Polish culture during World War II is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 1, 2009. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
TV series and rock belong rather to pop-culture. I'm not a native speaker - works of art mean rather pictures and sculptures, don't they?
I have replaced one instance of the word artists by writers, but I have realised that it was a general problem. Xx236 ( talk) 08:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
"formal publication of any Polish language book, literary study or a scholarly paper was forbidden" - so what is this: [1] and items no. 2, 120, 134, 147, 163, 181 here: [2]? MCiura ( talk) 11:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Movies were working and Poles visiting them, even if forbidden by the underground state. BTW - the article is Movie theater, not cinema. Xx236 ( talk) 12:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
This could be GA quality but we need to overhaul it to get there.
What is the connection between Queen Bona's 16th-century Royal Casket and Izabela Czartoryska's Royal Casket of 1800, to which it is now linked in the caption? Nihil novi ( talk) 07:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
The article goes so far as to say that the Soviet zone was little better than the German occupation - yet also quotes reviews describing commitment to Polish culture as stronger than ever before after 1945, and limits this period of discussion to the period between wars. Was the treatment of Poles by Russians during the war much harsher than the Warsaw Bloc status afterward, and if so, how and why? Wnt ( talk) 18:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if a reader understands, that the majority of names are non-Jewish, that the majority of Jews died 1942-1943.
Isn't word gentiles equal or even more precise than Christian here? Xx236 ( talk) 09:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Jewish literature means Jewish according to Nazis, i.e. written by ethnic Jews. Xx236 ( talk) 10:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
According to Soviet documents less than 500 000. Many of them to Kasakhstan or Arkhangelsk region, which wasn't Siberia. Xx236 ( talk) 09:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Germans allowed to publish uncomplicated texts and to perform in cabarets. Both activities were sometimes illegal from the Polish point of view and punished during or after the war. Xx236 ( talk) 09:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Publication of any Polish-language book - not true, e.g. many books for children were published. Xx236 ( talk) 10:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Rozstrzelanie V - execution V - Wróblewski.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 21:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Polish wiki has unreferenced statistic that a year after the invasion, enrollment in Polish schools dropped to about 30% of the pre-war. I am trying to track down the source of this statistic, so far unsuccessfully.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:20, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Kazimierz Braun, in his history of Polish theatre points out that the AK sometimes authorised actors to perform if it was of use to morale or AK operations. Braun likewise points out that many of the theatre shows allowed by the Nazis bordered on pornographic caberet and, ironically, were often visited by AK soldiers themselves. ( 79.190.69.142 ( talk) 16:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC))
Twice in one short paragraph. BTW - the "new" languages were Soviet. Xx236 ( talk) 07:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
The destruction of Jewish culture in Poland should be described, eg. of synagogues (only one s. in Łódź mentioned), Toras. Destruction of Poland's Jewish community is mentioned only in postwar paragraph. The artists were generally isolated from their non-Jewish public and/or coautors and finally murdered. People like Janusz Korczak or Bruno Schulz were important for big part of educated public in Poalnd. "The Messiah" by Schulz was probably one of very important Polish language books. Xx236 ( talk) 11:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the following unreferenced addition, with no prejudice to it being readded once its properly referenced.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
"Portrait of Raphael was the most important painting robbed by Germans. Some authors believe however that the portrait was painted by another artist, eg. Sebastiano del Piombo."
