Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ukrainian-German collaboration during World War II


 * 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 No consensus, although the consensus in favor of cleanup is overwhelming. But AfD is not the place to settle content disputes, that's what WP:RfM, WP:RfC, WP:RfArb are for. ~ trialsanderrors 05:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Ukrainian-German collaboration during World War II

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

A POV/edit war magnet, including the title. The content should be merged/split between Non-German cooperation with Nazis during World War II, History of Ukraine (or German occupation of Ukraine in World War II), History of the Jews in Ukraine and/or Holocaust in Ukraine during World War II. We don't have Romanian-German collaboration during World War II, Hungarian-German collaboration during World War II, Polish-German collaboration during World War II, French-German collaboration during World War II, or Austrian-German collaboration during World War II. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete per Hummus Alex Bakharev 09:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete per above --Bryndza 14:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and delete is not a possible outcome. --- RockMFR 22:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It seems that some people don't quite understand- per GFDL requirements, the edit history for content must be maintained. Therefore, if the current content of the article is to be merged somewhere, it can't be deleted. It can be redirected however. Is this what you mean? --- RockMFR 15:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge content and Delete - This is a definite fork article. It has been and still is an edit war magnet. In its present form it is singularly antiukrainian and prejudiced. If one wants legitimately treat the subject of Ukrainian German collaboration, than there should not be an exclusive focus on Holocaust, there should be at least an attempt to look at other forms of collaboration including non-military. In its present form it is "How Ukrainians murdered Jews". If this is an objective of the author, than there should be an article about how "Jews murdered Ukrainians". This is not a legitimate or in any way serious treatment of the subject. These events are already covered in a number of articles. It should be merged with History of Ukraine and these events could be covered and expanded there.--Hillock65 05:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Non-German cooperation with Nazis during World War II discusses the same thing but the article sub sections are only stub paragraphs or less, much information is lacking, especially by encyclopedia standards, it would be better if that article redirected to individual articles like this one, the topic is unique and deserves much more information than just stub sections in various articles --Yarillastremenog 10:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Yarillastremenog. Additionally, the fact that it is a pov or edit war magnet doesn't mean that there shouldn't be such an article.  The rationale for deletion really seems to boil down to "I don't like it".  Individual national collaboration with the Germans in WWII are each worthy of articles, if someone has the time and expertise.  Books have been written on the subject, you know.--Wehwalt 12:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Because of the extent of Nazi activity in Ukraine during WWII, and the notoriety of some Ukrainian collaborators, there is enough material for an article. There are similar articles for state-level collaboration in Vichy France, Nedic’s Serbia, Independent State of Croatia, etc, (linked from Non-German cooperation with Nazis during World War II) and the article ahould be named consistently with these. I'd suggest Reichskommissariat Ukraine, but (a) that is a large and badly organised article already, and (b) it's about the Nazi civil admin rather than Ukraininan collaboration. I incline to weak keep, partly because there seems to be edit warring and accusations of POV pushing, which should not be resolved by AfD. Squiddy | (squirt ink?)  14:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * After thought and reading other people's points, I am persuaded that good, NPOV and sourced material should be merged, mostly into Reichskommissariat Ukraine, (possibly some into other holocaust topics / articles about individual people), and the page deleted. So I now vote Merge, but then delete the current article. Squiddy | (squirt ink?)  20:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep There is more than sufficient material to keep it as a separate article. The title is a neutral description of historical events; collaboration took place in Ukraine, just like elsewhere in Europe. The lack of separate articles on collaboration in different countries is a problem that must be addressed through content writing. Deleting this article is not a way of solving this problem. Beit Or 15:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Many articles, and you know that, exist in wikipedia that are edit war magnets. the content is notable and for the most part referenced.Bless sins 17:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge or Move to a future article called "Occupation of Ukraine" per Galkovsky 's suggestion.Bless sins 02:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge &mdash; It's a legitimate topic. But the article should spend more coverage on the failure of Germany to better exploit the mentioned national divisions, which is considered one of their key strategic errors during the invasion. &mdash; RJH (talk) 17:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Encyclopedic topic, and worthy of its own article. The article is referenced. If it is an edit war magnet, it can be semiprotected, and disruptuve editing or 3RR violations can be dealt with appropriately other than by giving in and deleting the article. The title seems appropriate and NPOV. Lack of the other reedlink articles is perhaps a reason to create same, but hardly a reason to delete this one. Edison 20:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 21:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 05:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 05:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment partly per Squiddy. This is a hopeless grabbag, typical of a POV fork. Parts of the content are encyclopedic, and would seem to belong in Reichskommissariat Ukraine, which itself needs major work. It is actually two distinct topics, littered with POV fluff confusing the picture: Ukrainian military, police, or guard units that served the Germans, and Ukrainian local populace collaboration. The two overlap at the Holocaust. But there is nothing convincing that these are the same topic. Perhaps I would be more inclined to keep an article on participation in the Holocaust by non-German populations in the east. Jd2718 06:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete --Galkovsky 06:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * keep If the more comprehensive article is justifiable, then so is this, because it is unfortunately enough material. Desires to merge it are not NPOV. DGG 07:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete this ukrainophobic article should not be kept in Wikipedia. --Alex Kov 09:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment if this is a POV fork, then so is Non-German cooperation with Nazis during World War II. And describing crimes by Ukrianians is in no way Ukrainophobia, but rather an accurate depiction of history.--Carabinieri 12:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep In its current state it is no good, but it can be expanded (maybe renaimed) and if well referenced and concise, this can be a good article. Of course it has to be kept neutral as such, but it can be done. Just take one step at a time. And no it is not Ukrainophobia but just a reminder to all Svidomy Ukrainians' the truth about the people they call "heroes".--Kuban Cossack 13:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I decided to change my opinion to Merge with other bits already on wiki and create History of Ukraine in World War II--Kuban Cossack 01:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject is notable, poor and even possibly partisan/highly POVed contents of the article are no ground for denying the need to have a separate article on that subject.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 14:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and delete There are valid issues and facts contained in this entry which have a place in Wikipedia, but not as a separate article which so specifically singles out Ukrainians, and certainly not under this inflammatory title. It should be noted that until Adam Carr moved it, the title was the even more incendiary Ukrainian Nazi Collaboration during WW2. By its very nature and uniqueness, it posits as a given fact that large numbers of non-Jewish Ukrainians behaved in such a heinous fashion towards Jewish Ukrainians that they deserve an article which would serve to direct more condemnation against them than against any other German-occupied national group. This is the very point raised by Humus sapiens in his opening comment and reiterated even more strongly by User:Hillock65. Reasoned examples of articles about other countries under German occupation are provided by Squiddy. All of those countries had collaborators and militias which rounded up Jews and transferred them into German hands, to be sent off to death camps, but the titles of those articles are neutral&mdash;Vichy France, Nedic's Serbia, etc. Squiddy notes that the Reichskommissariat Ukraine entry is primarily about German administration of occupied territory, not the Holocaust, but the same can be said about the Vichy France entry, and yet no one has spun off a separate article about French-German collaboration in the Holocaust. French police chief of Lyon, Rene Bousquet, who personally ordered and supervised the delivery of thousands of Jews to the Germans, doesn't even have an entry. The proposal by Jd2718 of combining this Ukrainian entry into a broad article on the entire region's culpability makes the most sense. Romanspinner |talk 16:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and delete per Humus Sapiens and Romanspinner. I don't consider this ukrainophobia, but the entry is not balanced and can better serve its informative role under an appropriate title, such as mentioned above (e.g. Vichy France, etc).
 * Kuban kazak, although we differ in our political views, when it comes to working on wikipedia subjects, we usually find common ground. So I am puzzled as to the usefulness here of your comment that Ukrainians call Nazi collaborators their heroes.  I disagree.  Further, on your User page, you have a picture of Stalin (!), allegedly in protest of "nationalist xenophobia", yet Stalin's murder count rivals Hitler's.  Remember the Gulag? the artifical famine during the 1930s? the deportations to Siberia of Poles, Ukrainians, Tatars? the "dekulakization"? or the murder of Don Cossacks?  So who are you to make comments that Ukrainians worship the Nazis, when you so admire Stalin?!--Riurik (discuss) 17:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If my disclaimer could not be more clear...actually Stalin was the person who signed the order to reestablish the Cossack hosts in 1936 and kept them going until his death... However what are we talking about here? And yes it is a sorry sight, not to watch how those former UPA veterans march on the Kreshatik, but how they allow themselves to be used as dolls in a political game...--Kuban Cossack 12:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Like Piotrus has already stated, the fact that the article is badly written in so many ways is not a reason for deletion, but rather one for improvement. The fact that there are no corresponding articles does not "serve to direct more condemnation against them [the Ukrainians] than against any other German-occupied national group" like you claim Romanspinner. Wikipedia is not for about directing condemnation against anyone - it is for describing historical truths, for example. And the fact that a lot of Ukrainians collaborated with Nazi Germany is such a historical truth. Croatians, Lithuanians, Albanians also did that and that should be mentioned too - in the correct articles. A higher level of detail on the Ukrainian collaboration only goes to show that there are more Wikipedians interested in writing about it than about the Croatian collaboration, for example. We should encourage more people to write about those topics rather than deleting information about topics with better coverage.


