Talk:Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia

Please observe the 1RR on this article

See the result of this 3RR case. All editors working on Massacres of Poles in Volhynia must limit themselves to one revert of this article per day (WP:1RR). The definition of revert is given at WP:REVERT. Any admin may enforce this restriction by blocks, if needed. Before an editor reports a violation of 1RR to admins, it is good practice to leave a note for the person who you think exceeded 1RR and ask them to take back their last edit. This restriction can be lifted by any uninvolved admin without consulting me provided the admin is supported by consensus at a noticeboard. Any admin who closes a WP:AE case related to this article may undo the restriction if they think it desirable. EdJohnston (talk) 00:25, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Just to prevent these disputes from spilling onto other pages, I'd slap 1RR on Ukrainian Insurgent Army as well just to make sure.radek (talk) 14:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm planning to set up a 1RR at Ukrainian Insurgent Army as well. See a review of the 1RR at WP:AN. EdJohnston (talk) 22:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

1RR still in effect on this article

See #Please observe the 1RR on this article. User:Hedviberit and User:Lvivske are urged to take note of this. EdJohnston (talk) 20:10, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

....for the love of god I just made a simple grammatical fix, can noone make a basic edit on here without getting into a revert war?--Львівське (talk) 21:04, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Since two people were reverting that language back and forth, at least one of them must have thought that more than grammar was at stake. Why not ask for consensus for your change on Talk? EdJohnston (talk) 22:21, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Because I know how to speak english--Львівське (talk) 02:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

"Polish" kapo

If Volksdeutsche (members of German minority) kapos were Polish, Bandera and Ukrainians in Volhinia (members of Ukrainian minority) were Polish as well. Teritorially and by citizenship. So this is your logic: some Polish people were angry because other Polish killed one Polish so massacred other Polish people. Is here any point?Yeti (talk) 12:31, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

A matter of taste/Lipniki photo

"Taste" is a highly subjective thing. Therefore, I don't find this "better taste" justification to be sufficient enough to delete the photo. It was previously removed from the article about Ukrainian Insurgent Army (specifically from the section describing ethnic cleansing by the UPA) on the grounds that photos of victims are not used in articles about military organizations. Right? Similar argument can't be applied here; such photographs seem to be acceptable in wikipedia articles dealing with massacre(s) or genocide (even exhumation photos are sometimes included) e.g. The Holocaust,My Lai Massacre,Katyn massacre - should these be removed too? IPN's site contains other photographs of Poles murdered by Ukrainian Insurgent Army, far more drastic than this one, e.g. [1]. Description under the photo ought to reflect the one given in the original source.--Hedviberit (talk) 05:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about? It was never removed, just moved down and the more tasteful memorial photo put at the top. Jeez, don't wig out. --Львівське (talk) 06:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

If you check your last edit, you will notice that the photo was indeed removed. Should I be guessing what your intention was? Anyway, as you can see, photos of victims are at the beginning of the articles I linked to (My Lai, Holocaust), and no one finds them distasteful. --Hedviberit (talk) 06:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

It was two edits done at the same time, you know what's up.--Львівське (talk) 07:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

For the record, since you pointed it out above, Katyn massacre begins with a memorial photo.--Львівське (talk) 09:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Katyn massacre is an example of article where exhumation photos (very drastic) are used. Hedviberit (talk) 18:29, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

... in the body, there are like 5 memorial photos used in the lead and body prior to the exhumation photos.--Львівське (talk) 19:17, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Bosnian genocide, Srebrenica massacre, etc the list goes on of other articles of similar topic exercising good taste.--Львівське (talk) 19:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

should be added

link, exhibit opened on it causing outrage. would be good for the article. also, those running it refer to it as "The Volyn Slaughter" so we might have a common use name for it now? --Львівське (talk) 18:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Conflict between Ukrainian political forces. Both sides are criticized: link. "Volyn slaughter" is Polish term, "Volyn tragedy" is the term used in Ukrainian publications, as highlighted in the lead of the article.Hedviberit (talk) 15:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

undid massive renaming/moves

Please see here for some background [2]. Basically I restored Faustian's last version but then kept the edits made by bots and by Diannaa.radek (talk) 16:06, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Snyder vs. Piotrowski

Yale historian Snyder is a historian specializing in this stuff. University of New Hampshire professor Piotrowski is not a historian but a sociolgist. Checking Piotrowski's references, he used some dubious sources. The two are not equal.Faustian (talk) 17:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC) Yes, yes he is a sociologist and professor of anthropology, history, recognized in the world. for over twenty years Piotrowski, carry out in the history of ethnic relations. I believe that Piotrowski is a bigger expert in the subject line, please compare his scientific achievements. Questionable sources are your opinion, please cite specifically its suppose. Snyder works are characterized by naivete and lack of integrity describes the years 1939 -1947 in the same breath. does not do any analysis of the nationalities. Lack of integrity in his work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrzejSkulimowski (talk • contribs) 02:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Snyder lacks integrity?? I have a feeling you don't speak or read English and never even bothered to read his work.--Львівське (talk) 02:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

--Bstarzewski (talk) 23:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC) My father is a survivor of the uprising. He lived near the village of Sielec in July 1943 and knew many of the people interviewed for Piotrowski's book and a number of the victims described including Sokolov the Russian school teacher and Irena Moralewska who's fates he had not been aware of.

The following is an excerpt from the memoir of Konstanti Starżewski (my father) which would seem to bear out Piotrowski's version: (notes: that he refers to himself in the 3rd person as "Kostek". I have not attempted to make any grammatical or spelling edits so as not to taint the content. He is still alive and available for interview.)

UKRAINIAN UPRIZING One summer day, all three of the boys decided to go to Polish colony in Janiewicze, Zbyshek's home village. The visit meant to serve two purposes: one, to visit family of Zbyshek, and the other, to visit place where he knew many young friends usually gathered on Sundays – the preferred house for such activity happen to be on the way to Zbyshek's parents place. As they approached the house, Zbyshek remarked, “It seems too quiet inside. Did they noticed us and are trying to play a joke on us?” As they all entered the porch, Kostek glanced upwards and noticed a girl signaling something while sticking her head from above. To him, the act seemed to reinforce the idea of a prank. Just about that time, Zbyshek stepped in front of his friends and opened the door to the house. Suddenly, without saying a word, he turned and ran out of the porch as if he was shut out of a sling. Romek, being close behind Zbyshek, must have glanced inside also and did the same. A strange man with a gun busted out after them. Kostek, however, was few steps behind the other two. Bewildered, he hesitated a bit by turning his head to observe his friends and the strange man. Not realizing what is going on, out of curiosity he extended his hand to grab the knob, for the door somehow got closed in the meantime. When the door opened as if by magic, in front of him appeared a man with a rifle. That man quickly grabbed him by the hand pulling him inside. What Kostek observed there stunned him. In the middle of the room there were several young people laying with their faces down to the floor. At that moment, he realized what his friends observed and why they ran. The young people on the floor were dead. However, Beyond that, his mind seemed to refuse to reason out any connection as to how this may effect him. Only after a little while when he heard a command to lay down on the floor that he instantly realized the horror of what is at stake.

“Lay down here, face down!“ the man gave an order in Ukrainian language in a sharp voice. Kostek realizing that this person intends to do him harm, his instinct for self preservation kicked in. The idea of pretending he is one of them, flashed through his mind like flash of lightening, for in the past the deceit worked to his advantage.

“Why? I am Ukrainian. Are you also killing your own people? (Pochemoo? Ja Ukrainski. Wy toze zabywayety swoich?) Kostek asked the person in his own language.

“No! You are not one of us. I heard you talk outside. You did talk to your friends in Polish, don't lie to me. Go down! Now!”

“Of course I did. I am sure you also can talk Polish. Does that make you one also? ” Kostek insisted. But that man did not answer, only kept on pushing him down with the but of his rifle.

Kostek tried again and again to convince his would be executioner that he was also an Ukrainian, but he was failing. When the three boys were trying to enter the house, there were two Ukrainians in that house. However, when the other two boys escaped, one left inside while the other took of after them. The one in the house was evidently a bit confused by Kostek's revelation, or maybe his conscience was bothering him. Yet driven by the fever of revolution, he fired his gun - the sight of this victim laying at his feet must have created conflict in his mind. The bullet did not find the intended victim, it hit next to Kostek's head. Kostek, upon hearing the noise of the gun, out of fear, passed out loosing his consciousness. How long he was in that state, he did not know. At some time he finally came to. Being disoriented and still in the daze, without realizing what has happen, he slowly began giving signs of life and slowly started to raise his head. The Ukrainian, seeing his victim alive, either became confused or stunned, got scared and dropped his gun. At that moment, Kostek seeing the reaction of his enemy, also scared but mindful of his life, quickly took advantage of the situation; got up and headed for the only light emitting source – the window, probably not even realizing that it was not opened. In the matter of only few seconds, Kostek and the frame were outside. Just like his two other friends; he took off for home via the tall stand of grain.

By the time Kostek reached his home, his two friends already spread the news about the event. However, in order not to alarm and worry his mother, who by then, was giving indications of being very stressed, he chose not to talk about what happened to him.

Zbeshek, who's parents lived near the house the boys visited, after escape, tried quickly to visit them. Finding all of his relatives murdered, explained in details the horror he had witnessed there. It so happened that his sister was also caught in the Ukrainian viscousnes. She was there with her newly born baby. On the news of what happened to them, her husband, who was an ex Russian soldier, became furious. his anger was even greater upon hearing the kind of death the baby suffered. Zbyshek described in detail every member's death. According to him, the baby was stuck with a pitch fork and nailed with it to the wall with writing beneath it in blood- “Polish eagle”. Siergay took upon himself to revenge his wife and the infant. Instantly, he mounted a horse and took into Ukrainian villages to hunt for the perpetrators. There is no doubt that he did not find anyone admitting to the crime, but every one believed that he did do damage to many households, for big column of smokes were visible in the direction of his search.'

Copyright reserved. Material is the original work of Constantine (Konstanti) Starzewski.Permission granted by author exclusively for the purposes of this article and discussion. All other rights reserved.

Renaming/Moving article

In my research, I'm finding that the events were much less one sided than the article currently presents. Poles killed civilians in reprisal, and there seems to be a question as to who threw the first stone in all of this. Considering this is a back and forth conflict, should the article be retitled to reflect the massacre as part of a larger conflict? If a separate article was made to reflesh the Polish killings, there would eventually be so much overlap that they would have to be merged anyway.--Львівське (talk) 01:30, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the article presents this in a "one sided" manner, rather it is based on sources. While there were reprisals it's a simple question of scale. I believe that this kind of proposal was made before and there was neither consensus in its favor nor sources to support it. Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Well 40-50k vs. 20k deaths, it's not really a matter of scale, both are high numbers, and both happened through similar means for similar purposes. The Polish POV seems to have more literature due to the nature of victimization narratives, and the Ukrainian side obviously doesn't want to talk much about it. I don't think the POVs from either side should take control here, or dictate what is and isn't talked about. Since "Massacres of Poles in Volhynia" only reflects one POV, and excludes a third of those killed, it doesn't seem very neutral.--Львівське (talk) 02:07, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, first you're comparing the supposed 20k killed by Poles in total to just the 40-50k killed by Ukrainians in Volhynia alone - the total number would be much higher if we consider all of affected areas. The fact that one set of actions was a response to the initiation of the killings also matters. The title is not "Polish POV" but simply how this is described in sources.

The 20k is in Volhynia and is specifically in reprisal to the 40-50k..what other areas, Galicia? I do think it is POlish point of view since its only presenting the chain of events from the Polish perspective. To quote Magocsi, "The [Polish] underground movement [...] was concerned with the post-war status of [Polish] territories which [Poles] argued should belong [...] to a restored Poland [...] hence the attacks on innocent civilians were designed to eliminate the presence of [...] Ukrainians to the advantage of the future state that would rule [this territory]”--Львівське (talk) 02:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

According to Motyka, who's a pro-Ukrainian historian, in Volhynia itself the number of Ukrainians killed by Poles was 2000 to 3000 (not 20,000), compared to 40,000 to 60,000 Poles killed by Ukrainians. The Magocsi quote is something that perhaps should be included in the article (I thought Faustian already put something like it in there somewhere) but it is not a reason to change the scope nor the title. (Also there's a lot of [...] in your quote). I believe we've discussed this before. Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:18, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Well lets say I get a bunch of sources showing the Polish actions and make it into its own article. Would that not be destined for a merge proposal? --Львівське (talk) 03:30, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

It might. It depends on the sources and the article. Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

The [...]s were just removing the Ukrainian references to 40k, "both groups", etc. Things that are clearly known here. Just trying to shorten it for the sake of brevity--Львівське (talk) 03:28, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I've also reverted one of your edits since you took out a text based on a reliable source and replaced it with what appears to be an opinion piece from a source of unknown reliability. Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:34, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

BTW, here's the last time we had this discussion [3]. Then you opined that something like "Ethnic Cleansing of Poles in Volhynia" (maybe with a "by OUN") was the most appropriate title (if I understand those comments correctly). For the record, as I said there, I do not think the title of this article should use the word "genocide", like some other people proposed. Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I remember. Back then I had no idea the amount killed by Polish groups was so high and, well, my argument then was to be more accurate of what the OUN/UPA was doing and to give the article a more accurate title. Like the Magocsi quote, the OUN wanted to ethnically cleanse Poles from Volyn....so I don't think my argument was off...either way, what I'm proposing now is totally different than the last discussion.--Львівське (talk) 03:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

If you're referring to the 20k number then that has also been extensively discussed before. Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't recall. Plus, some editors at one point were saying the UPA killed Ukrainian civilians...so I may have assumed that still fell under the article's main premise of UPA instigated ethnic cleansing. Now that I see it was done by both sides and both on large scales...well...I've stated my take on this. If I make an article dedicated to the Polish ethnic cleansing (not Op. Vistula) that took place at the same time, it would have an identical background section and rely on this article to bring the historiography together....so they would be merged...so I'm trying to get to skip the obvious outcome.--Львівське (talk) 04:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) My recollection was that the number of murdered Ukrainian civilians in this conflict was 15k-20k total. Of these, only 2-3 thousand were killed in Volhynia. According to Snyder I believe, some of the family members of Volhynian Polish victims avenged themselves on Ukrainian villages in the west (whose people were innocent of the Volhynian massacres); in those regions more or as many Ukrainian civilians were killed than Polish civilians were killed. But in Volhynia, the numbers were quite lopsided.Faustian (talk) 12:23, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

According to the newest results of investigation in Volhynia were killed about 2-3 thousand Ukrainians, Eeastern Galicia 1-3 thousand. In years 1944-1947 in current Poland territory about 8-10 thousand Ukrainians. But it is diffrent story Polish UB and LWP fought against AK/WiN too, there were many criminals assaults for money and goods.--Paweł5586 (talk) 15:09, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

AFAIK many of the Polish UB and LWP forces who were killing Ukrainian civilians from themselves from Volhynia, seeking revenge on people who didn't commit the Volhynia crimes. Most of the Polish civilians killed in those lands currently in Poland were victims reprisal attacks. Snyder described a cycle in which a Ukrainian village would be destroyed, in revenge the local UPA (not connected to the UPA in Volhynia) would destroy a Polish village next-door, and so on. Thus, Ukrainians in current Polish territories were in a situation similar to that of Poles in Volhynia.Faustian (talk) 15:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I think Faustian is broadly correct here (and note that it's not actually that different from what Pawel5586 is saying). The only thing I would be hesitant about is in ascribing motives like "revenge" to members of the UB; opportunism, "following orders" and a wacked ideology are probably more likely. There were *some* acts of revenge carried out by NSZ and rogue NOW-AK units in Galicia (actually the nom-de-guerre of one such guy responsible was in fact "Wolyniak") but the bulk of responsibility lies with the UB and the KWB (LWP was more of a mixed bag, with some records of LWP units "getting lost in the mountains" quite often - i.e. purposefully so in order to avoid having to carry out a "pacification" of some village. This was also reflected in the fact that both the Polish anti-communist underground and UPA generally treated captured LWP soldiers (take arms, strip buck naked, send on their way) differently than they treated captured UBeks (execute after something resembling a "trial")). Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, lets say this article deals specifically with Volyn and the 20k was total and included Galicia. Would anyone object if I made an article on the conflict as a whole--Львівське (talk) 18:35, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I think there is a possibility of a meta article here but again, it's gonna depend on how you do it. It can't be just a POV fork of this one. For example when you refer to "the conflict as a whole", what's your starting point? I mean, we could go back to Severyn Nalyvaiko, Kosinski or even further. If we limit it to WWII then that would exclude Op Wisla, as well as interwar Polish policy towards the Ukrainian minority. And it'd end up looking pretty much like this article. Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

"And it'd end up looking pretty much like this article" therein lies the problem. This article is restricted to just volyn and just the Polish side...but a broader article would look very similar and draw on the same material...--Львівське (talk) 19:36, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

The massacres of Poles in Volhynia, of Poles in Galicia, of Ukrainians in Lemko territories and the reprisals against Ukrainian civilians are all linked to each other and ought not stand alone; furthermore they cannot be understood without a good background context (which this article already has). For example Snyder described how after the Ukrainian police deserted, the Germans hired Polish police (often, family of victims of UPA) who executed Ukrainian policeman-deserter family members, which caused the violence to further spiral. Since the article already includes info on events in Galicia, and includes info on reprisal attacks claiming Ukrainian lives, I tend to agree that the current title ought to be changed to Massacres in Volhynia or Ukrainan-Polish massacres during and after World War II, with a redirect to this article from "Massacre of Poles in Volhynia." This would better reflect the article content. I am sensitive to those who rightly do not want it to seem that the crimes were equal in scope: in total about 4 to 5 times more Polish civilians than Ukrainian civilians were killed during the 1940's and most researchers (such as Snyder) state that UPA began the cycle of massacres, so something to that effect ought to be placed in the first paragraph of the lead. But the current title does seem to be too narrow.Faustian (talk) 21:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, a better alternative may be to spin of the events in Galicia, and the Lemkos, into their own articles, with this article just mentioning the connection and pointing the reader to those articles.

There's actually an important article waiting to be written here on how the Volhynian massacres were dealt with in Communist Poland - this is relevant to this discussion because the way they were dealt with was by falsely pretending that the events in Volhynia actually happened in Galicia (since it was one of the no-no's of the Communist propaganda to ever state that Volhynia had ever had Poles in it or had been part of the Republic of Poland - yet at the same time the Communists wanted to utilize the existence of these massacres for their own ends, like justifying Op Wisla). This kind of propaganda is part of what is responsible for some of the confusion that has arisen around this topic, including that over the number of victims. Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the events in Volhynia were independent of those in Galicia, or of the Lemko areas, though. Unless you mean one article about everything plus seperate articles with more details about each of the regions. In that case, however, you'd have to repeat the context in each article anyways.Faustian (talk) 21:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

So what do you think? Top article with shorter sections on the entire conflict, or separate articles, or one giant? If we go with the latter, it will eventually be proposed to split. I think a 'catch all' solution would be best, with emphasis on context, background, and mutual conflict. Would allow this article and a potential Galicia spin-off to be trimmed down with a hat-note directing to the mother article--Львівське (talk) 05:16, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, something like that in the long run. But let's not bite off more than we can chew at a time. How about spinning of the Galicia article successfully first? At the same time having a disambig page - essentially what should be a category - to various Polish-Ukrainian conflicts of this period for now is fine. Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:44, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

<-- Hmm, thinking about it some more, maybe a better approach would be to get more specific before going meta. If stand alone articles on Galicia and the Lemkos can be developed, then once they're in place we could have some kind of bigger "Polish-Ukrainian Conflicts around the time of World War II" (obviously we'd need a better title) article which could outline the basics and then direct the reader to the specific articles. It's true that none of these events were independent but that is always true in history - the key is to make sure that the articles don't become POV forks of each other, that the specific articles deal with specific information and stick to covering what they're supposed to cover and leave the generalities to the meta article. We could also put things like Polish policy in the interwar period, Operation Wisla and my proposed article on Communist propaganda regarding these events in the bigger article. We could even have an article on the cooperation between UPA and the Polish underground after the war, though while non-negligible that one might end up being sorta short. I think this is more of a question of HOW these articles were to be written rather than whether or not they COULD be written - so yes, you'll have to repeat the context but if you keep it brief and can refer to the meta article it could work. Volunteer Marek (talk) 22:01, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Excellent ideas, I was thinking along similar lines. This article probably has enough material for the Volhynia and Galicia stand-alone articles.Faustian (talk) 22:24, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, there's enough stuff on Galicia here to split it off. For the Lemkos I vaguely recall that User:Halibutt actually wrote some stuff on what happened to them long time ago but can't find atm where - there's probably some orphaned articles relating to it somewhere on Wiki. He's not very active anymore but it might be worth a try asking him about it. Volunteer Marek (talk) 22:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

There is big diffrence beetwen situation Poles at Volhynia and Ukrainians in Poland. First UPA command ordered to liquidate all Poles, in Polish side there were no such orders, in Volhynia main AK command ordered not to kill woman and children, there werent any big well-organized action in Polish side, only single retaliatory actions. Second, UPA in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia tried to kill as many Poles as they were able to - e.g. 11 July 2003. In Piskorowice Zadzierski unit, killed only families of UPA members not all Ukrainians, in Pawłokoma only men were shooted, Terka - only hostages were killed. There was no dead in Vistula action, only in Jaworzno died some Ukrainins due to typhoid.--Paweł5586 (talk) 13:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

