This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Xx236 ( talk) 11:16, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
If Kurek is far-right the same "Haaretzs" is far-left. We don't know Kurek's opinions about economy or law, to describe her position. Xx236 ( talk) 11:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
He isn't a historian but a Professor of Philosophy and Letters [2]. Xx236 ( talk) 11:39, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Multibook.pl or an iUniverse book are acceptable sources. GizzyCatBella ( talk) 05:35, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Can you explain this entry? [3] GizzyCatBella ( talk) 06:04, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
pl:Wielka trwoga: Polska 1944–1947: ludowa reakcja na kryzys by Marcin Zaremba discusses the subject, too.
See also https://www.yadvashem.org/articles/general/difficulties-in-rescue-of-children-by-non-jews.html
not shatter their tranquility, particularly if coercion was used...
Zezen ( talk) 14:32, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
The stmt "is a Polish historian, screenwriter, filmmaker, and author of historical books. She is a researcher of Polish-Jewish relation"
is sourced to Kurek's own writings. Haaretz (and most other outlets - e.g.
Tablet) - merely describe her as a far-right historian. Describing her books as "historical books" in our own voice is a NPOV violation given the contents and reception of some of them. Her role as a screenwriter/filmmaker is poorly attested and seems to be limited to a few documentaries - one would expect 3rd party coverage, in the body of the article, if these are significant - however this is lacking and all we have to attest to this is a self-authored self-published book jacket - we are essentially introducing puffery by echoing the self-
WP:PROMOTION in a self-published setting. In general - independent 3rd party sources are preferable for any article, all the more for
WP:FRINGE articles where
WP:FRIND indicates only such sources should be used.
Icewhiz (
talk)
08:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
How about this?
I think this is reasonably neutral and reflects the body of the article. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:42, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I readded the statement from article history: diff. My rationale was: "an attributed opinion; on the same theme (Irving)". Please let me know if there are any concerns. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 02:08, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
"Polish officials have intervened to prevent an author accused of anti-Semitism from receiving an award at a Polish diplomatic outpost in the United States"and in their own voice -
One, Polish author Ewa Kurek, has claimed that Jews had fun in the ghettos during the German occupation of Poland during World War II. Kurek’s views are offensive to relatives of Holocaust survivors.. Icewhiz ( talk) 05:29, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
In 2018, following Mateusz Morawiecki’s statement in Munich in which Morawiecki said that there were also Jewish perpetrators in the Holocaust, [1] Kurek agreed with Morawiecki, saying that Jewish sources prove Morawiecki right. According to Kurek, the correct Jewish sources to use are those written by Jews murdered during the war, which can be used in defense of the Polish nation. According to Kurek, sinister forces are trying to assign responsibility for the Holocaust to the Poles. [2]- surely the subject's own views (published well beyond Newsweek) represent the subject? Icewhiz ( talk) 05:31, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
References
My problem with Silkerkland and Lang is that this paragraph presents their views as facts, implying that yes, Kurek is a HDenial, and comparing her to Irving. This is a problem, as she is NOT universally seen as a HDenier. A few people made such claims, but there is no consensus for that. Those are controversial claims, and while I think we may want to include them we have to make it clear they are just that - claims, not representative (yet?) of any consensus. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Should the tags be removed? Everything in the article appears to be cited, while the reception section appears to be reasonably balanced, i.e. Kurek's later-career views are controversial, and sources reflect that. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 00:37, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, but how is this balanced? GizzyCatBella ( talk) 03:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
I have attempted to furnish this BLP article with balanced appearance form [8], but I was %100 reverted [9], so the tag must stay, unfortunately. GizzyCatBella ( talk) 19:55, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
If the article is left in the current state [10] the POV tag can be removed I think. What other editors think? GizzyCatBella ( talk) 00:10, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I believe that this content should be restored. Otherwise, "groundbreaking" just hangs there:
References
It also helps the reader understand how her view could have evolved to become more controversial over time. The rest of the removed content I don't feel strongly about, as long as it would help get the page to the state that most could agree on. I removed "sale of children" as it's rather out of the left field. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:41, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
"Jews behave like a [herd] of lions in a threatening situation,” Kurek says in a YouTube video. “Lions are said to throw the weakest ones to death, to save the rest. And this is the norm among Jews. We Christians, since the beginning of … time, we have one principle: In the situation of a threat, the strong protect the vulnerable. If someone tells you about a Judeo-Christian civilization, then there is no such thing because this [Judaic] law excludes our civilization.”. [13] Coverage in English has had an uptick in 2018 following the cancelled award and US visit - not because the IPN law. Coverage in Polish dates back a while - e.g. [14] a 2006 Gazeta Wyborcza piece. Icewhiz ( talk) 06:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
"Praca "Poza granicą solidarności" miała być rozprawą habilitacyjną. Przeczytali ją historycy z KUL-u. Uznali, że nie spełnia wymogów."[15] - who decided it did not meet the requirements. Icewhiz ( talk) 06:16, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
The issue of WP:BALASP continues in the article. GizzyCatBella ( talk) 08:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
The recent "Do Rzeczy" publishes two letters precizing, that Kurek described situation in ghettos till Summer of 1942. Xx236 ( talk) 09:50, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
What present POV issues are in the article?
