Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soviet repressions of Polish citizens (1939-1946)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was Keep as a reasonable fork. As editors said, the main article section that this was split from needs to be shortened, but that is just a matter for editing. This title seems to be a well-sourced and accurate name for the article, given its content. It was not split off to create a different POV space, as the nom says it is word-for-word (aka faithful) reproduction of it's parent equivalent. And yes, the closing admin can read rather than count, but in this case the result was the same either way.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 04:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Soviet repressions of Polish citizens (1939-1946)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The article is a word for word verbatim copy/paste of the section from the Treatment of Polish citizens under Soviet occupation of the Occupation of Poland (1939–1945) article, thus nothing but a blatant POV-fork pasted exactly word for word from another article under a more POVed title. Irpen 02:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Subject is obviously notable; there is a pl wiki equivalent; the article is well referenced. As I explained on article's talk it has been created per WP:SUMMARY; the occupaton article needs to be shortened, and this one expanded even further. The above nom is a sad case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, unfortunately.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions.   —Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, how can anybody ever come up with an idea of deleting such an important and factual article? There were Nazi crimes against ethnic Poles, just like there were Soviet repressions of Polish citizens (I would even rename this article into Soviet crimes against ethnic Poles). History cannot be changed according to some individual biases. Tymek (talk) 04:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The Nazi article is split since we have Holocaust in Poland concentrating on Jews, and Nazi crimes deals with genocide of ethnic Poles. Soviets did not distinguish by race as much and many Jews, Ukrainians and Belorusians, former Polish citizens, suffered at their hand as well. Soviets concentrated on class (rich suffered, poor not so much).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Officially they did not distinguish by the race, but all data shows that Poles suffered much more in the Polish Eastern Borderlands than other nationalities. Tymek (talk) 04:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not disputing that, but it was not as clear as in the case of Germans. The Soviets did not want to eliminate ethnic Slavs or ethnic Poles; they were more into eliminating Polish culture and assimilating Poles into the Soviet state. For Nazis, a good Pole was a dead Pole. For Soviets, transforming them into homo sovieticus would do. Granted; there was a major shift into less anti-Polish policies after Sikorski-Mayski agreement of 1941 (see Amnesty for Polish citizens in USSR), and later, after in 1944 Stalin decided to create a Polish puppet state; the policies of 1939-1941 were probably the hardest (vide Katyn massacre and so on).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, checking sources about Soviet occupation of eastern Poland between 1939 and 1941 I would say that their task, in cooperation with the Germans, was to eliminate ethnic Poles completely. After 1944 it was different, they wanted to keep Poland as a puppet state, this is true. Anyway, we are deviating from the subject. Tymek (talk) 06:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree with Tymek here, scholars studying the problem do point that that ethnic extermination of Polish nation stopped only in 1941 with Nazi invasion and the need to exploit Polish population as resource during the war. I would rename the article Soviet crimes against ethnic Poles, as Polish minority was repressed before 1939 in Soviet Union and after 1946.--Molobo (talk) 20:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - I can see nothing wrong with the plan Piotrus has laid out. It is an extremely notable and important article, and Piotrus has created it in line with WP:SUMMARY.  However, If someone can show me how the current title violates WP:UE or WP:NCGN, then of course it should be deleted immediately, and Piotrus should be blocked forever!  Ostap 05:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Article is well sourced, and subject is notable (as notable as this one). Moreover, the article exists on Polish wikipedia. Puark (talk) 19:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment on the votes above. I am not saying that the article discusses an non-notable info. Neither that it is unreferenced. The problem is its being a classical POV fork - an exact text pasted from an existing article under a more POVed title. If someone pastes a half of History of Jews in Poland into a new article and titles in Polish Antisemitism that new article would also be "referenced", present valid content and "sourced". Still it would be a POV-fork. --Irpen 21:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Instead of labeling editorial actions "classic" this or that which you don't approve of and passing summary judgement, consider giving things some time to develop. I certainly agree that one should not have a verbatim copy of content in two places--but the difference is that I don't immediately take that as being the intent and end product and then act on a basis of assuming POV-pushing. Perhaps we can yet agree on a less combative 2008? —PētersV (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, Expand and Rename Valid article, expand on attempts to destroy Polish minority in Soviet Union after 1920 till 1939, and repressions against Poles after 1946. Rename to Soviet crimes against ethnic Poles, just as Nazi crimes against ethnic Pols article.