There is no evidence that UPA in Poland (not in Volhynia) was trying to kill all Polish civilians. According to Snyder, UPA in Poland was trying to disrupt deportations of Ukrainians and to retaliate against massacres of Ukrainian civilians. In the latter actions they behaved like AK in Volhynia. As for AK in Volhynia, testimony is coming out that frequently those whom the Poles claimed were "UPA" or "men" were often in reality women and children. Here is an interesting excerpt from a book written by a Ukrainian journalist, which is carried by the Yale University library. This may or may not be a relaible source for this article (what do others think?) because the author is a respected journalist in Ukraine but not a historian, but it is certainly worth reading: [4]. Excerpts: "When I heard that the Polish researchers, Eva and Wladislaw Siemaszko (Incidentally, my countrymen from the village Sviychova Vladimir-Volyn region), were researching the tragic events in Volhynia during the war and described what is currently happening in almost every village in my homeland, I had the urge to read what they should write about my own hometown of Vyzhhiv. Because, the story by my now deceased grandmother Anna about the treacherous attack on the village on December 22, 1943 by Poles dissguised in the uniforms of the soldiers of Ukrainian Insurgent Army has lived in my memory from childhood [according to Timothy Snyder both UPA and AK disguised themselves in the others' uniforms in order to get into villages with less resistence - Faustian]. The Poles murdered the priest Nikolay Pokrovsky, cut down my great-grandfather Ivan Mishchuk, Aunt Alexandra and her husband Ivan Zinchuk and their three-year daughter Galya. Before me in scattered hamlets in the Vyzhhiv region are the graves of my neighbors and relatives the Savchuk family: Volodya, eight years old, Serhiko, 5; and eight year old Anton shot with his mother Xaratyna. The blind Pavlo Zinczuk was shot. My fellow journalist from Lutsk Andriy Bondarchuk got a book by Siemaszko somewhere, copied and sent me several pages of stories about Vyzhhiv and the closest village. I seized upon the pages, read them and could not believe my eyes: "In August 1943 ... in woods near Vyzhhova UPA warriors were gathering, and in the village was placed a strong UPA group(!?)... December 22, 1943 Polish division, formed from parts of AK guerrilla lieutenant Kazimierz Filipovich "cordite" and partisan of AK pidporuchnyka Stanislav Vitamborskoho "Small" which located on the outskirts Rymachiv (Berezhetska Commune Lyubomlsky County), attacked the UPA warriors that were in Vyzhhovi. However, it appears that there were no warriors in the village (!!!?), and was only abolished posterunok (!?), who, shot four UPA members (!?) and the priest Pokrovsky." I tried top put together who among the victims could have been a member of UPA according to the Poles. But from my memory fall the names of women and children. MAybe the old grandfathers Joseph Savczuk, Lev Shushelo or Zinoviy Olkhovsky-Savczuk? But they were all killed in their yards! Aha - in Vyzhhiv refugees were hiding. Under the categoty of UPA soldiers was Dmytro Karpiuk from Bovtuniv. But he did not have weapons in his hands, but children! And he was not shot, as Siemaszko wrote, but stabbed with bayonets along with his wife Ewa, his daughter Lena and his one month old son Mykolko." I'm inclined to put some of this info inthe article, but noting that "according to Ukrainian journalist Olkhovsky, whose family was romthis village..." Faustian (talk) 14:39, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

This anticipates some of the difficulty we're gonna have with trying to work on these other would be articles. But here's some comments.

According to Snyder, UPA in Poland was trying to disrupt deportations of Ukrainians and to retaliate against massacres of Ukrainian civilians. - the accuracy of this statement depends on the time period under consideration. If you're talking about the period after the entry of the Red Army and the establishment of communist authority then yes, that's pretty much it. If you're talking about the time period contemporaneous with the Volhynia massacres then no, not really. At that point UPA was on the offensive, in Galicia as well, even though there the action did not take on the same character as what happened in Volhynia.

In the latter actions they behaved like AK in Volhynia - mmm, sort of. Maybe. Well, no. I think the events were different enough, though connected, so that you cannot draw that kind of comparison. I don't think any of the major authors who've written about it make that kind of explicit connection.

As for AK in Volhynia, testimony is coming out that frequently those whom the Poles claimed were "UPA" or "men" were often in reality women and children. - as you acknowledge yourself a lot of that is from unreliable sources. You're also equivocating between "AK" and "Poles". Per Snyder, and what you say yourself above, most of the Ukrainians-killed-by-Poles in Volhynia (the 2000 to 3000) were ones who were killed by Poles who joined German sponsored police units after their family members had been massacred by UPA. If we go up a little further in time, some of the killings were done by NSZ and NOW units which did include some FORMER AK members but these weren't "AK" strictly speaking in the sense that they had nothing to do with the AK military structures (there's a running theme throughout a lot of non-Polish writing which simply identifies any "underground Poles" with the "AK", simply because the AK was the largest, best organized and most well known of the Polish underground organizations - but they weren't the same as these other units) and they were people who had left the AK by the time these things happened (sometimes, they were kicked out of AK for being unable to follow military discipline, or even fled AK because they had a court martial imposed death sentence imposed on them for disobeying orders). Anyway, it's a complicated story and that's part of the reason why we could use some sub-articles here. Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:44, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Snyder specifically mentioned that the AK's 27th Home Army Infantry Division (Poland) were murdering Ukrainian civilians in Volhynia and burning down Ukrainian villages. He also mentions Polish police in German service killing Ukrainian civilians. The bit I quotes about Poles killing Ukrainian women and children was written by a respected journalist from one of those villages. He basically refuted Siemaszko's claims and travelled from village to village in Ukraine asking about those events from Siemaszko's work, and predictably got a totally different view from the Ukrainian witnesses than Polish historiography says, based on the statements by Polish eyewitnesses. To be clear, the source is not a historian but neither does it seem to be a Ukrainian nationalist propagandist. It's a journalist (the book is carried by the Yale library, if that means something). Who knows? Maybe eventually the historians will start incorporating his findings and the number of Ukrainian victims will be revised upwards. My impression is that the Ukrainian historians are at least a decade or two behind the Poles in terms of researching this stuff. With respect to the extreme western territories, Snyder was clear that the UPA there had nothing to do with events in Volhynia or eastern Galicia - it was mostly local boys, and they didn't form until 1945 or so, in response to Polish actions against Ukrainians there. That UPA's actions against Polish civilians were stricly retaliatory, which s why I compared that UPA to AK. UPA in Volhynia and eastern Galicia of course cannot be compared to AK.Faustian (talk) 12:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I dont find any AK's 27th Home Army Infantry Division (Poland) anti-Ukrainian actions in Motyka, Filar, and other historians. Raised in January 1944, fought against UPA to protect Polish villages, in February togeter with Russian partisans destoroy UPA unit in Świniarzyn Woods. Since March 27 WDP fought with Germans. This is true about Polish police, after Ukrainian police excape Germans completed police battalions with Poles. Many of them have joined to get revenge, they losted family and often saw mutilated bodies their families. But there wernt any organized actions, like UPA. Different view of Ukrainians nationalists is obvious, they are on the side of the murderers they are trying to justify and whitewashing.--Paweł5586 (talk) 13:09, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Timothy Snyder on page 174 of his book states that the 27th Home Army Division murdered Ukrainins it found on roadways and burned Ukrainian villages. Władysław Filar was himself a veteran of that Division so he has an obvious conflict of interest with respect to negative information about that division. Siemaszko was also closely tied to this division. Indeed, it seems that a lot of Polish historiography is tied with them.Faustian (talk) 13:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

1 page 44, "Polish partisans (usually, but not always formations outside the main command of the Home Army) engaged in the mass killing of civilians." I think Snyder makes it pretty clear by previous and these statements that when he says "partisans" its like he's saying they killed off the record since the official order was to not, they did it anyway --Львівське (talk) 00:04, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Any names of destoyed villages, sources and evidences? Why Motyka, Hryciuk also dont mention that? Why Polish IPN dodnt mention and dont make any investigation about that? We got investigations about Piskorowice, Pawłokoma, Terka massacres but about 27 WDP there is no word. Why Ukrainian IPN dont make any investigation? This is not reliable, defending Polish villages cant be counted as ethnic cleansing. Single retaliatory actions without main command orders is not the same. UPA destroyed 1048 Polish settlements. --Paweł5586 (talk) 13:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Any statement written by Timothy Snyder in a book published by Yale University Press is certainly reliable. In fact, given that much of Polish history is based on the works of Polish veterans of the Ukrainian village-burning, Ukrainian-civilian-shooting 27th WDP, it would seem that Snyder's work is more reliable that those other works.Faustian (talk) 13:51, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Timothy must have his own sources, you couldnt even name one village allegy destoroyed by the 27 WDP. I can write you hundreds od Polish villages destroyed by the UPA. Polish historian are basing on Polish, Ukrainian and Russian archives. One thing is important OUN propaganda many times counted German pacifications as made by Poles. As I said there werent any organized by 27 WDP actions against Ukrainian-civilians, there were single retaliatory actions, single soldiers, single units could killed some Ukrainians. Thats why this is big difference.--Paweł5586 (talk) 08:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I never claimed that UPA didn't destroy hundreds of Polish villages so why are you bringing this up here? An attempt to excuse the atrocities committed by the 27th WDP? I'm sure that 27th WDP veterans claimed that there weren't any organized actions, but we go by what reliables sources say.Faustian (talk) 12:52, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

<<-- The thing is, Snyder doesn't actually say that it was the 27th Volhynian Division which killed civilians on roads and burned villages. What he does is he first discusses the formation of the division as a response to UPA's massacres. He then says that DESPITE orders from the Polish government not to attack civilians "in the field Polish partisans burned Ukrainian villages and killed Ukrainians found on the roads in Volhynia". "Polish partisans" could refer to the division, but it could also refer to a number of other things; independent units, self defense groups etc. Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:16, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

This was mentioned in the paragraph about the 27th Division, right after the formation of the 27th was discussed. Snyder: "The Volhynian Division, the Home Army's largest, drew its stength from the Polish self-defence units formed to defend civilians agianst the UPA, and from former policemen who left the German service [as noted earlier by Snyder, Polish police were killing Ukrainian civilians in reprisal attacks - Faustian]. Absent the UPA's ethnic cleansing, the division would never have arisen. Although the Polish government ordered that civilians not be harmed, in the field Polish partisans burned Ukrainian villages and killed Ukrainians found on the roads in Volhynia." How does the last sentence not refer to the subject of the rest of the paragraph, the 27th division?Faustian (talk) 21:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not saying it doesn't, I'm saying it's not clear that it does. The paragraph appears to be about the Polish response to the massacres. The formation of the division was one such response. Actions of Polish partisans were another such response. Since "Polish partisans" COULD refer to the division, but it could also refer to other units, it's not clear that the last sentence in fact refers to the division. What makes judging it a bit more difficult is that the previous page 173, where run-up discussion takes place is unavailable on Google books. I don't know, is there anything else on pg. 173 that would indicate some kind of connection? Other than that it looks like OR and some mind-reading of the author. Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:42, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Page 173 appears on my googlebooks (and I have the book, at home). The paragraph is about the 27th Division. It starts by saying that the events there were undesired by the Polish government, the Polish government in exile didn't know how to react as events in Volhynia came to their attention, in July 1943 it called on Polish self-defence units to place themselves under its command and then in January 1944 it created the 27th Division (this takes us into page 174). It would be quite odd indeed, don't you think, to assume that there is a possibility that in a paragraph devoted to the 27th Division suddenly in the last sentence Snyder switches and adds a sentence about someone else? If anything that kind of assumption seems to be some sort of OR.Faustian (talk) 22:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Moreover on pg. 176 he uses the term "Partisans" to refer to Home Army units (such as the 27th - though pg. 176 wasn't about the 27th specifically) so when he used the word on pg. 174 there's no need to assume he's referring to Soviet partisans, for example.. "The PEasant Battlions were not the only Polish parttisans in the field killing Ukrainians and battling the UPA. In spring 1944 Home Army units set out to secure the Chelm region, and burned about twnety Ukrainian villages in the process."Faustian (talk) 22:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, the AK are considered 'partisans', even on the AK wiki article its filled with references to the soliders being partisans, and so on.--Львівське (talk) 22:10, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the AK were "partisans" but that doesn't mean that all Polish partisans were AK. Faustian's example from page 176 illustrates this - BCh were also "Polish partisans". I never said he's referring to "Soviet partisans" - he's clearly referring to "Polish partisans". But it is not clear that he is referring to the 27th Division or the AK. Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:16, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Given that the parapgraph in question on page 174 is devoted to the 27th Division the partisans referred to in that paragraph were the 27th and it would be stretching things quite a bit, to say the least, to imply that perhaps after writing about the 27th suddently in the last sentence of the paragraph Snyder switched and wrote about someone else. This seems like an extreme standard here. If an author wrote a paragraph about the UPA and at the end of this paragraph about UPA described Ukrainian guerrillas murdering civilians, we would be completely justified in using that desccription of the crime as an UPA crime. In other words, it is not necessary in every sngle case to use the explicit word UPA in the sentence of evey claim abput UPA. In this case we have a paragraph about the 27th division, which includes a sentence stating that Polish partisans (which the 27th were) killing Ukrainians on roads and burning villages.Faustian (talk) 23:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

There are many evidences about UPA genocide on Poles. First orders - Klaczkiwski, described by Stelmaszczuk (you can find it below), second Szuchewycz during UHWR meeting said: "Liquidation of the Polish population ...), which ended in the summer of 1943, in Galicia," the UPA leadership has issued orders expulsion of the Poles, if they did not resettle. The attacks are continuing. " He added: "We are creating for themselves a comfortable position that can not be achieved by the green tables [talks]. We will not lie to yourself. Ukrainian mass in our hands. " - G. Motyka, Ukraińska Partyzantka, and Gazeta Wyborcza newspaper, third area: Poles were killed in 5 Voivodeship!, 4 time: the genocide started since 1943 and lasted till 1945 (and 1945-1947 in current Poland were some anti Polsih actions), 5: number of victims - at least 80-100 thousand, but more probable is number 120 thousand, 6: all Poles in villages were mourdered.

There is no mirror in Polish side - there werent any organized action, no orders, most of Ukrainians were killed in single reataliatory actions, most of victims were related to UPA, SB OUN, SS-Galizien members, not all Ukrainians were killed.--Paweł5586 (talk) 09:51, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

This is your own POV. I have provided good sources on the matter, other sources clearly show AK actions into Ukraine against civilians. Also, refrain from calling this a genocide, that's a really far stretch--Львівське (talk) 18:14, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

In Poland we got two articles: pl:Rzeź wołyńska, pl:Czystka etniczna w Małopolsce Wschodniej, in second you can find section about Polish retaliatory actions. There is also article about Vistula action of course. There is no article about "Lemko massacres", this is untrue. But we got single articles about Crimes: in Piskorowice, Terka, Pawłokoma, with background of retaliatory action.--Paweł5586 (talk) 13:37, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

As I've said above, there was a repression/deportation/ethnic cleansing of the Lemkos that occurred. But I don't know much about this particular aspect of this tragic story myself, and so I recommended bringing in somebody else into the discussion. Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:58, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll ask Magocsi about this, him being the Rusyn expert I'm sure he may have an idea on where to find documentation of this.--Львівське (talk) 06:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Your edit: This mirrored Polish attempts at ethnically cleansing local Ukrainians in hopes of regaining territory following the war. These actions by Polish self-defense groups and the Polish Home Army (AK) against civilians resulted in the killing of approximately 20,000 Ukrainians.[6] And you wrote: The 20k is in Volhynia and is specifically in reprisal to the 40-50k.

Are you sure prof. Magocsi wrote that Poles organized ethnic cleansing of Volhynian Ukrainians, killing 20,000 of them? From his book - Ukraine a history, 2010: UPA relationship to the Poles concerned the civilian population, that is, Poles living in scattered villages throughout the territories of western Volhynia, the Chelm region and Eastern Galicia, as well as the armed Polish resistance movement, in particular the Home Army (Armia Krajowa). Perhaps he refers exactly to these territories when writing about the conflict: This took the form of attacks by the UPA on Polish villages and reprisals by Polish self-defence units and later Home Army on Ukrainian villages. The underground movement on both sides was concerned with the postwar status of these territories which, each side argued, should belong to either a restored Poland or to an independent Ukraine. Hence, the attacks on innocent civilians were designed to eliminate the presence of Poles and Ukrainians to the advantage of the future state that would rule these territories. - Please correct me if I overlooked something.

The above fragment might be misleading – the situation in in the Chelm/Lublin area cannot be compared to the situation in Volhynia. And it seems strange that Magocsi recommended Timothy Snyder, The reconstructions of Nations as further reading:

• Volhynia:

In spring 1943, the UPA gained control over the Volhynian countryside from the Germans,43 and began the murder and expulsion of the Polish population. In Volhynia, Poles were far too weak to even consider striking first. Poles were at most 16 percent of the Volhynian population in 1939 (about four hundred thousand people), and had been reduced to perhaps 8 percent (two hundred thousand people) by 1943.44 They were scattered about the countryside, deprived of their elites by deportations, with no state authority except the Germans to protect them, and no local partisan army of their own. (pp. 169-170)

It's hard to believe that in such conditions, the Polish self-defence (even with help of the 27th Home Army division created only in 1944) was able to conduct ethnic cleansing of Ukrainians and kill 20,000. Polish underground simply wasn't in a position to even try to ethnically cleanse Volhynia out of Ukrainians, the overwhelming majority of the population.

• Eastern Galicia:

The UPA campaign to rid “Western Ukraine” of Poles began in earnest in Galicia in January 1944. In 1943 in Volhynia, UPA practice seems to have been to attack villages and murder populations without warning; in Galicia in 1944 the UPA seems to have sometimes presented Polish families with the choice of flight or death. This apparent change, in combination with a demographic balance more favorable to Poles, with better Polish self-defense, and with the mobilization and diversion of Home Army units, limited the death toll of Polish civilians to about twenty-five thousand in Galicia. UPA attacks on civilians in Galicia were still organized, and still brutal. (p. 176)

• But in eastern Poland the situation was quite different - both sides could be accused of trying to eliminate each other's civilian population (that would explain Magocsi's words).

To the west, across the river Bug/Buh, Ukrainian and Polish partisans engaged in an incredibly brutal, and evenly matched, armed conflict. In the eastern half of the prewar Lublin region, village after village was destroyed by both sides in late 1943. Polish partisans of the Peasant Battalions matched the UPA atrocity for atrocity. All told, in the Lublin and Rzeszów regions, Poles and Ukrainians killed about five thousand of the other’s civilians in 1943–44.74 (p. 175-176)--Hedviberit (talk) 19:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to ask Magocsi about the Lemko question, just to be clear, what should I ask him to clarify about the above? Where Poles struck, could they or did they strike first or is there a question of who struck first; what were the deaths in volhynia and galicia, and if there were instances elsewhere? Ukrainians killed in Poland and the situation, if any, of cleansing Ukrainians from territory now in Poland....did I miss anything?--Львівське (talk) 00:21, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

The repression of the Lemkos I believe was part of Operation Wisla, or at least of one of the earlier Soviet-backed deportations. Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:15, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

In my understanding, Magocsi doesn't state: on what territory, when, and in what kind of attacks (retaliatory or during ethnic cleansing operations - there is a difference) 20,000 Ukrainians were killed. Moreover he doesn't use the word "ethnic cleansing" in regards to attacks of the Home Army and Polish self-defence in Volhynia or Eastern Galicia. He writes about reprisals by Polish self-defence and later Home Army (just like other authors). He doesn't write anything about ethnic cleansing operation that would be orchestrated by Polish underground in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia. He is not specific enough.

From the lead: This mirrored Polish attempts at ethnically cleansing local Ukrainians in hopes of regaining territory following the war.[dubious – discuss] These actions by Polish self-defense groups and the Polish Home Army (AK) against civilians resulted in the killing of approximately 20,000 Ukrainians.[11]

1. In what way were those actions "similar"? According to Timothy Snyder, The UPA's cleansing was a coordinated action on a massive scale . (Recontructions, p. 325). 2. Even if there was a source backing this claim, it wouldn't change the fact that this view is not supported by majority of historians and it shouldn't be included in the lead of the article where the claim is given undue weight and contradicts the article itself. 3. If 20,000 is not the number of Ukrainians killed specifically in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia then why it is in the lead, while Motyka's estimates (80,000-100,000) are not?

Further: Attacks on civilians by the Polish Home Army with the intention of ethnically cleansing the Ukrainian presence from a restored Polish state[11] resulted in the killing of approximately 20,000 civilians in western Ukraine.[109][110]

None of the given sources support this claim.

None of the given sources? What are you talking about? Are you not counting the ones cited or what? --Львівське (talk) 20:06, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The conclusion is not explicitly stated by any of the cited sources. The territory, the intention of the attacks (retaliatory or ethnically cleansing the Ukrainian presence from restored Polish state) and the number of victims are not correct.

[10] Magocsi, "A History of Ukraine" (2010) - I don't see where he says that Polish Home Army conducted ethnic cleansing of Ukrainians in Western Ukraine (Volhynia, Eastern Galicia). Did you ask him about it?

[109] Subtelny in his book "Ukraine, A History", (2000), p. 475 doesn't state that Polish Home Army killed 20,000 Ukrainians in Western Ukraine. He doesn't give the number of Ukrainian victims in Western Ukraine (Volhynia and Eastern Galicia) at all, although states that, according to Polish sources, 60,000-80,000 Poles were massacred in Volhynia by Ukrainians. He doesn't write about Polish Home Army actions specifically in Volhynia, Eastern Galicia or Western Ukraine.

