Talk:Jedwabne pogrom

However Wasersztajn, however Fogel

This article has: "Wasersztajn was not an eyewitness to the events of 10 July 1941, since he had spent the day of the pogrom in a hiding place near Jedwabne.[87] Wasersztajn was however an eyewitness to events on 25 June 1941, saying..." then "However, Rivka Fogel, another eyewitness, disputes Wasersztajn's version..."

It's an examplar of WP:HOWEVER. Plus WP:SYNTH relying on WP:PRIMARY sources. It's got to go. There are reliable secondary sources out there raising concerns about the credibility of Wasersztajn as a witness, as well as Gross' reliance on him, and we can use those sources. But we may not dispute Gross in Wikipedia's voice as we are doing here. -Chumchum7 (talk) 17:52, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Lokkhen

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your account has made under 50 edits in four years, so the assumption is that you are a newcomer to our policy and guidelines and you may need some time to learn, as we all did. (i) Your comment (known as an 'edit summary') on your edit [1] alleges that Wikipedia's intro is "deliberately opaque" and in the edit you emphasized that the murderers were Polish citizens. (ii) Please read WP:AGF. We are all obliged to conduct ourselves as if we are assuming each others' best intentions. Alleging deliberate opacity breaches that. (iii) Take another look at the intro: it makes it abundantly clear that at least 40 ethnic Poles were implicated in the murder of 340 Polish Jews. If you read through the rest of the article, it goes into depth about that. (iv) In your edit, you've emphasized that the culprits were "Polish citizens", as if the Jewish victims weren't Polish citizens too, which they were. It would be similarly inappropriate for Wikipedia to state that the lynchings of black people in the Deep South were carried out by American citizens while omitting that the murder victims were American citizens. (v) The BBC source is actually less opaque than this introduction on a separate matter, that of the level of German involvement in the crime: the BBC states that the massacre took place "perhaps at the instigation of the Nazis". This introduction only says that some Germans were present at the crime, and that the additional involvement of other Germans is a matter of academic discussion. (vi) Non-English Wikipedia is no authority over English Wikipedia. We have something called 'Good Article status' articles which may be informative across languages. As English Wikipedia has the most editors and articles, it's often at the forefront of quality and quantity. For what its worth, the German intro on Jedwabne currently states: Es fand während der Besatzung Jedwabnes durch die Wehrmacht statt und gilt als gemeinsames Verbrechen einer Gruppe von polnischen Einwohnern und deutscher Besatzungsmacht while the Hebrew article on it is so small that it doesn't have separate sections and an intro. (vii) As a general way of navigating your early days at Wikipedia to set off on a good course, it's usually best to raise queries at the Talk page first, especially on well-established articles such as this one with many contributors who have established a form of consensus (although yes, it's difficult to perceive that at first sight). Also, it's best to read entire articles closely, before editing the intro. That's because we have a guidance at WP:LEDE which says the intro summarizes the article and that is how are meant to edit it. In fact, the guidance has been that we hardly need citations in the intro at all, because it is there to summarize the well-cited article. I hope that helps, and happy editing. -- Chumchum7 (talk) 05:09, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Grabowski's press review of this article

Recently Jan Z. Grabowski published an article on Gazeta Wyborcza, in which he mentions this article. Below is the Google Translation of his critique of this article. PS. I did contact him and receive a permission to post that excerpt, translated, here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:55, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

“ An English-speaking reader looking for information about the Jedwabne murder (slogan: "The Jedwabne pogrom") will learn at the outset: At least 40 Poles took part in the pogrom in the presence of the German Police (Ordnungspolizei – abbrv. ORPO). The additional participation of the German Gestapo and SS paramilitary forces, in particular the Einsatzgruppe B enforcement branch, is the subject of scientific debate.

Introduction to the password is important because most Internet users do not go beyond it. Information about the presence of Germans from ORPO on the day of the murder is supported by a link to the unsigned note taken from the website of the Polin Museum.

Meanwhile, there was no ORPO station in Jedwabne back then, and the topic of incorrect information on Polin's pages is an issue worth discussing separately.

I have been dealing with the extermination of Polish Jews for a long time, but I am not aware that there is currently a scientific debate in which participants would prove the "participation" of Einsatzgruppe B (which on July 10, 1941 was near Minsk) in the Jedwabne murder. Indeed, shortly after the publication of "Neighbors" by Jan Tomasz Gross, speculation was made about the presence in the town of the commando Hermann Schaper, but for several years there were no "scientific debates" on this topic. Well, but Wikipedia "editors" don't have to be professional historians and bother with facts. It is enough if they think they know each other, and the rest will be dealt with by their patriotism, specifically understood "Polish raison d'etat" and a link to any sources.

In the case of the Jedwabne slogan, of course, it was about creating in the foreign reader the conviction that the perpetrators of the murder were Germans and (few) Poles - at most blind tools in their hands. [2]

”

I've added the italics and paragraph breaks to the quote above. The archived article is worth reading.