--Molobo (talk) 22:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. I don't see this as a POV fork but as expansion. I am not 100% happy with the title but "repression" seems to be a more neutral word than "crimes" (particularly in the absence of any legal framework for labeling them as such). It would seem necessary to show what exactly is POV about the topic, and I don't see that it is or that it veers away from the parent article in a significant fashion. We're not paper -- we can expand and calve articles as long as there are sources to guide us. --Dhartung | Talk 23:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Perhaps we could allow editors some time to move and adjust content and summarize the original in the parent before we go around pouncing and nominating stuff for deletion? This sort of chewing up of editors' time to respond to yet another thing somewhere instead of working on content doesn't contribute to WP. Just a thought. —PētersV (talk) 01:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * P.S. To Irpen: It took you less than 24 hours after the initial article creation for you to nominate for deletion. And you nominated it for deletion a mere minute after you posted your first comment to the article's talk page. That would lead an impartial observer to conclude that you're monitoring Piotrus' editing and, more to the point, that you had no intent to actually discuss anything on the talk page (as in, await an explanation), you were merely rendering your verdict (of bad faith). I was rather hoping for a more positive 2008. —PētersV (talk) 02:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC) It's not too late, you can always withdraw the AfD. —PētersV (talk) 02:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I have to respond to this vicious attack by Vecrumba unleashed despite I said publicly many times that I am not monitoring Piotrus' editing. As a matter of principle I never click on his contributions link. Never! While he follows my edits everywhere adding whatever he can find to his diffs-dump, which he maintains to this day, I do not reciprocate this favor. Here is one of the places where I went on record on my approach to these matters. Last time when the issue of stalking was resurrected by Piotrus himself, even he was satisfied with the answer. Here the situation is exactly the same. The new article got linked by Piotrus himself to an article of which I was one of the major editors both at its current location and at the location of its mother article. There is nothing more to add to that except Vecrumba may want to apologize for accusing me of stalking and plain bad faith. As for the article, I only nominated it because it is a classical POV-fork not because it is "unimportant", or "sourced" as some here assert. --Irpen 04:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Please, Irpen! I was explaining what it looks like. That you nominate for deletion a minute after posting your first comment can lead one to believe you seek conflict, not consensus. You say you were not following, that is fine. I just don't nominate for deletion without first engaging in a meaningful discussion. Please put the sabre away. I have no desire to spend 2008 the way we spent 2007. The choice is yours.
 * " Vicious attack by Vecrumba? " You might examine whether you're rather taking this personally as opposed to a mere observation. You might consider what I stated more dispassionately. Again, I stated how it appears, not how it is. You clearly feel you are being personally set upon. Pretend the comment didn't come from me and consider the timings of your editorial choices and what their rather pointed absence of dialog imply. What we are having here is not dialog, discussions on AfD are already conflict resolution. This is not a substitute for discussing article worthiness on a talk page. —PētersV (talk) 18:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep or rename to more trendy idiom such as: Red Holocaust Rising (Poland under Soviet occupation 1939-1946) if not satisfied with the article title. The content is thoroughly notable and unpretentious in comparison to the Jewish paranoia regarding such wording as "holocaust", "apartheid", "anti-semitism", etc. greg park avenue (talk) 03:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. I have to agree with PētersV. Martintg (talk) 06:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Absolutely no chance of having this being deleted of course, as most of the people attracted to voting here will wish its content to be retained. Well, it'd be retained anyway, as it already exists in another article, where it is not flagged in the same POV-way. But I guess having it in one place in a semi-neutral manner isn't enough! Another lamb of neutrality sacrificed on the wikipedia altar to the nationalist god of victimhood. Everyone these days wants to be a victim of something; for Eastern Europe more than anywhere perhaps, victimhood is being cultivated on wikipedia by people with no or little direct experience of it claiming it through the constructed medium of national identity, with no regard for WP:NPOV, WP:SYN or POV-forking. Most of the eastern European articles of this type promote victimhood or visions of a larger state (e.g. Partitions of Poland articles, Polish minorities in areas that "used to be [and ought to be?] Polish", etc), and that's not just Polish articles. Sad for me is that I love Poland and Polish history, but all I'll get for this vote is dislike from many Polish users. For what it's worth, I'd be just as against British repressions of Scottish Highlanders or British repressions of the Irish. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 22:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Everyone these days wants to be a victim of something - what a ridicuous remark, written by an otherwise experienced editor. Let me remind you this is about facts, not about wishes. Hundreds of thousands of Poles died in Soviet hands, and nobody is promoting victimhood. These events need a description. How about deleting Holocaust-related articles? Why don't you give it a try? In this context, your alleged love of Poland is really dubious Tymek (talk) 20:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply I don't get your point. The material already exists on wikipedia! And what a surprise the Holocaust is brought up, the Jules Rimet Trophy of ethnic victimhood ... and of course perfect affirmation of Godwin's law. Yeah, you've really made my comments look ridiculous! ;) Along with the Holocaust comes Holocaust Denial, or H. D., also standing for Holodomor denial on wikipedia since a few months ago; same kinda thing ... you see it's not just Polish articles where this kind of thing comes up, so don't feel too persecuted! And I refer you to my previous comments, I'd be just as against British repressions of Scottish Highlanders or British repressions of the Irish. The articles we have about the Holocaust of course aren't in violation of WP:OR, WP:SYN, WP:NPOV, and WP:POV-forking, and as that's the case I don't see what your point is. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 21:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know where you are getting this ethnic angle from, the article under discussion is about repression of Polish citizens, i.e. a political/legal concept. Recall Felix Dzerzhinsky, the founder of the NKVD, the tool of Soviet repression, was an ethnic Pole. The repression was politically based, not ethnic. Martintg (talk) 01:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * As far as my own comments are concerned, I don't see why any of that matters ... Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 01:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Martintg, let me just remind you that Dzerzhinsky died in 1926, and this article describes later events. Deacon of Pndapetzim - your theoretical speculations are very interesting, but as articles British repressions of Scottish Highlanders and British repressions of the Irish do not exist, get to work and delete this . Also, your remark Polish minorities in areas that "used to be [and ought to be?] Polish" was very helpful, so please delete British Empire, as this is about areas that used to be British. Thank you. Tymek (talk) 17:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. A notable and encyclopedic subject. The article is nicely sourced and illustrated. Such articles should be written about all countries occupied by the Soviet Union. This can not be compared with British repressions because Soviet Union was a totalitarian country. I invite everyone to improve a more general article called Soviet political repressions. Biophys (talk) 05:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you think it would be a good idea ... imagining when we have all the Soviet repression articles ... to have a "Soviet Repressions" template like the current "Soviet Occupations" template? Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 05:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Just looking at the Category:Political repression in the Soviet Union, I think that would be a number of different templates. Templates are generally helpful, no matter what is their subject. They facilitate navigation in WP and look nice.Biophys (talk) 21:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll take it that's a yes. Do you think Oppressions by the Soviet Union needs a different template from Oppressions in the Soviet Union? Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 21:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This is not a proper place to discuss templates. Soviet political repressions include repressions within the country and abroad, such as those conducted by SMERSH at the occupied territories. If you have any specific questions, you are welcome to discuss them at my talk page.Biophys (talk) 01:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure this place is any more proper a place to invite everyone to improve a more general article called Soviet political repressions, yet that's what you did. But two wrongs don't make a right ... I was just wanting to establish how far you were prepared to go along that line of thinking. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 01:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * To reflect the old joke, I do hope that the closing admin can read rather than count. Relata refero (talk) 20:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * All that had to happen is some meaningful dialog before the AfD was launched. But no, we jumped right into an AfD which was bound to run along party lines, rehash the same dialog regarding Soviet repressions, and not move opposing viewpoints any closer to consensus, just more time wasted on needless conflict. —PētersV (talk) 00:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * And not meaningful dialogue before the article was created? Relata refero (talk) 08:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe that before or after works as long as there's a discussion somewhere along the way. I do not believe that submitting an article to AfD immediately after posting one's first comment to said article qualifies as a discussion. —PētersV (talk) 05:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * All the closing admin has to do is to close it per WP:SNOW. Simple story.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.