[110] From the press article on Radio Free Europe page: According to Poland's National Remembrance Institute, in 1943 the UPA murdered some 60,000 civilian Poles in Volhynia, in anticipation of an independent Ukrainian state after the war and a plebiscite on which country, Poland or Ukraine, should possess the disputed area. The Polish AK subsequently resorted to retaliatory actions. According to Ukrainian estimates (who?), the AK may have killed in retaliation as many as 20,000 Ukrainians in Volhynia.--Hedviberit (talk) 16:03, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm removing the problematic statements and hope they won't be reinserted until we reach consensus.--Hedviberit (talk) 16:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

lede - moved from my talk page

From my talk page, regarding the statements: The peak of the massacres took place in July and August 1943 when a senior UPA commander, Dmytro Klyachkivsky, ordered the extermination of the entire Polish population between 16 and 60 years of age. vs. The peak of the massacres took place in July and August 1943. No official orders regarding the operation have ever been discovered., Lvivske says: "what should it be changed to, though? Both refs contradict eachother"

Honestly, I don't think the Ukrainian Weekly [5] is a reliable enough source. Maybe - let me stress the maybe - it can be used in the body of the article with proper attribution. But it is not reliable enough to support something that is to be found in the lede. There's some pretty strange statements in that text too. Also what it actually states is an opinion of one person (which would make this a tertiary source) - who qualifies his statement with a "that I know of".

On the other hand the other source is academic and the same information can also be found in other reliable sources. Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I cited who Himka cited. Seeing as Himka is a respected historian, here is his original quote: "The argument is made that no order has ever been discovered instructing the UPA to kill Polish civilians in Volhynia." so he cited it and didn't argue against it (the Himka article was on another topic altogether, he was slamming the Ukrainian narrative, so if he could refute it I assume he would take the opportunity). Though its debatable if the Ukrainian Weekly is relaible as a whole, Taras Kuzio, who I referenced about this, certainly is. Can we verify what was said in the Polish source? I don't speak it and can't see hte preview on google books on my end. --Львівське (talk) 03:25, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Wait, I'm confused. I don't see any sourcing to Himka. Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Himka cited who I cited, so I just leapfrogged to the original source. Here's where the above Himka quote was from and the Kuzio citation 1--Львівське (talk) 03:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah, but then it looks like Himka is critiquing the source and possibly that claim in particular.

My understanding of it - and I'll have to go and look some stuff up to make sure it's correct - is that the evidence for the actual order consists of both an actual order given by Klyachkivsky (though I guess one could split hairs and get into semantics about what exactly is the order ordering - but the "liquidation" of entire Polish male population between 16 and 60 is definitely in there), so it exists and has been "found", as well as statements from memoirs of UPA men who were present when this order was issued and recall this. Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:49, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll do more digging on the Kuzio claim, seems weird for one side to say there is no "smoking gun" while another to state clearly there were liquidation orders. The way I read Himka was that he was saying: Ukrainian historians say "there is no evidence" for the order to kill Poles, but then say the Holodomor happened when there is no official orders for Ukrainian genocide either (or the Final Solution either). He was basically calling Kuzio/Ukrainians hypocrits for ignoring the "no proof" argument against the USSR but hiding behind it with regards to the UPA--Львівське (talk) 03:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

According to Filar the order is in "Archiwum SBU Obwodu Wołyńskiego, d. nr 11315, t. l, cz. H, s.16. " or the Archives of the Volhynian Security Service of Ukraine. Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

--Bstarzewski (talk) 01:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC) I am adding this further excerpt from my father's memoir as it appears that there is considerable debate on whether this was a two sided affair. It confirms that while there were some reprisal actions it was without the home army's approval and largely sponsored by the Germans. This portion of the work is after the uprising began and after a German truck had picked them up in Markostaw and took them to Wolodymyr Wolynski. As per my previous comment Siergay was a former Russian soldier who's wife and child had been murdered in a gruesome manner a few days earlier.

"To exploit and dishearten effected escapees even further, the authorities used many methods. The most effective one was the psychological. To convince people that returning to their homes will not be possible, they offered a locomotive with few box cars encouraging anyone desiring revenge while offering often jamming guns, to take a ride with some soldiers. Some took that offer, among them was Siergay. The soldiers, and some anxious to pay for burning and killing, would shoot at anyone that was in sight right from the train.

The ex Russian soldier did the most damage. He would leave the train, and ventured far from the railroad tracks and into Ukrainian villages burning, and killing anything he encountered on his way. According to Zbyszek's statements, German soldiers dressed in civilian clothing accompanied him. The Polish underground organization strongly discouraged such actions, as a result very few took part in such excursions. "

Again, Copyright reserved. Author Constantine (Konstanti) Starzewski grants permission exclusively for the purpose of this article and discussion.

UPA orders

Here. All documents founded in SBU archiv in Volhynia by Filar. You can translate it at google: ... powinniśmy przeprowadzić wielka akcję likwidacji polskiego elementu. Przy odejściu wojsk niemieckich należy wykorzystać ten dogodny moment dla zlikwidowania całej ludności męskiej w wieku od 16 do 60 lat(...) Tej walki nie możemy przegrać, i za każdą cenę trzeba osłabić polskie siły. Leśne wsie oraz wioski położone obok leśnych masywów powinny zniknąć z powierzchni ziemi.

• Źródło: Tajna dyrektywa terytorialnego dowództwa UPA – „Piwnycz”, podpisana przez „Kłyma Sawura”

Druże Ruban! Przekazuję do waszej wiadomości, że w czerwcu 1943 r. przedstawiciel centralnego Prowodu – dowódca UPA – „Piwnycz” „Kłym Sawur” przekazał mi tajną dyrektywę w sprawie całkowitej – powszechnej, fizycznej likwidacji ludności polskiej.(...) Dla wykonania lej dyrektywy proszę rzetelnie przygotować się do akcji przeciw Polakom i wyznaczam odpowiedzialnych: w rejonach nadbużańskich – kurinnego „Łysoho”, na rejony turzyski, owadnowski, oździutycki i pozostałe – „Sosenka”; na okręg kowelski – „Hołobenka”. Sława Ukraini.--Paweł5586 (talk) 08:23, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Dowódca grupy UPA „Turiw” – „Rudyj”, 24 czerwca 1943 r. Stawka

• Autor: Jurij Stelmaszczuk „Rudyj”. dowódca Północno – zachodniego OW „Turiw”

• Niemożliwe, żeby dowódcy UPA składali meldunki w języku polskim - to jakaś fałszywka. --Birczanin 15:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure it's a translation. Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

How about some neutral sources or something in english? If there is documentation of this, and the subject has been tackled by western scholars, there has to be evidence of it somewhere else.--Львівське (talk) 02:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

This orders was translated by Polish historians, I can provide pl-language sources, orginal documents you can find in SBU Archiv in Volhynia, and also in Russian archives--Paweł5586 (talk) 12:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Pawels insertion of 80-100k claim

Do any western scholars agree with this figure? I mean if the volyn est. is 35k and galicia is 20k, why is the low end of motyka's range 80,000? what is his year range? is he including only upa? what's his angle on these figures?

I have to dig out my Motyka book so I'll check the details later but I'm guessing that the reason is that it wasn't just Volyn and Galicia that were affected. Tarnopol and several others voivodeships were also involved. BTW, I'm not sure where you're getting the 35k as a lower bound - unless you're referring specifically only to those victims that have been positively identified by name; but that's an obvious underestimate. I think Motyka's lower bound for Volyn alone is 60k. Again, I'll look it up. Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

What I meant to say was the lower bound agreed on by other historians is 35k (Snyder says 40k, Katchanovsi says 35 area is best) but Motyka's lower bound is twice that...we can't use his numbers as a trump to all other historians (that's why I tried to fix the numbers section yesterday). If we're using Tarnopol and other areas affected now...are we not leaning towards turning this article into one that represents the entire UKR/POL conflict? --Львівське (talk) 17:11, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually I contradicted myself on Motyka. Hold on while I look it up. Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:19, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Generally, this whole discussion on casualties is getting confusing and this is also reflected in the text. Sometimes the numbers refer to casualties just in Volhynia. Sometimes to ones in Galicia, sometimes both and sometimes some other region. Maybe making a table such as this would help clarify things:

Estimates of casualties

	In Volhynia alone	In Galicia	In all areas affected by conflict	Notes
Researcher 1	xxxx	yyyy	zzzzz	He notes that xyz
Researcher 2	aaaa	bbbbb	ccccc	This is based on fgh

If somebody only estimated numbers for one of these cases then we just put "N/A" in the cell. I would also like it if we stuck to academic sources and exclude things like newspaper etc. articles as one can find all kinds of crazy things written in those, on both the Polish and Ukrainian side. Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:47, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Terrific idea. I'm on board.--Львівське (talk) 18:14, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok then let's start filling it out above. I just looked up Snyder's article in Past and Present - there he gives 50k Polish civilian casualties in Volhynia, in 1943 alone, and notes in a footnote that perhaps 35k of these have been identified. He gives 10k for Ukrainian civilian casualties in Volhynia, in 1943 alone, but these were due not just to the action of Polish self defense units but also actions of Soviet partisans and German police. Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Snyder's article in Past and Present

I removed a statement cited to it [6] because it's not in the actual source. What Snyder actually says is that 10,000 Ukrainian civilians were killed in 1943 by "Polish self-defence units, Soviet partisans, and German police" - i.e. he DOES NOT say that all these casualties were done "by ethnic Poles". Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

He also indicates in his discussion that most of the German auxilliary police was still composed of ethnic Ukrainians even after the mass desertions to UPA. The killing of Ukrainian peasants by Germans during this time was mostly due to the increased quotas for forced labor that were instituted after German setbacks on the Eastern Front and the resistance to these. Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:32, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Casualties table - move it here so it can be worked on first

Estimates of casualties, Poles killed by Ukrainians

	In Volhynia	In Galicia	In Volhynia and Galicia	In all areas affected by conflict	Source	Notes
Timothy Snyder	50k	N/A	N/A	N/A	In Past and Present
Timothy Snyder	>40k in July '43	10k in March '44	N/A	N/A	Memory and Power, 2002
Timothy Snyder	40-60k in '43	25k	N/A	+5k killed in Lublin and Rzeszów	The Reconstruction of Nations, 2004	Killed by UPA
Grzegorz Motyka	40-60k	N/A	N/A	80-100k ('43 - '47)	W kręgu Łun w Bieszczadach, 2009
Grzegorz Motyka	40-60k	30-40k	N/A	100k	Od rzezi wołyńskiej do akcji "Wisła", 2011
Ivan Katchanovski	35-60k	N/A	N/A	N/A	?	Katchanovski considers the lower bound 35k to be more likely
Niall Fergusson	N/A	N/A	60-80k	N/A	The war of the world, 2007	Fergusson is citing other authors (which ones?)
John Paul Himka	N/A	N/A	100k	N/A	Interventions: Challenging the Myths of Twentieth-Century Ukrainian history, 2001
Anders Rudling	40-70k	N/A	N/A	+7k in Poland	Theory and Practice, 2006	Problems with Rudling noted below
Rossolinki-Liebe	N/A	N/A	70-100k	N/A	The Ukrainian national revolution, Celebrating Fascism...	I'm having trouble finding the actual source - it may be referred to here.
Ewa Siemaszko	60k	70k	130k	133k	Bilans zbrodni [7]

Estimates of casualties, Ukrainians killed by Poles

	In Volhynia	In Galicia	In all areas affected by conflict	Notes
Grzegorz Motyka	2-3k	N/A	10-20k	The number for total includes those killed in Volhynia, Galicia, Lublin and Rzeszow regions in '44/'45 as well as during Operation Wisla
Grzegorz Motyka	2-3k	1-2k	10-15k	(8-10k killed in present borders of Poland), in: Od rzezi wołyńskiej do akcji "Wisła", 2011
P.A. Rudling	20k	N/A	+11k killed "in Poland"	in "Historical Representation of the Wartime Accounts of the Activities of the OUN..."
Magocsi	-	-	20k
Snyder	10k	x	x	Past and Present, "Over the course of 1943, perhabs ten thousand Ukrainian civilians were killed by Polish self-defence units, Soviet partisans, Nazi policemen".
Snyder	x	x	+5k killed in Lublin and Rzeszów; 11k total in Polish territories, 20k if including vol/gal	The reconstruction of nations p204
Rossolinski-Liebe	N/A	N/A	10-20k	both UPA members and civilians, during and after the war, Celebrating Fascism...

The Niall Ferguson number of 80k - is that for Wolyn or for total casualties? Also does he "estimate" this himself, or (as I suspect) is he quoting others? Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea (I guessed on where to put the ref)--Львівське (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Should there be a third section (eventually spun into another article) about evnts in Lublin and other areas that became partof Poland? Citing Tadeasz Olszanski, Redrawing nations: ethnic cleansing in East-Central Europe, 1944-1948 By Philipp Ther, Ana Siljak pg. 188 goves figures of 8k-10k Ukrainian deaths in Poland from 1944-1947, 2500-4500 of whom were in his words "murdered" by the Polish underground. The source also states that 2200 Polish soldiers and civilians killed by UPA - civilian deaths were 600.Faustian (talk) 06:06, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm....should we start a new meta article or should we continue "adding context" to the point where the title needs to be changed? Not enough info for separate "in galicia" and "in poland" pages...what to do what to do...I'l be sure to check out that book though--Львівське (talk) 06:11, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

@Faustian - there is a sense where the conflict in Lublin (and Rzeszow) is seperate from both the massacres of Poles in Volhynia and the events in Galicia. A lot of it though was actually "spillovers" (this is more or less covered in sources). These things happened later though and to some extent after the advance of the Red Army pushed both the Polish underground and UPA into those areas; but lots of the "partisans" (both Polish and Ukrainian) involved were in one way or another refugeees from the events of Volhynia etc. The way it unfolded was that the civilians living in these areas became caught up in it, whether or not they had anything to do with the events of '43 and '44. There was a running fight between UPA and AK up until at least late '44 - and then both organizations realized that they were gonna get screwed by the communists. Subsequently they actually came to an agreement and at least instituted a cease fire - in some cases even cooperated with each other against the communists. There's even incidents of post-AK units defending Ukrainian villages during Operation Wisla from communist Poles, though admittedly that had nothing to do with any kind of sympathy for Ukrainians but rather just a simple antagonism towards the PKWN. Anyway, at this point I think this kind of analysis is sort of at the cutting edge of modern research - like you said earlier, Ukrainian historiography might be ten years behind Polish historiography in this respect, but even Polish historiography is pretty recent here (since '95 or so). Up until at least mid '70's official Communist party line often propagated the view that the post-AK underground in eastern Poland supported the UPA (i.e. both were "bandit bands"). The movie Ogniomistrz Kaleń is sort of a typical example of such propaganda.

@Lvivske - like I said earlier, before we can get meta it would be good to get more specific first. So if you want to create a seperate article on Galicia and/or Lublin/Rzeszow that'd be good. I put in a "split" tag here to suggest it. Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:38, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

In the meantime, help me fill out the table above. Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Who qualifies? Are we going to include sociologists like piotrowski in the article, siemaszko?--Львівське (talk) 06:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Piotrowski definetly qualifies. Even though he's not a historian per se but a sociologist of history, he's still an academic. Ummm, it's sort of like I'm not a historian but I study economic history - there's an obvious overlap between fields and that's where Piotrowski falls in. Siemaszko - still thinking about it. For what it's worth, they are quoted authoretitively by Snyder. So at the very least other historians take them seriously. In their case I think the proper approach would be to discuss them but also discuss the criticsms of their work that have been made. Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:57, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Seehere for a detailed discussion about Piotrowski:[8] who basically just copies the work of often-discredited people such as Prus when discussing historical events which are not Piotrowski's field. The danger is he can be used as a "back door" to let dubious information in. There are plenty of actual historians doing research and writing about these events, no need to go to a sociologist who is writing outside his field. Use Piotrowski for information involving the social impact of these events (his subject), not for historical facts (not his area).Faustian (talk) 13:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

There are quite a few Piotrowski refs in the article. What should stay/go?--Львівське (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

If you can point to a specific part where he supposedly is basing himself on non-reliable sources then it should be at the very least noted where the info comes from. Other than that I would say he should be considered reliable. Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:24, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

BTW, I believe Snyder authoritatively cites Siemaszkos - but we wouldn't then say that Snyder is not reliable. Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:25, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Piotrowski not only used Siemaszkos but also the totally discredited Edward Prus as a source. And there is a difference between Snyder citing from Siemaszko once in a while and Piotrowski cited him and even more dubious sources a lot. Not everything the Siemaszkos wrote is wrong, and we can trust a legitimate historian, who knows this stuff well, to sort out what is fact and what is not (same thing if Snyder cited UPA her eor there). Piotrowski on the other hand is not a historian but a sociologist. And his chice of sources for historical information betrays his lack of expertise.Faustian (talk) 05:03, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I disagree for two reasons. First, it's not our job to interpret sources, only decide whether or not they're reliable - and that is done at a general Wikipedia level, such as RSN. If Piotrowski is a reliable source (which he is) then it's not up to us to decide whether we can 'trust him or not' for whatever reason (i.e. just because he's a sociologist). We just report what he says. Second, looking through the book, I don't think Piotrowski cites Prus authoritatively just says "for a different view, see Prus" and stuff like that. Most of the references to Prus seem to be in footnotes, basically acknowledging - but NOT SUPPORTING - that these works exist. There might be an instance or two which is different but generally it's not true that "Piotrowski... used ... totally discredited Edward Prus as a source". Mentioning an author is not the same as using him as a source.

Which gets us back to my original point. IF there is some part in Piotrowski which you feel is based on faulty sources (like Prus) then, sure, we can exclude that part. But you have to be specific about that particular part. Otherwise we should also throw out Patrylyak out of Massacre of Lviv professors since he also uses "totally discredited" UPA-affiliated sources. Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Piotowski is a reliable source for sociological statements, not for historical ones. Of course eveything he writes on sociology is reliable and we have no right to judge it, we only report it. But the issue is using him for history. And a source that is reliable for one thing is not reliable for everything. If a chemist publishes a book and then includes some controversial statements on physics in his book, the physics stuff shouldn't be automatically considered reliable. And nor should adherents to that controversial theory use the chemist's book as a "back door" to get info into physics articles based on supposed reliability. With respect to your comments on Patrilyak, he may use UPA as a source (how could a historian not do so, if UPA is a subject matter - could a historian of World War II Germany not use Nazi documents?) but Patrilyak doesn't just follow their line. As for Piotrowski's usage on this article, I do not see anything particularly controversial in how he is being referenced; the particular statements referenced to his work are referenced to other works too and don't involve anything outlandish. I was speaking about him generally and saying we need to be very careful with him (btw Piotrowski does use Prus' works as references for facts, check googlebooks).Faustian (talk) 05:58, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

<<- To address the general point, I think you'd be right if we were talking about a chemist writing about history (or a linguist writing about politics). But this is more like a chemist writing about biology or a physicist writing about chemistry. It's a sociologist who studies history writing about history. Similar to an economist who studies economic history (and you'd be surprised how little academic dialogue there is between economic historians and traditional historians - yet, they're both reliable sources for Wikipedia purposes). So it's stepping outside a declared discipline, but not by much. And since it isn't much, it's not up to us to make these kinds of judgement calls as to their "trustworthiness". In regard to the specifics - I guess it looks like we're agree. I thought there was some specific passage of text reffed to Piotrowski that you were objecting to. I agree that it's fine to mention that he is a sociologist in the text. Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:21, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

An economic historian would be reliable as a source about, say, monetary and labor policies of the third reich but not about power struggles between Hitler's cronies or about World War II battles. Similarly, sociologist Piotrowski would be a reliable source about Polish and Ukrainian society of the 1930's and 1940's and the impact the genocide had on those societies - but not about the historical events themselves.Faustian (talk) 06:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha. I think for Siemaszko, keep his figures to a separate paragraph maybe? And explicitly state who he is / his connection to the subject. What's the relevance of this "communique" that was put in the article? Keep or go?--Львівське (talk) 07:01, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Seperate paragraph sounds good, though I'm not sure what you're referring to with the "communique". Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:06, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

"t the first ever joint Polish-Ukrainian conference in Podkowa Leśna organized on June 7–9, 1994 by Karta Centre, with almost 50 Polish and Ukrainian participants, an estimate of 50,000 Polish deaths in Volhynia was agreed upon, which they considered to be moderate.[106]"--Львівське (talk) 07:13, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

<<-- The conference should be put into the table. I guess the part you're referring to is whether or not the fact that Siemaszko signed the statement is significant enough to be included. I don't care and if the conference itself is mentioned I see no need to mention them. Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:15, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

The Rossolinski-Liebe article probably shouldn't belong in the table. It's taken from a work that isn't about these events and, ,ost likely, uses numbers referenced from one of the other sources found during the author's lit review.Faustian (talk) 19:55, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Number of victims

We got the newest book by Motyka: Od rzezi wołyńskiej do akcji Wisła, Wydawnictwo Literackie, 2011, ISBN: 978-83-08-04576-3. Many UPA orders, some new evidences, and confirmed numbers (according to Polish and Ukrainians historians). --Paweł5586 (talk) 14:01, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

hm, anywhere i can confirm this online? I'm coincidentally going to be researching this topic a lot over the next few days for a paper--Львівське (talk) 16:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I can upload a scan from Motyka book, and help to translate it. It is impossible to 35 thousand victims at Volhynia becouse we got about 30 thousand victims with knowing name and surname. So many were mourdered without knowing who they were. Number of victims is up to 50 th.--Paweł5586 (talk) 09:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah but 1 biased historian doesn't trump all the other numbers out there. We went down this road before and Motyka is not the authority on this subject to the point of dismissing everyone else in the world. We've gone down this path before with you and Motyka. Just update his numbers in the appropriate section, don't inflate the low-end figure in bad faith.--Львівське (talk) 10:01, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Why do you think Motyka is biased? His numbers should in my opinion be included wth the others.Faustian (talk) 13:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I think I keep getting him mixed up with someone else. His numbers are well beyond western estimates, however.--Львівське (talk) 02:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't say Motyka's 80,000-100,000 in all areas (Volhynia, Eastern Galicia and other territories, including those in Poland) or 40,000/50,000-60,000 in Volhynia and 10,000-20,000 in Galicia are well beyond western estimates of killed Poles: Snyder ("The Reconstruction of Nations"): 40,000-60 000 in Volhynia, 25,000 in Galicia, 5,000 in Lublin and Rzeszów. That would be 70,000-90,000 in all areas he takes into consideration. Fergusson : 60,000-80,000 in Volhynia and Galicia. John Paul Himka – 100,000 in Volhynia and Galicia.

