Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of the Jews in Poland/archive1

History of the Jews in Poland
Partial self-nom. Many editors have helped to prove that we can have a good NPOV article on a controversial subject. Has been through a Peer Review. Former FAC objections have been addressed, I hope - they were fairly minor, and I was supprised that the article had so few (2!) votes then. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:41, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Support. But, of course, I have also worked heavily on the article, and would be pissed off to deal with any objections that might be raised. --Goodoldpolonius2 16:58, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, it's definitely one of he best descriptions of the topic I've seen on the internet - and I did read a lot. Halibutt 18:04, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support; a very well-written and thorough article. A few questions/suggestions, though:
 * The two templates at the top, when combined with the TOC, form a continuous set of boxes across the screen, which looks somewhat strange; it may be better to space them out vertically, possibly by using TOCright.
 * Some of the section headings don't follow the MoS in that they have leading articles and non-standard capitalisation.
 * Most of the articles in the "See also" section are linked in the text; is this section necessary?
 * The issues are minor enough that they're not worth objecting over, but I think resolving them may improve the article further. Kirill Lokshin 18:28, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I know. From ADL: In responding "probably true" to the statement "Jews have too much power in international final markets," the 2005 survey found: Austria - 33%, down from 36% in 2004 Belgium - 33%, down from 36% Denmark - 21% up from 18% France - 24%, down from 29% Germany - 24%, down from 27% Italy - 32%, up from 31% The Netherlands - 19% no change Spain - 54%, up from 53% Switzerland - 30%, down from 38% The United Kingdom - 16% down from 18% Hungary - 55% Poland - 43% Poles' mind about that issue is not that different (there are even countries 2 countries in this list where the situation is worse) but it is however more than two times the scores of Denmark, UK, and the Netherlands, and 10% more than Belgium and Austria which are known for their strong far-right parties (Vlaams Belang and FPÖ). I would not call that normalized. Of course there are no pogrom or appartheid laws, but I wouldn't describe this as normalized. You must really rewrite this sentence in a way which make clear what normalized means Vb 16:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support a marvelous, important and thorough article. I agree with Kirill Lokshin that I don't believe the See Also section is really needed. I have seen the same section questioned on a number of articles here. Great job! *Exeunt* Ganymead Dialogue? 18:35, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Well done. --Lysy (talk) 18:53, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Balcer 19:49, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Object . The article is written in a wonderful style, is easy to read, seem to be comprehensive and is very interesting. I have found the term "Kahal" which should be explained in the text. I have however a quite strong objection.  I have the feeling the article has a weak non NPOV.  The lead and the last section (1989–present) are in my opinion a bit too positive with respect to the anti-semiticism in Poland.  In the lead: " immediately prior to World War II it had a vibrant Jewish community" I wonder whether "vibrant" is the correctly chosen term: is this really NPOV?  Is the expression "the increasingly anti-Semitic Russian Empire" really NPOV?  From the lead one gains the impression that, if the Jews in Poland were victims of anti-semiticism, that was due to foreigners and not to the Poles themselves.  I wonder whether this is not a trend towards minimizing the Polish participation to anti-semiticism and the holocaust.  I think if the Poles did not participate actively to the holocaust that should be said explicitly.  On the other hand if they did one should mention to which extent.  This impression of NPOV is destroyed later on in the article but it should be mirrored in the lead.  The last section ignores to discuss the anti-semitic movements in Poland in the 1990s.  I have made a bit of google with the keyword antisemitism poland and found the following article on http://www.axt.org.uk/ : Nonetheless, the existence of xenophobic or ultra-nationalistic sentiments remains evident, to a lesser or greater degree, among large sections of Polish society. The parliamentary elections of 2001, in which a number of far right candidates were elected, show that ultra-nationalist and populist rhetoric—used particularly by candidates of the ultra-conservative Liga Polskich Rodzin and the protest party Samoobrona—is still able to attract support. The fact that Poland’s economic situation has visibly worsened recently almost certainly contributed to this electoral outcome, as did the ongoing cultural and political effects of the Polish bid to become a member of the European Union. While many mainstream political leaders willingly express support for initiatives that promote tolerance and that combat xenophobia, those on the far right continue to use xenophobic discourse in pursuit of their parties’ political goals.Furthermore, despite a certain amount of ‘good will’ among more liberal political circles, actual manifestations of prejudice are often downplayed, passed over in silence or even denied. At the same time antisemitic and xenophobic attitudes are demonstrably present to some degree among the young generation of Poles, and to a very high and visible degree among football fans and ultra-nationalist skinheads. Verbal and physical attacks on immigrants and members of 'visible minorities', as well as numerous cases of the desecration of Jewish cemeteries and synagogues, are of course the most spectacular evidence of these problems in Poland.  