Talk:Witold Pilecki

Stub?

this page could do with more, but it doesn't seem to be a stub any more since it covers his life and greatest deeds. What's missing? Can we delete the stub notice? 08:00, 2004 Jul 22 (UTC) (no comment will be taken as agreement :-)

I am just a perfectionist, so I tend to leave big stubs everywhere, bit I guess you are right, this is not that stubbish now. If you have time, do browse the external links and add some more info though, they still have some interesting details. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 08:40, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

He was a cool man! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.12.251 (talk) 19:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Witold Pilecki in Art and Media

No film yet? Inmate 4859 by Swedish rock band Sabaton concerns Pilecki's exploits in Auchwitz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodnebb (talk • contribs) 10:28, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

References and peer review

This needs references. Any other ideas for improvement before I submit this to Wikipedia:Peer review and eventually Wikipedia:Featured article candidates? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:06, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I never thought this article will reach that far... Halibutt 00:19, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)

I think it can make it. It is well written, very interesting, and featured article don't have to be very long. Witold already has over 2 screens, which make it long enough IMHO. So, are you up to putting finishing touches on it? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 12:59, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Some questions:

1. Could you provide IPA pronunciation for Witold Pilecki's name?

Ummm. How do I make it?

No problem Halibutt

2. What is the Russian spelling of "Oloniec"?

No idea. I have seen English spelling Oluniec as well. I believe text from Polish sources is most correct and so I chose Ołoniec.

Olonets is the transcryption I used somewhere in the wiki Halibutt

3. Is "Jozef Pilsudski" correct? Any relation to the Marshal?

Ops, my (?) mistake. Jozef Pilecki.

4. What is "primary trading school" in the original Polish? "Podstawowa szkola zawodowa"? What is it?

Szkola Handlowa w Wilnie in Polish. I doubt English term is much valid, but considering the age Witold graduated (13-14 years) it looks like a type of primary school.

5. What were the "commandos" ("kommandos"?) at Auschwitz?

Ummm. Who do you mean, exatly? I wrote about Cichociemni's only, and I can't find any mentions of commandos in Auschwitz in that article (of course, many commandos were imprisoned there, but this is another article, I believe).

6. "night of April 26 and 28th": do you mean "26th and 27th"?

Yes, fixed.

7. What is the original Polish of "Great Bastion of Warsaw"?

I am not sure, it comes from English source only.

I'm sure I saw it once, I'll check that. AFAIR the Polish name was much less pompatic... Halibutt

8. Is the Polish original "Wiezienie rakowieckie"? What does "rakowieckie" refer to?

In Polish orginal, "więzienie mokotowskie". Englis sources mention "Rakowiecka prison". I believe the terms refer to the same place and the second name is more popular?

I prepared a decent article on Mokotów prison (Rakowiecka Street) once, but my computer crashed before I saved my work... Halibutt

9. Why wasn't I able to get these questions to stay on your user page? Logologist 09:02, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No idea. Wiki has been acting a bit laggy past 2 days, maybe it some engine fault? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:10, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Kommandos

You write: "At Auschwitz, while working in various kommandos and surviving pneumonia..." A "kommando" would seem to be some kind of organization or work detail. I would, however, keep the wording as it currently exists. Interesting article! Logologist 23:40, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

AFAIK it is German word, meaning "team" or something similar. Pibwl ←« 17:24, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

This is true, it is mentioned many times in Primo Levi's : If This is a Man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.192.127.151 (talk) 02:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Two points on translation

Rendering Krzyż Walecznych as "Cross of the Valorous" is, in my judgment, an example of excessive metaphrasis ("literality"). A more proper English equivalent would be "Cross of Valor."

"Prusy Army," which I gather in the Polish original reads "Wojsko Prusy," is an example of the opposite phenomenon: inappropriate paraphrase. I am confident that, in a competently edited English-language history, this military unit would appear (metaphrastically) as "Army Prusy." Logologist 20:07, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

During September Camapaing, Polish forces were organised into many 'Armia (Regional name goes here)' units, like 'Armia Prusy' (not 'wojsko'). I also think that better translation would be 'Army (name)'. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:34, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

As to the 1939 Armies - we've started similar discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Polish Army. As to the Krzyż Walecznych - for me Cross of Valor is too ambiguous. It might refer to: Krzyż Walecznych, Krzyż za Odwagę, Medal za Odwagę, Za Dzielność and Krzyż za Męstwo - all were military decorations used on Polish lands (although most of them in tsarist times). I'd leave it as it is, without making it too easy to read and too difficult to distinguish from the rest. Or, alternatively, we could simply leave it without any translation. Halibutt 02:23, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)

