some problems here.


 * Deliberately provocative edit summary. The comparison between Home Army (anti-Nazi fighters) and Nazis is intentionally offensive and intended to provoke. Like comparing Civil Rights movement to the KKK. Removes Yad Vashem as source. See response.


 * Falsely claims "I did not compare the Home Army to the Nazi Party" which is exactly what he did (see previous). This is gaslighting. After denying he made the comparison, proceeds to ... make the comparison again. Sources provided don't make comparison between Nazis and Home Army (obviously, since such a comparison would be absurd).


 * Without some historical background it's hard to appreciate how obnoxious this comment is. Icewhiz claims "The AK's purpose was not to fight the Germans". The whole raison d'etre of Home Army(AK) was to fight Germans.


 * Tries to unilaterally declare ALL Polish media sources post 2018 unreliable. His claims about Polish Holocaust law (as stupid as that law is) are false.


 * Falsely claims Polish sources have to "comply with the right version of history" "by law". To back this up presents source about censorship ... in Russia!?!


 * Trivializes and dismisses Polish suffering during WW2 at hands of Nazis ("hagiagraphical depictions of Polish suffering" (sic)). Comment is irrelevant to discussion. Provocation.


 * Icewhiz asserts we can ignore high quality sources because the matter was, quote, "adjudicated in a Soviet court "


 * Derisively refers to murder of Poles by Nazis as "Polocaust" (he's using the term ironically).

WP:CPUSH
'''Icewhiz often makes a claim about a person or subject X, but then presents sources about person or subject Y and pretends the second supports the first. '''


 * Pretends magazine Najwyzszy Czas! is used as source and provides links. Except it isn't, links are irrelevant.


 * Writes NSZ is known as antisemitic, killing many Jews.[3] VM: [11] The diff from me has NOTHING to do with whether NSZ was anti-semitic (they were) and whether they killed Jews (they did). Icewhiz falsely insinuates it does. Extremely dishonest smear - I've removed far-right bullshit which whitewashed NSZ myself


 * Writes This sort of discourse is present in far-right Nasz Dziennik,[5] see also museum by Father Rydzyk.[6][7][8] after linking to one of my diffs. This makes it appear as if I used either or somehow supported them. It's complete nonsense. I've never used those nor would I. Same statement grossly misrepresents my edit. Icewhiz falsely claims I said "most Poles were involved in rescue of Jews (which would be false). That is not what diff shows. I restored text which said Poland had most Righteous Among Nations, which is true, sourced. He pretends I said "12 million Poles" were involved in rescue. No idea where he gets this from. He just.... made it up.

Icewhiz pretends dispute is about one thing, when it's about another


 * Uses WP:MOS ETHNICITY as excuse to remove info about subject being involved in Stalinist crimes. Nobody here cares what ethnicity she was. Her involvement in Stalinist show trials is exactly what makes her notable. He repeats this false assertion in evidence


 * Red herrings: alleged anti-semitism in Home Army. Quotes Tec, Zimmerman. Neither source supports such blanket statement. This also has nothing to do with text under dispute. It's just deflection. Another red herring by mentioning UBK and ONR-Falanga, two Polish fascist groups. Except… the text, article, has nothing to do with either of these groups. They're unrelated to the dispute. Also []


 * Pretends this is about restoring banned user's edits or restoring "Jewish" to lede. It's about undoing Icewhiz's blanking of the article . Icewhiz did NOT indicate concern was subject's ethnicity in lede (I couldn't care less either way). Once that became clear I removed it myself, which Icewhiz is aware of - yet, he chooses torepeat false accusation regardless.


 * Says this is "counter to WP:MOSETHNICITY, offensive, and prejudicial." As he is aware, my rationale for removing both "Polish" and "Jewish" from the lede is that it's already implied by rest of the sentence I've explained this several times. Continues to pretend otherwise.


 * , in Evidence Pretends dispute is whether legend of Esterka is fictional. Nonsense. NOBODY thinks this legend is factual. Dispute is about how sources describe the legend in literature. Contra Icewhiz, source says legend has been used in both positive and negative ways in Polish and Yiddish literature  (Search string makes clear Icewhiz was looking for cherry picked info)


 * Pretends this is me "misrepresenting sources". No, this is me reverting sock puppet of User:Kaiser von Europa, something which I repeatedly explained. Icewhiz engaged in WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT ... until he acknowledged my explanation to accuse me of making false allegations of sockpuppetry (it's Kaiser, no doubt). KvE was banned for pushing neo-Nazi POV. Perfect example of Icewhiz's cynicism


 * Falsely pretends AfD was closed not just to move, but also for change in topic (so he can WP:COATRACK). See  for explanation.


 * Claims source is unreliable because it's "Catholic". What would happen if someone tried to remove sources because they "were Jewish" or "Muslim" or "Protestant"?


 * Classic Icewhiz. Pontificates about how we shouldn't use "Polish right wing media". Links to article about some anti-semitic rag in Poland, as if this was a source somebody is using in article. Except... absolutely nobody is using it. Dispute is about Icewhiz removing DIFFERENT, scholarly sources. Nobody is trying to use trash mentioned in The Independent. Deflection and dishonest tactic.

Just straight up false claims


 * Falsely claims source is not Antony Polonsky. The excuse? It's an interview WITH Polonsky, so, according to Icewhiz, Polonsky didn't "write" it (whoever transcribed it did). I'm not kidding, that's the excuse.


 * Spurious POV tag, false edit summary. No idea what "national elements" suppose to mean. Objection article uses some Polish sources? There is no "fringe" sources there. Sources are left-wing newspaper and Journal of Genocide Research


 * Under pretense of "trimming" removes multiple reliable sources, historians. Labels controversy "Polish dispute" to trivialize it. Unsourced. Polish, American, Israeli historians were critical of subject's article.


 * WP:POINT by removing reliable sources. This behavior was noted by uninvolved outside long time editor. Icewhiz admonished for making false claims of BLP vios.

Double Standards
'''When it suits his purpose, Icewhiz uses sources he previously rejected as unreliable. Or removes sources he previously insisted were reliable.'''


 * . Often makes big pretense on talk pages and boards claiming he only wants to use "high quality academic sources". Sure, he'll use those... when they match his POV. He's also got no problem using authors who specialize in books about ... catfish fishing  to try and source historical facts.


 * and but then edit warring (with Francois Robere)       First two diffs: Icewhiz advocates we use Antony Polonsky as source. Fair enough, prominent historian. When it turns out Polonsky doesn't quite match Icewhiz's POV, Icewhiz edit wars to REMOVE Polonsky.


 * Has no qualms using low quality "right wing" sources when it suits him


 * Uses op-ed by a celebrity gossip columnist to reference historical controversy. So much for "only high-quality scholarly sources"


 * Blind reverting. Edit summary about funding. Revert of something completely difference. References a non-existent RfC. Didn't bother looking what he was reverting just saw it was my edit. Uninvolved editor User:Nishidani notices problems with Icewhiz too.

Quadrifecta?