I therefore think it would be a good idea to add a paragraph about antisemiticism in the 1990s in Poland. Vb
 * Thank you for your comments and providing the sourced quote - you do make a good point about the anti-Semitic propaganda of some elements of modern Polish society. And you make another good point that it should be stressed that Poles did not participate in the Holocaust (with a few, tragic exceptions) - instead, they were its victims. Be bold and suggest/edit in exact changes to the lead and other paragraphs that would satisfy you, I have already made some changes. Oh, Kahal is linked to its own article on the first occurence of this term. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:20, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't know a lot about 1990s anti-Semitism, but that should be covered, perhaps some of the other editors could help, I will do some digging as well. As far as the participation in the Holocaust, it was more complicated to assign blame in Poland than elsewhere since the Poles were targeted by the Nazis, there was little direct cooperation with the Germans despite growing anti-Semitism in 1930s -- at the same time, there were some horrible pogroms like Jedwabne, and also acts of heroism.  It is difficult to figure out how to make this much clearer in the article, since these interactions were at a much smaller level than the wholesale participation of countries like Romania, or even countries with many collaborators, like Lithuania.  I don't find "vibrant" or "increasingly anti-Semitic" POV -- do you have any specific objections to them? --Goodoldpolonius2 16:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I have added a para about anti-semitic right-wing propaganda in modern Poland. I would polish it more (no pun intended), but need to go offline now. Let me know if you think it needs further expantion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:40, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I would like to see just a word of explanation after Kahal and the newly introduced Sejm (like "Oświęcim (the site of the Auschwitz camp)") because clicking on the link is a strong flow break. Maybe changing "(called "Żydokomuna", or the belief in a Jewish-Communist conspiracy)" into "(this conspiracy is alled "Żydokomuna", or the belief in a Jewish-Communist conspiracy)" would be clearer but I am not sure.  I simply think the new paragraph should be a bit copyedited but that its content is good and raise my objection with respect to the 1989–present section.  I think this paragraph and others exemplifying the participation of the Polish people in anti-semitism should be mirrored in the lead.  A sentence such as "Poles did not participate in the Holocaust (with a few, tragic exceptions)" could appear in the lead but also the section "Rising Anti-Semitism" could be summarized in the lead.  I think this must be done because the lead as it is now provides the reader the impression of non NPOV, a trend to embellish the relationship between the Poles and the Jews.  To the question why I object to the use of "vibrant".  I have the feeling (but I am no native English speaker) this adjective provides the impression of a positive atmosphere (a happy Jewish community playing klezmer music in the street in a Chagall's painting) which contrast with the information in the section "Rising Anti-Semitism".  My objection to "the increasingly anti-Semitic Russian Empire" is because I think one cannot say of a state (except Nazi Germany) that it is anti-Semitic.  One can say that it has strong anti-Semitic political or popular movements but usually no state is explicitly anti-Semitic.  The same objection is for the wording "the state-sponsored "anti-Zionist" anti-Semitic campaign".  Since everybody knows the communist government was some kind of Russian puppet, this sentence seems to advocate for an intrisically non anti-Semitic Polish society.  It sounds like the responsible ones for the antisemitism were not the Poles but the Russians.  I think a good way to counterbalance this overall impression is to introduce some contra balancing arguments in the lead.  Vb 08:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I have found another source at the US gov which could help you http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2004/35477.htm describing current concern about antisemitism in Poland. Vb 12:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, I tried to address the issues with the introduction, Sejm, and Kahal. I left in the state-sponsored anti-Zionist campagin, because it was exactly that (you may want to read the article).  