Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Faustian (talk | contribs) at 22:10, 31 August 2009 (→Komański & Siekierka as source). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Reliable Sources?

There does not appear to be a single reliable source for this article.Faustian (talk) 13:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the website for the principal source we see the familiar names of discredited "scholars" such as Edward Prus, ALexander Korman and Wiktor Poliszczuk. Speaking of this sort of stuff, Polish historian Rafał Wnuk of the Institute of National Remembrance in Lublin wrote "The third, para-scientific trend consists of works that are of no scientific value. Their authors play freely with historical facts. They appeal mostly to the reader's emotions. Their use of sources and researchers' findings does not contribute to historical discoveries. Instead it is used to make their "true"version of events credible. It is often only politically involved publicism, not historical work. Edward Prus, Aleksander Korman, and Jacek E. Wilczur26are followers of this trend."

Also: "In the third, "non-scientific" trend there is a group represented by E. Prus, A.Korman and J. Wilczor. They all strongly support the idea that one cannot talk about a Polish-Ukrainian conflict, butonly about the genocide of Poles by Ukrainian nationalists. Works by these authors are written in the form of a lampoon. E.Prus's and J.Wilczor's books do not include footnotes and have only bibliographies. This prevents a reader from confirming facts which are often more than doubtful. For instance, in one of his books E.Prus writes that in Sachryn, near Hrubieszow, Ukrainians murdered each other.56However, all of Polish historiography and the memories of Home Army soldiers state clearly that it was an action of Polish underground."

Unless reliable sources are found confirming this stuff, this article probably needs to be deleted.Faustian (talk) 13:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

There are plenty of Polish language sources which confirm the massacre. An atrocity of such scale, with more than 800 murdered, should be described in the Misplaced Pages. Tymek (talk) 15:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I added few more sources, including the president Lech Kaczynski speech were he refers to the massacre (and we know that he is FAR from being anti-Ukrainian). There is plenty of Polish language sources but I could not find much about it in English.--Jacurek (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

IPN has nothing about the Chodaczkow Wielki massacre (I can't find it anymore) ... --Jacurek (talk) 18:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Are there any scholarly sources confirming the existence of this massacre? The other issue is much of the info about this massacre in this article comes from Korman's work which is clearly not a reliable source. As I just posted, Rafał Wnuk of the Institute of National Remembrance in Lublin wrote "The third, para-scientific trend consists of works that are of no scientific value. Their authors play freely with historical facts. They appeal mostly to the reader's emotions. Their use of sources and researchers' findings does not contribute to historical discoveries. Instead it is used to make their "true"version of events credible. It is often only politically involved publicism, not historical work. Edward Prus, Aleksander Korman and Jacek E. Wilczur are followers of this trend."Faustian (talk) 01:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Faustian, I understand your point, but is the opinion of Rafal Wnuk binding here? Historians, like other people, have their likes and dislikes. Just because Wnuk criticized Korman, Prus and Wilczur, does not mean we should not treat their works as scholarly. Wnuk himself and his fellow historian Grzegorz Motyka have often been criticized (especially Motyka) by other Polish scholars for being too pro-Ukrainian. Motyka, who has been kicked out of the National Rememberance Institute, has been called pro-Banderite or plainly Ukrainian-Polish historian.Tymek (talk) 05:13, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Was Wnuk criticized by historians or by non-historian nationalists such as Korman? Not all opinions are equal. Wnuk's cticism of Korman's work, moreover, was quite strong and is not to be taken lightly. He is not saying Korman is merely biased, or makes mistakes. He says No historical value. This is more than criticism, it's condemnation. And Wnuk is a very credible historian. The article that this is quoted in was devoted to an examination of Polish historiography. These are the words of a Polish expert on this topic, writing specifically about historiagraphy. Faustian (talk) 14:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Wnuk is not the only one. Yale historian, graduate of Oxford whio also sdtuided in Warsaw, Harvard, Paris and Vienna, and expert on Eastern Europe Timothy D. Snyder writes of Prus : "The propagandistic publications of Edward Prus are indefensible in this regard." This sort of stuff neeeds to be kept off of wikipedia.Faustian (talk) 14:36, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