We currently have a BLP sources tag
reverted back in here - what passages are not reliably sourced? I'll note that the revert re-instated this approach was praised by
Marek Jan Chodakiewicz in his review of the book
- which is indeed not quite in the source (which does mention the review, but not quite the praise. There is another source by Michlic that covers the praise in a secondary manner - however I suggest we just cut out Chodakiewicz).
Icewhiz (
talk)
16:50, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
This
reverted passage - Kurek's 2006 Poza granicą solidarności: Stosunki polsko-żydowskie, 1939–1945 presents Jewish-Polish relations as a conflict between incompatible civilizations.
[1] Kurek's interpretation of ghetto development in German-occupied Poland was described as "outlandish" by
Laurence Weinbaum. According to Kurek ghettos "were essentially autonomous Jewish provinces built in the years 1939-42 by Polish Jews with the approval of the German occupation authorities", and the Jews "for the first time in over 2,000 years built their own framework of Jewish sovereignty". Kurek has also said that the situation of ethnic Poles in the years 1939-42, outside the ghetto, was far worse than the situation of the Jews who were held in confinement in the ghettos.
[2]
- presents the subject's own views - the sole criticism (which we have to present due to NPOV) is the labeling of this, in an attributed manner, as "outlandish". The subject's own views and writings are a fair representation of themselves, one would think.
Icewhiz (
talk)
16:50, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
References
Szmul Zygielbojm opposed the cration of the Warsaw ghetto. Xx236 ( talk) 11:15, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Preserving here by providing this link [17]. I removed the vague language such as "Some critics say..." while restoring reception by peer-reviewed sources. I also removed ext links from the list of works. Please let me know if there are any concerns. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:43, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
References
They were complicit exactly like Polish Baudienst workers were. Xx236 ( talk) 10:23, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
It's not obvious that Silberklang said that Kurek "is maybe the only legitimate Holocaust scholar". Silberklang said "could only think of the British Holocaust denier David Irving, who lacked Kurek’s extensive formal credentials and was never taken seriously as an academic historian."
Skimmed the recent edits, as well as this talk and I sincerely believe this person's bio should not appear on Wikipedia:
To summarize: Notability is a good criterion to have living person's bio published on Wikipedia. Being "controversial" does not. In other words: being minor league alleged historian should not lead to having one's bio published on Wikipedia just because one's views are far from common knowledge and common sense.
Notability and credibility are separate issues. I did not start the previous one anyway. Goodbye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.127.231.154 ( talk) 07:25, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
It's here. "Polish officials prevent award to author accused of anti-Semitism" "How Ewa Kurek, the Favorite Historian of the Polish Far Right, Promotes Her Distorted Account of the Holocaust" "Polish Consulate In Nyc Nixes Event After ‘Antisemitic’ Author Honored " Doug Weller talk 19:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Also covered in Polish media: [19]. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I saw that this article has had an 'unbalanced section' template on its 'Reception' section standing for a year. If this section does not clearly meet our verifiability criterion, then the inadequately sourced material should be removed; it is not enough according to our BLP rules to tag it.