The "increasingly anti-Semitic Russian Empire" also makes sense, semi-official attacks on Jews (pogroms) grew rapidly throughout the Empire, as did official anti-Semitism, it really does work as a description.  I would also defend "vibrant" -- the community may have been poor and somewhat persecuted, but culture and learning florished in the pre-War years.  --Goodoldpolonius2 15:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the changes you performed. However I think what is still missing is a sentence in the lead about the current concerns (you can find such sentences at both ).  Those concerns are not very strong but they should be cited in order to improve the NPOV of the lead.  I still believe "anti-Semitic Russian Empire" is not correct.  Another way to describe the situation should be found.  As far as I know only Nazi Germany can be qualified as "anti-Semitic".  On the other hand I agree with you on the wording "state-sponsored anti-Zionist campaign" and with "vibrant": my point was not that these words were not correct but that they should be counterbalanced (this is what you did).  The claims about Liga Polskich Rodzin and Samoobrona in the last section should be supported by references because they will lead to edit conflict as soon as the article get featured.  However I still wonder whether the situation from 1918 to 1945 is well described.  I quote from  http://www.axt.org.uk/ : The first wave of antisemitic pogroms in independent Poland took place soon after independence had been regained in 1918. Antisemitism became particularly visible after 1935 when the extreme right and radical Catholic circles began depicting Jews as a foreign element and a threat to the Polish state and nation. Right-wing parties and militant groups pressed the government to impose anti-Jewish measures, including economic restrictions, such as the 1936 laws limiting ritual slaughter. As a result of pressure to introduce the numerus clausus law, after 1937 universities were allowed to create separate places for "national" and for Jewish students, and in 1938 the parliament voted in legislation regulating the number of new attorneys, which affected Jewish applicants. The same year a law was passed that aimed to deprive Jewish emigrants of Polish citizenship. Orchestrated by the extra-parliamentary nationalist opposition and supported by a large section of the Catholic Church, pogroms and boycotts of Jewish shops became frequent.  (...) Although some Poles did help Jews to survive the Holocaust, most remained passive in the face of Nazi terror. Poland was the only country in Europe where the death penalty was imposed for assisting a person of Jewish origin. Some groups and individuals of Polish nationality were openly hostile to the Jews. Polish police (so-called policja granatowa) as well as some civilians collaborated with the Nazis by denouncing Jews who escaped the ghettos. A number of Poles acted as blackmailers (szmalcownicy) demanding that Jews pay ransoms, and threatening both Jews who were in hiding and gentiles who were assisting Jews. Among the anti-Jewish pogroms and other incidents initiated by fractions of the Polish population that occurred during the Nazi occupation the most violent and tragic took place during the summer of 1941 after the Nazis had entered the eastern territories that were annexed by the Soviet Union in September 1939. Some Poles, who opposed Communist rule and, inspired by the Polish nationalist and Nazi propaganda, associated Jews with the Soviet persecutors, felt encouraged by the presence of the Nazis and took part—often voluntarily—in pogrom-type killings of Jews. Several such cases have been documented, the most well-known, recently made public, being the Jedwabne pogrom of 10 July 1941, in which at least several hundred Jewish inhabitants of a town were murdered by a group of their Polish neighbours.  Of course the Poles were victims of the Nazi and of course they collaborated to a less extent than some others but depicting them as ...with a few tragic exceptions, the non-Jewish Poles themselves did not participate in the destruction of the Jewish community, and some Poles protected their Jewish neighbors is maybe a bit of embellishing, isn't it? Vb 16:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I wonder whether ...with a few tragic exceptions, such as the Jedwabne pogrom, most of the non-Jewish Poles did not participate in the destruction of the Jewish community, and a few Poles protected their Jewish neighbors would not be better, more NPOV Vb 16:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Just a quick note. In the above quote, the sentence: Although some Poles did help Jews to survive the Holocaust, most remained passive in the face of Nazi terror. is misleading, as it implies that the only people who were not passive in the face of Nazi terror were those who were actively engaged in helping Jews. What about the millions who opposed Nazi Germany by participating in or supporting the huge Polish Underground, fought in the Home Army, or went to great lengths to join units of the Polish Army formed outside of Poland?Balcer 17:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I would invite you to compare the State Department warning about antisemitism in Poland with their information on : France, United Kingdom, and Germany, to give quick examples. This will put the problem of antisemitism in Poland in a proper perspective. In particular, desecration of Jewish cemeteries is a crime occuring all over Europe.  