We can't use the low-end of the estimates of the number of Polish victims (taken from one source) and the high-end of the estimates of Ukrainian victims (taken from another source). Let's be consequent, low-end for Polish victims in Volhynia is 35,000 (Katchanovsky), for Ukrainian victims - 2,000 (Motyka). Another mistake which should be avoided, is to compare the number of Polish victims in one area – Volhynia with the number of Ukrainian victims in all areas affected by the conflict.Hedviberit (talk) 17:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

For sure Motyka is not biased, in Poland he is ctiticized by other historians for favoring Ukrainians. Second why are you reverting? As I said we got about 30 thousands confirmed surnames, how it possible to get lower numbers than 50.000. Motyka is one of the best historians in Ukrainian-Polish relationships. For sure Magocsi isnt, if he claims that the UPA actions were mirrored by Polish selfdefence its prove that he have no idea what happend in the Volhynia.--Paweł5586 (talk) 14:10, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Magocsi is one of the better historians on Ukrainian history, that's for sure. He does know what happened there, and I don't get your viewpoint of censoring the reasons and surrounding issues that caused what occurred. Very few events in history are one dimensional.--Львівське (talk) 02:36, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I haven't reverted anything here, indeed I don't think figures from Motyka opught to be removed. "Confirmed surnames" doesn't mean he is right (though it doesn'teman he is wrong, either). Biased Siemaszkos used confirmed surnames also, and Ukrainians use confroemd surnames for higher numbers of Ukrainian victims.Faustian (talk) 21:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Grzegorz Motyka, Snyder (Yale University) describes one of his book about OUN and UPA, "Ukraińska partyzantka", as a "fundamental study" ("Bloodlands...", 2010, p. 500). Motyka is also praised by Ukrainian scholars, as a "leading specialist on the [Polish-Ukrainian] conflict" (Zenon E. Kohut, Bohdan Y. Nebesio, Myroslav Yurkevich. "Historical dictionary of Ukraine"‎. 2005. p.664). Motyka wrote several books dedicated specifically to the Polish-Ukrainian relations in the years 1943-1948. He is not one-sided, but adopts multi-dimentional approach in his analysis (see: Rafal Wnuk,Recent Polish Historiography on Polish-Ukrainian Relations during World War II and its Aftermath). Since 2011, Motyka is a member of the IPN Council.Hedviberit (talk) 17:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to rv your last edit - the sources in the lead confirm that the massacres/ethnic cleansing took place not only in Volhynia, but also in Galicia (that means the perpetrator was not only UPA-North). There was no consensus regarding deletion of the "Eastern Galicia" section. In my opinion the title of the article should be renamed to: "Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Galicia".Hedviberit (talk) 17:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll tell you what. There are only few experts that are/were deeply involved in victims number counting - Siemaszko, Motyka, in the beginning of 90'ties Torzecki... There rest, especially Western historicians, rely on available works. The "problem" is that process of counting the victims began in late 80'ties and it is still continued. The numbers increased by the years. That is why we have a lot of different numbers circulating in the literature. So, we should follow the newest works of real experts.

Worst situation is with estimation of Ukrainian victims number. The numbers circulating are not even „estimations” but just guessing. See Ilyushin's „UPA and AK” (Warsaw 2009): „No official information about the number of Ukrainians killed can only be explained by the fact that similar to Polish studies and calculations were never carried in Ukraine”. (page 37)

Number of 20,000 killed Ukrainians in Volhynia given by Rudling citing newspaper article of some unknown Maksymiuk is completelly crazy. This is example how host of circulating versions of one history can confuse even good scholars.GlaubePL (talk) 21:31, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Table

Is it ready to be put into the article itself?

Also, as far as I remember, Fergusson doesn't carry out an independent estimation of the deaths, but rather quotes another author (Snyder? Can't remember - I had the book checked out but had to return it to the library). If that is indeed the case then I don't think he should be included independently, just noted in the "Comments" section. Also I think the page number is actually 463 (based on Amazon's search inside feature, where the page is not available) rather than 455. It also means that it isn't quite correct to say in the text that "Niall Ferguson estimated the..." - unless a particular researcher did actual field work of some sort or a meta analysis of sources then we should probably use the phrasing "reports..." rather than "estimated".Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

See my comment about the Rossolinski-Liebe source, please.Faustian (talk) 19:56, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

If that's indeed the case and he quotes one of the other authors, we can do rephrasing.Hedviberit (talk) 06:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it's not clear there either - I would include him but note in the comments that this appears to be based on other works, rather than an independent estimate.

Other than that, is the table ready to be included in the article?Volunteer Marek (talk) 20:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I think so.Faustian (talk) 22:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

To elaborate on my earlier commnet - Rossolinski-Liebe seems to be a student of Rusling and/or Himka. His work is ano another topic and seems to just refer to Rudlng and/or Himka when he mentions the massacres of Volhynia as context for hisown work. Therefore citing Rossolinski-Liebe seems a bit like reciting Himka or Rudling twice.Faustian (talk) 02:57, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Can you identify which one?Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:49, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Katchanovsky uses estimates from Hrytsiuk and Snyder and his article is on another topic. Should we delete him from the table? On the other hand, Rossolinski's nummbers aren't exactly the same as those from Rudling and Himka.Hedviberit (talk) 06:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

One more thing - we shouldn't include the numbers of Poles killed in Poland, because they weren't the victims of this ethnic cleansing. Hedviberit (talk) 06:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Galicia

Since the article will be staying "...Poles in Volhynia" I've taken the initiative of cleaning out non-Volyn related content, namely, what carried out into Galicia. The entire Galicia section itself needed a rewrite as it was ass-backwards (galicia had more Poles, not less; Galician Poles were given warning, not NOT given warning, etc.). Should this stuff be staying if re-written? I suggested before that this article cover more / be retitled due to its depth, but was voted down that it should focus on the Volhynian massacres. Now I'm focusing it and just got reverted. Which is it going to be? All or 1? Can't have it both ways.--Львівське (talk) 06:59, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I oppose the removal and suggested earlier that the article should be retitled - Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and (eastern) Galicia or Massacres of Poles in Western Ukraine. From my understanding the majority (most popular) view is that the ethnic cleansing/massacres of Poles took place in (Eastern) Galicia and Volhynia. Among the seven sources that you deleted ('do we really need EIGHT sources to prove this?') were scholars who agree with it. That is why I included them in the first place. I'm not aware of any wikipedia rule that limits the number of references.

I suggested before that this article cover more / be retitled due to its depth, but was voted down that it should focus on the Volhynian massacres.

Was that really the reason? What was your proposition for the title?

galicia had more Poles, not less;- Ukrainian Galicia (eastern Galicia) had less Poles than Ukrainians.

Galician Poles were given warning, not NOT given warning, etc.

From Snyder (The Reconstruction...): The UPA campaign to rid “Western Ukraine” of Poles began in earnest in Galicia in January 1944. In 1943 in Volhynia, UPA practice seems to have been to attack villages and murder populations without warning; in Galicia in 1944 the UPA seems to have sometimes presented Polish families with the choice of flight or death. Consider an order from the UPA high command to its soldiers, issued after the slaughter in Volhynia, and during the cleansing of Galicia: “Once more I remind you: first call upon Poles to abandon their land and only later liquidate them, not the other way around.”75 However: UPA attacks on civilians in Galicia were still organized, and still brutal. As in Volhynia, UPA units OFTEN killed every inhabitant of a village, not sparing women or children. So, Poles were SOMETIMES given the choice to flee, but OFTEN whole villages were massacred by the UPA. There is also this Shukhevych's order from 25 February 1944 (taken from Rudling) : In view of the success of the Soviet forces it is necessary to speed up the liquidation of the Poles, they must be totally wiped out, their villages burned... only the Polish population must be destroyed.

Both orders should be included.

You added this in the lead: Ukrainian victims, either those loyal to rival political factions or found to be aiding Poles, are said to have fallen in equal numbers.[10]. The reference is Snyder who writes: The OUN Mel’nyk, as we have seen, was at war with the OUN-Bandera. Both of these rivals were destroyed in early 1943 by the OUN-Bandera, and their soldiers incorporated by the OUN-Bandera’s UPA. Along the way partisans loyal to the OUN-Bandera killed tens of thousands of fellow Ukrainians for putative links to Borovets or Mel’nyk. Although no one has yet taken up the subject, it is likely that the UPA killed as many Ukrainians as Poles in 1943. What is the purpose? The article is about ethnic cleansing of Poles, not OUN. Hedviberit (talk) 06:40, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Mistakes

"In Polish retaliatory actions conducted in early 1944, the Ukrainian villages of Prykhorile, Mentke, Sakhryn, Shykhoviche, and Terebin were destroyed." - this sentence is in the section "Galicia". The localities above are not Galician. This is region called Kholmchyna or (better) Lublin voivodship. GlaubePL (talk) 19:56, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

"Father Ludwik Wrodarczyk from the village of Okop was crucified by the Ukrainians, father Stanislaw Dobrzanski from the village of Ostrowka beheaded (967 local Poles were killed with him) and father Karol Baran from the village of Korytnica was cut in half by a saw." - it should be in the section "Volhynia" and not "Galicia" because all the localities are in Volhynia. GlaubePL (talk) 13:07, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

"In the night of February 5–6, 1944, Ukrainian groups attacked the Polish village of Barycz, near Buchach. 126 Poles were massacred, including women and children. A few days later on February 12–13, a local group of OUN under Petro Chamchuk attacked the Polish settlement of Puźniki, killing around 100 people and burning houses. Those who survived moved mostly to Prudnik." - The dates are wrong, the massacres in Barycz and Puźniki happened in 1945 and not 1944. GlaubePL (talk) 13:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, why don't you fix it ? --Lysy^talk 16:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Galicia

Why not forking the Galicia part to a separate article. Has this been discussed ? --Lysy^talk 16:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I have proposed moving the article to "Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia." Hedviberit (talk) 16:16, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Thet would be good as well. Keeping it all in a single article saves us having to duplicate all the background explanations and excuses of Poles and Ukrainians, as they would be the same in both cases. Has this rename been voted upon yet ? --Lysy^talk 18:34, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I support the split. If I am not mistaken, Galicia in this context would be the same as Eastern Lesser Poland, and pl wiki has a dedicated article on the subject: pl:Czystka etniczna w Małopolsce Wschodniej. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 06:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Generally speaking Eastern Galicia was essentially Lwow/Lviv, Tarnopil/Tarnopol and Ivano-Frankivsk/Stanisławów, i.e. the three pre-war Polish voivodeships. Western Galicia would be more or less present day southwestern Poland up to Krakow or so, i.e. Eastern Lesser Poland. Most, but not all of the of "Galician" part of the conflict took place in Eastern Galicia. Volunteer Marek  15:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

This appears to be a concensus to split off the Eastern Galicia section per the split tag. Is anyone willing to make the split? If no-one wants to make the split then I will have a go next weekend. The split tag has been there long enough now. Op47 (talk) 20:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think there's some consensus to split off Eastern Galicia, or maybe just Galicia and Lublin region off to another article. Of course some info here should remain, since the two events were related. But the bulk of the info should be in a split off article. I think it's mostly just that peoples is busy and no one has had time to do it properly. So go ahead.VolunteerMarek 21:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be better to simply change the title? Practically all the sections (including the lead section) except the subsections 2.2 and 2.3 (Volhynia and Eastern Galicia respectively) concern both Eastern Galicia and Volhynia. Lublin region doesn't seem to be part of this article. Hedviberit (talk) 21:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I must confess that having thought about it and re-read the article, I am more inclined to agree that keeping the article intact and renaming it would be better. It would be easier for me and given how busy the article's regular editors seem to be, well with the best will in the world, if I did it then there would probably be a lot of cleaning up to do. How would Massacres of Poles in the Ukraine (1942-43) be for the title? I will leave it another week and go with that unless there are developments/objections.Op47 (talk) 20:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it is correct to assign the territories in question (Volhynia, Eastern Galicia) to any country in the title, because they were neither under Polish nor Ukrainian administration, but under German occupation (still technically of south-eastern Poland) at the time of the massacres. What do you think about my proposition ("Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia")?Hedviberit (talk) 22:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Given how long this has been going on, it would be tempting to agree with you and do it. My concern would be that if Lublin (or another region) were to be added to the scope of the article then the whole issue may reccur. Also, speaking as someone who stumbled upon the article, I thought that the article was refering to a Nazi atrocity. It is not important to me to distinguish to be fair. Nevertheless, what do you think of these titles: Massacres of Poles by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (1942-43) or Ukrainian Massacres of Poles (1942-43)? Op47 (talk) 13:11, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I still think this way of doing things skews the fact that it was part of a greater civil war...and lets not forget that not only Pole were killed, and it was not only one sided. All I'm saying is something as complicated as this shouldn't be so tightly defined in the title.--Львівське (говорити) 18:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Then what would you call it? Op47 (talk) 18:54, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I believe the correct years are 1943-44 (or 1943-45). The sources from the lead section confirm that the ethnic cleansing of Poles by UPA/'The massacres' took place in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia (Galicia, Western Ukraine). They don't state any other region. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a widely used codename for this operation (unlike in the case of Operation Vistula). That's why the territorial scope (Galicia/Eastern Galicia and Volhynia) is usually mentioned.

During the period 1939-1947, there were quite a few instances where Poles and Ukrainians opossed each other. Both sides have blood on their hands. Operation Vistula, for example, can be classified as ethnic cleansing of Ukrainians by Poles.Hedviberit (talk) 05:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia it is. To be fair, if needed, it is easy to rename an article. It seems choosing the name is the hard part.

Don't forget to put it through the page rename process, it is not as simple as deciding amongst yourselves that a new name will be better, you need to find consensus on it as well. Chaosdruid (talk) 03:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I put a request on Chaosdruid's talk page asking for clarificationOp47 (talk) 13:01, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Compared to Volhynia and Galicia, the Lublin part of the story is fairly minor, so I think it's ok if it doesn't get mentioned separately. Honestly, my view on this is that I don't care that much whether it's covered in one article ("Volhynia and Galicia") or two articles ("Volyhynia" and "Galicia") as long as it is covered well and neutrally. I do see some sense in having some kind of a disambiguation/meta/general page for ... "early 20th century" Polish-Ukrainian conflicts which would direct readers to this article, as well as to Operation Vistula and other related articles. But if we do that, we should be careful that we don't start POV-forking stuff.VolunteerMarek 04:00, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Interesting source

[[9]] Bandurist (talk) 16:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, at first glance that source does not appear to be RS (is it a translation of Krwawym szlakiem stalinowskiej demokracji?) but most of the factual info in it is probably true enough. This is Zawadka Mochorowska/Zavadka Morochivska massacre (or in Polish "zbrodnia") and it has an article on pl wiki [10]. The info more properly belongs in Repatriation of Ukrainians from Poland to the Soviet Union (which I thought was going to get renamed but I guess there was no consensus for a batch move), or possibly Operation Vistula, though strictly speaking this happened before the commencement of that action (I think some sources lump it in with OV though).VolunteerMarek 20:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

---

Massacres of Poles in Volhynia → Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia – This article originally covered incidents in Volhynia (a region of Poland before WW2 and currently a region of Ukraine). The scope of the article has expanded to cover Eastern Galicia (similarly a former region of Poland and now Ukraine).

Options considered have included:

Splitting the article into Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Massacres of Poles in Eastern Galicia. This was discounted because the 2 articles would be largely identical apart from small sections pertinent to the regions being discussed.

Renaming to Massacres of Poles in Ukraine. This was discounted because the regions were neither Polish nor Ukrainian at the time of the incidents.

Renaming to Ukrainian Massacres of Poles (with dates). This was discounted because (considering the bigger picture) it would cease to be NPOV.

There is no need to further oppose the above options. If you oppose this move, please state your propsed solution. Op47 (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I suggest "Massacre of Poles in Western Ukraine" It is shorter and more understandable to the English speaker. Bandurist (talk) 14:53, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

That was already objected to above I believe.VolunteerMarek 17:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

• Weak support - I think it makes some sense, barring someone is willing to devote some very significant time to creating to separate dedicated articles. But like I said, in this case the actual content is more important than the title.VolunteerMarek 17:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Title

OK, now that is sort of over, I have realised that this is possibly a largely POV page. Unfotunately I did not have much spare time, as well as having no electricity for 4 days, and did not get here in time to comment.

"Ukrainian casualties at the hands of Poles during the conflict range from 2,000 to 20,000 in Volhynia,[14][15] and 20,000 for the two regions combined."

Is there a corresponding "Massacres of Ukrainians in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia" article?

If not, then can we not name it something more neutral as this seems to cover both sides. I believe it should be something like "Massacres in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia 1943-1944" Chaosdruid (talk) 23:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it should be Ukrainian-Polish civil war...but then the whole ethnic cleansing angle is so big that it would result in a split to another article - so I think this article should focus on the Ukrainian operation (as it were) and a larger article covering all aspects of the clash should remain separate.--Львівське (говорити) 01:52, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Well I haven't looked at this article in awhile, but now that you mention it there does appear to be the problem with the lede, in particular that sentence and the one right next to it.

The first sentence: The actions of the UPA resulted in over 35,000 Polish civilian casualties in Volhynia - it's a bit POV to give just the lower bound on the casualty estimates here. In fact, this is not just any lower bound but a lower bound found in a single source, which may not be representative. If you look at the table we were working on, it's clear that most other lower bounds are at least 40k. Also, the upper bound should be given as well. Again, based on the table, the sentence should be changed to "between 40k and 70k Polish civilian casualties". If we are going to refer to "regions combined" then it should be "60k to 90k".

The second sentence: Ukrainian casualties at the hands of Poles during the conflict range from 2,000 to 20,000 in Volhynia,[14][15] and 20,000 for the two regions combined. I'm ok with giving 20k for "regions combined" as that's at least feasible though most definitely an upper bound. However, it should not say 20k for Volhynia alone. As far as I can tell this is, again, a single source, which is probably confusing Volhynia with "regions combined". Even the Snyder number of 10k might be talking about both regions. This would be like including some of the Polish casualty estimates that go up as high as 150k.

Personally in this I would go with the most reliable sources and leave the "outliers" out of it. That would mean Snyder and Motyka.

So yes, there is POV here but perhaps not in the way you think.

As to the "massacre" name - this is the term used in reliable sources. Are there reliable English language sources which talk about "massacres of Ukrainians in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia" out there?VolunteerMarek 01:04, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I think the massacre wording is just translated from Polish, no? In english it would just be ethnic cleansing, or for snyder, civil war & ethnic cleansing? I'm personally opposed to the "massacres" title as it's a bit emotive--Львівське (говорити) 01:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Nah, Snyder does use "massacres" [11]. So does Marples, Copsey and many others.VolunteerMarek 02:39, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I was thinking more in terms of a proper title, not that massacres didnt happen or one wouldnt describe them as such. Snyder calls it the Ukrainian-Polish civil war several times in Reconstructing; Marples calls it " The Ukrainian-Polish Conflict", and Copsey also calls it the 'Volhynian conflict'--Львівське (говорити) 02:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh I see, the lede was changed just recently, right after the move. Ay, come on Lvivske!VolunteerMarek 01:39, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

What's the matter? I haven't read over the article in a bit, without getting long winded here, I just repeated what's said in the article. 35-40k is the accepted western view, I said 35+ to keep it neutral. Second, I don't think we can count the 20k figure to the hundreds of thousands on the other side...I mean, several of the sources say 20k for the combined, and motyka says 2-3k for volhynia and 20k combined - that would mean 15k+ for Galicia unless I'm reading that wrong? I'll try to stay available/online to hash this out --Львівське (говорити) 01:52, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Ay, ok. We've been through this. Fine, let's do it again. First 35-40k is NOT the "accepted western view". Take a look at the table that we both were working on above [12]. Let's look at it in detail.

For Volhynia alone:

The 35k number appears in the source by Ivan Katchanovski. First I don't think that's representative of "accepted western view". Second what it says is 35k-60k.

An "accepted western view" would be Snyder or Motyka (whom Snyder relies on anyway). This gives, again, for Volhynia alone 50-60k by Motyka, or 50k by Snyder in one source, 40k+ in just one month of 1943 in another, and 40-60k in just 1943. So the accepted western view is more like 50-60k. Rudling gives an even higher upper bound, but at this point, having noted the general sloppiness of his work, I'm not going to consider it.