AFAICS all claims are well-sourced, assuming the material attributed to Michlic and Weinbaum has been correctly handled. Are there any issues with removing the tag? If there are, please raise them here or be WP:BOLD and remove poorly sourced claims.
Given Kurek's antics in NY, I expect journalists are providing us with low-hanging fruit. I'll look for some when I have time. — Charles Stewart (talk) 15:02, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't think this belongs in the lead (Undue, BLP) but certainly a section on this is relevant. She gained notoriety for her comments (I am not sure if this is due, I haven't read her book, and it is possible some claims by her have been taken out of context). See this (somewhat negative, but also presenting her own defense) article in Wyborcza (already in 2006). I will see if I can dig up any academic reviews, since outside Weinbaum it's all media reports. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
"Analysis of comments to Newsweek Polska article 3: Article 3, entitled Will a Film be Produced that Negates the Truth about Jedwabne? ‘It wasn’t the Poles who did the killing’, was published on 3 August 2017 (Kumór 2017). .... The article also reports on denialist and anti-Semitic remarks made by nationalist activist Ewa Kurek who has publicly denounced the 2017 decision by the PiS Minister of Justice Zbigniew Ziobro not to reopen the criminal investigation into Jedwabne"- a peer reviewed publication associated with Collegium Civitas (see Zoon Politikon). that doesn't quite refer to her as an historian, but rather as an activist. (Rather confirmed by the sparsity of references to Kurek in an academic context in the past decade or so). Any actual sources to support your assertions regarding coverage of the subject? We generally follow mainstream media. Icewhiz ( talk) 07:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
What makes a petition notsble? There are plenty of them. Xx236 ( talk) 12:47, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Kurek has published such book. Is it a real memoir, edited by Kurek, or fiction? Xx236 ( talk) 09:39, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Xx236 ( talk) 11:16, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
If Kurek is far-right the same "Haaretzs" is far-left. We don't know Kurek's opinions about economy or law, to describe her position. Xx236 ( talk) 11:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
He isn't a historian but a Professor of Philosophy and Letters [2]. Xx236 ( talk) 11:39, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Multibook.pl or an iUniverse book are acceptable sources. GizzyCatBella ( talk) 05:35, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Can you explain this entry? [3] GizzyCatBella ( talk) 06:04, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
pl:Wielka trwoga: Polska 1944–1947: ludowa reakcja na kryzys by Marcin Zaremba discusses the subject, too.
See also https://www.yadvashem.org/articles/general/difficulties-in-rescue-of-children-by-non-jews.html
not shatter their tranquility, particularly if coercion was used...
Zezen ( talk) 14:32, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
The stmt "is a Polish historian, screenwriter, filmmaker, and author of historical books. She is a researcher of Polish-Jewish relation"
is sourced to Kurek's own writings. Haaretz (and most other outlets - e.g.
Tablet) - merely describe her as a far-right historian. Describing her books as "historical books" in our own voice is a NPOV violation given the contents and reception of some of them. Her role as a screenwriter/filmmaker is poorly attested and seems to be limited to a few documentaries - one would expect 3rd party coverage, in the body of the article, if these are significant - however this is lacking and all we have to attest to this is a self-authored self-published book jacket - we are essentially introducing puffery by echoing the self-
WP:PROMOTION in a self-published setting. In general - independent 3rd party sources are preferable for any article, all the more for
WP:FRINGE articles where
WP:FRIND indicates only such sources should be used.
Icewhiz (
talk)
08:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
How about this?