Józef Grabski, Zaginiony "Portret młodzieńca" Rafaela ze zbiorów XX. Czartoryskich w Krakowie. Ze studiów nad typologią portretu renesansowego, [w:] Rafael i jego spadkobiercy. Portret klasyczny w sztuce nowożytnej Europy. Materiały sesji naukowej pod red. S. Dudzika i T. J. Żuchowskiego, Toruń 2003, (= Sztuka i Kultura, 4), s. 221—261 Xx236 ( talk) 13:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC) [4] - 52 000 of objects robbed by Germans, the most expensive painting (if painted by Raphael). Xx236 ( talk) 13:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Words beginning with "anti-" need to be rendered consistently: is it "anti-semitic" or "anti-Semitic"; is it "anti-communist", "anti-Communist", or "anti-Soviet"? Is there MOS guidance on this? Magic ♪piano 13:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
As geocities is closing down, this link should be replaced. It's not in the wayback machine. Related material is at [5] and at [6] LeadSongDog come howl 18:13, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The article partially relies on dubious sources, eg
A FA (or any other article) should not rely on that kind of sources to back up "facts". I propose Wikipedia:Good article reassessment if this is not fixed in the course of the FA review. Skäpperöd ( talk) 08:32, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
There looks to be some well-sourced criticism of Czesław Madajczyk in the PL WP article [7] that was not brought over into the EN version. It would be good to include this. Novickas ( talk) 15:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
The above is taken from an obituary, not a neutral assessment. Skäpperöd ( talk) 05:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
...that I think are not yet in the article:
I will try to incorporate some of the info into the article and its refs later. Really busy right now. radek ( talk) 23:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
We may want to consider these sources: Google books is second best compared to real books
All three books are by recognized scholars and were published in the USA, it will hard to refute or nitpick them.-- Woogie10w ( talk) 00:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
A few more English language sources - right now with all the other stuff going around don't have time to fully utilize these, so help is appreciated:
I would like to state the reasons why I believe the word brutally should be removed the lead. Simply, it fails WP:ASF: "Assert facts, including facts about opinions—but do not assert the opinions themselves." That the suppression of Polish culture was "brutal" is an value judgment or opinion; it may have support by one author, or even by the vast majority of people, but it is nevertheless an opinion, the same way "Hitler was an evil man" is an opinion no matter how many sources you tag onto it, and we must describe who holds what opinions, not state the opinions as if they are fact as the article currently does. If you are intent on stressing that scholars think it was brutal, then say that: "scholars describe the measures as brutal", although that would run into the issue of weasel words (who are "scholars"?), and quite frankly I think the following sentence ("Policies aimed at cultural genocide resulted in the deaths of thousands of scholars and artists, and the theft or destruction of innumerable cultural artifacts") will get at the moral repugnance quite clearly.
Furthermore, I would like to remind everyone to assume good faith and avoid name-calling, especially when it comes to articles on the main page where where new editors are likely to tread. Thank you. — DroEsperanto ( talk) 00:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I am neutral with regards to this, it does seem a tad emotional, and The Holocaust does not use any emotional words in its lead. For the record, this was the reference for the word: "Jonathan Rose, "The Holocaust and the book: destruction and preservation", Univ of Massachusetts Press, 2001, pg. [14]" -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello.
I'm the one who's edited it back to 'brutally' these last few times. Whilst you hardened editors and Wikipedia-librarians will probably regard this comment as low, ridiculous, and of absolutley no use....I'm afraid i'm going to make it anyway. I respect the work that everyone does here, and I respect that great encyclopediae (and if that is not a word, it should be) such as this cannot be cluttered with loose opinion and false facts. I vaguely apreciate all of your points....but I must point out that if you can't use the world 'brutal' to describe the Nazi invasion and occupation of Poland....than when the hell can you use it at all? -- 86.166.59.112 ( talk) 23:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
'Cultural genocide'. Isn't that a rather strong and over-emotional term to be used in an encyclopedia? I would use 'cultural suppression' or something similar. 1812ahill ( talk) 22:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to say it's me again. I have The Concise Oxford Dictionary here - "Genocide - the deliberate extermination of a race, nation, etc." It dosen't seem all that emotive to me. -- 86.166.59.112 ( talk) 23:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I was in no way aware this article existed. It already discusses the role of the Catholic Church to some extent but could say more. I have written some stuff in Reorganization of occupied dioceses during World War II, and there is also useful information in most of the biographies linked in the Poland section therein. I leave it to the authors of this article to decide if any of that is applicable. Savidan 04:28, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The dates give the impression that this article is British English, but it uses American English versions of 'theater'. Which language is it written in? Parrot of Doom ( talk) 08:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
This article cites authors and works that are almost exclusively Polish. I believe this leads to rather one-sided view on the subject of German and Soviet 'cultural genocide' and compromises the neutrality of this article. I think the cited opinions should be supported by some oficial documents that clearly show Soviet and Nazi intent of destroying Polish culture. Also, some of the sources seem funny at best. See [1], "For 123 years, Poles lived under Russian, Prussian, or Austro-Hungarian rule. During World War I, all three of these imperialist empires collapsed." We have yet to see a non-imperialist empire, or am I wrong? -- 188.18.151.57 ( talk) 10:14, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Like many others I came across this article from the front page of Wikipedia. I am very disturbed that such an article exists putting forward opinions as if facts.