 * Several of the above. Pretends massacre of civilians was really battle and that civilians deserved it. Here and  Icewhiz pretends Lithuanian unit engaged in battle with Soviets (they didn't). When asked for quotes per WP:V deflects . Makes false claim about what's in the source  (there was no "engagement"). Keeps insisting massacred villages (mostly women and children) brought it upon themselves. Does this by making false claims about what's in source  (there was no "combat with the Soviets", "other mainstream English sources" is 100% made up)


 * Does his classic tactic: "attack source A by bringing up irrelevant source B" . Says "At least (...) we aren't trying to use quotes in Nazi Propaganda and WW2". This is NOT source under dispute. NOBODY ever brought that source up or tried to use it. Why is Icewhiz bringing it up? To associate reliable source under discussion with irrelevant Nazi propaganda. Also phrasing it to insinuate editors who disagree with him are spreading Nazi propaganda. It's personal attack, intended to provoke, which Icewhiz can use at WP:AE. It's WP:BAITing. Really ugly, obnoxious baiting.

WP:AE and WP:BATTLEGROUND
Icewhiz weaponizes WP:AE in pursuit of his battleground

In ~two years Icewhiz has been part of FIFTY WP:AE reports, both IP and EE  (as filer, subject, commentator). This is ~two reports per month, more than any user during that period, probably ever. ~Third of these were closed in his favor, ~40% against him, rest neutral. Both IP and EE topics exploded when he (and Francois Robere) arrived. High rate of closure against him indicates most of these reports are spurious.

In EE, Icewhiz was filer in ~half the reports, subject in ~third, commentator in rest.

Icewhiz regularly tries to WP:BAIT editors he’s in dispute with by making outlandish and offensive claims (see above), when they react negatively he runs to WP:AE to file reports. This is WP:GAME.

False statements in evidence

 * Icewhiz: Claims of WP:BAIT by VM (...) in respect to (...) antisemitism and Jew killings by by the AK - reflect on VM's ability to edit the topic area neutrally. I haven't said a single damn thing about antisemitism or "Jew killings" (sic) by the AK in my evidence. What I said was that Icewhiz was offensively comparing anti-Nazi resistance fighters to the Nazi party. Which he was, as BAIT. You know how one of my section is titled Icewhiz pretends dispute is about one thing, when it's about another? Yeah, well, thanks for illustrating my point. When somebody constantly ... obfuscates like this constructive discussion becomes impossible.

Anti-Polish POV of Icewhiz

 * , - This is something Icewhiz followed in his editing, discussions and suggestion to Arbcom to rewrite WP:RS . But he is wrong because:
 * Yes, the Polish law was criticized and amended, but it does not invalidate Polish media and scholars. Even really oppressive countries (like Russia) have a few independent/reliable media (like Novaya Gazeta). But Icewhiz tells again "media sources from those countries [Poland and ... Russia] are clearly unusable". No, even in Russia journalists were killed precisely because they did honest reporting.
 * 1) Accusing all Polish journalists of not following their professional duties (honest reporting) is anti-Polish sentiment and ethnicity-based discrimination of sources. Hence the comment by VM.
 * 2) Polish and Israeli media cover subjects differently. This needs to be resolved per WP:NPOV, i.e. using all RS. The blanket dismissal of all "Polish" sources qualify as POV pushing.


 * (long reply by Icewhiz to 1st comment by Piotrus) - Icewhiz wants to blacklist a book by several Polish historians ("Golden Harvest or Hearts of Gold?...") because the authors were criticized and WP:BIASED. No, one should simply follow WP:RS . But Icewhiz probably thinks that the "Harvest" is an OK source because he inserts it himself to a BLP page, repeatedly, and over the objections by VM (!), . So why did Icewhiz argued so much on WP:RSNB that the book should never be used?


 * Responding to this, Icewhiz said that genocidal policies by Nazi were directed only against Polish "dissenters and elites". This is  misrepresenting Nazi crimes against the Polish nation including murder of women and children. That offends other contributors. The responses by Icewhiz, do not make sense (my reply ).


 * - Icewhiz removes "communist" everywhere to put the blame for crimes on Poles, rather than on the oppressive communist regime created by USSR.


 * Icewhiz removes sourced information about political repression against Polish population by the Soviet NKVD and the similar organization of communist Poland ,,,,, ,,,. Icewhiz tells it was ethnic cleansing, not genocide (discussion). Not according to some academic RS,  . According to Ellman, (see Ealdgyth below), "The ‘national operations’ of 1937–38, notably the ‘Polish operation’, may qualify as genocide as defined by the UN Convention, although there is as yet no legal ruling on the matter." ). But regardless, this info had to be included with minor corrections, not removed.


 * (see text removed at the bottom of the diff) - removal of sourced information about anti-Polish sentiment in Israel with misleading edit summary.

WP:Battle to get rid of content "opponents"
, - Icewhiz tells he submitted this case to remove content included by inactive Poeticbent. In his early Evidence Icewhiz suggests sanctions of VM, Piotrus, Xx236, Poeticbent, GizzyCatBella, Tatzref and MyMoloboaccount, i.e. all contributors with whom he had content disagreements. Later, Icewhiz decided to focus on Piotrus and VM, i.e. two most active contributors in this subject area with whom he has disagreements (after Poeticbent who was topic banned and stopped editing after the conflict with Icewhiz). Note the involvement of Icewhiz at WP:AE.

Unsubstantiated accusations

 * Icewhiz said this (“a redline conduct issue”) meaning this edit by VM who just removed one of two words "Polish" in same phrase. Icewhiz refused to explain . But this triggered the response by VM . A reason to topic-ban VM or a ridiculous accusation by Icewhiz? "Harassment by VM"? Based on their "personal attack" comments, it was actually VM who felt offended by Icewhiz, not the other way around.


 * Icewhiz claims wikistalking by VM. He asks VM not follow his edits and starts editing numerous pages on Polish history. No wonder, VM appears on these pages (as anyone would expect ), but his edits serve to improve the content. Even in reverts  he asks "Please explain specific concerns on talk". And what Icewhiz does? Start talking? No. Note that VM agreed with versions by Icewhiz when they are NPOV and supported by RS  proving that VM acted in good faith;  - VM removed antisemitic content.


 * I think accusing Poeticbent of intentionally creating anti-Jewish hoaxes is absurd. He was busy with creating good content,  (agree with Piotrus). Yes, he did not like Icewhiz.

VM: PA, ASPERSIONS and assumptions of bad faith

 * Accusation of conducting a "smear campaign":
 * Frequent accusations of falsifying sources ("making shit up"), which he readily admits:
 * Accusations of misleading editors:
 * An "all in one":

Past warnings:

VM: OR or suggestions of OR

 * Removing / supporting the removal of sources deemed "Communist"/"Stalinist" without evidence: (unless they support his position ). The first is also a borderline BLPTALK violation - Krakowski passed away Sept. 2018; the discussion took place less than a month later.
 * Suggesting we do OR to involve a Jewish leader in a massacre:

VM: BATTLEGROUND

 * Filing a superfluous AE at the eve of an ARBCOM case:

Xx236: BLPTALK

 * 

Xx236: PA

 * 

MyMoloboaccount: Sourcing

 * Misrepresented sources about the Czech Republic and the de facto post-war situation  as if they're about international law applying to Poland (third citation was malformed, so I couldn't verify it [same diff]). Both are also "cherry picks", immediately followed in the source by exceptions.
 * Added several news sources on the same subject, then stonewalled queries on their credibility.
 * "Cherry picking":

MyMoloboaccount: Bias and POV pushing

 * "Poles are good":
 * "Jews are bad":

Tatzref: ASPERSIONS

 * Repeated ASPERSIONS against Icewhiz and K.e.coffman of "concocting a bogus attempt to discredit [a source]", despite being refuted twice.