Second Corps

Why is Poland's "Drugi Korpus" rendered on the Wikipedia as "2nd Polish Corps" instead of--as seems to me more accurate--"Polish 2nd Corps"? Logologist 01:27, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Captions

I think it would remove a certain cut-and-paste quality, if fresh captions could be made for three photos:

1. Gate to Auschwitz Concentration Camp (1941), with German motto: "Work liberates."

2. Auschwitz Concentration Camp photos of Pilecki.

3. Photos of Pilecki from Warsaw's Mokotow Prison (1947).

Logologist 08:20, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

To elope

Rich Farmbrough is right: "eloped" can mean running away to get married. It can also, in a second, equally valid sense, mean simply "to run away; escape; abscond." It was in the latter meaning that I wanted to use "elope" in this article, to avoid verbal repetitiveness. As it was, I used "escape" twice within the span of four sentences. Unfamiliarity with a meaning is not synonymous with the meaning's illegitimacy (the latter word not to be confused with "bastardy"!). And an unfamiliar application can sometimes breathe a useful whimsy into a text. Logologist 04:43, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Style isn't always easy! Websters says "To run away, or escape privately, from the place or station to which one is bound by duty; said especially of..." so I would avoid elope. Abscond implies wrong doing, as does absquatulate, which is also obscure. Somtimes repetition is best. I have changed the first occurance of escape to "break out", what do you think? (Change it back if you like.) Good article by the way. Rich Farmbrough 13:14, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"Break out" does read well. Thanks for the suggestion. Logologist 18:57, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations

on well-deserved Featured Article recognition today. Logologist 04:41, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yup, congrats to all who contributed to this article! Halibutt 05:42, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)

One of the most interesting feature articles ive read, esp the stuff about the ZOW. The bellman 04:52, 2005 Jan 24 (UTC)

Wikiquote?

Great article, thank you very much. Is it OK that the wikiquote link points to an empty page? BACbKA 06:37, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

sorry for interfeering with this nicely laid out discussion page... but why is there a link to wikiquote from this article? There don't seem to be any quotes from pilecki there!

Good point, fixed (added some quotes). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:56, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Further Congrats and Vandal Report

Excellent work! His story deserved to be told a long time ago.

There is a vandal who has been adding lines about Pilecki being a pedophile. Someone else has been reverting to the unvandalized version, but the vandal may be back. I add this article to my watclist so I can keep an eye out, but I don't know how to revert to earlier versions.

Is there any way to appeal to the Wiki staff to block the vandal's IP address?

Try WP:ViP. BTW, would you like to form a user account? Sam Spade (talk · contribs) 09:55, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)ou considered adding a link to Norman

I too want to congratulate you all on such a superb and entertaining and colorful article. What a beautiful job and excellently done. Bravo to all!WHEELER 14:25, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations to all involved in putting this excellent article together, have you considered adding Warsaw Uprising in "see also" I know it is linked in the text. Norman Davies newly published '"Rising '44 : the battle for Warsaw": Norman Davies: Viking Books, 2004.'or 2004: Rising '44. The Battle for Warsaw. London: Pan Books. ISBN 0-333-90568-7 in this work Davies highlights the lack of support for the Polish resistance shown in this article re; liberation of Auschwitz "British authorities refused the Home Army air support". The importance of this storey cannot be underestimated, this is possibly seen in the despicable vandal attackNigel Savage 06:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Personal life, wife, children?

There is no mention in the article about him being married, yet there is a picture of his widow's tombstone. I believe that a paragraph would be warranted regarding his wife, whether or not he had any children, and what became of them. -- James Teterenko (talk) 20:23, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Tnx for the note, it should be covered now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 13:28, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Related Article: Rotmistrz

I don't know how to properly pluralize rotmistrz. I used "rotamasters" in the article when I started a section on notable holders of the rank. I have Pilecki for the modern era --- maybe someone conversant in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth history knows of a few medieval guys to put in the list?--Jpbrenna 00:27, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Michal Grocholski, Prokop Sieniawski, Franciszek Sebastian Lubomirski and Zygmunt Szendzielarz (modern era)--Emax 00:48, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Disambiguation