 * If Wikipedia was to follow your logic, Romanspinner, the majority of all US-related articles would have to be deleted, because the country definately gets undue weight on Wikipedia currently compared with other countries with comparable sizes. If there is to be a reasonable discussion about this, everyone will have to ignore the emotional aspects connected with dealing with Nazi Germany and the Holocaust.--Carabinieri 18:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge content and delete per above. --Fire.Tree 18:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * comment Perhaps the fair think to do would to also expand the sections dealing with other nationalities. and given them separate articles. But we have this one already so let's keep it; there is no excuse to decrease the coverage of the parts we do have. DGG 03:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and delete per nom. --Yakudza 17:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into a Ukraine during World War II, History of Ukraine (1941-1945) or something of the sort article and delete the redirect. —dima/s-ko/ 23:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge then delete redirect (Conisistent with my comment, above). Content belongs in Non-German cooperation with Nazis during World War II, History of Ukraine, History of the Jews in Ukraine, Holocaust, and Reichskommissariat Ukraine. There is encylcopediac content relevant to Ukrainian collaboration during WWII, and we should be careful that this is preserved and mreged into the appropriate article(s). Jd2718 23:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC) (changed delete to redirect) Jd2718 23:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and delete per above.--Chuprynka 00:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and delete per above.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 10:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and delete per above.-- red SUNRISING 10:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as this is a solid article and meets all the requirements of WP:V 100%. The fear about "POV magnet" is unfounded, as Wikipedia's function is not to hide the facts and truth of history nor to become an accomplice to historical revisionism by splitting up and scattering important, albeit painful, articles to the four corners of the Earth just because some people can't face the frightening facts of history. IZAK 19:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per IZAK --Nfvatutin 20:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This article is its current form is just a place to grind an ax for various editors. If to exist, it should be rerwitten from scratch with strict adherence to WP:V and WP:NPOV. In the current form the article is a waste. The best is to blank its content by a redirect so that that whatever valuable and referenced in it could be merged into other articles or to be used in an article to be rewritten in the future. --Irpen 21:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to where?--Bryndza 23:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Somewhere like Reichskommissariat Ukraine. Squiddy | (squirt ink?)  00:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, [[Reichskommissariat Ukraine would work for now. Sorry to have forgotten. The only reason why I want it replaced with a redirect, rather than deleted, is to preserve the history as a source for whatever refs there are now and, mainly, as a lesson to learn upon. Nothing can possibly come out from the disgusting mess in which this article is now. --Irpen 01:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. As far as I can see, nobody actually wants to delete all the content. Merging and moving should be handled on the article's talk page, not on Afd. As I said above, merging and deleting is not an option. It can be renamed, or maybe merged and redirected, or both, but merging and deleting is not an option. --- RockMFR 21:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete per above.--A4 22:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, no matter where it is, the information should be kept. --Shamir1 23:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename I dunno what, but the current name deosnt go. frummer 04:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, improve rather than delete.  // Halibutt 15:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge, although I think most of the reasons for deletion given in this discussion are wrong. It should not be deleted because the quality is poor, or because there are no corresponding articles for other nations. Deleting the article for that reason would be completely absurd, since that would justify deleting large parts of Wikipedia. And Wikipedia articles are not designed to place blame as has been mentioned by several editors, but rather to inform. I do, however, believe that starting a History of Ukraine in World War II article first and then splitting information related to collaboration into its own sub-article once there is a lot of it would be more helpful. For one, those Ukrainian nationalists, who start to cry and add irrelevant information about resistance just because they can't bear the thought of having crimes committed by Ukrainians mentioned by themselves, would be satisfied (I hope). Further, I just believe it would be more easy to write good, informative articles about this topic if a general article about Ukraine in World War II is written first and then other articles are split off once there is enough information.--Carabinieri 20:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * For one, could you just name a single Ukrainian nationalists among those opposed to this article in this shape? Secondly, no one denies that an article on collaboration specifically could have been written but this would not be an "improved version of this article" but a complete rewrite. This disgusting piece  of crap started by a confirmed sock solely to grind an ax cannot serve as a basis for the article improvement. Anything encyclopedic on the topic would have to be written from scratch. So, this, so called, "article" belongs to the wastebasket anyhow. --Irpen 20:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you implying that Ukrainians did not participate in the massacres of Jews at Babi Yar and elsewhere and did not enlist in the SS Division "Galizien"? These are the facts that you want to throw in the wastebasket. Beit Or 20:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Not at all I imply this. I added the info you mention to articles in WP myself and fought the Ukrainian nationalists who tried to suppress this info. I am implying that this article in its current form and shape belongs to the wastebasket since it cannot be improved but rewritten. Crimes committed by Ukrainians do belong to Wikipedia all right. --Irpen 20:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Noone is suggesting Ukrainian participation in German units didn't happen, although it should not be painted black and white either, not to mention that not all of them committed crimes. History is full of exceptions and different circumstances, it should not be used for smearing someone with labels but rather to educate. What is objectionable in this disgusting piece is that the author of this "article" posts pictures of bare brested girls as evidence of collaboration. This is the level of the whole article. All aspects of Ukrainian German cooperation should be covered but preferrably by adults with serious approach.