There is a movement at present seeking to diminish the unique horrors of Nazism by equating 'Soviet' with 'Nazi' as frequently as possible. The placing of this article as Featured Article is disturbing (how do we make a comment on that decision?).
The following comment was placed earlier today (2009-09-01) and was removed (censored) by another user. Please note - a comment on the 'discussion' page not an edit to the article. Although I do not agree with the strange argument (catholo-fascism???) it deserves to be seen on the discussion page.
This article is disgusting. Its a pity to see Polish religious fascism on the rise again and exploiting the suffering of the Polish people for its own dark purposes. All the harder it is to believe that the article made it to being featured in this current, factually wrong and biased form. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.202.144.34 (talk) 11:16, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I also found the article difficult to follow in places (dates not given where needed etc) but that is less important than the POV issue. Sussexonian ( talk) 16:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The article also says nothing about collaborators or the strong anti-Semitic strain in Polish culture before the German invasion. Both of these factors must have had some effect on the cultural situation.-- MacRusgail ( talk) 16:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I was surprised not to see any mention of films that focus on this subject including "The Pianist" and "To Be or Not to Be". Having said that, I agree this article tries to cover too much. There actually needs to be several linked articles that treat this topic.
As for neutrality, that struck my right away. But is it really possible to be "neutral" about this subject? JayinDC ( talk) 17:03, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Unique horrors of Nazism? That is definately a controversial opinion; Daniel Goldhagen, for example, has been attacked repeatedly for calling the Holocaust unique. The comparisons between the Nazis and Soviets are backed up, and the case could equally be made that it was trying to demonize the USSR i.e. by playing the Nazi card but it's verified, and seems justified. I don't share the hypersensitivity a lot of editors have towards including generally accepted opinions and think this article's comprehensiveness is fine. Yohan euan o4 ( talk) 17:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
"During World War II, Polish culture was suppressed by the occupying powers of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, both of whom were hostile to Poland's people and culture."
I never heard that Marxism-leninism is per se hostile to any people or ethnicity. Mitch1981 ( talk) 19:46, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Is this a quote from Hitler or Stalin or from Ferguson? It is unclear from the article.-- Dojarca ( talk) 13:37, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
The major problems on this site is the adherences to the sites protocols, that ultimately result in throttling the whole process. Firstly, is this even a good article? Did experts in the subject edit this article? Did anyone have any understanding of the complexity of this subject?
The answer to all these questions, is I must admit, after reading this article is NO NO and NO.
By using non-experts to cobble this article together, it just becomes a literary Emmental (cheese) with glaring holes throughout every section. But hey, slaps on the back all round as the article has its precious citations.
The article primarily just talks about loss, the Poles were denied this, the Poles could no longer do that (but they did resist this and they resist that)....the article should be:
Types of Polish Culture repressed by the Nazis (1939-1945)
Because this article lacks a serious encyclopedic examination concerning the methodology of the Nazis.
For instance, there is no mention of these Nazi agencies:
They all played a key part in the repression of Polish Culture, RuSHA took children away from their parents for Aryanization, VOMI settled Germans in occupied areas, and the RKFDV over saw it all.