What can be done about this? Pinging Ealdgyth and K.e.coffman. I'm at a loss, because it's not only this article that's the problem. Grabowski states that the English Wikipedia is hosting falsified history about Polish-Jewish relations during the Holocaust. He writes that the same issues are handled more neutrally on the Polish Wikipedia, where editors can spot the problems. On the English Wikipedia, with its larger reach but fewer editors familiar with the sources and able to read Polish, we are not able to crowdsource corrections. SarahSV ^(talk) 20:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Frankly, we need to rely only on sources that the majority of editors can verify... and we all need to verify everything. I saw the original post but between the stupid virus and hubby breaking left wrist and right elbow, I've been swamped. He's now into the "time will heal things" period so hopefully I can at least start on this. But it'll probably be next week. I'm utterly frazzled from trying to secure grain and hay for the herd to tide us just in case. --Ealdgyth (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about your husband; that sounds painful and horrible. There is no rush for any of this because it involves a lot of articles. We need something systemic, such as consensus that only English-language sources are used; only scholarly sources; and/or that we should abandon citation bundling on these articles and insist that each point be clearly sourced to one RS. SarahSV ^(talk) 00:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Just a note that I don't see why we should exclude non-English sources. For example, AFAIK every single one of Gross's books such as the milestone Neighbors: The Destruction of the Jewish Community in Jedwabne, Poland was first published in Polish, and got an English translation 1-4 years later. A new book on relevant topics by, among others, Grabowski himself, Dalej jest noc, is still not translated, and the forthcoming English edition is described as 'abridged'. We don't need to exclude foreign language sources, we just need to follow WP:RS. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Following RS misses the key point: the English Wikipedia cannot—cannot—crowdsource the checking of Polish-language sources. Because of that, plus advocacy, with every passing year these articles become more divorced from the scholarship. One idea would be to host translations of the Polish Wikipedia versions, because they have the ability to check the work. Another idea is to insist on English-language sources. Perhaps we ought to start a discussion with the Polish Wikipedia about what can be done. SarahSV ^(talk) 04:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The facebook discussion which I am aware of that is related to this issue (at pl.wikipedia fb group, all in Polish) was mostly puzzlement since Polish Wikipedia editors don't think their articles in this topic area are much better. For example after recent fixes our English article on KL Warschau seems to be in a better shape then the Polish one, which I think is now behind. Anyway, I don't see the problem, errors are common and get fixed over time, with Polish or other sources. English are preferable, but WP:NOENG overall applies. If you think some Polish source is problematic, ask, I am reasonably active here, and a post at WT:POLAND or such with a ping to me will be answered within reasonable amount of time. (And for the record, I agree that some sources used in articles here are unreliable...). PS. The problem on how to host a discussion with pl wiki is hard. I'd love to have more people in this topic area, more eyeballs etc. Maybe we can start something at WT:POLAND and post an invitation to pl. wiki Village Pump equivalent. Problem is I don't think many people are interested in coming over, periodically I try to invite people or such, and it almost never ever works. Language barrier, etc. Pretty much all active editors on en wiki are expats who don't edit pl wiki much and vice versa. Actually, this gives me an idea for a research paper, thanks :) PS. I also double checked and I think 3 out 4 sources Grabowski's complains are in English, not Polish... :P --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• The article does suffer from WP:WEIGHT issues. For example, the lead contains two paragraphs, one of which focuses on how other groups were potentially responsible:

At least 40 ethnic Poles were implicated, and German Order Police were present.[3][4] The additional involvement of the German Gestapo[5] and SS paramilitary forces, especially the SS Einsatzgruppe B death squad, is a matter of academic discussion.[6][7][8][9]

The USHMM source says [3]:

On July 10, 1941, Polish residents of Jedwabne, a small town located in Bialystok District of first Soviet-occupied and then German-occupied Poland, participated in the murder of hundreds of their Jewish neighbors. Although responsibility for instigating this “pogrom” has not been fully established, scholars have documented at least a German police presence in the town at the time of the killings.

This is not sufficient weight to put the statement in the lead, and, in general, the structure of the lead creates an impression of false balance. --K.e.coffman (talk) 18:07, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

• Comment:

Grabowski's published opinion is as important as every other specialist historian's; as I'm not entirely clear what precisely he objects to in the lede I would very much welcome his input here or through the user who is corresponding with him. (He's entirely welcome at Wikipedia as well as commenting about Wikipedia through the press.)

First, as far as I was aware it was generally agreed among historians that there was a German police presence, so is he disputing that per se, or something more granular?