And here is a description of Korman's hoaxing a picture of children murdered by their mother in 1923, claiming that it was the work of UPA: . As I said, let's stick to reliable sources, not Korman or Prus. Faustian (talk) 14:40, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Faustian, I have too much respect for you to argue with you and as much as I would not like to see Ukrainian crap on Misplaced Pages, I am sure you would not like to see Polish crap here, and we agree with each other on it. So far I have not been able to find reliable sources describing this massacre, give me a little more time and then we will see about deletion of the article. Surely, there might be books on it, but the internet is blank (except for Korman and Prus). Furthermore, I have found an interview with a man who lived there, he mentions that out of a thousand houses, maybe a hundred remained, but he does not mention any Ukrainian units. He says later Every second or third night, despite that I was a little boy, I had to stand sentry. We had to keep an eye on the banderowcy (members of Ukrainian organisation fighting for independence). The Ukrainians robbed and murdered the Poles, but does not mention the massacre. THe interview in English is here Tymek (talk) 03:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with what you write above. We ought to be careful with testmonies by individuals, without a source to back it up. As for what was written by this eyewitness, if UPA committed that atrocity than it wasn't the 14th SS Division. best regardsFaustian (talk) 03:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion

Faustian, you have my endorsement if you want to go on and delete the article. There have been enough local massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Podolia, we do not really need a one with sources that are not reliable. Tymek (talk) 02:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know how to delete articles, but left a message on an administrator's talk page. I appreciate your efforts on this topic. warmly Faustian (talk) 03:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I do not know how to do it either. Tymek (talk) 04:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Just a remark on the tag which says There seems to be an agreement on the talk page that we do not need an article per every local massacre. I strongly disagree with this statement, as all massacres should be described. The difference is that e.g. in Belgium during WW2 there were few massacres, while in Volhynia and Podolia alone there were hundreds of such sad events. The only reason for deletion is lack of reliable sources, nothing else. Tymek (talk) 04:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you 100%.Faustian (talk) 12:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree also. If we have good sources we certainly should have all such articles. For this one , where those whose opinion I must rely on say the sources are borderline, why don;t we merge with the article for the village. DGG (talk) 05:31, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that pretty much all the information in this article is taken from unreliable sources so unless another source is found then I'm not sure if it belongs in any article (unless it's a brief mention and the problem with the source is noted in the article).Faustian (talk) 02:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I declined to delete the article via prod--I suggest again hat you move it, but otherwise it needs community attention. AfD would be the place. DGG (talk) 17:11, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources

1. H. Komański, S. Siekierka, „Ludobójstwo dokonane przez nacjonalistów ukraińskich na Polakach w województwie tarnopolskim 1939-1946”. Wrocław 2006. This complete documentation about Massacres of Poles in Tarnopol voivodeship.

Is it a reliable source and does it mention this act specifically?Faustian (talk) 19:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

1. War Crimes SS-Galizien Look at this link carefully: CHODACZKÓW WIELKI, powiat Tarnopol. 16 kwietnia 1944 roku oddziały SS-Galizien , które zdšżały z odsiecza niemieckiej załodze oblężonej przez wojska radzieckie w twierdzy Tarnopol, przybyły do Chodaczkowa Wielkiego. Ukraińscy SS-mani rozpoczęli systematyczne palenie i niszczenie zabudowań oraz mordowanie mieszkańców wsi. Byli oni nawet do tego specjalnie przygotowani , gdyż mieli na hełmach żółte frędzle zwisające do poziomu ust, co uniemożliwiało rozpoznanie ich twarzy. Do uciekających ludzi, w pierwszej kolejnoœci do mężczyzn strzelali zapalającymi pociskami fosforowymi, zaœ dzieci i starców wrzucali w ogień do płonących domów. W sumie łączna strata polskiej ludnoœci wyniosła 862 osoby. Ocalała ludnoœć pogrzebała pomordowanych rodaków na placu przy koœciele rzymsko-katolickim w Chodaczkowie Wielkim we wspólnej mogile o szerokoœci 2 m i długoœci 30 m, układając zwłoki warstwami. --Paweł5586 (talk) 18:24, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

