Draft talk:Battle of Gdeszyn: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:18, 30 June 2024

Request

please create one article, not millions of them, stop using a pseudo-historical book that is not recognised by historians like Grzegorz Motyka Birczenin (talk) 13:10, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Volodymyr Viatrovych is a great Ukrainian historian and if you just don’t like him and his works - it’s not my problem. I’m making an articles so what’s the problem? Go make your own and don't get involved in my business Forward.ops (talk) 13:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"The Second Polish-Ukrainian War 1942-1947" was criticised by historians Ihor Ilyushin, Andriy Portnov, Grzegorz Motyka, Andrzej Zięba, Per Anders Rudling, Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe, Andrzej Leon Sowa and Grzegorz Hryciak, who levelled a number of accusations against it:

Double standards, selective choice of sources. Historians accuse V.Vyatrovych of applying double standards in assessing evidence and facts. In the case of Ukrainian crimes, he seeks to diminish them, and in the case of Polish crimes, to exaggerate them. V. Vyatrovych also applies double standards to the memories of witnesses. He completely rejects the memoirs of Polish witnesses to OUN-UPA crimes as allegedly biased. At the same time, he uncritically relies on those witness accounts that confirm his vision of history (most often the recollections of Ukrainian nationalists). A similar tactic is used by V. Vyatrovych to documents. He quotes them selectively in order to prove a preconceived thesis and questions the authenticity of documents that put the OUN-UPA in a bad light without any basis. For him, Yuri Stelmashchuk's testimony before the NKVD that Dmytr Klaczkiwsky had handed over to him a secret directive from the OUN provincial office to murder the Polish minority is a Soviet forgery. At the same time, V. Vyatrovych is not reluctant to refer extensively to documents made public by Mykola Lebed and Volodymyr Kosyk, despite proving that Ukrainian nationalists removed from them passages compromising the OUN.

Relying on one unverified document (a letter from Bishop Plato to Bishop Polycarp), the author of the book holds the Schutzmannschaft unit composed of Poles responsible for the Malina crime, ignoring a number of other sources contradicting this thesis. Birczenin (talk) 13:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 :Volodymyr Viatrovych is a great Ukrainian historian and if you just don’t like him and his works - it’s not my problem. I’m making an articles so what’s the problem? Go make your own and don't get involved in my business [[User:Forward.ops|Forward.ops]] ([[User talk:Forward.ops|talk]]) 13:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
+::"The Second Polish-Ukrainian War 1942-1947" was criticised by historians Ihor Ilyushin, Andriy Portnov, [[Grzegorz Motyka]], Andrzej Zięba, Per Anders Rudling, Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe, Andrzej Leon Sowa and Grzegorz Hryciak, who levelled a number of accusations against it:
+::'''Double standards, selective choice of sources'''. Historians accuse V.Vyatrovych of applying double standards in assessing evidence and facts. In the case of Ukrainian crimes, he seeks to diminish them, and in the case of Polish crimes, to exaggerate them. V. Vyatrovych also applies double standards to the memories of witnesses. He completely rejects the memoirs of Polish witnesses to OUN-UPA crimes as allegedly biased. At the same time, he uncritically relies on those witness accounts that confirm his vision of history (most often the recollections of Ukrainian nationalists). A similar tactic is used by V. Vyatrovych to documents. He quotes them selectively in order to prove a preconceived thesis and questions the authenticity of documents that put the OUN-UPA in a bad light without any basis. For him, Yuri Stelmashchuk's testimony before the NKVD that Dmytr Klaczkiwsky had handed over to him a secret directive from the OUN provincial office to murder the Polish minority is a Soviet forgery. At the same time, V. Vyatrovych is not reluctant to refer extensively to documents made public by Mykola Lebed and Volodymyr Kosyk, despite proving that Ukrainian nationalists removed from them passages compromising the OUN.
+::Relying on one unverified document (a letter from Bishop Plato to Bishop Polycarp), the author of the book holds the Schutzmannschaft unit composed of Poles responsible for the [[Malin massacre|Malina crime]], ignoring a number of other sources contradicting this thesis. [[User:Birczenin|Birczenin]] ([[User talk:Birczenin|talk]]) 13:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)