Tatzref: Sourcing

 * Misrepresenting sources throughout this discussion (particulary from this message onwards; Icewhiz's and my comments follow, with source quotes further down ). This later evolved to a BLP violation. Piotrus supported the revision even after clear contradictions surfaced between the text and the source.
 * Copied citations from a banned source. Case was closed without prejudice.

Overview: Balance and Consensus
Assuming the Wikipedia process works, its repeated application will approach neutrality. A good way to establish editors' neutrality, then, is to examine their involvement in the process - particularly in votes. We can use the percentage of editors' votes that accorded with the consensus as a measure: the more frequently their votes accorded with the consensus, the more neutral they are assumed to be. Adjusting for discussions with an impact favorable to the OP regardless of the formal tally (namely RfC: Does a source support a categorical statement and AfD: Heaven for the nobles), we get the following results:

For example, my votes accorded with the consensus in 66.7% of the 12 votes I participated in, or 83.3% when adjusted for impact. This isn't the whole picture, though: RSN, BLPNB, FTN and NOR discussions aren't tallied, so I encourage you to review those as well.

VM: "Double standards"
The edit in question was a clear "cherry pick" by MyMoloboaccount. We had two discussions on it, with both Icewhiz and myself  explaining the issues with that quote.

Piotrus: BLP
All of the additions were well sourced and passed BLPNB.

Piotrus: Sourcing
Chodakiewicz's post was used in his article to illustrate his opinions (WP:ABOUTSELF), not as an RS in the field.

Pudeo: Blocks
Indeed I've been blocked twice in this topic area: the March 2018 3RR block was a bit of a "rookie's mistake", having gotten into a major "Wiki-feud" for the first time. I've since gotten some good advice and this hasn't recurred. The February 2019 block, however, was unjustified, and if the committee wishes to examine the admins' conduct there I would welcome it.

Pudeo: PB
These are PB's mass removals of well-sourced content, to which I responded: He was later topic banned.

Pudeo: Stereotyping
Here's the comment in context: There's indeed some historical background to it, but we're talking a 21st century trope that doesn't seem to consider medieval religious segregation and trade practices.

Evidence presented by MJL
I'm not involved in this case nor have historically had significant connections with either user. I'm going to be submitting some boring evidence for the sake of process. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 16:59, 9 June 2019 (UTC) Edited: 20:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

I have given a brief overview of some selected moments both editors had. If this completely is useless, any clerk is welcome to remove it. I just ask to be pinged in the edit summary please, so I know for the future. If any further analysis is asked of me, I will be happy to provide as well. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 20:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

VM's history (Arbcom)
On 3 November 2010, Volunteer Marek requested and was granted  an account rename citing personal privacy. 

Party to WP:EEML
In Eastern European mailing list, after being opened by motion, Volunteer Marek was added as a party. 

This ultimately led to a finding of fact, an admonishment and a sanction against the editor (the admonishment was to all participants). 

Sanction rescinded
On 21 June 2010, the committee removed its previous sanction against the editor. 

This was after a previous motion to amend the case that narrowed the topic ban having been enacted. 

Submitted, &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 20:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Icewhiz's history
This is only a partial account of Icewhiz's history with processes related to VM and topics related to Eastern Europe.

3RR request
On 29 June 2018, Icewhiz filed a report against Volunteer Marek. It was closed with a note to seek dispute resolution in the future. 

Both topic banned for battleground
An AE request was filed by Icewhiz. This request was m=ade after a then-recent AE filling against Icewhiz. 

The AE request filed by Icewhiz was closed with a topic ban related to history of Poland in World War II (1933-45) for three months. 

Amendment request (Eastern Europe)
Recently, Icewhiz attempted to have Arbcom amend Eastern Europe. The request would have Arbcom apply (among other things) a sourcing restriction for Polish-Jewish relations. It was closed with no action. 

Submitted, &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 20:11, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Closing
A lot has been said...  going back at least a year.  I am unable to support further assertions within the word limit.

I cleaned this up just a bit for better navigation. Cheers, &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 19:01, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

WP:AE
Re:

There were actually too many AE reports for me to go through. My apologies if I left that bit out a bit of context. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 00:38, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Provocative and inflammatory dits by Icewhiz
As along standing user who has written articles on Holocaust i.e Operation 1005 I see many of comments by Icewhiz and edits as very provocative,and it is difficult not to see them as aiming at inflamming discussion or provking other editors.Edits often include ethnic based remarks and inflammatory statements rather than constructive work on encyclopedia.I will list some examples below.

WP:BAIT
7.Removes information about Poland being occupied both by Soviets and Nazis. States that occupation is Polish POV or view by Polish nationalists.
 * 1.Comparing Poland to Iran and North Korea similar to the Iranian or North Korean media being unreliable on their respective supreme leaders
 * 2.Here Icewhiz claims that Nazis only murdered Polish "dissenters and elites" rather than women and children; when asked ""Are you claiming Polish civilians, women and children murdered by Nazis were dissenters",Icewhiz stated "dissenters and elites".
 * 3. Icewhiz removes information about Polish rescue of Jews under the title "remove Polish rescue myth".
 * 4.Poland is not a large country, and its academic footprint is not large either, furthermore history in Poland seems to have become something that is managed by the government. It would seem that Polish denialists, who deny Poland's complicity in the holocaust, and attempt to propagate various myths (the latest was a proposal to open a "polocaust" musuem displaying Poles as the main victims of the Holocaust)
 * 5.Stating that Polish civilians attacked in massacres and raids by Soviet and Jewish partisans were engaging in theft of Jewish property.
 * 6.Here in an article about anti-Polish sentiment Icewhiz removes a racist insult used as an example(sourced to BBC) about "Poles sucking antisemitism with their mother's milk", stating "lack of context in that Polish complicity as well as direct responsibility for Jewish deaths is not discussed"

Falsification of sources

 * 8.Icewhiz falsified a source stating that villagers massacred by Soviet partisans were supposedly hunting down Jews.There is nothing about Naliboki village on page 280. I uploaded a screenshot from the source in question showing that there is nothing about villagers attacking Jews on page 280.Icewhiz then claimed the statement s is on page 283. Here is the screen of page 283-nothing about inhabitants of Naliboki village doing such a thing.

