![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Re this revert by Gitz6666 - the consensus is summarized in Z1720's comment on talk page from 17:44, 12 June 2021 and 02:44, 19 June 2021 and my comment from 04:27, 19 June 2021. VM - Volunteer Marek 06:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
I support inclusion of the citation to Zimmerman page 213, but not page 361. As far as I can see everyone would support p.213 being included, so consensus might be found by cutting p.361 from this RfC(Chumchum7 at 12:28, 12 June 202). Buidhe and Z1720 agreed
to remove Zimmerman 361. However, if I'm not wrong, Buidhe and Z1720 did not agree on removing Zimmerman, p. 213.
In Dęblin, a town 43 miles northwest of Lublin, the Home Army anticommunist division noted the presence of communist bands that it claimed consisted primarily of Jews. These bands, according to the report, stole food and resources from farmers: “In general, relations of the local population to communism is [sic] rather favorable. But the same people are decidedly hostile to the Jewish bands.
According to a 1943 Home Army report, the local ethnic Polish population was hostile to Jewish fugitives
According to Farkash, in 1943, Wenkert allowed a group of Jewish partisans seeking refuge from a hostile unit of the Polish Home Army resistance group into the camp.
Gitz ( talk) ( contribs) 09:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)The Home Army itself accused Jews of joining Communist partisan groups and stealing from ethnic Polish peasants
I believe that the June 2021 consensus was achieved through edit war and bludgeoning: it was not a real WP:CONSENSUS. It doesn't really matter what you believe as this "tactic" of calling any disagreement with one's POV "bludgeoning" is played out and wasn't much of an argument to begin with. WP:BLUDGEON is an essay, not a policy and anyone can always self-servingly claim that anyone who disagrees with them is "bludgeoning".
Farkash is a bit problematic ... she was a PhD student when she published this article), which were addressed by rephrasing the text, using attribution ("Survivors recalled...", "According to Farkash") and not calling her a "historian" [2]. Piotrus himself modified the text [3] and Buidhe accepted (here at 04:44, 28 December 2019). Piotrus didn't raise the issue again at FAN [4], so he was probably satisfied with the way his concerns had been met.
I can't see the objection to "Israeli historian" myself; she graduated in 2016, and is now a fellow. Even at the time she wrote it, irrespective of being a student, she was clearly a historian(12:15, 6 March 2020).
The problem with Farkash are different and we can return to that later). Buidhe argued
Farkash paper is peer-reviewed and a reliable source. I tried to come to a compromise above, but clearly you aren't happy with any compromise. Z1720 said that Farkash is
high-quality(04:22, 24 May 2021) and
If editors propose removing Farkash, I would like a separate discussion about that (preferably in a new section)(20:55, 26 May 2021). Buidhe also said
I believe Farkash' source is a high-quality RS because it was published in Dapim: Studies on the Holocaust (later renamed The Journal of Holocaust Research) an established, peer-reviewed journal associated with the University of Haifa and published by Taylor & Francis.(23:48, 26 May 2021) and
Neither of you have addressed one of Z1720's main concerns at all; that is, the removal of Farkash source without discussion(07:08, 28 May 2021). In fact, no one argued against using Farkash as a source, not even you and certainly not GCB and Chumchum7. During the 19 May-27 May 2001 edit war, you and GizzyCatBella repeatedly removed the text and the source, but you did not provide any argument on the talk page. Chumchum7, however, said
I didn't remove Farkash(08:00, 28 May 2021). The possibility of having an RfC on Farkash was mentioned by GCB and Z1720, but eventually no one opened the RfC and there was no community discussion on Farkash either here or at RSN.
The Home Army itself accused Jews of joining Communist partisan groups and stealing from ethnic Polish peasants), I stand by my opinion: the June 2021 "consensus" was achieved through edit war and bludgeoning, and was not a real WP:CONSENSUS but exhaustion. Unless you feel personally touched by my remark, I don't understand why you accuse me of
discuss[ing] content not editors. Gitz ( talk) ( contribs) 22:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
According to a 1943 Home Army report, the local ethnic Polish population was hostile to Jewish fugitives. The Home Army itself accused Jews of joining Communist partisan groups and stealing from ethnic Polish peasants.{{sfn|Zimmerman|2015|pp=213, 361}} . Can someone link those two pages from Google Books or IA or such, so we can double check what's in the source before rehashing this?
Reports of the Home Army from that time often described the local ethnic Polish population as hostile to Jewish groups which stole food from Polish peasants
(sorry for my defective English; if the concept is shared, please improve the rendering).Reports of the Home Army from that time often described the local ethnic Polish population as hostile to "Jewish bands" [or Jews] which stole food and resources from Polish peasants, and occasionally shared such lack of sympathy for Jews by accusing them of engaging in robbery and embracing communism
Wenkart allowed a group of Jewish partisans to enter the camp to seek refuge from persecution by the Armia Krajowa (AK)) is supported by five primary sources (
35YVA 0.3/9295, testimony of Topolsky, p. 17; YVA, 0.3/2951, testimony of Eckhaiser, pp. 23–24; Daitsher, pp. 482–483; Perelmuter, p. 502; Wenkart, pp. 60–61) and is not presented by Farkash as uncertain or merely probable. Finally, the content I restored is attributed to the source:
(my emphasis) Gitz ( talk) ( contribs) 22:36, 4 April 2023 (UTC)According to Farkash, in 1943, Wenkert allowed a group of Jewish partisans seeking refuge from a hostile unit of the Polish Home Army resistance group into the camp.
