Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soviet repressions of Polish citizens (1939-1946)

Soviet repressions of Polish citizens (1939-1946)

Soviet repressions of Polish citizens (1939-1946) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

The article is a word for word verbatim copy/paste of the section from the Treatment of Polish citizens under Soviet occupation of the Occupation of Poland (1939–1945) article, thus nothing but a blatant POV-fork pasted exactly word for word from another article under a more POVed title. Irpen 02:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. Subject is obviously notable; there is a pl wiki equivalent; the article is well referenced. As I explained on article's talk it has been created per WP:SUMMARY; the occupaton article needs to be shortened, and this one expanded even further. The above nom is a sad case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, unfortunately.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. —_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, how can anybody ever come up with an idea of deleting such an important and factual article? There were Nazi crimes against ethnic Poles, just like there were Soviet repressions of Polish citizens (I would even rename this article into Soviet crimes against ethnic Poles). History cannot be changed according to some individual biases. Tymek (talk) 04:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

  The Nazi article is split since we have Holocaust in Poland concentrating on Jews, and Nazi crimes deals with genocide of ethnic Poles. Soviets did not distinguish by race as much and many Jews, Ukrainians and Belorusians, former Polish citizens, suffered at their hand as well. Soviets concentrated on class (rich suffered, poor not so much).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Officially they did not distinguish by the race, but all data shows that Poles suffered much more in the Polish Eastern Borderlands than other nationalities. Tymek (talk) 04:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I am not disputing that, but it was not as clear as in the case of Germans. The Soviets did not want to eliminate ethnic Slavs or ethnic Poles; they were more into eliminating Polish culture and assimilating Poles into the Soviet state. For Nazis, a good Pole was a dead Pole. For Soviets, transforming them into homo sovieticus would do. Granted; there was a major shift into less anti-Polish policies after Sikorski-Mayski agreement of 1941 (see Amnesty for Polish citizens in USSR), and later, after in 1944 Stalin decided to create a Polish puppet state; the policies of 1939-1941 were probably the hardest (vide Katyn massacre and so on).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, checking sources about Soviet occupation of eastern Poland between 1939 and 1941 I would say that their task, in cooperation with the Germans, was to eliminate ethnic Poles completely. After 1944 it was different, they wanted to keep Poland as a puppet state, this is true. Anyway, we are deviating from the subject. Tymek (talk) 06:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Tymek here, scholars studying the problem do point that that ethnic extermination of Polish nation stopped only in 1941 with Nazi invasion and the need to exploit Polish population as resource during the war. I would rename the article Soviet crimes against ethnic Poles, as Polish minority was repressed before 1939 in Soviet Union and after 1946.--Molobo (talk) 20:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep - I can see nothing wrong with the plan Piotrus has laid out. It is an extremely notable and important article, and Piotrus has created it in line with WP:SUMMARY. However, If someone can show me how the current title violates WP:UE or WP:NCGN, then of course it should be deleted immediately, and Piotrus should be blocked forever! Ostap 05:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. Article is well sourced, and subject is notable (as notable as this one). Moreover, the article exists on Polish wikipedia. Puark (talk) 19:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comment on the votes above. I am not saying that the article discusses an non-notable info. Neither that it is unreferenced. The problem is its being a classical POV fork - an exact text pasted from an existing article under a more POVed title. If someone pastes a half of History of Jews in Poland into a new article and titles in Polish Antisemitism that new article would also be "referenced", present valid content and "sourced". Still it would be a POV-fork. --Irpen 21:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, Expand and Rename Valid article, expand on attempts to destroy Polish minority in Soviet Union after 1920 till 1939, and repressions against Poles after 1946. Rename to Soviet crimes against ethnic Poles, just as Nazi crimes against ethnic Pols article.--Molobo (talk) 22:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. I don't see this as a POV fork but as expansion. I am not 100% happy with the title but "repression" seems to be a more neutral word than "crimes" (particularly in the absence of any legal framework for labeling them as such). It would seem necessary to show what exactly is POV about the topic, and I don't see that it is or that it veers away from the parent article in a significant fashion. We're not paper -- we can expand and calve articles as long as there are sources to guide us. --Dhartung | Talk 23:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. Perhaps we could allow editors some time to move and adjust content and summarize the original in the parent before we go around pouncing and nominating stuff for deletion? This sort of chewing up of editors' time to respond to yet another thing somewhere instead of working on content doesn't contribute to WP. Just a thought. —PētersV (talk) 01:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

P.S. To Irpen: It took you less than 24 hours after the initial article creation for you to nominate for deletion. And you nominated it for deletion a mere minute after you posted your first comment to the article's talk page. That would lead an impartial observer to conclude that you're monitoring Piotrus' editing and, more to the point, that you had no intent to actually discuss anything on the talk page (as in, await an explanation), you were merely rendering your verdict (of bad faith). I was rather hoping for a more positive 2008. —PētersV (talk) 02:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC) It's not too late, you can always withdraw the AfD. —PētersV (talk) 02:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)