The link to Murnau should be disambiguated to point to Murnau am Staffelsee, since Murnau itself is a disambiguation page. -- Dominus 19:21, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tnx for the note, fixed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:55, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Escape from Auschwitz conflicts with Cyrankiewicz

The Józef_Cyrankiewicz article says that Pilecki escaped by faking Typhus. This one says that he overpowered a guard at a bakery. Am I missing something?--Medicmann 20:17, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Probably one is incorrect. It has been close to a year since I read stuff on it and wrote the article. IIRC the bakery is the correct version, and the typhus may be a failed attempt - but sb needs to go over the sources. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:28, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Suggestions

• The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program. They may or may not be accurate for the article in question (due to possible javascript errors/uniqueness of articles). If the following suggestions are completely incorrect about the article, please drop a note on my talk page.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.

• Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a no-break space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.

• Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example, ==The Biography== would be changed to ==Biography==.

• Please alphabetize the categories and interlanguage links.
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.
  • To assist you with this, add {{subst:js|User:AndyZ/monobook.js/footnotehelper.js}} to your monobook.js file (mine is located at User:AndyZ/monobook.js) and then bypass your browser's cache by pressing: Mozilla/Safari/Konqueror: hold down Shift while clicking Reload (or press Ctrl-Shift-R), Internet Explorer: press Ctrl-F5, Opera: press F5. In editing mode, click on the "Footnote creater" tab that appears.

• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a.
• You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions (and the javascript checklist; see the last paragraph in the lead) for further ideas.
• Thanks, Andy _t 21:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Scouting

• Does anyone want add him to the Scouting_memorials page? --evrik 15:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Contradiction?

The last section seems to contradict itself. If "he was ordered by General Władysław Anders to return to Poland and gather intelligence to be sent to the West. He went back and proceeded to organize his intelligence network..." and "Pilecki was accused of having spied for the Western Allies and General Anders", than how come "Pilecki's conviction was based on false charges..."? Either I don't understand something, or one of those three fragments is incorrect. With respect, Ko Soi IX 04:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC) Thank you, Piotrus. One small question though, why did you change "probably forged" to simply "forged"? With respect, Ko Soi IX 05:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Dates?

This article says that as early as 1940, [he] informed the Western Allies of Nazi Germany's Auschwitz atrocities. The term atrocities merits substantiation, here, as systematic extermination in Auschwitz and elsewhere started only in 1942. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LeMiklos (talk • contribs) 12:35, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The date is fine but this is a reference to harsh (sometimes fatal) slave labour of civilians and POWs rather than the later gas exterminations of the Final Solution. Agree a citation would help here. -Chumchum7 (talk) 13:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

External links

Is The Murder of Cavalry Captain Witold Pilecki an appropriate EL for this article? TIA Tom (talk) 03:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Intersting tidbit

This is a bit of trivia but according to Foot's "Six Faces of Courage", when Pilecki escaped from Auschwitz and made his way to Bohnia, the first AK commander he met was Tomasz Serafiński, the very person who's name he took as his secret identity, and under which he was imprisoned in the camp. Like I said, bit of trivia, but it might be worthwhile to include.radek (talk) 22:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

If anyone wants to add to the legacy section, similar to other articles (Charles XII of Sweden Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden) the Swedish power metal band Sabaton wrote a song about this man entitled 'Inmate 4859'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.197.190 (talk) 04:14, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Very last Sentence

Congratulations on producing an excellent article. May I humbly submit two small modification suggestions:

1) The last sentence which currently reads - "He is thought to have been buried in an unmarked grave near Warsaw's Powązki Cemetery's garbage dump." This always leaves me a bit cold, it just doesn't quite feel right (or read well) to end an article of this quality about a man such as Pilecki this way. I feel the end of the article would hit the right note with something along the lines of - "his burial place is thought to be somewhere within Powązki Cemetery, a symbolic gravestone was erected in Pilecki's memory at Ostrowa Mazowiecka Cemetery after the fall of Communism in Poland."

Then at least the final words of the article wouldn't be "garbage dump".

2) Might be better still to move the sentence addressing Pilecki's burial place so it follows the final sentence on his execution that reads - "Ten days later, on May 25, 1948, Pilecki was executed at the Warsaw Mokotów Prison on ulica Rakowiecka street,[2] by Staff Sergeant Piotr Śmietański.[18] Śmietański was nicknamed by the prisoners the "Butcher of the Mokotow Prison". If this was done then the article will end by addressing Pilecki's rehabilitation in post-communist Poland, which would give the article a better flow and a more upbeat, redemptive ending.