Dubious sources

 * 9.Icewhiz states  Polish airmen in the UK even plotted flying to bomb Buckingham palace and parliament)Icewhiz sourced this to Najwyższy Czas!. Why did he do so if he himself was adding information that NajwyzszyCzas! is highly unreliable source?This seems a clear case of POV pushing and trying to incite  the discussion using unreliable source.Icewhiz was aware of this as he edited article on NCz!.

Double standards

 * 10. Here Icewhiz states that Ethnic Poles were responsible for killing and capturing Jews, the book describes actions by Ukrainian and Belarussian villagers as well, yet Icewhiz edits the article to state only "ethnic Poles".Contrast this with this edit:Operation in which ethnic Poles were targetted for executions(and were majority of victims)-Poles are removed and replaced it with "people".
 * 9.Attack sothers of using the same source he used before

Blanking of whole articles

 * 11. Complete blanking of whole article about Stalinist criminal, including list of atrocities, the article had several reliable sources including Cambridge University Press publication.

Removing of Nazi atrocities against Poles

 * 12.Icewhiz removed information that Poles were target of genocide by Nazi Germany claiming "unsupported by source".I have uploaded the screenshot of the source ,it does state that there was genocide

Derogatory ethnic remarks

 * 12."He's advancing polocaust, which is quite fringey" Ethnic based deregatory term about Nazi Germany genocide against Polish people..
 * 13.Obviously, it is possible to find polophilic writers in English Ethnic based attack to discredit source.

Equalizing Poland with Nazi Germany

 * 14.Stating that Polish anti-Nazi resistance group is responsible for deaths of 100,000-200,000 Jews, using a quote that doesn't even have anything about Home Army in it.


 * 15.we wouldn't add such a section to the Nazi Party and here ,Certainly - we describe crimes by the Schutzstaffel and Wehrmacht.Comparing Polish resistance against Nazi Germany to Nazi forces.
 * 16.Here Icewhiz claimed scholars state 500,000 Jews were murdered by Poles

Icewhiz provocative editing is not limited to Polish topics
In article about Lehi, a terrorist organization calling for anihiliation of Arab people, seeking alliance with Nazi Germany, Icewhiz tried to delete information about it's links with Nazis, claimed that lead should have views "of those who justify it"--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC) )

Summmary
Icewhiz presents extreme claims(Poland us equal to Nazi Germany, Polish people=mass murderers of Jews), uses inflammatory language,is unable to compromise with other users in the topic of Polish-Jewish relations and WW2, defends extreme terrorist organization such as Lehi.His edits are very tendentious, and represent extreme POV.Icewhiz also engaged in blanking articles that were reliably sourced and engaged in falsifing information.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 17:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Poeticbent created numerous quality articles on Polish Jewish history
Poeticbent created and/or DYKed 100+ P-J articles: Jewish ghettos in German-occupied Poland and 10+ individual ghetto articles like Pińsk Ghetto, on Holocaust crimes against the Jews like Grossaktion Warsaw, on documents like Einsatzgruppen reports or The Black Book of Polish Jewry, on Polish activists helping the Jews like Julian Grobelny, Maria Kotarba, Alfreda and Bolesław Pietraszek, Józef and Wiktoria Ulma, Krystyna Dańko, on Jewish organizations like Central Committee of Polish Jews and Union of Jewish Religious Communities in Poland , on several Jewish cemeteries like Jewish Cemetery, Kielce, on synagogues like Synagogues of Kraków, Kupa Synagogue or Wolf Popper Synagogue, on places of memory like the Majdanek State Museum or Garden of the Righteous Among the Nations, on several pogroms like Proskurov pogrom, on many Holocaust perpetrators like Wilhelm Gerstenmeier, on death camps like Poniatowa concentration camp, Vulkanwerft concentration camp or Szebnie concentration camp. He also contributed much content to Holocaust trains, The Holocaust in Poland and dozens of others.

He also created useful P-J history infographics like a map of the Holocaust in Poland and uploaded images like File:Stanislawów Synagogue.jpg or File:Słonim Ghetto burning (1942-06-29).jpg, and used PhotoShop skills to improve quality of images like File:Jewish man humiliated and tortured by German policemen in Tarnów ghetto.jpg

He also got the Treblinka extermination camp to GA.

To accuse him of antisemitism or hoax creation is absurd.

Poeticbent received an unfair topic ban
He received a lengthy topic ban at AE from Polish-Jewish topics for a single diff perceived as violating NPA, in the context of being accused of antisemitic attitude. This was a surprise of many editors. He decided to retire rather then appeal it. Even now, he is listed in the Top 3000 most active Wikipedians by edit count. His retirement is a clear loss to the project, and to the content area of the P-J history.

Rebuttal
I am not a party to this, but since my name is mentioned several times on this page with diffs to several of my edits, I will presented a rebuttal in the analysis of evidence section in the workshop.

Possible BLP violations in lead

 * by Icewhiz: "far-right political activist", BLP discussion, "far-right", add Category:Polish Holocaust deniers, (undue criticism in main body of a short article)
 * one of the BLP subjects in question became aware of some of this and wrote an essay in Tygodnik Solidarność complaining about Icewhiz:
 * by Francois: nationalist, right-wing activism, anti-Semitism, similar, far-right activist

POV editing
Minimizing Polish WWII-era suffering and stressing Polish misdeeds.

AfDs of (mostly) Polish-Jewish topics related to pro-Polish POV, often content created by Poeticbent:
 * kept


 * Gunnar S. Paulsson (historian)
 * Irene Tomaszewski (historian)
 * John Radzilowski (historian)
 * Leszek Gondek (historian)
 * Józef Turowski (historian)
 * Public execution in Dębica (event)
 * deleted


 * Anna Poray (historian)
 * Leszek Pietrzak (historian)
 * Zdzisław Zakrzewski (activist)
 * Szczepan Siekierka (activist)
 * Marcin Urynowicz (historian)

Removal of information about Polish rescuers from ghetto articles (this information was often added by Poeticbent using a source Icewhiz complained about on FTN (no consensus...), sometimes he used low quality sources but almost all of it can be sourced to googlable RS as demonstrated below. It is not a red flag, so why is it being removed?): While removing information on Polish rescue efforts, Icewhiz adds information on Polish collaboration with the Nazis (which, for the record, nobody challenges).
 * Brzesc ghetto: removal of information, including referenced, under the claim it is uncited, much of it restored later by me and VM with better sources
 * Grodno ghetto: removal of sentence summarizing the rescue claiming OR,
 * Kielce ghetto: removal of references, then removal of "uncited" information, my restoration with RS
 * Łódź Ghetto: removes mention of rescuer Stanisława Leszczyńska, my restoration with RS
 * Lubartów Ghetto: removal or references then removal of "uncited" content, my restoration with RS
 * Międzyrzec Podlaski Ghetto: removal of references, my restoration with RS
 * Nowy Sącz Ghetto: removal of references, my restoration with RS
 * Piotrków Trybunalski Ghetto: removal of refs my restoration with RS
 * Radom Ghetto: removal of refs, removal of content, my restoration with RS
 * Sambor ghetto: removal of ref content, my restoration with RS
 * Siedlce Ghetto: removal of ref content
 * Slonim Ghetto: removal of ref my restoration with RS.
 * Sosnowiec Ghetto: removal of content, my restoration with RS
 * Stanislawow Ghetto: removal of ref content. my restoration with RS

JUST DYK, where several editors, myself included, raised concerns about neutrality of the hook Icewhiz proposed that unduly focused on "Polish nationalists". I proposed a more neutral hook there which Icewhiz did not accept as "Not hooky", the DYK has failed. Also see this DYK nom: compare the neutrality of hook/alts proposed by me and User:Pharos and the ALT3 proposed by Icewhiz. DYK also failed.