In short, I would be really careful to avoid giving the impression that anti-semitism in Poland is (or was) somehow unique and exceptional. I would especially dispute the claim that it is somehow "rising". What is the quantitative evidence for that? Balcer 16:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * You are fully right. I have already had a look.  The warning of the State Department are not really NPOV.  But they are an officially recognized POV which can be cited.  I agree with you that one should not overestimate this testimony.  However I know pretty well the situation in both France and Germany and the informations there are all exact.  In both countries there is a real concern with respect to anti-semitism.  Usually this antisemitism is interpreted as a respons of Muslim minorities to the Israelo-Palestinian conflict though the case of a CDU politician in Germany sounds more like an intrisic anti-Semitic case.  I must admit this is a reason why I am surprised that the situation in Poland with respect to antisemitism is so positive.  However since nobody's perfect depicting a to perfect situation often leads to the opposite result because one doubt about too perfect pictures and gains the feeling of a biased article -- what is not the case of this article: I insist.  My only point is that the lead could have a better NPOV. Vb 17:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Vb, you may want to read the Talk:History of the Jews in Poland page, and especially Talk:History of the Jews in Poland where there is a really detailed back-and-forth about prewar anti-Semitism, and in which many of these points are debated. I generally started from the same angle that you are coming from, but as I have done more reading on the Holocaust, I have moderated my views quite a bit, as the official cooperation by Poles (outside of the pogroms) was much lower than elsewhere in Europe. Perhaps I am being too moderate about WWII, but we do discuss Jedwabne in great detail, and the general story is one of the destruction of the Jews at the hands of the Nazis (with Lithuanian and Ukranian help), rather than at the hands of the Poles.  Still, I think your suggestion makes sense, let me try it out. --Goodoldpolonius2 16:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Urgh. I had a look at Talk:History of the Jews in Poland.  You are crazy men!  I am really impressed by such a level of discussion and research.  However, I think after such a discussion this maybe a good idea to have the help of a pair of fresh eyes.  I might suggest a change in the lead : ...one of the largest in the world, though anti-Semitism was a growing problem --> ...one of the largest in the world, though anti-Semitic legal restrictions were a growing problem for the community.  Because I have the feeling the word anti-Semitism might be a bit weak in this case since this antisemitism was supported by the state. Vb 17:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well I think now my objection is raised with respect to the section 1989–present. I nevertheless wonder wether one should not find better references than ADL for supporting the claim.  This page is so non NPOV that it sounds a bit ridiculous.  I have found another source about Polish antisemitism which sounds much more authoritative Poland warms to other nations on BBC News. However, though, the lead section has been improved.  I still disagree with the use of "anti-Semitic Russian Empire".  Anti-Semitic should be removed or reworded.  This qualification is not acceptable for a state except for some like Nazi Germany.  As said above I still believe "though anti-Semitism was a growing problem" is too weak and should be replaced by something mirroring the fact that the government supported this movement such as "though anti-Semitic legal restrictions were a growing problem for the community".  I also believe a word should be said in the lead in order to qualify more precisely what is meant by "the situation of Polish Jews has normalized".  Does it mean "comparable with neighbour countries", "comparable with other jewish communities in Europe", "as it was when the community was vibrant"?  The lead should be more precise about it.  The above cited BBC article says that 46% of Poles declare disliking Jews.  Is that really a normalized situation? Vb 13:33, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * On the ADL side, their methodology seems sound, and it is a much more detailed survey, with more information, than the BBC quote -- what is your objection, exactly? I also think that at this stage we are trying to cram a bit too much nuance into the introduction, but I will try to address the problem with the 1919-1939 section in the intro according to your thoughts.  As far as Russian state anti-Semitism, until Nazi Germany, the persecutions in Russia were the worst in several hundred years (since the Cossack Uprisings), with thousands of Jews killed in increasingly bad (and increasingly state-supported) pogroms.  