I think this is reasonably neutral and reflects the body of the article. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:42, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I readded the statement from article history: diff. My rationale was: "an attributed opinion; on the same theme (Irving)". Please let me know if there are any concerns. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 02:08, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
"Polish officials have intervened to prevent an author accused of anti-Semitism from receiving an award at a Polish diplomatic outpost in the United States"and in their own voice -
One, Polish author Ewa Kurek, has claimed that Jews had fun in the ghettos during the German occupation of Poland during World War II. Kurek’s views are offensive to relatives of Holocaust survivors.. Icewhiz ( talk) 05:29, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
In 2018, following Mateusz Morawiecki’s statement in Munich in which Morawiecki said that there were also Jewish perpetrators in the Holocaust, [1] Kurek agreed with Morawiecki, saying that Jewish sources prove Morawiecki right. According to Kurek, the correct Jewish sources to use are those written by Jews murdered during the war, which can be used in defense of the Polish nation. According to Kurek, sinister forces are trying to assign responsibility for the Holocaust to the Poles. [2]- surely the subject's own views (published well beyond Newsweek) represent the subject? Icewhiz ( talk) 05:31, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
References
My problem with Silkerkland and Lang is that this paragraph presents their views as facts, implying that yes, Kurek is a HDenial, and comparing her to Irving. This is a problem, as she is NOT universally seen as a HDenier. A few people made such claims, but there is no consensus for that. Those are controversial claims, and while I think we may want to include them we have to make it clear they are just that - claims, not representative (yet?) of any consensus. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Should the tags be removed? Everything in the article appears to be cited, while the reception section appears to be reasonably balanced, i.e. Kurek's later-career views are controversial, and sources reflect that. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 00:37, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, but how is this balanced? GizzyCatBella ( talk) 03:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
I have attempted to furnish this BLP article with balanced appearance form [8], but I was %100 reverted [9], so the tag must stay, unfortunately. GizzyCatBella ( talk) 19:55, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
If the article is left in the current state [10] the POV tag can be removed I think. What other editors think? GizzyCatBella ( talk) 00:10, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I believe that this content should be restored. Otherwise, "groundbreaking" just hangs there:
References
It also helps the reader understand how her view could have evolved to become more controversial over time. The rest of the removed content I don't feel strongly about, as long as it would help get the page to the state that most could agree on. I removed "sale of children" as it's rather out of the left field. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:41, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
"Jews behave like a [herd] of lions in a threatening situation,” Kurek says in a YouTube video. “Lions are said to throw the weakest ones to death, to save the rest. And this is the norm among Jews. We Christians, since the beginning of … time, we have one principle: In the situation of a threat, the strong protect the vulnerable. If someone tells you about a Judeo-Christian civilization, then there is no such thing because this [Judaic] law excludes our civilization.”. [13] Coverage in English has had an uptick in 2018 following the cancelled award and US visit - not because the IPN law. Coverage in Polish dates back a while - e.g. [14] a 2006 Gazeta Wyborcza piece. Icewhiz ( talk) 06:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
"Praca "Poza granicą solidarności" miała być rozprawą habilitacyjną. Przeczytali ją historycy z KUL-u. Uznali, że nie spełnia wymogów."[15] - who decided it did not meet the requirements. Icewhiz ( talk) 06:16, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
The issue of WP:BALASP continues in the article. GizzyCatBella ( talk) 08:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
The recent "Do Rzeczy" publishes two letters precizing, that Kurek described situation in ghettos till Summer of 1942. Xx236 ( talk) 09:50, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
What present POV issues are in the article?
We currently have a BLP sources tag
reverted back in here - what passages are not reliably sourced? I'll note that the revert re-instated this approach was praised by
Marek Jan Chodakiewicz in his review of the book
- which is indeed not quite in the source (which does mention the review, but not quite the praise. There is another source by Michlic that covers the praise in a secondary manner - however I suggest we just cut out Chodakiewicz).
Icewhiz (
talk)
16:50, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
This
reverted passage - Kurek's 2006 Poza granicą solidarności: Stosunki polsko-żydowskie, 1939–1945 presents Jewish-Polish relations as a conflict between incompatible civilizations.