This info wasn't in the section written by Motyka (the first part of the website) but in a different section of the website, attributed to Josef Fajkowski and Jan Religa, in a work published in Warsaw in 1981. Is this a reliable source? I found no seeming trace of Fajkowski on googlem and the only Jan Religa I found was a politican with a background in chemistry: . I'd like confirmation from a reliable source before this controversial information comes into the article.Faustian (talk) 19:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Another source used is H. Komański, S. Siekierka, „Ludobójstwo dokonane przez nacjonalistów ukraińskich na Polakach w województwie tarnopolskim 1939-1946”. Wrocław 2006. It's published by Norton publishers in Wroclaw. The publishing house gets praised on this anti-Ukrainian Russian nationalist blog: and in addition to the work above includes stuff by noted propagandists Prus, Polszczuk and Korman (see previous section of this talk page). Scroll down to read about the kind of literature published by that group. I doubt that this is a reliable source, either.Faustian (talk) 19:25, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Stop questioning Polish books, Komański and Siekiera are from organisation Association Commemorating Victims of the Crime of Ukrainian nationalists. Their resarches based on reliable sources - based on many witness accounts. You are using nationalists pages for sources. U cant forbid me to use book as source becouse you dont like it. Motyka based on their book in Ukraińska Partyzantka, 2006. There are many refs to Siekierka's book. On his page u cant check number of victims - source.--Paweł5586 (talk) 21:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I would question a Ukrainian source of similar caliber alleging Polish atrocities the same way. Since this is a controversial issue, I simply ask for a reliable source as the basis. So far there isn't one. The "Association Commemorating Victims of the Crime of Ukrainian nationalists" is not a reliable source. Anything published by a university, the Institute of National Remembrance, or people regarded by reliable sources as historians?Faustian (talk) 21:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Nobody questioned thier books thats enough for me, seriuos historians are basing on his books. They are participating in conferences of historians. Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. Book was published, I dont see any historians criticized their book--Paweł5586 (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

"Nobody questioning" something published is not a criteria for a reliable source. Not every piece of propoganda is notable enough that people actually question it. The fact that this went uncommented on may be good enough for you but it is not good enough for wikipedia. See below.

Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources Review

Nobody questioned thier books thats enough for me, seriuos historians are basing on his books. They are participating in conferences of historians. Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. Book was published, I dont see any historians criticized their book--Paweł5586 (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Many Misplaced Pages articles rely on scholarly material. Academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources when available. However, some scholarly material may be outdated, superseded by more recent research, in competition with alternate theories, or controversial within the relevant field. Reliable non-academic sources may also be used, particularly material from reputable mainstream publications. Misplaced Pages articles should cover all significant views, doing so in proportion to their published prominence among the most reliable sources. The choice of appropriate sources depends on context and information should be clearly attributed where there are conflicting sources.

• Material that has been vetted by the scholarly community is regarded as reliable; this means published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses.
• Items that are signed are preferable to unsigned articles.
• The scholarly acceptance of a source can be verified by confirming that the source has entered mainstream academic discourse, for example by checking the number of scholarly citations it has received in citation indexes. A corollary is that journals not included in a citation index, especially in fields well covered by such indexes, should be used with caution.
• Isolated studies are usually considered tentative and may change in the light of further academic research. The reliability of a single study depends on the field. Studies relating to complex and abstruse fields, such as medicine, are less definitive. Avoid undue weight when using single studies in such fields. Meta-analyses, textbooks, and scholarly review articles are preferred when available, so as to provide proper context.

Komański and Siekiera don't meet any of these criteria. It isn't published by a "reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses". It is published by the same publisher that releases all sorts of anti-Ukrainian propaganda by authors such as Korman, etc. It is not a reliable source, sorry.Faustian (talk) 22:15, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but what about 862 dead Poles? They are killed themselves? Rescued still live as well as their families live. So Komański and Siekierka resarch set the exact figure killed people. First read ther book than criticize. Look at Motyka's book, there are many eferences pointed to Siekierka and Komański book.

And one more thing, not all what Prus and Korman wrote was lie. They used anty Ukrainian language (they saw what UPA did on their eyes) but many facts are true.--Paweł5586 (talk) 22:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

If the only evidence for the 862 dead Poles is a nonreliable source than it does not belong here. If the 862 figure is true, then find a reliable source that says so. The other "fact" is the allegation that the 14-SS Galician were involved in the alleged massacre. Any reliable source claiming that they were involved in that specific act? As for Prus and Korman, is doesn't matter if "not all what Prus and Korman wrote was lie". The fact is that they are not reliable sources (see first section of this discussion page). Faustian (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Dear Pawel, we have to go for a compromise here. I am sure you would not appreciate unreliable Ukrainian sources on Misplaced Pages, just like other users do not appreciate some Polish sources. It goes both ways. I have created this article, and now I see that we do not really have solid evidence of this massacre. I am not saying it did not occur, what I mean is that in controversial topics, such as this one, we need something more. Tymek (talk) 22:25, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Szczepański and Siekierka are reliable source, just read thier book.--Paweł5586 (talk) 22:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

By what criteria are they a reliable source, other than your opinion?Faustian (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Next source by "Extermination of South-east Ends " by Stanisław Żurek: Most victims in assault: 2. Chodaczków Wielki pow. Tarnopol = 862 osoby (faktycznie ponad 1000 osób), w kwietniu 1944 roku, w wyniku napadu SS „Galizien” oraz OUN-UPA; —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paweł5586 (talk • contribs) 22:42, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

According to this the author is an artist and medical doctor who fought in a Polish resistance unit. Not a historian. Zurek's works are published by the same notorious Nortom publishing house that publishes works by other Polish nationalist propagandists such as Korman. Seriously, a reliable source would be welcome but not this stuff.Faustian (talk) 22:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

This is not same person. I got 6 sources about Chodaczków: 1. Szczepański and Siekierka book where u can find exact number of victims, based on recoletions 2. Stanisław Żurek book, 3. Prus (SS-Galizien. Patrioci czy zbrodniarze?) and Korman (A.Korman - "Nieukarane zbrodnie SS-Galizien z lat 1943-1945" - Londyn 1989.) books, 4. Page source, 5. Page source (number of victims), 6. Czesław E. Blicharski Chyba ten eufemizm "działalność rewolucyjna" pokrywa zbrodnie ludobójstwa, dokonane przez "rewolucjonistów" w takich miejscowościach jak np. Chodaczków Wielki z 862 zamordowanymi, --Paweł5586 (talk) 23:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

As proven above, they are not reliable sources. Yale historian Timothy Snyder actually mentions Prus' work here: : "The propagandistic publications of Edward Prus are indefensible in this regard." You are not citing reliable sources, sorry. I can probably cite 10 or 100 Ukrainian nationalist sources that claim that Ukrainians didn't kill anybody or that it was all the communists or someone else doing these things. So what? It's not the number but the reliability of the source that counts. Not just me but Tymek, who created this article, agree that so far there is no reliable source supporting what you are trying to put in the article.Faustian (talk) 23:24, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

For you this is not reliable source for me its fine. Especially Siekierka, they collected many reccoletions of victims. And tell me why Motyka in Ukraińska Partyzantka are basing on some facts from Siekierka's book? Becouse he finds it as relialbe source. For me Snyder isnt good source, he cant recognize genocide or ethnical cleansing from other things.--Paweł5586 (talk) 23:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not about a source being relaible "for you" or "for me". It is about a source meeting wikiepdia's standards for reliability. And this one clearly does not, as confirmed not only by me but by Tymek, the creator of this article.Faustian (talk) 15:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Polish News sites about Lwów and SS - Galizien:

• 1 - Utworzona na wiosnę 1943 roku z zamieszkujących dawne polskie Kresy Wschodnie ukraińskich ochotników jednostka 14 Dywizja Grenadierów SS wsławiła się głównie polowaniem na partyzantów na Lubelszczyźnie i licznymi masakrami ludności cywilnej. Najbardziej znane z nich to mord dokonany na 868 Polakach w lutym 1944 roku w Hucie Pieniackiej i masakra w Chodaczkowie Wielkim, gdzie zginęły 862 osoby.
• 2 W Chodaczkowie Wielkim oddział SS "Galizien" zamordował 862 osoby.--Paweł5586 (talk) 00:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Are the authors of the newspaper articles historians? The latter is from a radical nationalist newspaper btw (for English=speakers: the "kresy" stuff seems to be sort of a Polish version of German Danzigers and East Prussians wanting their territory back).Faustian (talk) 04:39, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

You are very unfair to Poles. There is no radical nationalist in Poland in polish-ukrainian relationships. There are sill many Poles living at East. Thats news for them and about them, there is no revisions, no hate in this page. This is not for the comparison to OUN-UPA fans, which are persuading even to kill the priest Isakowicz-Zalewski, who are fighting for the truth and never is against Ukrainians only against nationalist who killed his family.--Paweł5586 (talk) 09:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I haven't really read that much about this issue so I comment with some hesitation. However, I do agree with the opinion of Lysy here that publications by Nortom should not be used as sources. Additionally, I have some recollection that Leon Kieres and the IPN stated that there was no evidence of Galitzien being involved in this particular massacre. I think that Tymek went out of his way on this one to only use reliable sources and that's exactly how these kinds of articles should be approached.radek (talk) 22:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

It is only published by Nortom! Author and publishing house are form Wrocław. You didnt ansewer about references in Motyka to Siekierka's book. I dont accept your claims.--82.115.88.68 (talk) 08:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Komański & Siekierka as source

The book LUDOBÓJSTWO DOKONANE PRZEZ NACJONALISTÓW UKRAIŃSKICH NA POLAKACH W WOJEWÓDZTWIE TARNOPOLSKIM 1939-1946, Henryk Komański, Szczepan Siekierka was reviewed (noticed) by prof. dr hab. Bernard Janusz Albin and ks. prof. dr. hab. Józef Mandziuk. This is notes from historians (in Polish):

Z recenzji prof. dr. hab. Bernarda J. Albina: „Zbrodnie nacjonalistów ukraińskich na ludności polskiej zamieszkującej południowo-wschodnie Kresy II Rzeczpospolitej w latach II wojny światowej, mimo upływu od tamtych tragicznych wydarzeń sześćdziesięciu lat, wciąż pozostają stosunkowo słabo opisane i zbadane Recenzowana praca dokumentalna przygotowana do druku przez Szczepana Siekierę i Henryka Komańskiego, niewątpliwie wychodzi naprzeciw tym potrzebom. Nieczęsto spotykana tak znaczna objętość dzieła wydaje się tu jednak uzasadniona, zważywszy na jej wysokie ambicje dokumentalne oraz to, że odnoszą się one do dość rozległego obszaru wybranego województwa i w zasadzie nie mają, poza książką W.i E. Siemaszków traktującego o Wołyniu, odpowiednika w literaturze naukowej Mimo pewnej jednostronności jest ona swoistym pomnikiem upamiętniającym nazwiska tych mieszkańców województwa tarnopolskiego, którym odebrano życie tylko dlatego, że byli Polakami, w imię obłędnej i zbrodniczej ideologii ukraińskiego integralnego nacjonalizmu. Jest ona przestrogą dla młodych Polaków i Ukraińców i zarazem cennym wkładem do rozpoczynającego się dialogu polsko-ukraińskiego oraz budowy podstaw do rzeczywistego pojednania, które może nastąpić poprzez obnażenie całej prawdy o współczesnej przeszłości

Z recenzji ks. prof. dr. hab. Józefa Mandziuka: „Nie można bowiem budować stosunków między narodami, zwłaszcza sąsiadami, na kłamstwie i niedomówieniach. Jednak temat zbrodni popełnionych przez Ukraińców na polskiej ludności kresowej nadal był konsekwentnie pomijany i przemilczany. Prezentowane dzieło oceniam bardzo pozytywnie. Posiada ono najwyższą rangę w naszej bibliografii i z pewnością spełni pokładane w nim nadzieje w przyszłych stosunkach z Ukrainą. Uchroni od zapomnienia tych, którzy ponieśli śmierć z rąk Ukraińców --Paweł5586 (talk) 10:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Could you translate this for the benefit of Enlish-speaking editors? The first prfessor admits that the book you cite is "one-sided." ("Mimo pewnej jednostronności jest ona swoistym pomnikiem upamiętniającym nazwiska tych mieszkańców województwa tarnopolskiego...", use google translate). The second professor is a priest at a university that was a communist-era Roman Catholic Seminary. More importantly, neither of these sources, in the quotes you provided, endorsed the specific facts you are trying to place into the article. Do either of these professors confirm the specific events you seek to place in the article?Faustian (talk) 15:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

You didnt read the book thats why you dont understant it. This book has two parts - one part (short at begining) is general basics about the general situation - OUN, UPA, SS-Galizien... This is that part, first professor writting about, second part (above 800 p.) is description of events. This descripcion is basing on recolections which was published in Karta Center. Motyka used this facts in his book, he added some references to Siekierka's book. Look at second say: " This book got highest rank in our bibliography". I can send you pages from this book - read informations about Huta Pieniacka - its the same what Polish Instytue of Membrance established.--Paweł5586 (talk) 16:54, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

If Motyka mentioned Chodaczkow Wielki then include that in this article and there isn't a problem. Unfortunately that hasn't been the case. We can use stuff that Motyka or other relaible sources have taken from this work, but justbecause they took some stuff from this work doesn't mean that the work itself is reliable. Motyka can judge what parts of the source are good, we cannot and must defer to the experts.Faustian (talk) 22:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

And I got 8 sources about number of victims and participation SS-Galizien. --Paweł5586 (talk) 16:58, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

You can have 800, if they are not reliable sources the number is irrelevent. All we need is one reliable source. Unfortunately so far there isn't one.Faustian (talk) 22:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)