Tattooing

The article states that Pilecki's inmate number was tattooed on his forearm, however this is unlikely because tattooing was not introduced at Auschwitz until the autumn of 1941 (Pilecki was incarcerated almost one year earlier in September 1940) when the SS began to tattoo (for identification purposes) the thousands of Soviet prisoners of war (POWs) who arrived at the camp after the German invasion of USSR. It wasn't until the spring of 1943 that almost all previously registered and newly arrived prisoners, including female prisoners throughout the entire Auschwitz complex started to be tatooed. So it unlikely that Pilecki was tatooed with his prison number shortly after his arrival at Auschwitz or before he escaped in April 1943. Aslo Pilecki does not mention being tatooed with his number in any of the three personal Auschwitz reports made after his escape, although he does mention being assigned a number.

I think this present statement " Pilecki was tattooed on his forearm with the number 4859" should be revised to read " Pilecki was assigned inmate number 4859"

Page 390 of the cited source for the statement " Pilecki was tattooed on his forearm with the number 4859" does NOT state that Pilecki's number was tatooed on his forearm at all it reads 'Two days later, he was recieved (as Serafinski) in Auschwitz, and became prisoner number 4,859.'

The fact that Pilecki wasn't sent back to Auschwitz when he was captured during the Warsaw uprising suggests to me that he wasn't tattooed with his prison number. Either that or he kept his forearm covered up, which is unlikely as he would probably have been strip searched at same point after his capture.

See: The Mammoth Book of True War Stories (Mammoth Books) [Paperback] Jon E. Lewis.

http://www.amazon.com/Mammoth-Book-True-Stories-Books/dp/0786706295#reader_0786706295

See ref: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007056 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjam2004 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Witold Pilecki is not listed in "Righteous among the Nations

Witold Pilecki is not listed in "Righteous among the Nations". See: http://www1.yadvashem.org/yv/en/righteous/statistics.asp The Righteous Among the Nations Department Righteous Among the Nations Honored by Yad Vashem By 1 January 2012

........... Pilat, Pawel & Helena 2001 Pilat, Piotr & wife, children Leon, Wincenty, Jan & his wife Matylda 1965/1990 Pilch, Kasper, ch. Czeslawa & Stanislaw 2007 Pilecka, Michalina 1992 Pindelak, Roman & Paulina 1979 Pindor, Stanislaw & mother 1990 .................

Sjam2004 (talk) 09:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

• I confirm that Sjam2004 is correct. Please, see also: "Honored by Yad Vashem by 1 January 2012. POLAND" in http://www1.yadvashem.org/yv/en/righteous/pdf/virtial_wall/poland.pdf page 84 of 132 (1.16 MB). Poeticbent talk 10:10, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Witold Pilecki/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

needs inline citations --plange 20:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 20:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 10:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Rank Promotion

For his daring work and at the risk of his own life, Witold has prepared reports of what happened in the death camps. He got interned at Auschwitz, prepared reports and escaped to friendly lines and has addressed the world community of the atrocities that took place in the camp. The poles executed him instead of promoting him from Captain to a Full General. That was a remarkable feat of soldiering by anyone's measure. As a Non-Jew Witold should be placed in the Yad Vashem's "Avenue of The Righteous". Captain Witold Pilecki was the most courageous cavalry officer in the Polish Cavalry and once again, for his work, he should have been advanced to General. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaddrums (talk • contribs) 23:49, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Rehabilitation vs. conviction

It is interesting, that charges against him are presented as true in the article, yet nothing points to questionability of his rehabilitation in that case (If charges are true, why rehabilitation? This is a problem with many post-Soviet rehabilitations, actually.). Alternatively, charges should be described as false (as they were in previous versions), but that would contradict most descriptions on what happened, most likely. 185.150.154.77 (talk) 13:35, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Lack of citations

To justify placing the additional citation needed tag on the head of the article, here are some paragraphs/ strings of text that need citations: His forces held a fortified area called the "Great Bastion of Warsaw", one of the most outlying of partisan redoubts. Pilecki and his men inflicted significant casualties and caused considerable logistical difficulties for German supply lines by routinely seizing control of a strategically placed building overlooking the city's main west-east thoroughfare, Jerusalem Avenue. The bastion held for two weeks in the face of almost constant attacks by German infantry and armor.

...