Attempt to get the ArbCom to declare all Polish sources on Polish-Jewish history unreliable

Icewhiz (rightly) criticizes Polish right-wing media as unreliable - but will use them if they serve his POV:. Same with FR

Whitewashing: removal of academic source that mentions some Jewish collaborations with the Soviets as "primary accounts used to promote a canard in Wikipedia's voice". Here and here, removal of other content about Jewish collaboration.

Response to rebuttal of the above: there are probably better (less battleground-inducing) ways to combat the "ignoble ungrateful Jew stereotype" then doing exactly what it suggests, i.e. denying/minimizing the role of Polish rescuers. Particularly where almost all of the removed content that was using substandard refs contained uncontroversial statements of facts, no REDFLAG opinions or claims, and could have been easily verified with better ones (it took me just few hours in a single day to do so). If Icewhiz tried to fix the content rather than remove it, i.e. tried to mend faces rather then to burn them, we would be much less likely to have this case here.

I support Piotrus
I fully support Piotrus. Serious editors shouldn't be expelled by fanatics.Xx236 (talk) 13:05, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * That is sufficient for a permanent topic ban - so Icewhiz and a number of his supporters deserve 10 times topic ban. BTW - does Poeticbent  read Yiddish/Hebrew? Xx236 (talk) 08:57, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The topis of the ban was the history of Poland during World War II, including the Holocaust in Poland. Xx236 (talk) 09:02, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

AK and Jews
We have a recent academic book by Zimmermann, who doesn't seem to be a radical Polish nationalist. Xx236 (talk) 13:11, 10 June 2019 (UTC) We don't need biased press articles on the subject.Xx236 (talk) 12:24, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

The Holocaust
The Holocaust was designed and implemented by Germans. Transferring responsibility from German and Austrian Nazis to poor terrorized peasants is a form of Holocaust revisionism. Xx236 (talk) 12:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Lithuania
The Lithuanians who murdered Jews murdered also Poles, eg. in Ponary massacre. If Icewhiz writes about Lithuanian crimes, he - once more - ignores Polish victims. Xx236 (talk) 12:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Tatzref

 * Icewhiz has been involved in disruptive, hoax editing since I joined Wiki last year. Here are some examples. Icewhiz repeatedly removed a reference in the article on the Bielski Partisans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bielski_partisans) to a major book, Sowjetische Partisanen, by historian Bogdan Musial, published by Schoningh, a renowned German publishing house. The book was hailed by Yehuda Bauer, a leading Holocaust historian, as “a most important contribution” to the history of the war, the Soviet partisans, and Polish-Jewish partisan relations in Belorussia (Yad Vashem Studies, vol. 38, no. 2). Icewhiz alleged it was “fringe” and “SPS” (self-published sources).
 * 06:16, 28 May 2018‎ Icewhiz talk contribs‎ 20,929 bytes +137‎  Highly questionable fringe SPS.
 * 07:16, 1 June 2018‎ Icewhiz talk contribs‎ 19,592 bytes -659‎  Undid revision 843878281 by GizzyCatBella (talk) No consensus to include this non-English fringe work


 * In order to bolster a bogus claim that the Polish authorities blocked the return of Jews from DP camps in Germany, something that major Holocaust historians dispute, Icewhiz engaged in a flagrant misrepresentation, claiming “The “grossly discrimanatory” Polish act was criticized by US president Truman.” The source he cited, however, said nothing of the kind. In fact, Truman was criticizing certain provisions of the 1948 Displaced Persons Act, not the actions of the Polish government. See History of Jews in Poland – Talk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_the_Jews_in_Poland.


 * Icewhiz has also been involved in disruptive editing in purely Polish-related matters. He recently deleted all the edits I made to the Canadian Polish Congress article on the stated pretext: “We prefer reliable secondary sources over the website of the subject.” When I restored several edits for which I had provided third party sources, he accused me of edit warring on my Talk page. When I asked him to explain why he was removing properly sourced information, he failed to do so (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tatzref; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Canadian_Polish_Congress):
 * Icewhiz, you are the one who is deleting all my edits wholesale including sourced information:
 * 21:23, 9 May 2019‎ Tatzref talk contribs‎ 10,942 bytes -29‎ Views - restored scholarly book by Patryk Polec removed by Icewhiz under false pretenses; removed nonRS that contains a third party attribution (not a direct quote)
 * 21:03, 9 May 2019‎ Tatzref talk contribs‎ 10,971 bytes +324‎ History: Solidarity Movement - restored reliably sourced information removed by Icewhiz under false pretenses
 * 20:43, 9 May 2019‎ Tatzref talk contribs‎ 9,889 bytes +414‎ History: Katyn monument - Restored reliably sourced information removed by Icewhiz under false pretenses
 * Please explain each of these these reverts.Tatzref (talk) 22:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Tatzref (talk) 02:19, 11 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Although it appears Icewhiz withdrew his claim that Musial’s book was self published, he continued to maintain it was “fringe” and claimed repeatedly that it was “widely criticized” and “very criticized,” even though many historians had hailed it as an important work (Yehuda Bauer, Karel Berkhoff, Björn M. Felder, Zdzislaw Winncki). When challenged to provide proof, Icewhiz failed to do so. (Talk on Bielski Partisans.)

Tatzref (talk) 03:15, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Rebuttal

 * Regarding postwar property restitution (History of Jews in Poland), under Talk I set out passages from the book “Klucze i kasa” that support my edits. The conclusion that thousands of properties were returned was amply justified, Kopciowski being just one example. A scholarly consensus has emerged among Polish historians (8 were named) who carried out in-depth research into court records for various towns that large quantities of private property were returned. For example, at least 1/3 of all such properties in Szczebrzeszyn were expeditiously reclaimed and sold to Poles without incident. Jewish organizations monitoring the situation at the time corroborated this state of affairs. Icewhiz repeatedly removed references to the extent and effectiveness of that restitution process (02:56, 11 May 2019‎ Icewhiz; 06:06, 16 May 2019‎ Icewhiz), and it has now simply vanished as part of a blatant POV effort. Instead, he launched Michael Meng, who carried out no research on court restitution and cites no sources. Meng’s statement that that the number of recovered properties was “extremely small” is therefore pure speculation, and it was appropriate to point this out.


 * K.e.coffman joined Icewhiz’s & Pinkbeast’s POV effort to remove Musial’s highly regarded book Sowjetische Partisanen even though its foundation (“fringe” book by “anti-Semitic” author) was exposed as a hoax with reference to Yehuda Bauer. (Bielski Partisans.)