There is a brief mention of Generalplan Ost, but it is without context. The article just says the policies that crushed Polish culture were part of the plan. And?
Plain and simple, this article lacks the WHY! Without an authoritative examination of the agencies (their goals etc) that carried out the repression of Polish education, culture and intellectuals you get an article like this.
An article that explain how bad times were for Poland under the Nazis (and its resistance) but without the substantiation of the background, reasons and ultimate purpose of why repression was implemented by Nazis.
It's History Lite - and certainly NOT encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.127.70 ( talk) 13:44, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Who is Jarosław Szarek? Why his opinion is so important?-- Dojarca ( talk) 13:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
The subject is mentioned many times. It wasn't a part of "Polish culture", at least not so important. It should be mentioned once. Xx236 ( talk) 08:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
There was also Operation Antyk. Xx236 ( talk) 11:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
There is a request, submitted by Tony419c ( talk), for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: "This is an important article,specialized both in French and Dutch Wikipedia.This English counterpart is as good as French and Dutch one, and the texts of this article is comparatively static. So this article is extremely worth recording. I am not a native English speaker, so wish an volunteer recording this page into an Spoken Wikipedia Article. Thanks!". |
I have doubts about the consistency of this passage:
"(...) The press was reduced from over 2,000 publications to a few dozen, all censored by the Germans.[53][57] All pre-war newspapers were closed, and the few that were published during the occupation were new creations under the total control of the Germans. (...)" (from the Censorship and propaganda part)
- Where all the newspapers closed or the press was reduced to a few titles? I'm not sure, but it seems that those two sentences together don't make sens. I assume that those few dozens which were still publishing were recreated under the control of Germans - am I right? Please explain that to me, as I'm translating the article now, but I'm not a historian and I don't want to make any mistakes. Thank you! Agnes86 ( talk) 17:10, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Polish culture during World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:43, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Polish culture during World War II is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 1, 2009. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
TV series and rock belong rather to pop-culture. I'm not a native speaker - works of art mean rather pictures and sculptures, don't they?
I have replaced one instance of the word artists by writers, but I have realised that it was a general problem. Xx236 ( talk) 08:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
"formal publication of any Polish language book, literary study or a scholarly paper was forbidden" - so what is this: [1] and items no. 2, 120, 134, 147, 163, 181 here: [2]? MCiura ( talk) 11:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Movies were working and Poles visiting them, even if forbidden by the underground state. BTW - the article is Movie theater, not cinema. Xx236 ( talk) 12:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
This could be GA quality but we need to overhaul it to get there.
What is the connection between Queen Bona's 16th-century Royal Casket and Izabela Czartoryska's Royal Casket of 1800, to which it is now linked in the caption? Nihil novi ( talk) 07:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
The article goes so far as to say that the Soviet zone was little better than the German occupation - yet also quotes reviews describing commitment to Polish culture as stronger than ever before after 1945, and limits this period of discussion to the period between wars. Was the treatment of Poles by Russians during the war much harsher than the Warsaw Bloc status afterward, and if so, how and why? Wnt ( talk) 18:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if a reader understands, that the majority of names are non-Jewish, that the majority of Jews died 1942-1943.