After the defeat of Nazi Germany in May 1945, Pilecki was sent to Great Britain as a staff officer of the Polish Armed Forces in the West

...

By mid-1946 Pilecki's network had successfully made contact with Poland's anti-Soviet partisans and established an underground courier system to spirit information from Warsaw to the headquarters of the Polish II Corps in Italy. However, its greatest achievement was the recruitment of Captain Wawel Alchimowicz, an official of Poland's Ministry of Public Security (MBP), the communist secret police.

Alchimowicz provided the underground with highly-sensitive material on the MBP's covert operations, internal organization and senior personnel as well as evidence that the results of the people's referendum of June 1946 had been forged by the MBP to favor the communists and their allies.

This information was compiled into the so-called "Blade Report" and was dispatched to the II Corps in December 1946 by Pilecki. During this time Pilecki's group was itself infiltrated by Leszek Kuchciński, a former TAP member and double agent for Poland's Stalinist government.

...

Pilecki told his wife in their final conversation: "I cannot live. They killed me. Because Oświęcim [Auschwitz] compared with them was just a trifle." His final words before his execution were: "Long live free Poland". The Polish government in exile decided that the post-war political situation offered no hope of Poland's liberation, and they ordered the remaining members of the Polish resistance (who became known as the cursed soldiers) to return to their normal civilian lives or escape to the West. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Did you review the sources that appear next after these paragraphs and did you find the material missing? Each para does not require a cite - if all the information in a group of paragraphs is tagged at the end of that group, that is perfectly acceptable. This is a Featured Article that went through the FA process - are you aware of what that means?50.111.25.206 (talk) 03:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Agree with the comments concerning the citation style, the look fine to me. However, I would point out that the last time this article was assessed for Featured status was April 2009. Lots has changed since then and it may need to be reassessed. --dashiellx (talk) 11:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I looked in the sources immediately after the disputed material: it wasn't in them. Consequently, I have removed the unsourced material, virtually all of which had been added since the FA process. DrKay (talk) 14:08, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

FAR needed

I don't think the article currently is of FA status. It has careless and inconsistent ref formatting, with both shortened footnotes and long ones intertwined. It relies rather heavily on a single web page, which I can't access, owing to its lack of proper sertificate for privacy. Is it a HQRS? And is our copy sufficiently paraphrased? We need better sourcing than what we've got here: IMDb and Publicystyka Antysocjalistycznego Mazowsza are not HQRS. We also have a See also farm and an EL farm. It is also not particularly well written with repetitive lines like […]he was not breaking any laws. He pleaded guilty to the other charges. He was sentenced to death on 15 May with three of his comrades, and he was executed and noun + -ing, -ing, -ing He was also a vigorous advocate of rural development, founding an agricultural cooperative, heading the local fire brigade and also serving as chairman of a local milk-processing plant built in the district. Eisfbnore ^(会話) 09:51, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Based on what I see in the IA, the broken link can be updated to [1], through I cannot confirm the authorship attributed in our link to Lidia Świerczek (incidentally, I found this OA article which: [2]. Anyway, the source is reliable but this article needs a copyedit for prose and MoS issues. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, i agree, the stroty is amazing, the English syntax and style less so. I'll fix a bunch of these paras and sentences. Probably just weak translations, and the usual wiki "chop quote structure'. Billyshiverstick (talk) 02:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Fixing the lead

Amazing guy, amazing story. The lead is all chopped up. I'll fix it to normal standards. Don't worry. Please don't revert, but revise if you feel inspired. Tx Billyshiverstick (talk) 02:27, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Fleming quote

Buidhe, you are once again completely ignoring WP:BRD and trying to force your way on yet another article via brute edit warring. Your edit has been challenged you, you should make an attempt to discuss it.

And I agree with GCB. That quote doesn't really add to the article, it's kind of just dropped there for no apparent reason (less apparent reasons? Perhaps), it doesn't really relate to anything else in the article, it's sole purpose appears to be to just include something "negative" about the subject. It's clearly UNDUE. Volunteer Marek 07:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