 * Stefka Bulgaria’s assertion that the Canadian Polish Congress “denies Polish involvement in anti-Jewish pogroms, including the 1946 Kielce pogrom” is a preposterous hoax introduced by Icewhiz. It is nowhere to be found in the Congress’s critique of Our Class (available online). Moreover, the claim was amply debunked under “Talk” (Canadian Polish Congress).


 * There is nothing inappropriate in referring to sources that Mark Paul uses. (This was part of the rationale for dismissing Icewhiz’s arbitration request against me earlier this year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive248). The alleged “consensus” to bann Mark Paul was the work of just three editors: Icewhiz, K.e.coffman, François Robere (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_241#The_Holocaust_in_Poland:_Ewa_Kurek_&_Mark_Paul). In the real world, Mark Paul has been cited by numerous reputable academics and professional historians among them Damian Bednarski, M.B. Biskupski, M.J. Chodakiewicz, Myrna Goldenberg, Edward Kopowka, Eike Lossin, Tilar Mazzeo, Agata Mirek, Caryn Miriam-Goldberg, Bogdan Musial, Tadeusz Piotrowski, Jan Piskorski, John Radzilowski, Frank Salter, Peter Stachura, Marek Wierzbicki, and Jan Zaryn. His publications are referred to in the Virtual Shtetl website of POLIN The Museum of the History of Polish Jews. Alicja Jarkowska-Natkaniec, a scholar at the Jagiellonian University, remarked on the neutral nature of Mark Paul’s “Patterns of Cooperation, Collaboration and Betrayal” placing it alongside publications by Lars Jockheck, Israel Gutman, Gabriel N. Finder, Rafał Węgrzynek, and Tom Frydel. See her monograph “Wymuszona współpraca czy zdrada? Wokół przypadków kolaboracji Żydów w okupowanym Krakowie” (Universitas, 2018), pp.33-34. Zygmunt Zieliński, former head of 19th & 20th Century History of the Church at the Catholic University of Lublin, called Mark Paul’s “Wartime Rescue of Jews by the Polish Catholic Clergy” a highly competent and meticulous study(https://wpolityce.pl/historia/440091-ks-prof-zygmunt-zielinski-o-dyspucie-na-temat-holokaustu). The fact that some historians may not share those views does not override this large body of scholars who deemed Mark Paul’s publications to be reliable. The opinions of Icewhiz, K.e.coffman, François Robere in this matter are of no consequence.


 * Mark Paul’s views regarding Jewish collaboration in Soviet-occupied Eastern Poland are not inconsistent with those of famed courier Jan Karski (an honorary citizen of Israel), who wrote in 1941, “Jews are denouncing Poles (to the secret police), are directing the work of the (communist) militia from behind the scenes … Unfortunately, one must say that these incidents are very frequent,” and prominent historians such as Norman Davies, Marek Wierzbicki, and Ben-Cion Pinchuk. My statement, "Collaborating with one of these states in furthering these goals (i.e., destroying the Polish state and its leadership) constituted de facto collaboration with the other,” is, I believe, self-evident. Moreover, it extends to all those individuals, regardless of their ethnicity, who collaborated with the Soviets while they were an ally of Nazi Germany. Those two regimes mutually agreed to suppress “all beginnings” of “Polish agitation” and to keep each other informed of their progress. Therefore, if you were helping one to achieve this goal, you were also helping the other. [CORRECTION: Karski's report was written in 1940, not 1941.Tatzref (talk) 21:58, 23 June 2019 (UTC)]


 * After Yaniv (יניב הורון) was reprimanded for accusing me of anti-Semitic vandalism (despite Icewhiz's vigorous defence), and Icewhiz’s unsuccessful arbitration against me, the campaign to discredit me quickly moved to Stormfront, where someone posing as Tatzref spewed a series of ugly anti-Semitic posts that also targeted TonyBallioni (https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1273151/).Tatzref (talk) 03:13, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Paul Siebert
The description of is definitely an anti-Jewish hoax, because  the word "וואַלן" (elections) is clearly seen in the first line, so the current description (election banner) is correct, and the original one (Jews welcome Soviet troops) was wrong. That is sufficient for a permanent topic ban, and I do not understand how can Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus speak about lifting a ban. ---''Removed to fit a word limit. See page history''-- However, until such evidence is provided, it is impossible to speak about any lifting of any sanctions.

Another diff has drawn my attention. Poeticbent added a table to the Ministry of Public Security (Poland) article where the ethnic composition of the ministry is shown. The table is properly sourced, but it is not supplemented by any comments in the article, so, obviously, the table implies that the idea the source is conveying is "Jews played a major role in Stalinist repressions" (otherwise it is not clear why it is needed there, and, by the way, I am going to delete it as irrelevant). However, on the page 63, the cited book says (my translation):
 * "However, it would be a great oversimplification to treat the representatives of Jewish nationality working in security as a compact, homogeneous and maintaining their national autonomy. These people felt primarily communists. Many - as demonstrated by their biographies - also felt Polish, trying not to remember their Jewish roots. Jews did not know that they were Jews until 1968.

That means, by taking the table out of context, Poeticbent distorted the idea of the source he used. Obviously, the purpose was to connect Jews (as an ethnic group) and Stalinist crimes. This Żydokomuna-style mentality seems to be an essential part of Poeticbent's editorial pattern, and I cannot understand why other Polish editors (including those who present their evidences on that page) see no problem with that. Moreover, they seem to edit in the same vein: I've just reverted Żydokomuna-style edits that stayed for years - and nobody saw any problem with that. Something is definitely wrong with the group of Polish editors. Of course, majority of anti-Jewish edits they make (or tolerate) is not a violation of our policy sensu stricto, however, I sincerely cannot understand why they cannot understand that something is fundamentally wrong with what they are doing. I haven't done any systematic search yet, but I am afraid many Poland related articles are infested with this type petty anti-Jewish stuff (formally, non-punishable according to our policy), and they are waiting for some Hercules to purge these Augean stables.--Paul Siebert (talk) 05:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Tatzref: SPA for KPK
Tatzref has 340 edits, and comes across as a WP:SPA for KPK. The KPK denies Polish involvement in anti-Jewish pogroms, including the 1946 Kielce pogrom, that no one seriously disputes. Piotr Wróbel said "that this group is aggressively right-wing". Tatzref's first edit was to promote Mark Paul (RSN, RfC). Here Tatzref seems to support Paul's views of a Jewish-Nazi-Soviet conspiracy - page 10 here: "There is overwhelming evidence that Jews played an important, at times pivotal role, in arresting hundreds of Polish officers and officials in the aftermath of the September 1939 campaign and in deporting thousands of Poles to the Gulag. Collaboration in the destruction of the Polish state, and in the killing of its officials and military, constituted de facto collaboration with Nazi Germany, with which the Soviet Union shared a common, criminal purpose and agenda in 1939–1945.". This goes on:, , , , , , ,

Also: (Ewa Kurek),  (Nasz Dziennik).

Tatzref added WP:PUFFERY to Canadian Polish Congress - - sourced to KPK itself.