The 20k number - like I said, that might be possible for Galicia, Volhynia and Lublin combined, and probably also includes the casualties from Operation Vistula. And that's what Motyka says (I can give the exact breakdown between Galicia, Volhynia, Lublin and OV later). Snyder's number of 10k includes Ukrainians killed by Soviet partisans and the Nazis. For Volhynia the number 2-3k is the generally accepted number, with 20k possibly being the number for ALL regions + Operation Vistula. But then, if we're considering other regions her, then obviously we should do the same for Poles killed by Ukrainians which would give 80-100k.VolunteerMarek 02:33, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

It is quite simple, if there were murders on both sides of similar numbers, (40,000 and 20,000 are similar) then equal weight should be given. It is POV to have an article carry so much weight for one side, mentioning only the deaths of thousands of Ukrainians in passing, and yet state 2:1 killings.

I cannot help but be dismayed by an attitude of aggression; I am totally neutral here and want nothing more than neutrality in the article and title. If others cannot respect that then perhaps they should stop and rethink the way they are attacking and making snide comments? Reign in the rhetoric, calm down, put on your neutrality cap, bury the hatchet and discuss ... Chaosdruid (talk) 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Snyder definitely views it as an affair that went both ways, and once you add in the thousands more Ukrainians killed in Poland, and the ethnic cleansing that followed, and the political atmosphere that proceeded...it really takes on a whole 'nother light than what some editors intended for this article originally. I talked to Magosci and I agree with him/Snyder on the more neutral, 'civil war' take on the conflict.--Львівське (говорити) 02:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know about Magosci, but I definitely don't think that Snyder portrays Volhynia as a civil war - because quite simply, it wasn't. It was one side massacring the other side, who then, to some extent, tried to defend itself. It WAS Hutus killing the Tutsis. Now, Galicia was different to some extent - which was actually part of the original reason given for not renaming the article. In Galicia UPA had less support on the ground (both because the Ukrainians weren't as dominant of a majority and because most Ukrainians in Galicia, unlike Volhynia, opposed UPA), Poles had heard of what happened in Volhynia and AK actually had a presence. So yeah there it was more "equal" but "more" does not mean completely so. The one region affected by the conflict that COULD be described as a civil war was actually the Lublin region which is why I kept bringing it up before. Now, IIRC Snyder does refer to the Galicia conflict as a "civil war" in some places. But he also talks of "massacres".

Basically, to even start talking about a "civil war" we'd have to rename THIS article back to its previous title, and THEN someone would have to write a separate article on Galicia.

And let me just point out that if what really happened (not just on this topic, but in general as far as Wikipedia articles are concerned, on various topics) *was* a massacre, then calling it a "civil war" is the non-neutral (and weaselly) term.VolunteerMarek 02:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

"I definitely don't think that Snyder portrays Volhynia as a civil war" He does, very plainly in Reconstructing Nations. He refers to the conflict as mutual, and calls it the Ukrainian-Polish civil war over and over. There's nothing to even infer here.--Львівське (говорити) 03:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

First, there's no "attitude of aggression". Please don't make false statements like those. I have consistently been a moderating voice on this article curtailing some of the more extreme POV pushing from both sides. I resent your insinuations and I find the passive-aggressive tone irritating and insulting. And believe me, I can be aggressive if I want to and that usually happens when somebody insults me with false remarks in a way seemingly designed to irritate.

Ok, as to the matter at hand - it is simple but not in the way you say. By saying "40,000 and 20,000 are similar" what you are doing is picking a lower bound on one side of casualties (Poles killed by Ukrainians) and then picking an extreme, unreliable upper bound on other side of casualties (Ukrainians killed by Poles). Why not compare, 400,000 (Poles killed by Ukrainians, according to some sources) to 2,000 (Ukrainians killed by Poles in Volhynia, according to most reliable sources)? You can make all the protestations of "total neutrality" all you want, but when somebody comes in to a controversial article, picks the lowest possible number on one side, and the highest possible number on the other... well, sorry but that don't look all that neutral from where I'm sitting.

So there's your problem right there. You are making an obviously skewed, biased comparison, and then, because the article does not reflect that bias and skewness, calling it "not neutral". Sorry, but that's backwards.

But like I said, as far as the title and coverage of this article, or of some potential hypothetical article, it is simple - it's simply how reliable sources refer to the events. We have lots of sources which talk about "Massacre of Poles". There are no reliable sources which talk about "Massacre of Ukrainians" for this period, for either Volhynia or Galicia, although of course most of the sources which describe the "Massacre of Poles" note that there were some retaliatory killings. So it is simple - reliable sources.VolunteerMarek 02:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know man, why are you saying 20k is a higher bound? 20k seems to be the median here for Ukrainian causalities and 2-3k is a lower extreme bound. Up to 20k in volyn, more in galicia, and 5-10k elsewhere? that's potentially 30-50k ukrainians vs. 40-60k poles...that's kinda on par at the end of the day--Львівське (говорити) 02:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

"There are no reliable sources which talk about "Massacre of Ukrainians" for this period" that is categorically false.--Львівське (говорити) 02:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

No, for Volhynia alone 20k is most certainly not the median. 2-3k is the most quoted and reliable number. 20k for all the regions affected by conflict is feasible though probably on the high side of things. And again, the 40-60k Poles are for Volhynia alone.

So please DON'T do this:

1. Take the lowest possible number of Poles killed in Volhynia alone and use that as an average or highest possible number for Poles killed in all regions

2. Take the highest reported (I'm not even gonna call the 20k "possible" because it simply is not) number of Ukrainians killed in all regions

and then compare the two numbers. We have to compare like to like, which means using the median estimates for both. And if we're talking Volhynia we don't all of sudden switch to "all regions" numbers.VolunteerMarek 02:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I posted 6-7 sources below showing the 20k +/- figure, how you can call it not possible is beyond me at this point.--Львівське (говорити) 02:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm addressing that below. - the 20k +/- (mostly -) figure is for "all regions". Explicitly in some of the sources you listed. The only 20k "for Volhynia" that has been presented is the Rudling/Maksymiuk source - but seriously, if we're gonna put that in, then I'm gonna insist that we put Siemaszkos in too.VolunteerMarek 03:03, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

And yet your tone increases in aggression, even threatening to increase - "I can be aggressive if I want to" - and admitting that perhaps it is only your perception of it that is making it passive aggressive "seemingly designed to irritate".

To move forwards consensus is necessary. At present the article is about all massacres in the region and so should reflect that in the title, which removing "Poles" (or adding "and Ukrainians") would certainly do.

It is obvious that you are not calm and are trying to brow beat me into submission, something that will not go down well. Stop the personal attacks and try and understand that your comments are not appearing neutral; perhaps the irritation is that you can see there is justification for my comment that the title is POV. Chaosdruid (talk) 02:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Look, I am not going to waste my time talking to someone who is falsely accusing me of stuff that just isn't true. Quit making personal remarks or speculating on whether I'm calm or not. Talk about sources and article content or there's no point in discussing anything with you. For example, Lvivske and I can disagree - disagree even very strongly - but we can have a discussion without resorting to accusing each other of "being aggressive" or personal attacks (and yes, false accusations fall under WP:NPA).VolunteerMarek 03:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

That is where you went wrong, this thread is about the article title - yet it has turned into heated discussion over how many rather than POV title

I began by suggesting that the title needs to be less pointy, less POV and more neutral in tone. I agree that "Massacre" is correct, and that the new title does cover the geographical area. What I do not agree about is that the article contains a significant number of Ukrainians massacred and yet the title suggests that only Poles were massacred.

I want you to talk about that one and only point, to find consensus, and to discuss what, if anything, can be done. If you can do that without trying to make me look like I am attacking you, then all will be fine. Chaosdruid (talk) 15:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

If you stick to the discussion of the issue, rather myself, we can talk.

The "how many" is central to the question of the title. In Volhynia and Galicia the

1. Conflict was initiated by UPA, as massacres of Polish villages

2. The casualties were greatly skewed to the Polish side. Based on the text below we're talking about 40-60k vs. 1-2k in Volhynia and 25-40k vs. 1-2k (by most recent estimates) in Galicia.

3. I still want to emphasize that while occasionally some sources will talk about both "massacres" AND "conflict" or even "civil war", the designation "massacres" is fairly standard in English language sources (particularly those which concentrate on Volhynia).

4. AFAIK - and Lvivske can present sources to the contrary if they're out there - there are no dedicated works which focus on the "Massacres of Ukrainians". Yes, some sources do speak of self defense or even massacres conducted in retaliation, but the discussion is always in the context of a response to "Massacres of Poles". This means the present naming is in agreement with sources.

Furthermore

5. I've already stated that the best solution might be to have a meta-article, called "Polish-Ukrainian conflict (some year)-1947" which would then point the reader to dedicated sub articles. If someone wrote an article on the events of Lublin/Chelm/Zamosc region, then that one I would be fine with being referred to as "Polish-Ukrainian conflict in Eastern Poland" or something (the precise title could be tweaked). Right now I'm still thinking about Galicia. But Volhynia was most definitely "massacres".

6. What makes this difficult is that this "conflict" changed both over time and as it spread westward. It definitely began as mass killings - even genocide - carried out by UPA against Polish civilians in Volhynia. As it moved west to Eastern Galicia it lost some of its genocidal aspect and became more of "just" a ethnic cleansing operation. Additionally, as it moved westward two things happened: 6a) it moved into territories where UPA did not have as much ground and logistical support as Volhynia and 6b) having seen what had happened in Volhynia, the Polish resistance in Eastern Galicia and other regions was better prepared. So gradually, as time went on, the nature of the conflict began changing from that of one sides massacres against Poles into something that *could* actually be called a "civil war". The "civil war" aspect was most true in the territories of present Poland where UPA and AK were more or less evenly matched. But this is precisely the part of the conflict that is NOT part of the present article (and that's actually why I kept bringing it up). And then of course Soviets took over, then Polish communist authorities, and you got Operation Vistula.

VolunteerMarek 19:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

First of all, I would ask you to remove the first sentence in your latest post. I was not the person who started discussing peoples thoughts, that was you ("perhaps not in the way you think."). If you remove that first sentence I will remove this paragraph.

As you are saying that the OUN started it, I was wondering if that was true. It seems that another sentence in the background section appears to not really support that. Here it says that the UPA performed terrorist actions (though not what those actions were, in particular were they against the people or the government) - "... and the ensuing state repressions.[18] Collective punishment meted out to thousands of mostly innocent peasants resulted in exacerbation of animosity between the Polish state and the Ukrainian population.[19]" (which is also not really clear as to what those punishments were).

If it is true that the Polish government was the first to take action against civilians, then it would certainly add weight to a more neutral title. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:32, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't plan on removing anything and I don't particularly care whether you do or not either. In fact, since I already replied to your paragraph, you SHOULDN'T remove otherwise it will confuse the record of the conversation.

As to the "who started it", yes OUN/UPA "started it". Of course everything has a background and a cause and that's why we have those sections. But it is ridiculous to try to justify - or even compare - massacres of thousands of people by UPA to the actions of the interwar government of Poland in Galicia (not Volhynia). And if you don't know what those "punishments" were, perhaps that suggests that you are not sufficiently knowledgeable about the topic to be discussing its neutrality. But here Pacification of Ukrainians in Eastern Galicia (1930), Volhynia Experiment, Henryk Józewski, Ukrainian People's Republic, Ukrainian Insurgent Army, UNDO...

And again, at the end of the day it comes down to sources. Consult'em, provide'em, discuss'em.VolunteerMarek 18:09, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

It's debatable whether it was outright started by the UPA as massacres/killings of Ukrainians by Poles were reported that directly preceded the big 'response' by the UPA. Also, the reason it is considered by Snyder to be civil war (and by others) is that the reason for the massacres was a response to Polish aims to ensure de facto ownership of the territory. The entire conflict was centered on Polish rule vs. Ukrainian independence, and there was a heavy political conflict that preceded everything. Poles were killing Ukrainians in the west, Ukrainians were killing tonnes [albeit a small % of] Poles in the east. I think the genocide claim is total rubbish when you actually look at the big picture; not to mention that they were killing ethnic-Ukrainian Polish-loyalists as well - according to Snyder just as many as Poles - the massacres has an intense political & territorial motivation. PS: How have we gone from up to 20,000 Ukrainians killed in Galicia to "1-2 thousand"???--Львівське (говорити) 18:39, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

It's debatable whether it was outright started by the UPA as massacres/killings of Ukrainians by Poles were reported that directly preceded the big 'response' by the UPA. - that's just not true, though UPA did make that claim as a propaganda excuse. But I've never seen a serious scholar take those at face value.

I think the genocide claim is total rubbish when you actually look at the big picture - for events in present day Poland yes, for Eastern Galicia it's debatable, for Volhynia "genocide" is in the ball park. Several authors do in fact explicitly refer to it (Volhynia) as genocide, usually after a careful consideration. Others are somewhat more skeptical.

How have we gone from up to 20,000 Ukrainians killed in Galicia to "1-2 thousand" - we actually went from 10k to 1-2k and the reason for that is that originally I misread the Snyder source - the 10k number he gives for Eastern Galicia includes Ukrainians killed by Nazis and Soviets.VolunteerMarek 19:16, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

It's not propaganda, there were documented cases of Poles slaughtering Ukrainians immediately prior. It's a chicken/egg scenario.

Who? What authors? And can you really call something genocide if you have to redefine it to only a small geographic territory and qualify it with "here, but only if you don't count the other areas; and only if you don't count all the Ukrainians they killed too, and only if..."

We went from 20k to 10k to 1-2k and I'm not seeing why. And it may be OR to combine, but you were in the small figure for Volhynia camp but the net for vol/gal was 20k - yet now the net is 4k? That's an extreme leap and some cherry picking of figures to get there.--Львівське (говорити) 22:39, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

there were documented cases of Poles slaughtering Ukrainians immediately prior - ok, let's see the reliable sources.

Who? What authors? - Motyka for one. Snyder does too, though only in passing (at least in this source) [13]. Several other authors do it implicitly without stating exactly "this was genocide": [14] [15] (I think Berkhoff does call it genocide directly at one point but it's on a page unavailable for preview - pg 282). Of course I'm leaving out obvious ones like Piotrowski and Terles. I'll also try and get a copy of Marples' book and look through it.

I want to note however that the view that it was genocide is not necessarily my view - I think the question is complicated and at the end of the day irrelevant; calling it different names neither adds nor subtracts from the number of people that were actually murdered.

That's an extreme leap and some cherry picking of figures to get there - I thought I explained it. I mistook Snyder's number which included Ukrainians killed by Nazis and Soviets for the number killed just by Poles. The newer sources also stress that the bulk of the Ukrainian casualties occured not in Galicia but in present-day Poland (Zamosc, Lublin, Chelm). So it's 4k for Volhynia and Galicia, and maybe another 8 to 10k in present day Poland (including during Operation Vistula).

Again, this is why I want that table to be in the article - it succinctly lists all the estimates, so we don't have to keep going through all this over and over again.VolunteerMarek 23:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

VolunteerMarek 23:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Snyder does't call it genocide in that source. Is he referring to the soldiers having experience with German-Jewish genocide before being recruited? Or the Holocaust in Poland in general? He's for sure not calling this conflict genocide. He more than anyone considers it a mutual conflict. That's markedly the opposite of genocide--Львівське (говорити) 00:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Rudling and question of Ukrainian victims

I'm just looking at Rudling source right now and at one point he says Despite statements by senior UPA commanders, such as Taras “Bul’ba” Borovets. Now, of course Taras Bulba-Borovets WAS a commander of UPA, but he was the commander of the ... original, DIFFERENT UPA. And in fact Borovets' UPA fought against Bandera/OUN-B's UPA. And (despite some fringe sources to the contrary) Borovets' UPA opposed, either passively or actively the massacre of Poles in Volhynia which were being carried out by the other, Bandera affiliated, UPA.

Rudling seems confused here.VolunteerMarek 01:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, Rudling is basing this 20k number on Jan Maksymiuk's Radio Free Europe article. He also refers to the AK "nationalist underground partisan movement". Now, it was of course Polish, and sought Polish independence from Nazis, but it wasn't "nationalist", at least not in any way more "nationalist" than say the French Resistance[1]. I checked the archives for this article and can't find any info on who this Maksymiuk is (ec add: he seems to be the "Senior Multimedia Editor" at RFE). It's strange that a journal article would quote a more or less random newspaper article. Especially on which gives a number that is so greatly different with what actual consensus number is (2-3k). Again, this would be as if we included the Terles' 200k number for Poles killed in Volhynia, or the Siemaszko 300-400k number. If we're keeping out the Siemaszko's numbers because they represent outliers, for the same reason we should keep out the Maksymiuk number.VolunteerMarek 02:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't see why they couldn't be described as nationalist. He didn't specify it as ethnic nationalism or really qualify it in any way. I think the parallel to the French works in this case, as I understood it.--Львівське (говорити) 02:03, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

[1] Oh yeah the footnote - this just looks like Rudling being a typical snotty biased chauvinistic Westerner. If French people fight for a free France then they're "freedom fighters", but if Eastern Europeans do the same thing they're being "nationalistic". Ok, that's just my piece of OR right there.VolunteerMarek 02:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay pulling out my essay notes to see what I've got here. I think I fudged the sources on the article recently because it seems to be missing a few....but...

• snyder says deaths in galicia limited to 25k poles
• snyder says as many ukrainians killed by UPA as poles in 1943
• snyder says 50-100k poles and ukrainians combined, 1.5m poles/ukrainians combined displaced persons
• magosci, 20k ukrainians killed "reasonable estimate"
• marples, 12k ukrainians in eastern poland killed, 15-30k total
• jilge, 15-20k ukr dead
• oliner, 15-17k ukr dead by poles
• witt, 15-30k ukr victims
• rudling, 20k ukr killed in volyn by AK
• snyder, 10k ukr killed by AK, nazi, soviet in 1943
• motyka, 2-3 in volyn and 10-20 in all areas (thus, 17-18k in eastern galicia, or EG + eastern poland?)

--Львівське (говорити) 02:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

* snyder says deaths in galicia limited to 25k poles - yes, this sounds right.

* snyder says as many ukrainians killed by UPA as poles in 1943 - where? page? Does not sound right. Maybe, maybe, if he's talking about all Ukrainians killed during this time, including those killed by Soviets and Nazis.

*magosci, 20k ukrainians killed "reasonable estimate" - in Volhynia alone? [Subsequent edit: according to the table above, this refers to "all regions"] - VM.

*marples, 12k ukrainians in eastern poland killed, 15-30k total - is this page 221 of this Marples [16]? I can't see the whole page but he appears to be describing some source not necessarily agreeing with it - I'd like to see the whole text. And he is giving 90k of Poles killed. Also I can only see the 12k killed in Eastern Poland, I can't see the 15-30k total part.

*rudling, 20k ukr killed in volyn by AK - he's just repeating the sketchy Maksymiuk source, as already addressed.

* snyder, 10k ukr killed by AK, nazi, soviet in 1943 - yes, I already referred to that. Note it includes those killed by the Soviets and Nazis.

* motyka, 2-3 in volyn and 10-20 in all areas (thus, 17-18k in eastern galicia, or EG + eastern poland?) - yes, which is also what I already said.

I'll have to look up Jilge, Oliner and Witt, but if those numbers are for "all regions" then they in no way contradict - in fact, support - what I've been saying here.VolunteerMarek 03:03, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll recheck and get back to you on this. I have all the page numbers, just not sure what original quotes I have available. Stick a pin in it.--Львівське (говорити) 03:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Part of the reason why I wanted us to construct that table above is precisely so we can avoid having to go through all this number talk over and over again. I still think we should put it in the article too.VolunteerMarek 03:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Wait. Ok - is the disagreement over the "1,000-2,000 in Eastern Galicia" line in the lede? If so - I just noticed it - then I concur and support with changing that number as that is indeed wrong. I think it was the more accurate 10k to 20k before but somebody on the Polish side monkeyed with it. So I'll fix that one - just please don't try to change the other numbers as they are the accurate ones. Two wrongs don't make a right, they just make it more wrong, and all that.VolunteerMarek 03:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll stay off edits until we get a table together. I could have sworn I posted the list before...or had more in the article at some point? Or maybe I was just holding off until I re-wrote my civil war article I had planned to compliment this one [that focuses on the ukrainian aspect] and just never got around to it. Regardless, I'll see what I can do and try to get all the sources in order.--Львівське (говорити) 03:19, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, sounds good. Like I said, I don't have an objection to a separate article here or actually a meta article that would give an overview and then direct readers to dedicated sub-articles.VolunteerMarek 03:27, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

BTW, the reason why the "20k killed by AK in Volhynia" number is impossible is just simply that there wasn't enough AK in the region to do it. There was no AK in Volhynia when the killings started in Feb 1943 (ok, there might have been like 4 guys in the region who went around calling themselves "The AK" or something, but for all practical purposes, AK didn't exist in Volhynia at the time). The first units were formed or brought in from outside in July 1943, as a response to the massacres. And we're talking at most a thousand or so AK soldiers vs. 200,000 UPA soldiers (if you believe the Germans - but even the lowest numbers are like 50k UPA soldiers). If you got 1k guys who are up against a 200k force, then massacres by the 1k vs. the 200k are not going to happen all that much, especially given how partisan warfare actually worked (various partisan groups physically controlling territory - this wasn't Fallujah where they attack and then run and hide).