Isn't word gentiles equal or even more precise than Christian here? Xx236 ( talk) 09:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Jewish literature means Jewish according to Nazis, i.e. written by ethnic Jews. Xx236 ( talk) 10:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
According to Soviet documents less than 500 000. Many of them to Kasakhstan or Arkhangelsk region, which wasn't Siberia. Xx236 ( talk) 09:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Germans allowed to publish uncomplicated texts and to perform in cabarets. Both activities were sometimes illegal from the Polish point of view and punished during or after the war. Xx236 ( talk) 09:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Publication of any Polish-language book - not true, e.g. many books for children were published. Xx236 ( talk) 10:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Rozstrzelanie V - execution V - Wróblewski.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 21:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Polish wiki has unreferenced statistic that a year after the invasion, enrollment in Polish schools dropped to about 30% of the pre-war. I am trying to track down the source of this statistic, so far unsuccessfully.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:20, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Kazimierz Braun, in his history of Polish theatre points out that the AK sometimes authorised actors to perform if it was of use to morale or AK operations. Braun likewise points out that many of the theatre shows allowed by the Nazis bordered on pornographic caberet and, ironically, were often visited by AK soldiers themselves. ( 79.190.69.142 ( talk) 16:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC))
Twice in one short paragraph. BTW - the "new" languages were Soviet. Xx236 ( talk) 07:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
The destruction of Jewish culture in Poland should be described, eg. of synagogues (only one s. in Łódź mentioned), Toras. Destruction of Poland's Jewish community is mentioned only in postwar paragraph. The artists were generally isolated from their non-Jewish public and/or coautors and finally murdered. People like Janusz Korczak or Bruno Schulz were important for big part of educated public in Poalnd. "The Messiah" by Schulz was probably one of very important Polish language books. Xx236 ( talk) 11:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the following unreferenced addition, with no prejudice to it being readded once its properly referenced.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
"Portrait of Raphael was the most important painting robbed by Germans. Some authors believe however that the portrait was painted by another artist, eg. Sebastiano del Piombo."
Józef Grabski, Zaginiony "Portret młodzieńca" Rafaela ze zbiorów XX. Czartoryskich w Krakowie. Ze studiów nad typologią portretu renesansowego, [w:] Rafael i jego spadkobiercy. Portret klasyczny w sztuce nowożytnej Europy. Materiały sesji naukowej pod red. S. Dudzika i T. J. Żuchowskiego, Toruń 2003, (= Sztuka i Kultura, 4), s. 221—261 Xx236 ( talk) 13:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC) [4] - 52 000 of objects robbed by Germans, the most expensive painting (if painted by Raphael). Xx236 ( talk) 13:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Words beginning with "anti-" need to be rendered consistently: is it "anti-semitic" or "anti-Semitic"; is it "anti-communist", "anti-Communist", or "anti-Soviet"? Is there MOS guidance on this? Magic ♪piano 13:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
As geocities is closing down, this link should be replaced. It's not in the wayback machine. Related material is at [5] and at [6] LeadSongDog come howl 18:13, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The article partially relies on dubious sources, eg
A FA (or any other article) should not rely on that kind of sources to back up "facts". I propose Wikipedia:Good article reassessment if this is not fixed in the course of the FA review. Skäpperöd ( talk) 08:32, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
There looks to be some well-sourced criticism of Czesław Madajczyk in the PL WP article [7] that was not brought over into the EN version. It would be good to include this. Novickas ( talk) 15:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
The above is taken from an obituary, not a neutral assessment. Skäpperöd ( talk) 05:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
...that I think are not yet in the article:
I will try to incorporate some of the info into the article and its refs later. Really busy right now. radek ( talk) 23:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
We may want to consider these sources: Google books is second best compared to real books
All three books are by recognized scholars and were published in the USA, it will hard to refute or nitpick them.-- Woogie10w ( talk) 00:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
A few more English language sources - right now with all the other stuff going around don't have time to fully utilize these, so help is appreciated:
I would like to state the reasons why I believe the word brutally should be removed the lead. Simply, it fails WP:ASF: "Assert facts, including facts about opinions—but do not assert the opinions themselves." That the suppression of Polish culture was "brutal" is an value judgment or opinion; it may have support by one author, or even by the vast majority of people, but it is nevertheless an opinion, the same way "Hitler was an evil man" is an opinion no matter how many sources you tag onto it, and we must describe who holds what opinions, not state the opinions as if they are fact as the article currently does. If you are intent on stressing that scholars think it was brutal, then say that: "scholars describe the measures as brutal", although that would run into the issue of weasel words (who are "scholars"?), and quite frankly I think the following sentence ("Policies aimed at cultural genocide resulted in the deaths of thousands of scholars and artists, and the theft or destruction of innumerable cultural artifacts") will get at the moral repugnance quite clearly.