The secret police created the Protocols, there were discriminatory laws (see May Laws) and Jews were restricted in where they could live and what they could do -- that certainly qualifies as anti-Semitic, and, in fact, was a key reason for the founding of Zionism. As far as "normalized," it makes perfect sense to me in contrast with the March 1968 events and other information described previously, it is neither glowing nor condemning, it just indicates that the back-and-forth precariousness of Jewish life in Poland has calmed down. --Goodoldpolonius2 16:22, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with your modification of the lead with respect to the governmental anti-Semitism. I also agree with your arguments for the wording "ant-Semitic Russian Empire".  I also agree with the reference to ADL. I however suggest you the following change: "After the fall of the communist regime in Poland in 1989, the situation of Polish Jews has normalized." --> "After the fall of the communist regime in Poland in 1989, though some concerns have been raised recently with respect to anti-semitism, the situation of Polish Jews has normalized and is comparable to their situation in other European countries." Vb 17:05, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * though some concerns have been raised recently with respect to anti-semitism - please provide a source for this. As indicated on the article's talk page, the anti-semitic rethoric of Polish populist political parties has subsidied in the recent years; and besides, are some quotes important enough to merit a mention in the lead? I am not aware of any discrimnation against Jews in the modern Poland. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:16, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I still think 46% of the population declaring disliking the jews is not a normalized situation.  My suggested wording was maybe not the best but the present word "normalized" doesn't describe the present situation well. I think this sentence should be reworded to mirror the present situation.  Normalized with respect to what? Vb 13:05, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Many countries, unfortunately, dislike various minorities and/or other coutnries. As long as this does not translate into any harassment and/or discriminatory laws, I don't see why this would be worthy of mentioning in the lead. Btw, do you know of any similar surveys in another countries? Comparison may prove very interesting. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * An extensive discussion of this survey (in Polish) is here. For comparison between Poland and other coutries in Europe, see this survey conducted by ADL in 2005.  It appears to show that levels of anti-Semitism in Poland are not that divergent from the European norm.


 * Before you assign too much significance to these numbers, keep in mind that the methodology of the survey (explained here) gives a margin of error of +/- 4.5%, based on using a random sample of 500 people in each country.


 * The average score on this question in 32% (add all numbers, divide by 12). Poland scores 43% +/- 4.5%.  So, is the situation in Poland so much worse than the average (i.e. not normal)?  Balcer 16:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't give too much importance to these numbers but on the WP article Antisemitism one find : "Still, according to recent (June 7, 2005) results of research by B'nai Briths Anti-Defamation League, Poland remains among the European countries (with others being Italy, Spain and Germany) with the largest percentages of people holding anti-Semitic views." This should be somehow mirrored in the lead even if one can stay very vague.  My suggestion above was not referring to those exact numbers.  Vb 16:39, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I would have absolutely no problem with a statement: The level of anti-semitism in Poland today is comparable to that in Italy, Spain and Germany or something to that effect. Any objections? Balcer 16:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes. That would raise my objection. Vb 16:50, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Could you elaborate? That is what the statement you yourself quoted implies, does it not? Balcer 16:53, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well I think it is OK. It makes the lead more NPOV and for me that's enough.  By the way I have found a new reference  comparing the number of violent antisemitism incident by countries and according to those numbers Poland does very well.  If the editors want to use this ref could counterbalance the ADL ref in the (1989-present) section. Vb 131.220.68.177 17:06, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing to that very interesting graph. This is indeed one interesting feature of antisemitism in Poland: while it is unfortunately quite prevalent on a verbal level, so to speak, it very rarely translates into violent antisemitic incidents.  On the other hand, the number of Jews in Poland is of course quite low, so there is little opportunity for such incidents to occur.   I am glad we are edging towards some kind of an agreement on how to address the issue.  I agree with you, though maybe for slightly different reasons, that the current formulation in the lead ("normalized" etc.) is somewhat unclear, and should be made more specific.  