, and occasionally shared such lack of sympathy for Jewsto
; said reports, according to Zimmerman, therefore can be seen as occasionally lacking sympathy for the Jews? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:33, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Re this revert by Gitz6666 - the consensus is summarized in Z1720's comment on talk page from 17:44, 12 June 2021 and 02:44, 19 June 2021 and my comment from 04:27, 19 June 2021. VM - Volunteer Marek 06:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
I support inclusion of the citation to Zimmerman page 213, but not page 361. As far as I can see everyone would support p.213 being included, so consensus might be found by cutting p.361 from this RfC(Chumchum7 at 12:28, 12 June 202). Buidhe and Z1720 agreed
to remove Zimmerman 361. However, if I'm not wrong, Buidhe and Z1720 did not agree on removing Zimmerman, p. 213.
In Dęblin, a town 43 miles northwest of Lublin, the Home Army anticommunist division noted the presence of communist bands that it claimed consisted primarily of Jews. These bands, according to the report, stole food and resources from farmers: “In general, relations of the local population to communism is [sic] rather favorable. But the same people are decidedly hostile to the Jewish bands.
According to a 1943 Home Army report, the local ethnic Polish population was hostile to Jewish fugitives
According to Farkash, in 1943, Wenkert allowed a group of Jewish partisans seeking refuge from a hostile unit of the Polish Home Army resistance group into the camp.
Gitz ( talk) ( contribs) 09:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)The Home Army itself accused Jews of joining Communist partisan groups and stealing from ethnic Polish peasants
I believe that the June 2021 consensus was achieved through edit war and bludgeoning: it was not a real WP:CONSENSUS. It doesn't really matter what you believe as this "tactic" of calling any disagreement with one's POV "bludgeoning" is played out and wasn't much of an argument to begin with. WP:BLUDGEON is an essay, not a policy and anyone can always self-servingly claim that anyone who disagrees with them is "bludgeoning".
Farkash is a bit problematic ... she was a PhD student when she published this article), which were addressed by rephrasing the text, using attribution ("Survivors recalled...", "According to Farkash") and not calling her a "historian" [2]. Piotrus himself modified the text [3] and Buidhe accepted (here at 04:44, 28 December 2019). Piotrus didn't raise the issue again at FAN [4], so he was probably satisfied with the way his concerns had been met.
I can't see the objection to "Israeli historian" myself; she graduated in 2016, and is now a fellow. Even at the time she wrote it, irrespective of being a student, she was clearly a historian(12:15, 6 March 2020).
The problem with Farkash are different and we can return to that later). Buidhe argued
Farkash paper is peer-reviewed and a reliable source. I tried to come to a compromise above, but clearly you aren't happy with any compromise. Z1720 said that Farkash is
high-quality(04:22, 24 May 2021) and
If editors propose removing Farkash, I would like a separate discussion about that (preferably in a new section)(20:55, 26 May 2021). Buidhe also said
I believe Farkash' source is a high-quality RS because it was published in Dapim: Studies on the Holocaust (later renamed The Journal of Holocaust Research) an established, peer-reviewed journal associated with the University of Haifa and published by Taylor & Francis.(23:48, 26 May 2021) and
Neither of you have addressed one of Z1720's main concerns at all; that is, the removal of Farkash source without discussion(07:08, 28 May 2021). In fact, no one argued against using Farkash as a source, not even you and certainly not GCB and Chumchum7. During the 19 May-27 May 2001 edit war, you and GizzyCatBella repeatedly removed the text and the source, but you did not provide any argument on the talk page. Chumchum7, however, said
I didn't remove Farkash(08:00, 28 May 2021). The possibility of having an RfC on Farkash was mentioned by GCB and Z1720, but eventually no one opened the RfC and there was no community discussion on Farkash either here or at RSN.
The Home Army itself accused Jews of joining Communist partisan groups and stealing from ethnic Polish peasants), I stand by my opinion: the June 2021 "consensus" was achieved through edit war and bludgeoning, and was not a real WP:CONSENSUS but exhaustion. Unless you feel personally touched by my remark, I don't understand why you accuse me of
discuss[ing] content not editors. Gitz ( talk) ( contribs) 22:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
According to a 1943 Home Army report, the local ethnic Polish population was hostile to Jewish fugitives. The Home Army itself accused Jews of joining Communist partisan groups and stealing from ethnic Polish peasants.{{sfn|Zimmerman|2015|pp=213, 361}} . Can someone link those two pages from Google Books or IA or such, so we can double check what's in the source before rehashing this?
Reports of the Home Army from that time often described the local ethnic Polish population as hostile to Jewish groups which stole food from Polish peasants
(sorry for my defective English; if the concept is shared, please improve the rendering).Reports of the Home Army from that time often described the local ethnic Polish population as hostile to "Jewish bands" [or Jews] which stole food and resources from Polish peasants, and occasionally shared such lack of sympathy for Jews by accusing them of engaging in robbery and embracing communism
Wenkart allowed a group of Jewish partisans to enter the camp to seek refuge from persecution by the Armia Krajowa (AK)) is supported by five primary sources (
35YVA 0.3/9295, testimony of Topolsky, p. 17; YVA, 0.3/2951, testimony of Eckhaiser, pp. 23–24; Daitsher, pp. 482–483; Perelmuter, p. 502; Wenkart, pp. 60–61) and is not presented by Farkash as uncertain or merely probable. Finally, the content I restored is attributed to the source:
(my emphasis) Gitz ( talk) ( contribs) 22:36, 4 April 2023 (UTC)According to Farkash, in 1943, Wenkert allowed a group of Jewish partisans seeking refuge from a hostile unit of the Polish Home Army resistance group into the camp.
, and occasionally shared such lack of sympathy for Jewsto
; said reports, according to Zimmerman, therefore can be seen as occasionally lacking sympathy for the Jews? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:33, 9 April 2023 (UTC)