As far as I recall Jan Gross speaks of discussions between the German police and the pogromists. Our article also quotes Gross: "At the time, the undisputed bosses over life and death in Jedwabne were the Germans. No sustained organized activity could take place there without their consent. They were the only ones who could decide the fate of the Jews. It was within their power also to stop the murderous pogrom at any time. And they did not choose to intervene. ... But it is also clear that had Jedwabne not been occupied by the Germans, the Jews of Jedwabne would not have been murdered by their neighbors."[43]

And Peter Longerich says "closer analysis of the crime" now shows that the pogrom was "engineered by a unit of the German Security Police", probably a unit from the Zichenau Gestapo office that had been assigned to Einsatzgruppe B, and which "had recruited local Poles as auxiliary 'pogrom police'".[44]

If Grabowski's issue is with Longerich, perhaps we can find a citation for that for it to be incorporated in the article as per WP:NPOV. I don't think we're actually too far off in the lede when it comes to reflecting article content, and it may be that content needs to be improved with citations to Grabowski.

Is he aware that the German language version of this article reads: "Es fand während der Besatzung Jedwabnes durch die Wehrmacht statt und gilt als gemeinsames Verbrechen einer Gruppe von polnischen Einwohnern und deutscher Besatzungsmacht. / It took place during the Wehrmacht's occupation of Jedwabne and is considered a common crime by a group of Polish residents and German occupying powers." ? As far as I can see the editors there are German veterans working in a wide topic area.

On a final note, Grabowski's opinion: "Well, but Wikipedia "editors" don't have to be professional historians and bother with facts. It is enough if they think they know each other, and the rest will be dealt with by their patriotism, specifically understood "Polish raison d'etat" and a link to any sources. In the case of the Jedwabne slogan, of course, it was about creating in the foreign reader the conviction that the perpetrators of the murder were Germans and (few) Poles - at most blind tools in their hands"

This mischaracterizes the Wikipedia project and I honestly wonder whether if levelled at any other institution Grabowski's allegations might be cut by the publication's lawyers. What does Jimmy Wales think? If stated by any editor in the ARBEE sanction environment would be deemed inappropriate and confrontational. This article has been worked on by our community, which includes Jewish Israelis as well as Germans. Vandalism from presumably deluded Polish nationalists is routinely reverted. Furthermore he doesn't seem to know that Wikipedia relies on verifiability of reliable sources (including his own work), not what someone perceives as a fact. It was actually the tireless work of the late (and presumably-non-Polish) editor named Icewhiz which exposed the fake story about Warsaw Concentration Camp, and he's the very same editor who put a banner on this article to get it improved to the better state that it is in now than it was before. So to repeat, if Grabowski wants to attend to this the Wikipedia way, he is welcome here with open arms. -Chumchum7 (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Unreliable sources review

info-poland.icm.edu.pl

Let's review some problematic sources. Right of the bat, in the lead, there is[4] / [5] (a bit more here). How reliable is [6]? In either case, this site's page is probably outdated, and we should try to replace it with something better. I'd recommend removing this source as at the very least obsolete, if not unreliable. Thoughts? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Piotrus I agree, go ahead and remove those. I have removed israelunwired.com per the same rationale based on Wikipedia policy and guidelines.-Chumchum7 (talk) 10:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

israelunwired.com

Since it was restored, we can discuss it here. It appears to be a small portal dedicated to movies and such, might be ok for info on movies, but I wouldn't cite it for any serious discussion in historical topics, particularly related to controversial issues. Ping Usr:N1of2 who restored it and User:Chumchum7 who removed it. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:40, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

The website says about itself: "Today’s conflict is on two fronts – the military front and the public opinion front. The main driving force for public opinion today is Social Media and online activity. Israel Unwired serves as a voice for Israel and the Jewish people that mainstream media rarely feature. At this point, hundreds of thousands of people are being reached everyday across social media channels. That places Israel Unwired at the forefront of impacting individuals worldwide about Israel and the Jewish people." That's WP:NOTRELIABLE, etc. -Chumchum7 (talk) 14:11, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Is this really what the Polish President said?

Nobel Peace Prize recipient and former Polish President Lech Walesa commented about the apology: "The Jedwabne crime was a revenge for the cooperation of the Jewish community with the Soviet occupant. The Poles have already apologized many times to the Jews; we are waiting for the apology from the other side because many Jews were scoundrels."[116]

---

I cannot believe it. Is this really what the Polish President said? But then he justifies the murders? 178.155.64.66 (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes. But at the time, he was former president. Despite his rebel credentials, when president and later, Lech Walesa said many things that were opposed by many people, which is why he didn't get re-elected. See fourth par of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lech_Wa%C5%82%C4%99sa#Presidency and further reading about using the anti-Semtic trope of Zydokomuna on his election campaign against the ex-Communist President Kwasniewski, who was not Jewish. "Walesa is running against him, but few reckon he can make a comeback. On radio he made some anti-Semitic remarks about his opponent which shocked even hard-bitten Walesa-watchers." Kwasniewski won re-election on a socialist platform and went to Jedwabne the next year, where he said: "For this crime we should beg the souls of the dead and their families for forgiveness. This is why today, the President of the Republic of Poland, I beg pardon. I beg pardon in my own name and in the name of those Poles whose conscience is shattered by that crime." -Chumchum7 (talk) 14:02, 25 March 2020 (UTC)