--Chuprynka 20:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that this article is mostly crap, which is why I voted to merge this article. It just really got on my nerve that there were editors who started writing about evil Zionists who were allegedly culpable for the Holocaust only in order to relativate what Ukrainians did. Further, the "Righteous people of the world" is really interesting and definately belongs in Wikipedia, but not in article about Ukrainian-German collaboration.--Carabinieri 20:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, if you really want to hear some names: I am mostly referring to User:Hillock65 and everyone he recruited to help him win edit wars.--Carabinieri 21:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You are not arguing with Hillock here. Please no Straw man arguments. If someone wrote somewhere that Jews are responsible for starving Ukrainians and it is still in the articles, show this to me or delete this crap yourself. In no way the antisemitic edit by one editor justifies the appearance of this Ukrainophobic piece of crap written by a sock and defended by you and some others. --Irpen 21:25, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I was not arguing with anyone. You asked me "just name a single Ukrainian nationalists", which I did and I explained why the Ukrainian nationalists were getting on my nerves: they were adding anti-Semitic crap to this article and removing sourced information I added to it.--Carabinieri 12:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hillock has left enwiki. His antisemitic insinuations is a poor excuse for this xenophobic crap written by a sock that you are trying to defend. --Irpen 16:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete Evgeny 22:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete per above. Serebr 22:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and Delete -- Serguei Trouchelle 23:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge content and Delete per Humus sapiens. --Igrek 09:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep -- the article is indeed of pretty low quality, but it's a valid topic and can be improved. bogdan 15:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, the pictures are good, the article needs work and expansion -- possibly a better title could be found, but thats a matter for the talk page, not AfD. - Francis Tyers · 15:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This AfD has been featured on the Ukrainian Wikipedia. - Francis Tyers · 15:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: not a single voter I've seen is a single-purpose account that came from the Ukrainian Wikipedia. Please do not try to present this vote as falsified for no reason. --Irpen 18:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Francis was just mentioning that fact. Calm down.--Carabinieri 20:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Please do not calm me down. What's the relevance then? --Irpen 01:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It is relevant because it could happen that people come here from the Ukrainian Wikipedia just to push this discussion one way and I guess that's what the user wanted to warn us (though I can't read his mind), but I don't want to argue with you about idiotic things like this. Just remain civil and don't make a big deal out of things like this.--Carabinieri 02:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Pardon me, where was I uncivil? --Irpen 03:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and Delete per above. -- Esp rus2 16:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or at least merge. While poorly written in parts, the subject is a valid one. Just because we lack articles on Romanian, Hungarian, Slovak, etc. collaboration isn't grounds for deleting this article; it should serve as a challenge for us to write articles on those other topics. Biruitorul 04:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note that those editors who voted merge and delete do not dispute or question the validity of the subject or that it should be covered. The delete should only come after merging is completed.--Riurik (discuss) 04:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The topic is indeed valid all right. The question is whether the article in its current form is of any use for the topic. If the current article can be improved into something encyclopedic, keep could be justified. The point is that anything encyclopedic would have been written from scratch. This so called "article" belongs only to a trashcan. --Irpen 04:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, rename, merciless cleanup. While this article, as well as the main one, Non-German cooperation with Nazis during World War II, are in an atrocious shape, there are bits and pieces about collaborationism in various wikipedia articles. Time to put all this into an observable and controllable shape, beginning with a standard title for all involved countries. I am repeating, since it is a sensible topic, the work must start with merciless cleanup. Anything unreferenced and dubiously phrased must be deleted at once. `'mikka 05:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and delete per above. --Zserghei 09:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Beit Or. - Darwinek 15:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and delete as previously said. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  17:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * keep - notable subject, needs to be re-written, though. Constanz - Talk 19:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * keep it is not appropriate to delete article because they have the propensity to attract pov/edit wars. Keep the article clean per WP:NPOV but do not remove it.  Jerry lavoie 01:25, 26 January 2007 (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.