Tatzref: response to COI
Tatzref has been evasive when queried by User:K.e.coffman on KPK WP:COI: July 2018, March 2019

Tatzref: False claims
ARBCOM diff: in Bielski partisans, it seems Bogdan Musiał (dewiki), who is described as ethnonationalist historian (reliable sources on enwiki removed by Volunteer Marek), was removed by User:Pinkbeast:. Icewhiz then reintroduced it:, then self-reverted "Oops - edited old version! Undo." after Pinkbeast alerted them

My Very Best Wishes: Tag teaming
There is a pattern of piling on between My Very Best Wishes, Volunteer Marek and Piotrus:, , , , , , , ,. Also AE:, , , ,.

My Very Best Wishes - Volunteer Marek prior arbitration request
My Very Best Wishes and Volunteer Marek's alleged tag teaming was the subject of a previous arbitration request in 2016. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 12:58, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Inaccurate statement by Icewhiz
(08:34, 10 June 2019) claims on this page that Poeticbent was confirmed to Loosmark on 14 September 2011 per an SPI investigation. However, that investigation actually states Likely to be Loosmark, not confirmed.  starship .paint  (talk) 13:27, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

I pinged Icewhiz in my above post, and they rectified their statement accordingly (13:33, 12 June 2019), striking confirmed and inserting likely. . No other comments from me at this point.  starship .paint  (talk) 15:18, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

IP's invited to edit and change Jewish to Polish
In the ANI thread linked above, and here, Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1011 about MOS:Ethnicity, there was an edit highlighting a Tweet on the Rafal Ziemkiewicz page. The very bad Google translations is as follows, "A week has passed, during which several English-language Wiki admins arms "polish" Rumkowski, withdrawn edits, raised the level of blockage And what's going on in these changes shows the removal (23.05) by the next admin ("I am a Jew") distinguish "nationality" and "citizenship"" After that tweet, we saw an influx of IP's and other accounts coming out of the woodworks to edit in this area to change Jew/Polish.

François Robere casting aspersions
I think that should have been added as a party. According to Xtools, FR has been one of the most active editors in the topic area. 295 edits in Collaboration in German-occupied Poland (941 talk-page edits!), 87 edits in Collaboration with the Axis Powers, 48 edits in Justice for Uncompensated Survivors Today (JUST) Act of 2017, 44 edits in Żegota, 41 edits in Jan Grabowski (historian) etc. A lot of these edits are edit-warring.

FR has been (quoting from a recent AE thread by ):
 * 1) 22:05 26 Feb 2019 Warned in the topic area for casting aspersions
 * 2) 22:21 26 Feb 2019 Blocked in the topic area for personal attacks (the offending diff in which FR accuses AE admins of protecting "ethnically motivated vandalism")
 * 3) 12:45 14 March 2018 Blocked for edit-warring in the topic area, with talk page access subsequently revoked, note also the relevant discussion at WP:3RR.

FR characterized Poeticbent's deletion of content in a content dispute as "vandalism" on their talkpage and threatened to take them to AN/I:

In a recent RS/N thread FR stated that talking about Jews and money is obviously antisemitic (but don't take my word for it, the message is more nuanced). However, there is a plethora of academic papers about Jews and money lending in the medieval period at   Google Scholar. The topic is not "obviously" antisemitic. Aspersions of antisemitism are serious.

I urge editors to look at edit warring in these articles in early 2018 especially at "Polish death camp" controversy. --Pudeo (talk) 22:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you to Ice Whiz
I just want to express my gratitude to Ice Whiz for his work on articles about the Holocaust in Lithuania, such as on Jonas Noreika. Here in Lithuania, there is an information war taking place on the subject of the Holocaust in Lithuania. On June 15, 2018, Grant Gochin submitted his Query Regarding Jonas Noreika's Criminal Gang to Lithuania's Genocide Centre, along with a letter of support from Noreika's granddaughter Silvia Foti. They were attacked by the Lithuanian government and dozens of articles in the Lithuanian press, but had the support of the international media. Finally, on June 6, 2019, Lithuanian public television LRT was the first Lithuanian media to interview Silvia Foti in a half-hour show. Meanwhile, it seems that a rogue troll (Alkas Paltarokas of VilniusLifeStyle) working with the Lithuanian Army's Strategic Communications Department has portrayed Wikipedia as unreliable because I had made 11 edits (!) to a Jonas Noreika article in the course of 8 years. (They made no effort to fix those pages, either!) And "unreliable" Wikipedia articles were considered a major priority by a Lithuanian consultant working on reducing the spread of disinformation for the Lithuanian Chancellor. That consultant cited TrueLithuania.com (which produces propaganda like this) as "best practices" to learn from. These agencies have not reached out to those who think differently, like me. The Lithuanian Army has not replied to my letters. I am sharing this to provide a sense of context. A great step forward recently is support by the Kazickas Foundation for indexing Lithuanian testimonies about the early days of the Holocaust. They previously seem to have been funding deniers of Lithuanian crimes against humanity, such as Vidmantas Valiušaitis, and perhaps still do. AndriusKulikauskas (talk) 15:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Icewhiz identified problematic content & sourcing
The impetus for these disputes was the January 2018 amendment to a Polish law criminalising certain statements about the Holocaust in Poland. This generated extensive media coverage, a spike in views for related Wiki-pages |%22Polish_death_camp%22_controversy|Rescue_of_Jews_by_Poles_during_the_Holocaust, and an influx of new editors.

A stable area doesn't mean neutral or accurate, so lack of disputes prior to 2018 isn't meaningful. See Icewhiz's evidence: #Jewish welcome & #1941 pogroms. (My impression was similar; e.g. the Pinsk Ghetto article, which seemingly subscribed to the "Jew-Bolshevik-Partisan" construct of Nazi propaganda:, or Lviv pogroms (1941): Juxtaposition.) These articles aren't well-trafficked so such errors, fabrications, and biases linger.

Icewhiz engages with the arguments by others and provides sourced counter-arguments (although at times too many/overlong). He launched several RSN discussions/RfCs, including: RSN:Mark Paul & Ewa Kurek; RfC:Mark Paul; and RfC:Jewish Baiting Techniques.

VM unnecessarily personalized disputes
VM has behaved in an aggressive and belittling manner towards others, using article TPs/edit summaries to accuse them of: lying ; being hysterical ; edit warring/dishonesty ; holding consensus hostage/sabotaging productive dialog ; being offended by sources positive towards Poland ; and losing it. I've discussed with VM previously, suggesting he use RfCs/admin boards instead, but without success:
 * "Call for decorum", June 2018
 * "Article Talk Pages", March 2019

Tatzref promoted fringe POV
I endorse about. I submitted similar evidence to AE in February 2019; my conclusion was: "an on-going and problematic pattern of advocacy-based editing and promotion of fringe theories": AE statement.

"Mark Paul", affiliated with Canadian Polish Congress, for which Tatzref appears to be a SPA, advocates the idea that Jews in the Soviet occupation zone (1939-41) were de facto Nazi collaborators; see here: Paul's thesis. Tatzref does as well:, bottom of diff: "Collaborating with one of these states in furthering these goals constituted de facto collaboration with the other."