Then the 27th Volhynian AK Division was formed, but that wasn't until January 1941, took awhile to get off the ground, and initially could only cover a very small chunk of territory in Volhynia. And even this "division" was only something like 6k-7k soldiers, so still vastly outnumbered by UPA units. Additionally the primary purpose of the 27th was to fight the Germans as part of Operation Tempest - in fact, some of the local commanders were pissed off that they had to fight Germans while UPA was killing Poles. And shortly thereafter, by March 1944, the 27th was engaged/attacked by regular German forces. It didn't have time to carry out that many massacres (though it might have carried out some). In April and May it basically had to fight German units the whole time, being surrounded for most of that period. And then it left Volhynia. And then the Soviets took over and that pretty much put an end to all the Polish-Ukrainian fighting.

Now, like I said, the situation in Galicia was different. Hence there you actually do get higher numbers for Ukrainians killed by Poles.VolunteerMarek 03:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Ruding doesn't put a year on it...and perhaps he's wrong about AK and it ties in with Snyder's assertion that the UPA was killing loads of Ukrainians as well. Just throwing it out there. PS: You're also doing your own low-vs-high bound trick, there weren't 200,000k UPA soldiers fighting in Volyn. That's the peak amount, and by that point they were busy fighting the Soviets/Nazis. Not sure the #s of the UPA-North...--Львівське (говорити) 04:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

there weren't 200,000k UPA soldiers fighting in Volyn. That's the peak amount - that's probably true, but even if there were only 50k it still means quite a skewed soldier ratio. In Volhynia UPA had a very strong advantage. As you moved on to Galicia and then Eastern Poland, that diminished. And as the advantage diminished the casualty ratio changed as well. In Lublin/Chelm/Zamosc, where there were about equal, the casualties were about equal, or even larger for the Ukrainians.VolunteerMarek 04:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

OMG. Guys, you are twisting around. It seems you don't know even last works about this topic (nonetheless you discuss about them and give references). You have to know:

1. Research of these masssacres is quite young discipline as it was not allowed during communism phase in Poland and USSR. It was possible in the West, but the scholars did not have access to East archives, so their knowledge was limited. The research started seriously in late 1980-ties and practically still continues, mostly by Polish side.

2. In the condition of lack of serious research, there circulated a lot of mistakes, wrong theories or even mistifications. They are circulating even today. Presently we are writing an article about it in pl.wikipedia [17]

3. As the research continues, we have more and more updated informations. Some numbers given 5 years ago may be outdated now.

4. There IS NO Western scholar who is an expert of so called Polish-Ukrainian conflict, especially in the statistics of victims number. As you can see, they (Snyder, Himka, Rudling, Rossoliński, Katchanovski etc.) cite other authors when they give number of victims. Consequently, they cite sometimes outdated numbers or even not reliable sources (like Maksymiuk).

5. If you go more deeply in the question of Ukrainian victims, you will see, that little is known. The numbers of tens of thousands Ukrainians killed by AK have no serious base. Polish and Ukrainian historians in the conference "Polska-Ukraina" stated: Obecny stan badań ukraińskich nie pozwala także na dokładne sprecyzowanie liczby ofiar ukraińskich w poszczególnych regionach. Według wstępnych szacunków z rąk polskich w latach 1939-1947, w tym także w operacji "Wisła", zginęły tysiące Ukraińców. Również w historiografii polskiej, jak dotąd, nie podejmowano prób całościowego ustalenia strat ludności ukraińskiej. [in: Polska-Ukraina. Trudne pytania, t.9, Warszawa 2002, p.403]. Ihor Ilyushin writes: Brak oficjalnej informacji o liczbie zabitych Ukraińców można wyjaśnić tylko tym, że na Ukrainie podobnych do polskich badań i obliczeń nikt nigdy nie prowadził. Dopiero w ostatnim czasie, z inicjatywy Wołyńskiego Uniwersytetu Państwowego i Lwowskiego Instytutu Ukrainoznawstwa, rozpoczęły się takie prace. Ale dziś ukraińscy historycy nie są jeszcze niestety gotowi, by przedstawić własne podsumowania. [in: UPA i AK. Konflikt w Zachodniej Ukrainie (1939-1945), Warszawa 2009, p.37].

6. So, 20,000 Ukrainian victims, that created you so much troubles, was outdated estimation given by Motyka. It did not included only Volhynia and Western Galicia but also present eastern Poland (Lubelsczyzna, Rzeszowszczyzna). But Motyka corrected it in his last book: Wiele kontrowersji budzi ocena strat ukraińskich. Przed dziesięciu laty, bodajże jako pierwszy polski historyk, próbowałem je oszacować. Według mojej ówczesnej wiedzy uznałem, że w wyniku polskich działań zginęło 15-20 tysięcy Ukraińców. Dziś, w świetle najnowszych danych, skłonny byłbym liczbę ukraińskich ofiar nieco obniżyć. Z ręki polskiej na Wołyniu zginęło zapewne (nie licząc zabitych przez policję pomocniczą) od 2 do 3 tysięcy Ukraińców. W Galicji Wschodniej zostało zabitych 1-2 tysiące Ukraińców. Zupełnie inaczej wyglądała sytuacja na ziemiach dzisiejszej Polski. Zginęło tam w latach 1943-1947 więcej Ukraińćów niż Polaków, najpewniej 8-10 tysięcy (3-4 tysiące do lata 1944 roku i 5-6 tysięcy w okresie 1944-1947). Ogółem dawałoby to liczbę od 10-11 tysięcy do 15 tysięcy zabitych. Także w tym wypadku podawanie wyższych liczb nie ma żadnego umocowania w badaniach naukowych. Podkreślmy to wyraźnie - spotykane w ukraińskich podręcznikach liczby 30, 50 czy nawet 70 tysięcy zabitych Ukraińców są po prostu wzięte "z sufitu". [in: G.Motyka, Od rzezi wołyńskiej do akcji "Wisła", p.448].

So, please be conform with the most updated sources and do not cite mistakes and mistifications. GlaubePL (talk) 12:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Would you mind translating those (5. & 6.) into English please? I do not speak or read either Ukrainian or Polish. Chaosdruid (talk) 15:39, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Here let me do it.

First one:

"The present state of Ukrainian studies does not make it possible to establish precisely the number of Ukrainian victims in various regions. According to preliminary estimates, during the years 1939-1947, including Operation Vistula, at the hands of Poles died thousands of Ukrainians. Also, in Polish historiography, until recently no attempts have been made to establish the victims among the Ukrainian population. (gives source)

Ihor Ilyushin:

"The lack of official information as to the number of Ukrainians killed can only be explained by the fact that in Ukraine studies and estimates like those carried out by Poles, have never been conducted. Only recently, on the initiative of the Volhynian State University and the Lviv Institute of Ukrainian Studies, has work (on this question - vm) began. However, currently Ukrainian historians are not yet ready to be able to present their own conclusions. (gives source)

Motyka (I have this book, and yes it is probably "the cutting edge" in research on this question.)

"A lot of controversy has been evoked by the question of Ukrainian losses. More than ten years ago, probably as the first Polish historian to do so, I tried to estimates these. According to the state of knowledge I possessed at the time I estimated that as a result of Polish actions, 15-20 thousand Ukrainians died. Today, in light of most recent studies, I would be inclined to lower this number somewhat. In Volhynia, most likely 2 to 3 thousand died (not counting those killed by the auxiliary police) by Polish hands. In Eastern Galicia 1 to 2 Ukrainians were killed (by Poles - vm). The situation was completely different on the territories of present day Poland. The number of Ukrainians killed there between 1943-1943, was greater than the number of Poles, most likely 8 to 10 thousand (3 to 4 thousand up until summer 1944, and 5 to 6 thousand in the period 1944-1947). In total that would give a number of 10-11 thousand to 15 thousand killed. Also in this case (he's referring to previous para - vm) the reporting of higher numbers has no basis in scientific scholarship. I wish to underline this explicitly - numbers encountered in some Ukrainian textbooks of 30, 50 or even 70 thousand killed Ukrainians are simply pulled out of thin air ("from the ceiling" - vm).

So basically Motyka has lowered his estimate for Eastern Galicia, and slightly lowered the overall number, from 20k to "10-11k to 15k". Again, this is for "all the regions combined", with the bulk of the deaths occurring in modern-day Poland - Lublin, Chelm and Zamosc regions (the last one was a bit more complicated too as it happened alongside the Zamosc Expulsions by the Germans) and Operation Vistula. For Volhynia and Eastern Galicia (and especially for the first one) the "conflict" was very much one sided - a massacre.

VolunteerMarek 19:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

That is why we have in pl.wiki 3 articles: pl:Rzeź wołyńska, pl:Czystka etniczna w Małopolsce Wschodniej (it's about Galicia) and pl:Partyzanckie walki polsko-ukraińskie w latach 1944-1945. GlaubePL (talk) 08:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Malopolska Wschodnia is different then Eastern Galicia, no? The problem though, is that the other two articles would have to get written.VolunteerMarek 09:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Małopolska Wschodnia is greater, but it this case it is rather question of semantics. GlaubePL (talk) 10:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Genocide question

Do any serious scholars make an opinion on these claims either way? All I've seen is Katchanovski refuse it.--Львівське (говорити) 22:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I've mentioned some above, though it's true that it's mostly Polish scholars (including some "serious" ones) that refer to it as such. Western writers tend to refer to it as a genocide in passing - as in talking about 'genocidal actions of the UPA' and similar phrasing.VolunteerMarek 23:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Is the latter not similar to the "with marks of genocide" comment? [cited in the article]. That is, it was genocidal in character, but not by actual definition?--Львівське (говорити) 00:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think it's about the same. So for example, I don't think the word "genocide" should be mentioned in the lede. But there is some place in the article where it should be considered.VolunteerMarek 00:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

But it's not the same, the word genocide can be used simply because it's emotive. But to call the events genocide in the true sense of the word...this is a case of strong claims require strong sources.--Львівське (говорити) 02:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Read the article Genocides in history, you can find there many examples genocides similar to genocide made by OUN and UPA. Read the genocide definition Genocide - there is no doubt that in Volhynia and Easter Lessern Poland Poles where killed only for being Pole. OUN were trying to destroy all Polish nation at the territory of 4 Voivodeships. We have Polish Sejm resolution, IPN judgment, and e.g. Motyka statemant about genocide.--Paweł5586 (talk) 07:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

No nations recognize it as genocide, just this one commission, which alleges it has "marks of genocide", not genocide itself. Furthermore, it was a mutually exhaustive conflict wherein Poles were killing Ukrainians en masse, and later we have Vistula; and Ukrainians were killing Ukrainians for the same reason they were killing Poles, often documented in equal numbers. Genocide is a very specific thing.--Львівське (говорити) 08:25, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I actually agree with Lvivske here - there isn't enough support in the sources to label this as a genocide. And 'aspects of genocide' is not quite the same as "genocide" itself. On the other hand, notably, it seems Motyka has come around to view the Volhynian part as genocide (before he disagreed with that view, IIRC). Still, this is something that can be explained in a neutral way in article text without committing to Wikipedia voice.VolunteerMarek 20:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I find myself agreeing with Lvivske and Marek. Let's remember it was the Hitler-Stalin tag team who started it all. Who killed who was (ultimately, if you follow the politics) based more on who was identified with which "side" by whom. When everyone is reduced to being someone's collaborator--whether through opportunism or the basic need for survival--civilization takes a back seat. Just as in some of the Lithuanian-Polish wartime conflicts, it serves no purpose to spin events as being anything other than tragic. (I won't even go into Vilnius being "given" to Lithuania by Lenin and later by Hitler, what a mess that was.) VєсrumЬа ►TALK 20:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

All Polish historiography calls it genocide - see for example Motyka and Hryciuk, not mentioning Kresy-historians. "One commission" mentioned by Lvivskie is Polish Head Commission for investigations of war crimes and it is the body competent to apply juridical qualification. GlaubePL (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Table again - let's finish it

Here is the current version (3/2/2012):

= Historian

= Poli Sci

= Research

Estimates of casualties, Poles killed by Ukrainians

	In Volhynia	In Galicia	In Volhynia and Galicia	In all areas affected by conflict	Source	Notes
Timothy D. Snyder	50k	-	-	-	In Past and Present
"" ""	>40k in July '43	10k in March '44	-	-	Memory and Power, 2002
"" ""	40-60k in '43	25k	-	+5k killed in Lublin and Rzeszów	The Reconstruction of Nations, 2004	Killed by UPA
Grzegorz Motyka	40-60k	-	-	80-100k ('43 - '47)	W kręgu Łun w Bieszczadach, 2009
"" ""	40-60k	30-40k	-	100k	Od rzezi wołyńskiej do akcji "Wisła", 2011
Ivan Katchanovski	35-60k	-	-	-	Terrorists or National Heroes? Politics of the OUN and the UPA in Ukraine	Katchanovski considers the lower bound 35k to be more likely; cited Snyder, Hrytsiuk
Grzegorz Hrytsiuk	35-60k	?	?	?	“Vtraty naselennia na Volyni u 1941-1944rr.” Ukraina-Polshcha: Vazhki Pytannia, Vol. 5. Warsaw: Tyrsa, 2001	Cited by Katchanovski
P.R. Magocsi	-	-	-	50k	Magocsi; A History of Ukraine, p 681	“among the more reasonable estimates"
Niall Fergusson	-	-	60-80k	-	The war of the world, 2007	Fergusson is citing other authors (which ones?)
John Paul Himka	-	-	100k	-	Interventions: Challenging the Myths of Twentieth-Century Ukrainian history, 2001
Anders Rudling	40-70k	-	-	+7k in Poland	Theory and Practice, 2006	Problems with Rudling noted below
Rossolinki-Liebe	-	-	70-100k	-	The Ukrainian national revolution, Celebrating Fascism...	I'm having trouble finding the actual source - it may be referred to here.
Ewa Siemaszko	60k	70k	130k	133k	Bilans zbrodni [18]
Marek Jasiak	-	-	-	60-70k	Redrawing Nations, p174	"In Podole, Volhynia, and Lublin"
Terles	50k	60-70k	-	100-200k	In Ethnic Cleansing p61
Karta	35k	28.8k	70.3*	6.5k in PL	here	Kalishchuk, chart on research cell Karta

Estimates of casualties, Ukrainians killed by Poles

	In Volhynia	In Galicia	In all areas affected by conflict	Source	Notes
Grzegorz Motyka	2-3k	-	10-20k		The number for total includes those killed in Volhynia, Galicia, Lublin and Rzeszow regions in '44/'45 as well as during Operation Wisla
"" ""	2-3k	1-2k	10-15k	Od rzezi wołyńskiej do akcji "Wisła", 2011	(8-10k killed in present borders of Poland)
"" ""	8.3k~	~8.3k	10-12k in poland, 15-20k net	"Polish reaction to the actions of the UPA: the scope and course of punitive" p28 2003	Cited by Kalishchuk; period 1943-1948
P.A. Rudling	20k	-	+11k killed "in Poland"	in "Historical Representation of the Wartime Accounts of the Activities of the OUN..."	Cites Maksymiuk “Ukraine, Poland Seek Reconciliation Over Grisly History.”
P. R. Magocsi	-	-	20k	Magocsi; A History of Ukraine, p 681	“among the more reasonable estimates"
T. Snyder	10k	-	-	Past and Present	"Over the course of 1943, perhabs ten thousand Ukrainian civilians were killed by Polish self-defence units, Soviet partisans, Nazi policemen".
"" ""	-	-	+5k killed in Lublin and Rzeszów	The reconstruction of nations
Rossolinski-Liebe	-	-	10-20k	Celebrating Fascism...	both UPA members and civilians, during and after the war
Katarina Wolczuk	-	-	15-30k		UK scholar
Marples	-	-	15-30k	In Marples, Heroes..., pg 222	Cites Wolczuk^
Katrina Witt	-	-	15-30k	Ukrainian Memory and Victimhood, p101	Cited Marples, who cites Wolczuk^
Karta	-	-	Says unknown in others, 7.5k in SE Poland	here	Kalishchuk, chart on research cell Karta
Zashkilniak L. and M. Krykun	-	-	35k	Zashkilniak L., M. Krykun History of Poland: from ancient times to the present day / L. Over- Shkilnyak - Lviv, 2002. - p. 527	Cited by Kalishchuk
Alexander Gogun	10k	-	-	link	Historian @ Postdam, Research fellow @ Harvard

Chart Discussion

Here are some thoughts:

1. Per Faustian comments above I think the numbers from Rossolinski-Liebe should not be included, as they are just mentioned in passing.
2. I would also exclude Rudling per my comments above, as he's just repeating non-scholarly sources and appears to be confused about some basic issues.
3. I would either exclude the Siemaszko number or somehow put it in a separate category of "other numbers", maybe with Rudling and Rossolinski-Liebe. With Siemaszko the advantage is that the estimates were actually carried out directly (aside from Motyka I don't think anyone else in the table did their own estimation based on archival documents). The disadvantage is that while the Siemaszkos did a lot of very good work gathering records and documents, they drew what is thought to be some very strong conclusions from them - i.e. very high numbers.
4. It would be nice to differentiate between sources where the author carried out their own study based on primary sources (i.e. "estimates") from numbers which come from an author which has not done the documentary research himself but who is obviously familiar with this research (i.e. "estimates by others that reliable sources find plausible" - this would be Snyder, maybe Magosci and Katchanovski) from numbers which is just an author who generally speaking is not familiar with the topic area and is just repeating the first number that he saw in some book (Fergusson, Rudling maybe Himka).

Additionally, another two "tools" that the article could use is a timeline and some maps. We keep arguing about what happened where and how many people were killed in what region. Part of that results from the fact that several regions were affected at different times and it is a bit of a pain to constantly keep track of it all.

In regards to the maps, it'd be nice something that shows for readers where Volhynia is, where Eastern Galicia is, and where Lublin/Chelm/Zamosc is. This will also show how the overall conflict spread through time.

In regards to the timeline, I think I can do some work on that. For the purposes of this article I see February 1943 as the beginning of the massacres in Volhynia, which I think is a reasonable starting point. Where to end it though? Go all the way to Operation Vistula just to make sure to include it all? Thoughts?

VolunteerMarek 00:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The timeline should simply run to the end of the war. Anything else risks opining who got in the last shot in the Hatfield–McCoy feud. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 20:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I would also lean to Magocsi as the best representation, the lead should mention the total death toll on both sides (i.e., the totality of which this article is a part). Also, the background section only has one sentence on the competing claims which laid the foundation for the feud, there needs to be less of the rest and more on the actual basis of the conflict and how it came about. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 20:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

We should follow the sources. Many sources (like Motyka) tell about period 1939-1947. Or we limit it only to ethnic cleansings and then we can talk about 1943-1947 (I would prefer 1043-1945). GlaubePL (talk) 20:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm of the belief, as I've stated already, that this article should focus on the years and actions of the ethnic cleansing campaign as stated in the lede, and a larger article should focus on the full scale of conflict that preceded and followed. For the purpose of this article, 1939 would be going too far back.--Львівське (говорити) 21:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but you cannot play with sources like you did above. Snyder, Katchanovski - OK; Rudling, Himka, Rossoliński - not OK. What's the difference?! They all are scholars who research history of Polish-Ukrainian borderlands, but they all don't count the Polish victims. You reject the only person (maybe apart Motyka) who does it - namely Ewa Siemaszko. Rudling, Himka and Rossoliński cite her works, all of them are professionsl historians. Himka is a professor of history, Rudling is PhD. The latter improved much more, he does not cite Maksymiuk in the last works. GlaubePL (talk) 20:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

@Vecrumba: In the interest of neutrality I think the timeline should go up to Operation Vistula. We could also have a "pre-1943" or a "1939-1943" entry in the timeline which just succinctly starts it of. @GlaubePL: Rudling, aside from making some basic mistakes in his paper, has a PhD in Public Policy and works in a Department of Political Science, not History. Up above, there were objections to including Piotrowski because he was a "Sociologist of history" rather than a historian. Same logic should apply to Rudling. I have not seen Rudling's latest work - do you have a link or a citation?

For Liebe-Rossolinski it's more of the fact that the source is actually NOT about the massacres/ethnic cleansing, only tangential to it. And he gives the figure in passing. I'm not sure about Himka - aside from the source given does he have other works on the subject?