And the way it's phrased - yes, it is a quote, but a cherry picked one out of context - insinuates to the casual reader that the fact that Pilecki was "imprisoned in Auschwitz" was a "myth". So not just UNDUE but... misleading. Volunteer Marek 07:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't see how anyone is going to be mislead by that since the article states clearly what Pilecki actually did. The Auschwitz Volunteer book is a mass-market not scholarly source which doesn't meet article sourcing requirements, similar to most of the content in the article. Fleming, who is a respected historian, says that "volunteer" is not the right word and that you have to distinguish facts from myths when it comes to Pilecki. Not sure why you are trying to remove that. PS I also added content about "Wallenberg myth" according to reliable sources to Raoul Wallenberg article a while back. I think both Pilecki and Wallenberg should be appreciated for what they did not what they didn't do. Having the word "volunteer" in the lead without proper context *is* misleading. (t · c) buidhe 07:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Buidhe, I agree, the text you added is misleading, cherry picked and WP:UNDUE. - GizzyCatBella🍁 07:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

The quote however doesn't really make much sense and it comes from a book review. The book itself meets the requirement of having been published by a reputable institution, by a award winning author, and has won prestigious awards. Volunteer Marek 08:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Simply looking at the edit by Buidhe, it does look to me problematic.

1. What is the difference between "volunteered" and "agreed to infiltrate"?
2. What exactly Michael Fleming implies? This is not clear. That Pilecki simply acted by the order? If so, that would be fine (that was a war), but the wording is misleading ("coercion, pressure, manipulation, and bullying". Order by whom, exactly and when? That must be said. My very best wishes (talk) 22:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

But in any event I agree that info by Michael Fleming can/should be included to this page. The only question is how exactly (and why) his story is different from the commonly accepted story that is currently described on this page. The edit by Buidhe does not say or explain it at all. My very best wishes (talk) 04:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Historian Michael Fleming is a better source than www.doomedsoldiers.com. Fleming and others say this was exactly volunteering, he was forced to "volunteer".Laizx (talk) 09:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Is “doomed soldiers” being used in this article? Volunteer Marek 03:32, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

• As I've commented on RSN, Assessment from professional historians is better than a mass market book. Saying he "volunteered" is not the view of academic sources. Doomedsoldiers, and material taken from it, is not acceptable.--Bob not snob (talk) 13:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Is “doomed soldiers” being used in this article?” Volunteer Marek 03:32, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, sure. But what exactly this professional historian tells on that subject? Who gave the order? Who decided that he goes? He or someone else? Did the subject dispute the order and someone "bullied" him, as this historian tells? Bullied? How? By threatening whom? I know nothing about this subject and would like to learn. My very best wishes (talk) 03:13, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

It is clear who gave the order, he had one superior officer and he was in a feud with him. Fleming is a superb source.--Bob not snob (talk) 07:13, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

It's a book review and the quotations that are pulled out of it are confusing without the context. This has already been brought up.

Also, I'm not sure if you're aware of the existing 500/30 restriction in this topic area]. Volunteer Marek 09:00, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

• Fleming is an RS, but I would avoid book reviews in this TA unless on books' articles. That said, as stated at RSN I would also avoid this book, as would most other editors who commented there. In either case this argument is unnecessary, since we already have scholarly sources stating what was claimed (p. 287 onwards here). François Robere (talk) 11:48, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Just to clarify, I see no problem in quoting or discussing reviews on Talk. François Robere (talk) 14:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Publicystyka Antysocjalistycznego Mazowsza

The website of Publicystyka Antysocjalistycznego Mazowsza is not a reliable source.--Bob not snob (talk) 07:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

After discussion, WP:APLRS

After this discussion, the page was updated in accordance with WP:APLRS.--Bob not snob (talk) 10:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

You just gutted the article. That is NOT what APLRS or the discussion at RSN recommended. I also notice that you are an account created in November 2019, shortly after the conclusion of the relevant ArbCom case, and that you began editing this topic area immediately after passing the 500 edit restriction imposed by ArbCom. WP:DUCK. Volunteer Marek 18:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Most of the sources you deleted were fine. Volunteer Marek 18:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Bob not snob: Can you list the sources you see as problematic (other than Fairweather and Fleming's review, for which there's no consensus ATM)? François Robere (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

And here you are FR, on yet another article that you've never edited before, showing up immediately after me. Volunteer Marek 01:20, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Volunteer Marek, you've removed an academic source (Fleming 2019) and replaced it with a newspaper article for the volunteering issue. I was about to add Fleming 2014, who also addresses this. SarahSV ^(talk) 00:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you provide the exact diff you're referring to? If you're talking about the article by Timothy Snyder then yeah, I think that's a better source than an off hand comment in a book review. Volunteer Marek 01:19, 15 February 2021 (UTC)