[1] Kurek's interpretation of ghetto development in German-occupied Poland was described as "outlandish" by
Laurence Weinbaum. According to Kurek ghettos "were essentially autonomous Jewish provinces built in the years 1939-42 by Polish Jews with the approval of the German occupation authorities", and the Jews "for the first time in over 2,000 years built their own framework of Jewish sovereignty". Kurek has also said that the situation of ethnic Poles in the years 1939-42, outside the ghetto, was far worse than the situation of the Jews who were held in confinement in the ghettos.
[2]
- presents the subject's own views - the sole criticism (which we have to present due to NPOV) is the labeling of this, in an attributed manner, as "outlandish". The subject's own views and writings are a fair representation of themselves, one would think.
Icewhiz (
talk)
16:50, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
References
Szmul Zygielbojm opposed the cration of the Warsaw ghetto. Xx236 ( talk) 11:15, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Preserving here by providing this link [17]. I removed the vague language such as "Some critics say..." while restoring reception by peer-reviewed sources. I also removed ext links from the list of works. Please let me know if there are any concerns. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:43, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
References
They were complicit exactly like Polish Baudienst workers were. Xx236 ( talk) 10:23, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
It's not obvious that Silberklang said that Kurek "is maybe the only legitimate Holocaust scholar". Silberklang said "could only think of the British Holocaust denier David Irving, who lacked Kurek’s extensive formal credentials and was never taken seriously as an academic historian."
Skimmed the recent edits, as well as this talk and I sincerely believe this person's bio should not appear on Wikipedia:
To summarize: Notability is a good criterion to have living person's bio published on Wikipedia. Being "controversial" does not. In other words: being minor league alleged historian should not lead to having one's bio published on Wikipedia just because one's views are far from common knowledge and common sense.
Notability and credibility are separate issues. I did not start the previous one anyway. Goodbye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.127.231.154 ( talk) 07:25, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
It's here. "Polish officials prevent award to author accused of anti-Semitism" "How Ewa Kurek, the Favorite Historian of the Polish Far Right, Promotes Her Distorted Account of the Holocaust" "Polish Consulate In Nyc Nixes Event After ‘Antisemitic’ Author Honored " Doug Weller talk 19:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Also covered in Polish media: [19]. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I saw that this article has had an 'unbalanced section' template on its 'Reception' section standing for a year. If this section does not clearly meet our verifiability criterion, then the inadequately sourced material should be removed; it is not enough according to our BLP rules to tag it.
AFAICS all claims are well-sourced, assuming the material attributed to Michlic and Weinbaum has been correctly handled. Are there any issues with removing the tag? If there are, please raise them here or be WP:BOLD and remove poorly sourced claims.
Given Kurek's antics in NY, I expect journalists are providing us with low-hanging fruit. I'll look for some when I have time. — Charles Stewart (talk) 15:02, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't think this belongs in the lead (Undue, BLP) but certainly a section on this is relevant. She gained notoriety for her comments (I am not sure if this is due, I haven't read her book, and it is possible some claims by her have been taken out of context). See this (somewhat negative, but also presenting her own defense) article in Wyborcza (already in 2006). I will see if I can dig up any academic reviews, since outside Weinbaum it's all media reports. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
"Analysis of comments to Newsweek Polska article 3: Article 3, entitled Will a Film be Produced that Negates the Truth about Jedwabne? ‘It wasn’t the Poles who did the killing’, was published on 3 August 2017 (Kumór 2017). .... The article also reports on denialist and anti-Semitic remarks made by nationalist activist Ewa Kurek who has publicly denounced the 2017 decision by the PiS Minister of Justice Zbigniew Ziobro not to reopen the criminal investigation into Jedwabne"- a peer reviewed publication associated with Collegium Civitas (see Zoon Politikon). that doesn't quite refer to her as an historian, but rather as an activist. (Rather confirmed by the sparsity of references to Kurek in an academic context in the past decade or so). Any actual sources to support your assertions regarding coverage of the subject? We generally follow mainstream media. Icewhiz ( talk) 07:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
What makes a petition notsble? There are plenty of them. Xx236 ( talk) 12:47, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Kurek has published such book. Is it a real memoir, edited by Kurek, or fiction? Xx236 ( talk) 09:39, 23 August 2019 (UTC)