Siemaszko - according to Motyka, while the Siemaszkos did great work of gathering documents and sources, the conclusions they drew from these were a little far fetched. (I've seem to misplaced my copy of the Motyka book "Od Rzezi...". I know it's either somewhere at home or at the office but I can't locate it for the life of me. I'm sure it will turn up soon). I guess we could include the Siemaszko number but note in the Notes section the objections to it that have been raised.VolunteerMarek 21:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Not only to Motyka. See my article in pl.wiki and citations in it: pl:Ludobójstwo dokonane przez nacjonalistów ukraińskich na ludności polskiej Wołynia 1939-1945 GlaubePL (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I think Piotrowski isn't the best for raw figures, he comes across as a bit biased, but his work on the subject offers a wide array of sources, accounts, and facts that would be instrumental to this article. Himka...I don't like him; he's an anti-UPA/Ukrainian POV pusher. I've found a lot of contradictions on his writings on Ukrainian-Jewish relations. He presents some good facts, without a doubt, but I wouldn't cite the conclusions he draws without scrutinizing them. (I digress, use him with caution, but he's usable)--Львівське (говорити) 21:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Rudling is a historian and he works in the Department of History: [19]. You probably mistaken him with Katchanovski, who is a political scientist. GlaubePL (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Correct--Львівське (говорити) 21:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Last work of Rudling: [20] GlaubePL (talk) 21:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

In which he says 88,700 Polish victims and cites "According to the most extensive study of the OUN-UPA’s anti-Polish campaign, the number of Polish victims reach 130,800 when including the victims whose names could not be established. Ewa Siemaszko, “Bilans Zbrodni,” Biuletyn instytutu pami#ci narodowej, no. 7–8 (116–117) (July–August 2010): 93."--Львівське (говорити) 21:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

You're right, I did confuse him with Katchanovski there. So my comments apply to Katchanovski not Rudling. And thanks for the link.21:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

For the record, Katchanovski is citing both Snyder and Hrytsiuk, the latter work is: Hrytsiuk, Grzegorz. “Vtraty naselennia na Volyni u 1941-1944rr.” Ukraina-Polshcha: Vazhki Pytannia, Vol. 5. Warsaw: Tyrsa, 2001: 249-70. --Львівське (говорити) 04:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I think we should differentiate when speaking between Western and Polish sources, rather than doing some OR and choosing what should win, or combining the two. With the Holodomor, for example, we differentiate between western, ukrainian, and soviet sources.--Львівське (говорити) 22:23, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The thing is that the reliable Western sources are essentially based on Motyka, a Polish source, or in some cases on Siemaszko, another Polish source. This partly reflects - as stated above - that most of the primary research on this topic has been carried out by Polish historians. So I don't see a reason to differentiate between "Polish sources" which say one thing, and "Western sources" which pretty much repeat what the Polish sources say, although with some time lag (for example, Snyder is based on Motyka's work from a few years back).VolunteerMarek 00:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Then we need to group who is basing their numbers on whom, and in the case of Motyka, accurately account for how he came up with his figures. I think we provide more backstory to him in the article itself if he is in fact a source for western scholars (kind of like a Robert Conquest for the Holodomor article). We should add these connections to the table for the time being in the notes section, a long with the year of publishing.--Львівське (говорити) 01:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I think we already have that to some extent. Snyder is basing his statements on Motyka. Some of the others are relying on Siemaszko. I don't know off hand whom Magosci is basing himself on. Some of the others (Rudling) are basing themselves on the Maksyumiuk article and who knows where he pulled his numbers out of. At the end of the day, as far as actual estimates are concerned it boils down to either Siemaszko or Motyka.VolunteerMarek 02:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I still think it would help to keep a note of it. Quickly looking at Reconstructing, Snyder cites Hryciuk a lot for figures for Ukrainian deaths. Also using Dzieje Konfliktów and Ryszard Kotarba--Львівське (говорити) 04:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Does really Magocsi write about number of Volhynian massacres' victims? In google.books there is nothing in page 681: [21] GlaubePL (talk) 21:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

He does, I even provided the quote itself. I believe I referenced the 2nd Edition he releases in 2010, though. (so the page numbers would be different)--Львівське (говорити) 22:08, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Grzegorz Hrytsiuk

Based on his PL wiki page alone, he seems like a huge source for this topic and someone we should track down. The article states ". Przemiany narodowościowe i ludnościowe w Galicji Wschodniej i na Wołyniu w latach 1931–1948" is a highly regarded book on the topic.

Katchanovski cites Hrytsiuk _{“Vtraty naselennia na Volyni u 1941-1944rr.” Ukraina-Polshcha: Vazhki Pytannia, Vol. 5. Warsaw: Tyrsa, 2001}. I ran a Google for it and nothing, so I tried it in Ukrainian (Втрати населення на Волині в 1941–1947 pp.) and found this by Stepan Makarchuk (Source: Ukraine - Poland: difficult questions. T. 5. - Warsaw, 1999). So same Name (different years), same journal, volume; 1999 instead of 2001.

"Polish memoirists and historians have not always agreed with some information about the Polish population of Volhynia in 1939, 1941 and 1944 pp. Unfortunately, Ukrainian historians have studied the above questions is not enough. Publicists are referred to the Polish researchers Czeslaw Madaychyka, Edward Prus, and others. Yes Basil Yevtushenko repeated by C. Madaychykom that OUN members killed almost 40 thousand Poles 37" He also provides a nice list of massacre sites of Ukrainians by Poles, which isn't something we normally find in our sources de jour. (ref 37 = A. Yevtushenko, Banderovschyna [in:] "Thank Rodynы" (newspaper Prykarpatskoho voennoho vicinity), 1990, March 17.) "Many acts of commissions are lists of victims by nationality, but does not state on whose hands they suffered death, often are "people shot by the German invaders and their accomplices." Since information about the killers of civilians remained in the acts of a few areas, like the mention of nationality is also executed in rare cases, the output even approximate the number of deceased Ukrainian population due to the Polish-Ukrainian armed struggle seems impossible." Also says 50k Poles in Volhynia (based on post-German population numbers, so 50k gone, not specifically UPA, some could have fled, some from nazis or soviets, etc. 50k Poles died in Volhynia during German occupation) and 120k Ukrainians (again, not pinning it on anyone, just from the war in general)--Львівське (говорити) 06:45, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Need help translating this from the Kalischuk article, "яких 35 700–60 тис. – жертви українських нападів" (Hryciuk G. Przemiany narodowościowe i ludnościowe w Galicji Wschodniej i na Wołyniu w latach 1931-1948 / G. Hryciuk. - Toruń, 2005. - S. 279.)--Львівське (говорити) 07:17, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Kalishchuk

I just want to recommend everyone involved in the # fact checking to check out the Kalishchuk article PDF. It's in Ukrainian, but Google Translate is sufficient. She provides probably the best recounting of literally every source out there. Most notable is the Karta Research Cell findings presented in a table. As a whole though, she cites everyone we've got in the table and then some, and if we comb through this I think we'll exhaust the chart and have everyone covered.--Львівське (говорити) 17:01, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a link?Faustian (talk) 21:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Magocsi

UPDATE: Ends up I got the Magocsi 'A Historyf of Ukraine and its Peoples' (2nd edition) in the mail today and nobody decided to tell me. I have it now, what should I be double checking? For what I'm reading now: He doesn't state just Volhynia, his 50 figure refers to the entire conflict. He offers no direct citation, but has a large Further Reading section. He suggests Snyder "The Causes of..." and Reconstruction of Nations; Terles, Piotrowski, Lotnik/Preece, Dzemianczuk, and then Piotrowski again for a 3rd time (highly recommends Genocide and Rescue as the best work in the genre.--Львівське (говорити) 04:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

An excellent source, Magocsi's credentials are impeccable, just ordered my own copy.(I have other works of Magocsi.) VєсrumЬа ►TALK 21:04, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding alleged mass killings of Ukrainians in Chelm region in 1942, Magocsi resonates unfounded claims of Ukrainian historians. Motyka in his last book closed this topic: Unfortunatelly Ukrainian historians never attempted to prove this hypothesis, limiting themself to vague statements about thousands of dead Ukrainians and Polish atrocities. ("Od rzezi...", Warsaw 2011, p.284). Motyka and other Polish historians (Cz.Partacz, K. Lada, W. Filar) claim that in 1942 the Polish underground killed in Chelm region around 30 Ukrainians ("Od rzezi...", p.285) A document of Ukrainian Aid Commitee prove it. The myth of the beginning of mass killings in the Chelm region in 1942 by the Poles is the result of the propaganda of the OUN-B, which after starting the massacres in Volyn and Galicia (1943-1944) falsely announced that Poles began the mass murders in 1942. ("Od rzezi...", p 290-292, Partacz, Działalność nacjonalistów ukraińskich w Ziemi Chełmskiej i na Podlasiu 1939-1944 [in:] Stosunki polsko-ukraińskie w latach 1939-2004, Warsaw 2004, pp.65, 90)

This shows that Magocsi is not a reliable source on this topic.GlaubePL (talk) 21:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Magocsi's Historical Atlas of Central Europe, for example, has been hailed as the seminal work in the field. So you cannot simply discount him as impaired. Have you read the suggested sources before just dismissing him? If this article is going to get out of the Poles said/Ukrainians said morass which has you all shouting at each other dissing each others' sources, you'll need to create a narrative which includes all reputable sources. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 02:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I am not dismissing whole Magocsi's book, but the half page of his "History of Ukraine". It seems you don't understand. I provided you a source - G.Motyka - who is an author of monographs about so called Polish-Ukrainian conflict, and he dismisses the issue of alleged mass killings in Chelm-region in 1942. Motyka dedicated to "Polish-Ukrainian conflict" in 1939-1947 thousands pages; how many Magocsi did? Presumably a half page, without any footnotes. It clearly resonates historical disinformation of OUN-B. This issue has to be rewritten, in this moment is POV. GlaubePL (talk) 09:43, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. Figure out how to include what Magocsi writes about the conflict, not how to exclude it. If this article narrative is ever to succeed, it won't be by leaving out sources. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 22:56, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Vecrumba. Wikipedia reports what is written in reliable sources. One can include what Magocsi wrote, and then follow that with what Motyka found. There ought to be no synthesis implying that Magocsi is wrong, simply include all the information. Write what Magocsi wrote, and then write that accoriding to Polish historians the number of Ukrainians murdered in Chelm in 1942 was approximately 30 but the OUN-B magnified this considerably in order to justify their massacres etc. etc., or something like that (I'm not familiar with what the Polish sources wrote).Faustian (talk) 21:45, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

"In all areas affected by conflict" - need to differentiate between:

• the whole of Poland and whole of Ukraine during the whole of initial conflicts and World War II
• Volhynia and eastern Galicia during a specific period.

At the moment that column title means all Ukrainian casualties before, during WWII, and afterwards. Chaosdruid (talk) 16:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Protection needed?

It seems to me that both User:Lvivske and User:GlaubePL have broken the WP:1RR restriction on this article (this needs double-checking to be sure). One option is to block both of them; another option is a period of full protection. Please comment if you have a recommendation of how to deal with this. The talk discussion is going fairly well but L. and G. are not waiting for it to reach a conclusion. EdJohnston (talk) 22:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm willing to just step away...but not all the revs are related to the ongoing discussion. For instance, I checked the source on a statement in the lede (the source said "from social and economic spheres") and I was immediately reverted back...and now I removed an unsourced photo and was immediately reverted again, and called for "denial"??

I think we should have a super-neutral lede [with regards to figures] until we reach consensus on that front to avoid fighting.--Львівське (говорити) 22:21, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Let's not block anyone. Yet. Both users are participating in talk page discussion and the 1RR restriction was placed some time ago so it's very possible that 1RR was broken simply because people forgot/were not aware of it. At this point, a reminder (which is what this is) is sufficient. Also, I don't think protection is yet needed though that may become the case.

I would like to remind the participants that "he who wins" is not "he who reverts the most" but "he who reverts last". And reverting last means "convincing others that their view is supported by sources" and establishing consensus.VolunteerMarek 00:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Unattributed exhumation photo

There is an image on the page with the caption "The mass grave discovered during the second exhumation in Wola Ostrowiecka (August 2011)". Can we confirm that this image is related to this article? The File Page says nothing of it, and inserting a random or unattributed exhumation in this article is WP:SYN (ie. murders happened in volyn, this image is of murders in volyn, therefore it must be from this event). For all we know it could be Nazi or NKVD victims--Львівське (говорити) 23:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The photo should have a secondary source or else, as far as Wikipedia (but not commons) is concerned it falls under OR. Having said that I doubt that the photo is inauthentic. There are other photos out there of the same exhumation which show the same thing in even more grisly detail. Problem is those other photos are probably copyrighted - in the Wola Ostrowiecka massacre they could probably be used under fair use though, but probably not here. Otherwise, if this photo was published by IPN at some point maybe we could use it.VolunteerMarek 02:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

This is a photo that I received from Polish historian Leon Popek (working in IPN) who participated in the exhumation. Leon Popek granted his permition for Commons and I uploaded this picture. How can I give you the source???? The cource is Leon Popek and Wikimedia Commons! GlaubePL (talk) 06:02, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Has the photo been published anywhere? Like in an IPN report or anything?VolunteerMarek 06:08, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if this photo exactly, but I saw similar photos somewhere in internet. GlaubePL (talk) 06:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I looked for it, but the only hit is to the Wiki commons version. There is another photo from 1992 or so of Popek and exhumed bodies from an earlier exhumation.

Here's the thing. I don't doubt the authenticity of this photo. But just like article text needs to be based on secondary sources or else it's OR, so do the images that we use. Unless a particular image is completely non-controversial, we should stick to public-domain images that have been published and verified by secondary sources. Yes I know that this makes it very hard to include images - usually images published in secondary sources are going to be copyrighted, hence not in PD. The unpublished images might be PD but they're not based on secondary sources. So you get stuck between the Scylla and Hybridis of PD and OR. But sticking to the policy is the only way to keep this honest. I've seen way too many sketchy images used to push POV (and which are still used to push POV) and I've objected to them there, hence to be consistent I have to object here.

Keep in mind though that non-PD images can be used under fair-use. Here is the google image search for related images [22]. Some of these illustrate the same thing as the image that is being currently fought over, but they have been published in secondary sources. They may not be PD but they could be used here under fair use.VolunteerMarek 08:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

In this way we can reject half of Wikimedia Commons. It's bizarre. Known Polish historian (his last book about the massacre in Ostrówki and Wola Ostrowiecka was "historical book of the year" in Poland) grants his photo for Wikimedia, Wikimedia has his e-mail with permition and... it is disputed. GlaubePL (talk) 21:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

If Wikipedia has his email with permission then that should be enough.VolunteerMarek 22:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

PS, believe me, we *should* reject *more than* half of Wikimedia Commons. Something more like 80-90%.

Picture of the same place from Leon Popek: [23] Visible table with name "Wola Ostr." Any questions? GlaubePL (talk) 21:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

That seems sufficient to me.VolunteerMarek 23:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Denial

I think everybody in this forum, including administration, should read Per Rudling's piece "The OUN, The UPA and the Holocaust" which is about Ukrainian nationalists war crimes' denial (already linked): [24]. Let me cite:

Denial of the fascist and anti-Semitic nature of the OUN, its war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and participation in the Holocaust have become central components of the intellectual history of the Ukrainian diaspora

(page20)

the narrative of denial and myth making around the OUN-UPA is now again mostly the preserve of the extreme right in the diaspora and Ukraine proper.

(page 38)

Additionally, for Polish reading people, examples how this denial looks in practise: [25] (article how Ukrainian nationalists denied crimes in Ostrówki and Wola Ostrowiecka). I think Wikipedia administration should understand that every massive crime has it's deniers and Volhynian slaughter is not an exception. GlaubePL (talk) 22:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider Nasz Dziennik as a reliable source, although the factual info in that article is probably correct - one way to see the potential "bias" is to note that the way ND writes up the exhumation and burial of the victims is by focusing on the denial aspect of it by *some* Ukrainian organizations while not paying much attention to the fact that this reburial was supported and green lit by Ukrainian authorities themselves (mówił ks. bp Marcjan Trofimiak, ordynariusz łucki, dziękując ukraińskim władzom za umożliwienie godnego pochówku ). It's a bit like the Zawadka Morochowska thing brought up by Bandurist up above - the source is unreliable, but the basic info is probably true enough.

Along similar lines, there's a part in Motyka's "Od Rzezi..." where he talks about how the monument to the Poles killed in a particular massacres by UPA (Parosle? or maybe one of these two) was actually upkept and taken care off through out the post war period by a local Ukrainian farmer.

With regard to Rudling, we should make up our minds - either include him through out, including his casualty estimates (possibly noting some problems), and his statement about this denialism, or exclude him. I think if we go by strict interpretation of NPOV and RS policy, that would suggest inclusion.VolunteerMarek 23:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

GaubePL, is this in relation to you accusing me of "denial" when I removed the pic? Because that was, and still is, a huge accusation to make to another editor.--Львівське (говорити) 02:29, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I would prefer you to explain this edition: [26] You wrote that the OUN-B goal, specified at the Second Conference of the OUN-B, was to remove non-Ukrainians from the social and economic spheres of a future Ukrainian state. But the source (Gibney's "Immigration...") referenced in the article says:

Simultaneously, steps were undertaken to eliminate "foreign elements" in Ukraine. OUN-B posters and leaflets incited the Ukrainian population to murder Poles and "Judeo-Muscovites". Since the majority of Jews in German-occuppied Ukraine had already perished at the hands of the Nazis, the OUN-B concentrated its assault on Poles. In February 1943 ,taking into account the possibility of Germany's defeat, the Third Conference of the OUN-B finalized its plans. Fearing that the Polish-Ukrainian conflict would compel Poles to gravitate toward an alliance with Soviet power-base in Western Ukraine, the OUN-B leadership also reasoned that the victorious Allies, who would determine the postwar border settlements, would be forced to recognize ethnically homogenous Ukrainian lands as a fait acompli. In the late winter and early spring of 1943 , the assault on Polish settlements began. Backed by peasant self-defence units, the OUN-B detachments attacked Polish villages at night or in the early morning, butchering all inhabitants regardless age or sex.

So the source clearly states, that the 3rd Conference decided to murder Poles, but you misquoted that it just wanted to remove them from social and economic spheres. It makes a difference! GlaubePL (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop misrepresenting the source. You are citing page 204, which clearly says social/economic spheres; and posting an unrelated quote from page 205. I fixed the quote, you reverted and added extra info from page 205. I then fixed the quote again, and added a summary on the leaflets info you above posted. This should be clear as day to anyone who is actually reading the information--Львівське (говорити) 01:10, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Another Lvivskie's edition: [27]. The number of Polish victims in Galicia according to Snyder decreased from 25k to 20k while Snyder writes about 25k. Ukrainian casualties "in the region" Lvivskie stated as high as 2k-20k while cited source (Motyka "Od rzezi...") dismisses the number of 20k! (acc. to Motyka it was 10-15k). Besides, "the region" was not only Volhynia and Galicia, but also Lublin district. So, these editions had nothing to do with WER rules. GlaubePL (talk) 18:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Next Lvivskie's edition: [28]. The source says about 50-60,000 victims in Volhynia, Lwivskie wrote: 35,000. GlaubePL (talk) 20:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

You are fully aware of the chart and where those figures come from. Please stop trolling for ref errors.--Львівське (говорити) 01:10, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

In terms of the figure in the lede and the infobox - what exactly is the objection here? The present figures reflect what sources say. The only alternative I see is changing them to the figures of Siemaszko (casualties of up to 140,000 Poles killed) which is the number given in some Western sources like Rudling. There is the Katchanovski number of "more than 35,000", but 1) Katchanovski is a public policy guy not a historian, 2) it's not clear what he's basing this on and 3) "more than 35,000" is very much consistent with the 40,000-60,000 for Volhynia given by other sources, 4) his numbers are for Volhynia alone.

So please, leave the numbers alone.VolunteerMarek 01:44, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Well I had no idea that you decided Katchanovski wasn't a good enough source for you, even though he cites Hrytsiuk, who seems to be up there with Motyka as a reference figure. Also flies against Magocsi. Not to mention you've put in the low-ball figures for Ukrainians killed using only the one source you like, and qualified it with the "also including Vistula" remark even though no other source out there says it. Yeah, we have a dispute here. You're cherry picking. And why do you keep bringing up Siemaszko in the sense of "if we use the higher bound Ukrainian numbers, then we should use the EXTRMELY OFF THE WALL Polish numbers". You're comparing 10k with 100k as if 'higher = higher'--Львівське (говорити) 02:13, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I already addressed Katchanovski above:

1. He is not a historian, unlike some of the other sources. This was the same objection as that raised in regard to Piotrowski above (who's a "sociologist of history"). Consistency requires that we apply the same standard.

2. His "more than 35,000" is not inconsistent with other, more numerous, more precise sources, by actual historians.

3. The "more than 35,000" is a number for ONLY Volhynia and does not include the Eastern Galicia figure. We've been through this - we cannot use numbers for a sub-region on one hand and numbers for numerous other regions, over a greater period of time on the other hand.

4. It's not clear what he is basing his numbers on.

Also, I don't know why you bring up Magosci. His number of 20k Ukrainians killed is based on Motyka's old number, which Motyka lowered and it's implicitly included in the article.

You also just changed 15,000 (which is the most up to date estimate) to ... 30,000. [29] How? If you keep bringing up Magosci, then at least use his number of 20k.

You removed the part of about Operation Vistula, [30] but that is explicitly in the source. The 10-15k, or the 20k number does include those killed after the war by the communist authorities.

You changed 3k to 20k even though 20k is not in any reliable sources, with all of them talking about 2 to 3 k.

You changed the lower bound of 70k, clearly supported by sources to 50k [31], supposedly based on Magosci. The page given is 621. There's nothing on 621 about this (it's about Crimean Tartars). If even the text is supported by the source here then ... well, yes, it does look like Magosci is in the minority here - though my guess is that he's simply talking about Polish casualties in Volhynia.