I wonder what the other editors think about this. Balcer 18:00, 11 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Strong support. Now I think the article has reached the required NPOV level. Vb 10:18, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose because the "see also" section needs to go -- many of those links are in the article elsewhere anyway. I'm also not sure about the distinction between a "main article" and a "for more details" link under a header -- at "The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth: 1572–1795", for example, I'd think the links should be switched, and I'm not really sure the History of Poland (1572-1795) link needs to be there. Support Tuf-Kat 08:18, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * So if "See also" is removed, you will support? --Goodoldpolonius2 09:01, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I will support if the se also section is removed. Tuf-Kat 16:40, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 'See also' reworked as per your suggestions. I think that the main also and details are ok though. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:49, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The see also is still too big. The "related countries and cities" (which includes no cities) seems arbitrary and unnecessary -- why not other countries instead?  The "Other issues related to World War II and the Holocaust" probably could be placed into the article without too much difficulty, and since they are clearly relevant, that would be a positive addition.  Of the remainder, Jewish culture (rdrcts to secular Jewish culture) and Culture of Poland don't seem too particularly relevant -- looking at both articles, I don't see what they add to my knowledge of the history of the Jews in Poland.  The same is true of Relations of Pope John Paul II with the Jewish People, which redirects to Relations between Catholicism and Judaism, which doesn't really add anything.  I could live leaving only list of Polish Jews as a see also, but I don't think that would be very useful either. Tuf-Kat 05:14, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, again, I will trim as you suggest. Can you change your vote? --Goodoldpolonius2 02:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

We appear to have achieved 100% consensus on a controversal topic being made an FA, which is very exciting. When does the process conclude? --Goodoldpolonius2 02:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support as per Vb above. Excellent work. Saravask 02:20, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Another very large (60 kB) history FA which isn't even a top-level article. A somewhat more terse summary would be nice. / Peter Isotalo 02:14, 18 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I acknowledge tremendous amount of work done to this article during the past several months. However, it still contains questionable paragraphs which prevent me from recommending it as featured article. One objectionable paragraph is in the Interwar Period 1918-1939 section. It reads This was accompanied by physical violence: between May 1936 and January 1937, 118 Jews were killed, 1350 were wounded, and 137 Jewish stores were bombed in anti-Jewish violence in Poland. Western press continued to report about tragic situation of Jews in Poland, e.g. reporting that in Białystok alone in 1936 there were 248 assaults on Jews, including 21 mass riots or pogroms (New York Times, Feb 7, 1937). I have a copy of this article and have found one or two books referencing the article. However, the quoted numbers, especially those killed, are not supported by most historians writing on this subject. I don't think the New York Times should be used here as a primary source especially since there are no other collaborating references supporting these numbers. --Ttyre 04:07, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * By all means, if you have access to new sources, please add the appopriate and referenced info to the article. What other objectionable paragraphs in addition to the one cited have you found?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The New York Times was not the source for all of the stats on violent anti-Semitism. Hagen, a historian writing in a peer reviewed journal, specifically gives an account of at least 350 Jews killed in antisemtic violence between 1935 and 1939. He cites Bauer, p. 18, Marcus, pp. 241 ff.; Heller, chap. 4; Mendelsohn, The Jews of East Central Europe p. 74; Jerzy Tomaszewski, "The Role of Jews in Polish Commerce, 1918-1939," in Gutman et al., pp. 141-57; Simon Segal, The New Poland andthe Jews (New York, 1938), pp. 85 ff.; Raymond L. Buell, Poland: Key to Europe, 3ded. (New York, 1939), pp. 288-319; Jolanta Zyndul, "Cele ackji antyzydowskiej wPolsce w latach, 1935-1937," Biuletyn Zydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego w Polsce 161 (1992): 53-63. --Goodoldpolonius2 16:40, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * See my response in this discussion. --Ttyre 15:41, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak support. As Vb noted, he considers the article a tad too pro-Polish (sorry for the shortcut, I hope all of us will know what I mean). I initially wanted to oppose as of yet, mostly because I saw the article as still a tad too anti-Polish (see my disclaimer above), especially in regard to unsubstantiated claims of government-led anti-Semitism in pre-war Poland. However, after reading Vb's comment I realized that perhaps it's not that bad. Sure, it still needs a lot of work, especially with the sources, but... no article is ever finished, and this article is really, really close. Halibutt 07:17, 29 November 2005 (UTC)