Furthermore, I would like to remind everyone to assume good faith and avoid name-calling, especially when it comes to articles on the main page where where new editors are likely to tread. Thank you. — DroEsperanto ( talk) 00:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I am neutral with regards to this, it does seem a tad emotional, and The Holocaust does not use any emotional words in its lead. For the record, this was the reference for the word: "Jonathan Rose, "The Holocaust and the book: destruction and preservation", Univ of Massachusetts Press, 2001, pg. [14]" -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello.
I'm the one who's edited it back to 'brutally' these last few times. Whilst you hardened editors and Wikipedia-librarians will probably regard this comment as low, ridiculous, and of absolutley no use....I'm afraid i'm going to make it anyway. I respect the work that everyone does here, and I respect that great encyclopediae (and if that is not a word, it should be) such as this cannot be cluttered with loose opinion and false facts. I vaguely apreciate all of your points....but I must point out that if you can't use the world 'brutal' to describe the Nazi invasion and occupation of Poland....than when the hell can you use it at all? -- 86.166.59.112 ( talk) 23:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
'Cultural genocide'. Isn't that a rather strong and over-emotional term to be used in an encyclopedia? I would use 'cultural suppression' or something similar. 1812ahill ( talk) 22:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to say it's me again. I have The Concise Oxford Dictionary here - "Genocide - the deliberate extermination of a race, nation, etc." It dosen't seem all that emotive to me. -- 86.166.59.112 ( talk) 23:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I was in no way aware this article existed. It already discusses the role of the Catholic Church to some extent but could say more. I have written some stuff in Reorganization of occupied dioceses during World War II, and there is also useful information in most of the biographies linked in the Poland section therein. I leave it to the authors of this article to decide if any of that is applicable. Savidan 04:28, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The dates give the impression that this article is British English, but it uses American English versions of 'theater'. Which language is it written in? Parrot of Doom ( talk) 08:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
This article cites authors and works that are almost exclusively Polish. I believe this leads to rather one-sided view on the subject of German and Soviet 'cultural genocide' and compromises the neutrality of this article. I think the cited opinions should be supported by some oficial documents that clearly show Soviet and Nazi intent of destroying Polish culture. Also, some of the sources seem funny at best. See [1], "For 123 years, Poles lived under Russian, Prussian, or Austro-Hungarian rule. During World War I, all three of these imperialist empires collapsed." We have yet to see a non-imperialist empire, or am I wrong? -- 188.18.151.57 ( talk) 10:14, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Like many others I came across this article from the front page of Wikipedia. I am very disturbed that such an article exists putting forward opinions as if facts.
There is a movement at present seeking to diminish the unique horrors of Nazism by equating 'Soviet' with 'Nazi' as frequently as possible. The placing of this article as Featured Article is disturbing (how do we make a comment on that decision?).
The following comment was placed earlier today (2009-09-01) and was removed (censored) by another user. Please note - a comment on the 'discussion' page not an edit to the article. Although I do not agree with the strange argument (catholo-fascism???) it deserves to be seen on the discussion page.
This article is disgusting. Its a pity to see Polish religious fascism on the rise again and exploiting the suffering of the Polish people for its own dark purposes. All the harder it is to believe that the article made it to being featured in this current, factually wrong and biased form. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.202.144.34 (talk) 11:16, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I also found the article difficult to follow in places (dates not given where needed etc) but that is less important than the POV issue. Sussexonian ( talk) 16:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The article also says nothing about collaborators or the strong anti-Semitic strain in Polish culture before the German invasion. Both of these factors must have had some effect on the cultural situation.-- MacRusgail ( talk) 16:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I was surprised not to see any mention of films that focus on this subject including "The Pianist" and "To Be or Not to Be". Having said that, I agree this article tries to cover too much. There actually needs to be several linked articles that treat this topic.