Removing unsuitable sources has been challenging
See disputes around the fringe/anon/self-published author "Mark Paul". Tatzref defended Paul in this RfC: "Even if SOME of Mark Paul’s views may not be mainstream, overall Mark Paul meets the test of reliability. Moreover, there is no Wikipedia policy that bans non-mainstream views..." , prompting a rebuttal from RfC closer:. Piotrus suggested Paul be kept for "non-controversial claims", missing the point that a self-published/anon work is major red flag. In a TP thread, Piotrus stated:


 * "I am not convinced this stuff [Paul] is unreliable"
 * "I agree that Chodakiwiecz and others named represents one side in this debate, but to me he is no less reliable, and no more POVed, then for example Michlic (and Grabowski and Gross)", putting these highly questionable sources on the same plane with mainstream historians such as Jan T. Gross.

Paul was also discussed at RSN:, while SPLC-profiled Marek Jan Chodakiewicz and SPS Anna Poray are still debated. The AfD on the latter (closed as "delete") is worth reading: Articles_for_deletion/Anna_Poray.

Sourcing/civility restriction has worked in the past
See DS-notice at Talk:Collaboration_in_German-occupied_Poland, expanded following AE:François Robere. The sourcing requirement was: "Only high quality sources may be used, specifically peer-reviewed scholarly journals and academically focused books by reputable publishers...". The article stabilised soon after.

--K.e.coffman (talk) 14:53, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Calthinus
before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person

This is tangled. If not for the involvement of established and respected editors on both sides, it wouldn't have lasted so long; the others essentially "pile on" imo. Overall one side feels the other exaggerates the negative aspects of Polish behavior vis-a-vis Jews especially 1939-40s; side 2 sees whitewashing of general Polish treatment of Jews.

I maintain that accusations of Jewish "whitewashing" of claimed mistreatment of Poland is a secondary aspect, but played a significant destabilizing role. Early VM/Icewhiz skirmishes disproportionately focus here ([|where there's not many edits], [| and viewership spikes during wikidrama]). With [|interaction analysis] we can see that aside from project pages, fighting is heaviest regarding historians on the Jewish/Polish issue and 1940s massacres. We can see from [| the history] that after unrelated US/MidEast editing, VM/Icewhiz conflict began February 2018 on "Polish death camp" controversy and Jedwabne massacre, then other massacres. [|This] shows one trigger of future issues: Icewhiz doesn't want "Soviet and Jewish partisans", it attributes murder to ethnicity, not ideology. I will not pretend to be impartial here, but I do assume that the "Polish" side didn't aim to blame Jews for Soviet Russia's actions, but instead to explain the reactions of some Poles as being motivated by something aside from classical antisemitism; nevertheless this inevitably lends weight to familiar "Jewish-Bolshevik" distortions, and "treachery/ingratitude" given Poland's alleged "Jewish paradise" -- maybe enlightened Poles celebrate tolerance with this narrative, but its darker side blames "Peasant Hell" and later traumas on Jews/"foreigners". Polish rescues are notable but perhaps shouldn't get [| equal weight to the ghetto's existence].

...but if you protest this, you inevitably (understandably) look anti-Polish. Icewhiz' edit summaries defending having survivors' views about actions by Poles may anger some; he's also made extensive contributions positively portraying Poles, example. He's "anti-Polish" when Polish rescue starts crowding out death on pages about genocide. Were defensive Polish narratives tilting articles? This demonstrates it. Disproportionate "rescue" emphasis crowding out Jewish death (analogous: White savior). And what about Ukrainian rescuers? Sambir's in Ukraine. Imo: Jewish-focused editors tried to fix these issues, and were misunderstood; it spirals downward after zydokomuna whataboutism. The topic area was infested with problems including anti-Semitic hoaxes. Many have been mentioned. Here's more. [This "Jewish" Soviet welcome poster hoax] [that Icewhiz had to repeatedly remove...]. [A side of source falsification.] The supposed event of Christian clergy freeing Slavic slaves from the evil clutches of Jews (reducing complicated matters[][] incriminating people of all religions/ethnicities to an icon of ethnoreligious libel recycling a classic antisemitic canard) got a picture near the top of the page, remaining for 7 years, one the first pictures the reader sees until June 2019 [] []. It's still being defended.--Calthinus (talk) 06:54, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Ealdgyth
I'm listing three examples, there are many more possible but word limits are strict.
 * Poeticbent adds Steiner's "novelization" of history in 2013. In 2016 Poeticbent created the article on Steiner including as a source this critique of Steiner - but Poeticbent didn't remove Steiner as a source.  As late as November 2018 it was still used at least twice.
 * See here where User:MyMoloboaccount admits that they copied information into the one article from another without copying over all the references which is an example of bad editing practices.
 * Here VM restores and tweaks this sentence "The coordinated actions of the Soviet NKVD and the Communist Party in 1937–1938 against the Polish minority living in the Soviet Union, representing only 0.4 percent of Soviet citizens, amounted to an ethnic genocide as defined by the UN convention, concluded historian Michael Ellman." - but Ellman doesn't actually conclude this. Ellman says (p. 686) (I stripped out parentheticals and sources) "...there are other actions of Team-Stalin in the 1930s that might well qualify as genocide as defined in the UN Convention. In particular this concerns the ‘national operations’ of 1937–38. Of these, the ‘Polish operation’... There are three objections to treating the ‘Polish operation’ as genocide. The first is that NKVD order no. 00485 of 11 August 1937 does not explicitly target Poles as such, ... However, in implementing order 00485, NKVD officers interpreted it as an order to arrest Poles. In its implementation it was predominantly an example of killing people based on their ethnicity. The second objection to treating the ‘Polish operation’ as genocide is that only a minority of Soviet Poles were victims of it. ... Whether this is enough to meet the UN Convention criterion of ‘in whole or in part’ depends on the interpretation of ‘in part’. The third objection is that many of those sentenced in the ‘Polish operation’ were not in fact ‘Poles’. Since no legal tribunal to try the crimes of Stalinism has been established, there is as yet no authoritative ruling on the legal characterisation of the ‘Polish operation’ and the other ‘national operations’ of 1937–38." Ellman (p. 690) states "The ‘national operations’ of 1937–38, notably the ‘Polish operation’, may qualify as genocide as defined by the UN Convention, although there is as yet no legal ruling on the matter." These are the only mentions of the Polish operation. This is not a strong enough statement to state in Wikipedia voice that Ellman concluded that this was an ethnic cleansing - Ellman doesn't discuss ethnic cleansing in connection to Poles. Also, the citation is given as "Michael Ellman, "Stalin and the Soviet Famine of 1932-33 Revisited." Amsterdam School of Economics. PDF file". But it's not published by the Amsterdam School of Economics - its a published journal article hosted on http://www.paulbogdanor.com and it is unclear if the site has permission to host it. (Original publication here.) Per WP:EL, we should not link to possibly copyright infringing sites.

Evidence presented by {your user name}
before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person

{Write your assertion here}
Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring.