Talk:Żegota

In favor

A great summary of Żegota's achievements during WW II. The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.106.1.229 on 14 April 2004.

Pronunciation of name

How does one pronouce "Zegota"? Long 'e'? Just curious. --Bk0 20:25, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

You know, for Poles there is no difference between long and short 'e', at least for me - i was never quite able to grasp it. :-D Szopen 08:10, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

The long e is still there, although covered by the grammatical accent. Anyway, I added the IPA pronounciation key. Hope you like it. Halibutt 03:00, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

What syllable is the accent on? --Espoo 18:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The second; the last syllable is unstressed. -- Deborahjay 00:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

OK. The dot over the "z" makes it something like the "z" in "azure," or the "j" in the French "jour." The "e" is as in the English "bet." The "o" is open (short) as in "got," not as in "oh." The "a" is open. And in Polish, one almost always accents the penultimate (i.e. next to last) syllable (in words of more than one syllable). So it's "zhe-GO-ta." 140.147.160.78 13:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

Clarification: "...under its care"

Who is meant by this, Jews?: had 180 persons under its care within a short time. Or did the author mean to say this?: "soon had 180 helpers at its disposal" --Espoo 18:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Difficulties hiding Jews

The article says, "A difficult problem therefore was to find hiding places for persons who looked Jewish." It would be good to elaborate on this with two points. With men and boys, it was easy for the Nazi occupiers to check, since Jewish men and boys would have been circumcized and non-Jewish Poles would not. Also, I understand that there were Jews living in Poland at the time who were so lived so completely in the Jewish community that they spoke only Yiddish and could not speak Polish; they could not be passed off as non-Jewish Poles. 140.147.160.78 13:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

Polish feminine surnames

The author is writing:

e mentioned theatre artist Prof. Maria Grzegorzewski, psychologist Irena Solski, Janina Buchholtz-Bukolski*, educator Irena Sawicki*, scouting activist Dr. Ewa Rybicki, school principal Irena Kurowski, Prof. Stanislaw Ossowski and Prof. Maria Ossowski, zoo director Dr. Jan Zabinski* and his wife Antonina*, a writer, the unforgettable director of children's theatres Stefania Sempolowski, Jan Wesolowski*, Sylwia Rzeczycki*, Maria Laski, Maria Derwisz-Parnowska.

unless these ladies, from Prof. 'Grzegorzewski' onwards, were Americans with Polish ancestors, which they were not, afaik, their names must be given in their Polish forms, i. e., GrzegorzewskA, SolskA, Buchholtz-BukolskA, SawickA, RybickA, KurowskA, (Maria) OssowskA, Sempolowska (or rather: Sempołowska), RzeczyckA, LaskA. Strangely enough, the author quotes the last surname, Derwisz-Parnowska, in the correct form. Their husbands, brothers (if any) and father were called 'GrzegorzewskI', 'SolskI' --- they were not. -A, not -I. This is the law in Polish. 131.220.251.28 (talk) 14:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC) Wojciech Żełaniec

I found a few of the names in sprawiedliwi.org.pl, so I changed them to -ska. I'm assuming savingjews.org (the quoted source) was wrong in quoting the names. I can't imagine all these women would have opted for the male form of the -ski name. I have met with women bearing the -ski names, but rather for less usual names: Biały, Jasny. I could not, however, find Ms. Laski in any source, so I left it unchanged. LMB (talk) 19:13, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Wrong conclusion

"Over 700 Polish heroes, murdered by Germans as a result of helping and sheltering their Jewish neighbors, were posthumously awarded the title Righteous Among the Nations; given the alleged involvement of over 200,000 Poles in the precarious underground hidings provided to Jews, this indicates that the death penalty was used as a deterrent rather than as a frequently executed punishment.[6] They were only a small percentage of thousands of Poles reportedly executed by the Nazis for aiding Jews."

The reason why there is such a small number of executed people recognised as Rightous is because the Jews they were hiding died along with them, so there are no Jewish witnesses. In my family's hometown three families were executed for hiding Jews and none of these people is recognised as Righteous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.74.6.63 (talk) 05:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

"More specific estimates indicate that some 100,000 to 300,000 Poles met Yad Vashem’s criteria, having been directly engaged in rescuing Jews despite the threat of death, which did deter others"

Total nonsense this and all the other guessings about Poles involved in saving Jews. If 100 - 300.000 Poles would met YV criterias there would not be 6.706 Polish Righteous but at least 100.000. Meeting criterias means providing evidence for those acts, not only "I heared my grandmother/grandmother saved Jews"! No evidence = no Righteous, easy as such. However, there are even Poles who "saved" Jews by including them in the family and instead to hide them he let them work on his farm in bright daylight! Noz long as another Pole became aware about and informed the German authorities. As result all Jews were killed as the Pole with his family. And this Polish farmer&family incl. small children were considered "saviour of the Jews " while the father caused in reallity the death of all persons! BTW, as the Poles are allways showing off with their big number of Righteous: 35000 000 Polish inhabitants (during WWII) and only 6706 Righteous makes exactly 0.019 Percent. O.019% of the Polish population was able to provide enough evidence to be considered as Righteous, the other guessed "saviors" not. That speaks for itself. Austrianbird (talk) 12:24, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Photoshopped Image

The guy standing in the right of the image has clearly been photoshopped in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.77.150.178 (talk) 23:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Why? By what indications can we conclude this? --Jüber (talk) 15:48, 18 December 2015 (UTC) Jüber (talk) 15:48, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Anna Poray - SPS

@GizzyCatBella and Poeticbent: Any policy based justification for reverting back in a WP:SPS source? Such sources, per policy, are not suitable, failing V. Also note, that though unlikely (due to the subjects' age) - unless you verified via RS that all those named are dead, there is a BLP issue here - as per WP:BDP we assume anyone younger than 115 (1903 birth year is alive).Icewhiz (talk) 17:53, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

• User Icewhiz, you are clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia. — Please stop assuming that if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it... Anna Poray is not a WP:SPS publishing historian because she is deceased. Your kind of disruptive editing makes me physically sick. Sorry to say that, Poeticbent talk 23:17, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Poray self published the book prior to being deceased - her death does not make a self published work published.Icewhiz (talk) 04:44, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

What is your point about self-publishing? There have been many non-self-published books that have been worthless. Nihil novi (talk) 07:28, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't know myself what Icewhiz's is talking about often times and what is his point, I'm forcing myself to read those massive walls of text and I was wondering if that was only me... really what is your point about self-publishing?GizzyCatBella (talk) 07:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

82 Words (above - counted both posts, without the sig) a wall of text? Hardly even a fence. Per WP:SPS (which is policy) - or that reason, self-published media, such as books, ... personal websites ... and social media postings, are largely not acceptable as sources. Certainly there are worthless published books, but self-published books are generally considered, by Wikipedia policy, to be unacceptable sources.Icewhiz (talk) 10:33, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

I haven't seen destructiveness like our Siamese twins' since the Russian depredations of some 10 years ago.

Nihil novi (talk) 10:38, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

There can be good reasons to self-publish. Among other things, it prevents publishers' editors, who like to show their mettle, from wrecking authors' texts.

Nihil novi (talk) 10:38, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Good reasons, perhaps, but it also prevents the editors (in a reputable publisher) from verifying the factual accuracy of the text, and exerting their editorial influence and prevent factual errors (and other such issues) from reaching the printing press and besmirching the publisher's name. That this was not accepted for publishing, and has not passed any form of review is a red flag, and per policy - this is not an acceptable source, particularly since Poray hasn't published in the field in a RS and the possible BLP issue here.Icewhiz (talk) 10:48, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Are there controversial claims being sourced in her book? Is there any reason to assume she is lying or mistaken? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

You got this backwards - the WP:ONUS is on those who wish to include (otherwise we would include any random web page no one bothered to criticize) - WP:SPS clearly calls for her exclusion given she never published in a RS on this topic. However, yes, an interview with her has been mentioned as an illustrative example (in a footnote) of promoting the WP:FRINGE polityka historyczna Historians and journalists practicing polityka historyczna often cite the number of Christian Polish rescuers of Jews honored to date by the Yad Vashem Memorial Institue in Jerusalem, numbering approximately 6,350, as a tool to "normalize" the dark past. By employing this data, they claim that Polish anti-Semitism and nationalism did not have much of a damaging influence on Polish-Jewish relations, in order to restore the image of Poles as solely heroes and martyrs (note 33)..[1], footnote: [2]. So is being used to source information on possible BLPs - in this article for instance (in which she is used to source information on some 27 names - and unless you have a RS proving each and everyone of them is dead (many are) - we assume per WP:BDP that as possible post-1903 births - they are alive) - which is a no-go per policy.Icewhiz (talk) 05:55, 16 May 2018 (UTC)