As for neutrality, that struck my right away. But is it really possible to be "neutral" about this subject? JayinDC ( talk) 17:03, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Unique horrors of Nazism? That is definately a controversial opinion; Daniel Goldhagen, for example, has been attacked repeatedly for calling the Holocaust unique. The comparisons between the Nazis and Soviets are backed up, and the case could equally be made that it was trying to demonize the USSR i.e. by playing the Nazi card but it's verified, and seems justified. I don't share the hypersensitivity a lot of editors have towards including generally accepted opinions and think this article's comprehensiveness is fine. Yohan euan o4 ( talk) 17:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
"During World War II, Polish culture was suppressed by the occupying powers of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, both of whom were hostile to Poland's people and culture."
I never heard that Marxism-leninism is per se hostile to any people or ethnicity. Mitch1981 ( talk) 19:46, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Is this a quote from Hitler or Stalin or from Ferguson? It is unclear from the article.-- Dojarca ( talk) 13:37, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
The major problems on this site is the adherences to the sites protocols, that ultimately result in throttling the whole process. Firstly, is this even a good article? Did experts in the subject edit this article? Did anyone have any understanding of the complexity of this subject?
The answer to all these questions, is I must admit, after reading this article is NO NO and NO.
By using non-experts to cobble this article together, it just becomes a literary Emmental (cheese) with glaring holes throughout every section. But hey, slaps on the back all round as the article has its precious citations.
The article primarily just talks about loss, the Poles were denied this, the Poles could no longer do that (but they did resist this and they resist that)....the article should be:
Types of Polish Culture repressed by the Nazis (1939-1945)
Because this article lacks a serious encyclopedic examination concerning the methodology of the Nazis.
For instance, there is no mention of these Nazi agencies:
They all played a key part in the repression of Polish Culture, RuSHA took children away from their parents for Aryanization, VOMI settled Germans in occupied areas, and the RKFDV over saw it all.
There is a brief mention of Generalplan Ost, but it is without context. The article just says the policies that crushed Polish culture were part of the plan. And?
Plain and simple, this article lacks the WHY! Without an authoritative examination of the agencies (their goals etc) that carried out the repression of Polish education, culture and intellectuals you get an article like this.
An article that explain how bad times were for Poland under the Nazis (and its resistance) but without the substantiation of the background, reasons and ultimate purpose of why repression was implemented by Nazis.
It's History Lite - and certainly NOT encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.127.70 ( talk) 13:44, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Who is Jarosław Szarek? Why his opinion is so important?-- Dojarca ( talk) 13:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
The subject is mentioned many times. It wasn't a part of "Polish culture", at least not so important. It should be mentioned once. Xx236 ( talk) 08:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
There was also Operation Antyk. Xx236 ( talk) 11:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
There is a request, submitted by Tony419c ( talk), for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: "This is an important article,specialized both in French and Dutch Wikipedia.This English counterpart is as good as French and Dutch one, and the texts of this article is comparatively static. So this article is extremely worth recording. I am not a native English speaker, so wish an volunteer recording this page into an Spoken Wikipedia Article. Thanks!". |
I have doubts about the consistency of this passage:
"(...) The press was reduced from over 2,000 publications to a few dozen, all censored by the Germans.[53][57] All pre-war newspapers were closed, and the few that were published during the occupation were new creations under the total control of the Germans. (...)" (from the Censorship and propaganda part)
- Where all the newspapers closed or the press was reduced to a few titles? I'm not sure, but it seems that those two sentences together don't make sens. I assume that those few dozens which were still publishing were recreated under the control of Germans - am I right? Please explain that to me, as I'm translating the article now, but I'm not a historian and I don't want to make any mistakes. Thank you! Agnes86 ( talk) 17:10, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Polish culture during World War II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:43, 20 May 2017 (UTC)