Finally, you just violated the 1RR restriction of this article, of which you are well aware. Please self revert.VolunteerMarek 02:33, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

If Motyka is claiming Vistula counts now, then that contradicts other scholars and should be stated separately. Vistula itself has its own range of deaths from different scholars. Mag says 50, Wolczuk says 60, why not just state the lower bound for what it is rather than rely SOLELY on Motyka like you're doing here? It's really a problem when all sources talk about 43-44, or 43-47, and now Motyk is including figures from 48-49; the source I'm looking at now says 12k killed by Poles in eastern Poland in 1948-49. --Львівське (говорити) 03:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

?? Several of your statements are confusing. Sure Vistula has its own range, and Motyka has gone ahead and included it with the other numbers, giving 10 to 15k total. What is this Wolczuk source? Where can I access it? Part of the problem is that pretty much any source BUT Magosci is giving numbers which are at least 60k - the discrepancy probably arises from the fact that Magosci is talking just about deaths in Volhynia but does not make it explicitly clear. And, umm, Operation Vistula WAS 1947, so it's within the 43-47 range, so Motyka is NOT including figures from 48-49. What is this source that you're looking at right now - I can't comment on it since without knowing what it is, I can't be looking at it myself.VolunteerMarek

And the 12k killed in eastern Poland - if that is supposed to refer to Ukrainians - doesn't make any sense. OW concluded in 1947. By end of that year all Ukrainians had been resettled and/or already killed. Any killings that happened after that were of individuals - certainly not thousands. Additionally other estimates for ALL people killed by communists for 1945-1948 give numbers along the lines of 10k. Hence if that info was true it would mean that more Ukrainians were killed than the total number of ALL people killed. Which doesn't make sense.VolunteerMarek 03:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

It's in the Marples book. And the only reference to year in the paragraph talks about 48-49, but the chapter ends with the figure. Maybe I read it wrong, but that's what it read to me. And Magocsi isn't talking just about Volhynia, if he was, then that'd be 20k Ukrainians dead in Volhynia.--Львівське (говорити) 04:15, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Snyder, in To Resolve the Ukrainian Problem Once and For All, page 87, says 50-100,000 Poles and Ukrainians were killed betwee 1943-1947.--Львівське (говорити) 04:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

and in Causes of Ethnic Cleansing, Snyder says 106k Poles + Ukrainians combined--Львівське (говорити) 05:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

K here's another issue I'm seeing. Snyder says 40k Poles killed in Volhynia in July '43, and that the UPA killed as many Ukrainians as Poles in 1943. Heroes and Villains acknowledges the July factoid (but states no figure), but says the number of Ukrainian victims was higher in October, and that in the summer of 1943, the number of victims for each side were equal. --Львівське (говорити) 04:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Here we have another example of Lvivskie's "understanding" of the sources. "Equal number of victims for each side" and the alleged beginning of massacres in Chelm region by Poles are not opinions of Marples. Marples's book "Heroes and Villains..." is a kind of rewiew. Marples reportes what different authors say. "Equal number" and "beginning in Chelm region" are opinions of Ukrainian scholar Serhiichuk, critically cited by Marples. Read this: The book [of Serhiichuk] uses primary sources selectively to present a partisan version of history that in every instance favors the Ukrainian version of events and denigrates the Poles at every opportunity. (Marples, p. 231). So, the onesided source devastated by Marples's critique, was turned by Lvivskie into Marples opinion... Lovely! GlaubePL (talk) 18:50, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Killings in Chelm region in 1942-1943

The version based on Magosci and misquoted Marples (in fact onesided Serchiichuk)...

Who started the cycle of massacres remains a subject of controversy and dispute. The killing of Ukrainians by Poles predated the Volhynian massacres in both Lublin and Krakow, with the 1942 massacre of Ukrainians in Chelm being the earliest such instance that would spark reprisals.

...is radical POV based on OUN-UPA propaganda. I propose more accurate version, in new section. I have it im my sandbox: [32] GlaubePL (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

From the way I remember it, there were some *individual* killings in the region both by Ukrainians and Poles, pre 1943 - with the Poles claiming (probably justifiably) that they were targeting individual collaborators or Ukrainian policemen. This was of course very different than any mass scale action and not comparable to UPA's campaigns in Volhynia and Galicia. But it was used by UPA for propaganda purposes. Motyka's pretty explicit about it and spells out clearly how it was a myth.

There's two ways we can approach this in the article. One is that somebody insists on making this claim in the text, in which case obviously other sources should be added - in that case the info in the sandbox version should be included. Or we could just leave out the claim - the only reliable source which seems to be making it is Magosci - and not include the sandbox info.VolunteerMarek 22:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I would prefer new section. If we leave out it, finally somebody will come and will add it the Magocsi version again. BTW. Can you check Snyder claim that in Chelm region Ukrainian casualties were 396 people? (it is in the article in the section about German occupation) I tried to find it in Polish edition of "Reconstruction..." but did not succeed. GlaubePL (talk) 22:38, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll look it up when I get home.VolunteerMarek 01:32, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

It says Poles in the Chelm region liquidated 394 leaders of Ukrainian society on grounds of collaboration. It's not clear what time period this is referring to. The sentence has a footnote which says O.S. Sadovyi, "Kudy priamuiut' poliaky?" Litopys UPA, Vol. 2, 52: Il'ioushyn, OUN-UPA i ukrainsk'ke pytannia, 107.VolunteerMarek 04:48, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

It's in a paragraph about events after the partition of Poland but before Barbarrosa (thus, preceding the Volhyn massacres). If Snyder says this uncritically it ought to stay, regardless of the original source. Snyder, a reliable source, can be assumed to know what he is doing when he uses primary or other sources.Faustian (talk) 06:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but it doesn't say that this was in the 1942-1943 period.VolunteerMarek 06:52, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

No, it does not. It's very strongly implied that it was in the 1939-1941 period (probably after 1939). The article currently seems to get it right. Some sporadic killing of those deemed to be collaborators by Poles, plans by Poles for a military take-over of these lands, OUN-B deciding to preempt these Polish plans by slaughtering Poles. Nice work here, btw.Faustian (talk) 06:57, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The section in general is talking about "Decapitation of Civil Society" - the disappearance and killing of social leaders as part of the cause for the violence. Snyder sort of switches the timing sentence to sentence, but in general you're probably right.VolunteerMarek 07:56, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I found it, thanks! Snyder indeed does not provide a year (so it could be understood it was before Barbarossa) and cites O.Sadovyi "Kudy priamuyut Poliaky" and Ilyushin. I have another Ilyushin book ("UPA and AK", Warsaw 2009, p.101), who writes more about it. O.Sadovyi is a pseudonim of Myroslav Prokop, OUB-B member. Ilyushin writes that Prokop's brochure issued in early 1944 blamed Poles for killings in Chelm region yet in April 1942 ("jeszcze w kwietniu 1942"). Motyka adds more about Prokop/Sadovyi brochure ("Od rzezi...", p.290):

[The brochure] had clearly propagandic character thus treating it as neutral source, as it is done sometimes, has to be considered as a serious methodological error.

So, Snyder based on a biased propagandic source (the brochure) and on Ilyushin who cited the same source. This shows the general problem with Western historians who ucritically cite Ukrainian sources, mostly secondary and propagandic (see Rudlings remarks about Ukrainian diaspora scholarship). Snyder is more carefull than Magocsi, but it seems they both were hoodwinked in this case. GlaubePL (talk) 11:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, sort of the same thing is true with respect to Western authors and the Siemaszkos, whom Motyka is pretty critical of (at least of the conclusions they draw).VolunteerMarek 18:36, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

We have to be careful here and avoid original research. Presumably Snyder (and Ilyushin), as a reliable source, can tell whether some piece of information he takes from another source happens to be credible or not. He may have used a piece of propaganda, but that particular piece may have been based on fact. Second-guessing a reliable source such as Snyder is original research. Unless another relaible surce explictly states that Snyder made a mistake (in which case we would report it) we shouldn't make it look like Snyder's info is mistaken, just because the original source is propagandistic. While it is unacceptable for wikipedia editors to use such a tainted primary source to build an article, using Snyder if he happens to use this is okay.Faustian (talk) 21:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Also, just on the basis of a common-sense test, I'm sure there were some assassinations and killings of Ukrainian leaders in Chelm region which the Polish underground regarded as collaborators. I think something about it is also mentioned in Motyka. The key difference was that these kinds of individual killings and score settling were completely different from the mass killings that happened in Volhynia.VolunteerMarek 22:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The issue with all these conflicts is that both sides generally consider themselves to be blame-free (or as blame-free as possible) victims. You forget the tension in Eastern Europe throughout the WWI-WWII period--Poland was not looked upon kindly, e.g., its occupation of the Vilnius region. Or, while the Poles helped drive the Bolsheviks out of Latvia (Latgale), their desire to keep Daugavpils led to the Latvians having to directly threaten to attack the Poles unless they withdrew. (From the Polish perspective, these were all acts of self-preservation.) If there were preemptive actions by the Ukrainians, they were not from baseless fears or suspicions, so let's put a lid on one-sided accusations of propaganda. There is more than plenty of blame to go around to indict everyone.

Conversely, we should be careful not to directly equate either side's patriotism with a desire to massacre one's neighbors. There are enough of those allegations going around Eastern Europe already. Again, the challenge is to create an inclusive view of scholarship on the topic. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 17:14, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Generally, yes, which is why this stuff is so hard to write about. At the same time, being careful with sources and trying to portray the events in a neutral manner does not mean throwing critical thinking skills out the window and letting in FRINGE-y stuff in.VolunteerMarek 18:36, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

In the meantime I'll see if I can do something about the somewhat disjointed narrative. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 19:08, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

PS, that's why Magocsi, for example, being a renowned scholar, can't simply be eliminated as someone who is hoodwinked. The more that we incorporate, the better, ultimately, the article will be. Meanwhile we need to be mindful (on either side) of content such as what I updated, which, at least in the specific paragraph—absent of other context actually in the article, implied Ukrainian nationals (patriots, no qualifiers) set about mass murdering Poles. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 19:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I repeat - this is an opinion of Motyka, the autor of monographs about OUN-UPA, found by Snyder as "fundamental" (and all Polish historiography). You apparently did not read my proposal in my sandbox. I don't propose to cut Magocsi, I want to show all views. And please don't mix Lithuania etc. with this topic. GlaubePL (talk) 20:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I did read your sandbox and found it lacking. For example, murdering someone as an accused Nazi collaborator does not mean there are no grounds for retribution. That characterization is a Polish POV, i.e., they were Nazis who deserved it, killing them couldn't possibly be a reason for reprisals. That contention ignores the entire pre-war period of tension between the Ukrainians and the Polish state, particularly the Polonization campaign right before the war, meaning that any act of singling out and killing any Ukrainians—for any reason regardless of motivation or justification—would inevitably be interpreted as a "first strike" in wartime. You cannot simply quote Polish scholarship as the ultimate arbiter regarding justification or not of Ukrainian actions. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 23:32, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

As far as I understand it, that sandbox is suppose to address one particular issue, so of course it ignores the interwar tensions and the Polonization campaign. Of course these are important but they are covered somewhere else in the article. And again, there *is* a huge difference between oppressive - and monumentally stupid - policies of the Polish government which nonetheless did not result in mass casualties and deaths, and mass killings that are in the tens of thousands of people.VolunteerMarek 23:48, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

With past hostilities feeding the already heightened tensions of wartime, you only have to pull on one little thread for the whole thing to unravel. Polish sources which pass judgement on what does, or does not, constitute a "Polish" act warranting "Ukrainian" reprisal—if represented properly in GlaubePL's sandbox, and I have no reason to doubt that—would appear, at best, to be extraordinarily naive.

Quite honestly, for cooperative work to succeed on this article and others, we all need to keep several things in perspective regarding WWII:

1. Who started the blood-letting in Eastern Europe? Hitler and Stalin. Not any of the peoples of Eastern Europe.
2. That some used the war as an excuse to kill anyone other than those invading their homes is the greatest tragedy of the war; that said, the collaborators (with either invading power—or both) among the peoples of Eastern Europe do not define any of the peoples of Eastern Europe.
3. All the peoples of Eastern Europe were victims.

The sooner we adopt that perspective the more constructive our interactions will be. @Volunteer Marek, I appreciate your perspective, but there is no advantage to be gained in completing any statement of the form "X murdered # of Y for every # Y murdered of X." VєсrumЬа ►TALK 17:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I think all of these are true, but I don't think they are relevant to GlaubePL's sandbox text which's purpose is to address a very narrow point. I do however think that more info in the article on German provocations, as well as the decapitation of civil Ukrainian society by Stalin as some causes for the conflict would be good. To be clear, the direct responsibility for the massacres lies with OUN-B and UPA, but the reasons why this particular extreme brand of Ukrainian nationalism (there were non-extreme variations of Ukrainian nationalism but they got pushed out) came to dominate in 1943-1945 did have a lot to do with the Nazis and Soviets (and, unfortunately, to some extent also the misguided and stupid actions of the Polish interwar government, or at least parts of it).VolunteerMarek 19:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Example of problematic content

"According to Polish historian Piotr Łossowski, the method used in most of the attacks was the same. At first, local Poles were assured that nothing would happen to them. Then, at dawn, a village was surrounded by armed members of the UPA, behind whom were peasants with axes, hammers, knives, and saws. All the Poles encountered were murdered; sometimes they were herded into one spot, to make it easier. After a massacre, all goods were looted, including clothes, grain, and furniture. The final part of an attack was setting fire to the village.[90]"

One source, even attributed, is insufficient for encyclopedic documentation of WWII atrocities. For example, there are ostensibly reputable sources that state Lithuanians bludgeoned Jews to death, then sang folk songs as they sat on piles of their still-warm bodies. Utterly false. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 19:08, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, in this case there are multiple sources, including some Ukrainian ones, which tell the same story. In fact the "According to..." part in that sentence is not really necessary. I'm sure a lot of [ ] [ ] [ ] brackets could be added to the end there.VolunteerMarek 22:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Then we should spend some time crafting content on which Polish and Ukrainian sources both agree to avoid "he said/she said". (With lots of brackets, as you say.) VєсrumЬа ►TALK 23:35, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Sometimes it's impossible to write an article without the he said/she said. But honestly, I don't quite understand what your objection to this passage is. The only possible "sensationalist" details is the one about the peasants with axes, though that kind of thing is found in lots of sources (at least for Volhynia, in Lublin/Chelm Polish and Ukrainian peasants for the most part tried to save each other, and Eastern Galicia was "in between" as far as the peasants were concerned). Other than that the description is factual - that's how the killings in Volhynia happened: surround village at dawn, move in and systematically kill everyone, loot and burn the place. In some cases there was resistance and then it might have played out differently.VolunteerMarek 23:57, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't disagree. We do need more than one source for axes et al. That is just common sense given how many false or exaggerated claims there are which circulate about WWII events. Single attribution in this case detracts from the content (coming at it reading it as someone who is uninformed). If we can improve the flow of agreed-to content we might be able to take some of the "ABC says XYZ" constructs and replace them with citations. That will also help with the he said she said. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 17:35, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

External Links

In the external links - (Polish) Genocide in Volhynia - http://www.bj.uj.edu.pl/~plok/genocide/index.html - you have a site with falsely acreditted photographs that Polish jounalists have shown were incorrectly labeled.

Fot. 12. Zdjęcie ze zbiorów dr Aleksandra Kormana z wyjaśnieniem: ŁOBOZOWA (?), pow. Tarnopol, jesień 1943 lub 1944 roku. Terroryści OUN-UPA dokonali okrutnego mordu na polskich dzieciach. W alei starych drzew, do każdego drzewa przybijali wokół małe dzieci, tworząc tzw. "wianuszki" Aleję tę, na rozwieszonym transparencie nazwali "drogą do samostijnej Ukrainy". Na zdjęciu jedno z drzew, na którym przybito czworo małych dzieci. Zdjęcie to publikuje J. Węgierski, informując, że pochodzi ono ze zbioru M. Domiszewskiego.

Which although the children are acreditted to having been killed by OUN-UPA and wrapped in barbed wire, were infact killed by their Gypsy mother some ten years earlier and the arbed wire is folds in the photograph.

I feel that this sort of site should be removed from the list.

Bandurist (talk) 18:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Agreed.Faustian (talk) 19:08, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

That work is apparently from 2000. The research which showed that particular photo to have been of a different thing (an insane woman killed her children, AFAICR) post dates that (2006 or so I believe). So it's understandable why that photo would be included and mis-attributed. Still, I removed the external link.VolunteerMarek 19:11, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

http://www.rzeczpospolita.pl/news.rol?newsId=1680 To nie są polskie dzieci Twierdzimy tak, ponieważ posiadamy niezaprzeczalne dowody, że wspomniane zdjęcie — pierwowzór projektu pomnika — przedstawia zupełnie inne wydarzenie. Miało ono miejsce w nocy z 11 na 12 grudnia 1923 r., cztery ofiary to dzieci cygańskie, a zabójcą była ich obłąkana matka, 32-letnia M.D. Zdarzenie jest szczegółowo opisane w pracy wydanej drukiem w 1928 r. (a zapewne też w ówczesnej prasie). publikacji, która powoływała się na artykuł z roku 1928. Obydwa teksty są publikacjami z zakresu medycyny sądowej. Pierwszy to artykuł „Psychoza szałowo-posępnicza w kazuistyce sądowo-psychiatrycznej”, zamieszczony w „Roczniku Psychiatrycznym” z 1928 r. Jego autorem był Witold Łuniewski, wieloletni dyrektor zakładu w Tworkach. Druga publikacja to „Podręcznik medycyny sądowej dla studentów i lekarzy”, wydany w 1948 r. przez Wiktora Grzywo-Dąbrowskiego, profesora Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i członka komitetu redakcyjnego „Rocznika Psychiatrycznego”. To właśnie fakt, że zabójcą dzieci była ich matka, przyciągnął uwagę uczonych. Nieszczęsna kobieta zabiła czworo dzieci w akcie rozpaczy po aresztowaniu męża i rozpadzie grupy cygańskiej, w której dotąd żyła, w przekonaniu, że grozi im niechybna śmierć głodowa. Następnego dnia zgłosiła się na policję. Z polecenia sądu została umieszczona w zakładzie psychiatrycznym, gdzie stwierdzono u niej „psychozę szałowo-posępniczą”, dziś powiedzielibyśmy zapewne o ciężkim przypadku depresji. Jak pisze Łuniewski, jej czyn „był psychopatologiczną próbą dokonania rozszerzonego samobójstwa, którego chora nie doprowadziła do końca”.

Obydwie wymienione publikacje zawierają fotografie z miejsca zbrodni. W „Podręczniku medycyny sądowej” zamieszczono zdjęcie, które oznaczyliśmy nr II. Nie jest ono takie samo jak zdjęcie nr I. Czytelnik dostrzeże, że zdjęcie I jest jego lustrzanym odbiciem. Fotografia zamieszczona w pracy Łuniewskiego, którą oznaczyliśmy nr III, jest innym zdjęciem — przedstawia niewątpliwie tę samą scenę, ale sfotografowaną z nieco innej strony. „Przejmujący grozą obraz tej zbrodni został sfotografowany przez urząd śledczy”, pisze Łuniewski, i zapewne wykonano kilka zdjęć z różnych perspektyw. Możliwe, że w archiwach sądowych lub policyjnych zachowały się inne jeszcze zdjęcia tej sceny. Ponadto zdjęcie I różni się od pozostałych ukośnymi jasnymi liniami, które kilku komentatorów wzięło błędnie za drut kolczasty. Są to zapewne ślady zgięć pierwotnej fotografii lub zarysowań na negatywie. Dwa lata później zdjęcie pojawia się w pracy J. Węgierskiego „Armia Krajowa w okręgach Stanisławów i Tarnopol ” z podpisem „zamordowane przez oddziały SS-Galicja dzieci polskie w rejonie Kozowej (pow. brzeżański) (ze zbioru W. Załogowicza)”. Aleksander Korman w pracy „Stosunek UPA do Polaków na ziemiach południowo-wschodnich II Rzeczypospolitej” (Wrocław 2002) zamieszcza najwięcej informacji o zdjęciu i zbrodni, którą ma ono przedstawiać. Twierdzi, że zdjęcie pochodzi ze wsi Kozowa lub Łozowa, pow. Tarnopol, zapewne z grudnia 1943 lub 1944 r., skąd grupa ocalałych z rzezi Polaków dostarczyła je na konspiracyjną placówkę 14. Pułku AK na przedmieściach Lwowa. Tam trafiło w ręce Władysława Załogowicza (na którego relację się powołuje), który wiele lat później przekazał je Krzaklewskiemu, a ten autorowi. Pisze też, że upowcy poczynili wiele takich „wianuszków” z dzieci, przybijając je do drzew w alei, którą nazwali „drogą do samostijnej Ukrainy”. Poznajemy nawet nazwisko przypuszczalnego dowódcy oddziału UPA, odpowiedzialnego za rzeź, i inne szczegóły zbrodni. W wydanym rok później wspomnianym już albumie Korman zamieszcza zdjęcie dwukrotnie, ponownie z informacją, że przedstawia jedno z drzew przy „drodze do samostijnej Ukrainy” w powiecie tarnopolskim. Z kolei w liczącym ponad 1100 stron tomie H. Komańskiego i Sz. Siekierki o ludobójstwie w województwie tarnopolskim (Wrocław 2004) czytamy, że zdjęcie pochodzi ze zbioru St. Krzaklewskiego, a wykonał je niemiecki fotograf wojskowy we wsi Kozówka, pow. Brzeżany, w listopadzie 1943 r. Choć praca ta ma bogatą bazę źródłową i rozbudowany aparat naukowy, nie podaje, na jakiej podstawie przypisano tę scenę do wsi Kozówka. Dodajmy, że od kilku lat zdjęcie I pojawia się w różnych publikacjach i w Internecie (np. w Wikipedii), a jego opis obrasta w coraz to nowe szczegóły rzekomej zbrodni. Bandurist (talk) 19:33, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

the link for (Polish) a Polish website of Światowy Związek Żołnierzy Armii Krajowej doesn;t seem to work. Should be corrected or removed Bandurist (talk) 19:40, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The link for: (English) An abbreviated preface to the monographic book of Władysław Siemaszko and Ewa Siemaszko, November 2000. Doesn't work. Should be removed or corrected. Bandurist (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)