Talk:Bereza Kartuska Prison/Archive 1

Archive 1

More sources

• Interview with Yuri Luhovy re Bereza Camp

where thousands of Ukrainian patriots were incarcerated without due process and in direct violation of the Polish Constitution is little known. Yurij Luhovy, a member of the Academy of Canadian Cinema and Television, is now close to completing a documentary film about this camp, a film based on authentic photographs, documents, archival footage, and eyewitness testimonials from survivors.

We were never certain of the reason. None was ever given. Ukrainians were arrested by the Polish police "bez prava zakhystu," without the right of a defense. This was illegal, of course, even under Polish law, but it was done anyway. My father had just finished law school in Ternopil and had just married my mother. They decided to settle in Brody; the year was 1938. He was supposed to work for two years under a lawyer for no pay. However, to survive they opened a fruit store. Nearby, a Polish man also had one, and he saw his business dwindling. My mother always thought that the reason for the denunciation of my father was this person's jealousy. One day my mother came to the store to bring my father some lunch but he was not there. The neighbors said that my father was arrested and taken to the Bereza Kartuzka concentration camp. This happened in June or July of 1939. That day about 17 other people from Brody alone were arrested and imprisoned.

Towards 1939 the majority were Ukrainians. In 1934 the population of the camp was about 250 people, but by September 1939 there were between 5,000 and 8,000 people, the majority of whom were Ukrainians. Just imagine the conditions, too. They used to sleep about 15 to a room when the camp first opened in 1934 but towards the end it was between 60 and 70 men to a room.

http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/2003/020325.shtml

Award-winning Montreal filmmaker Yurij Luhovy was completing a film about Bereza Kartuzka, the site between 1933 and 1939, of an infamous Polish concentration camp under the command of Col. Yanush Kostek-Biernacki where hundreds of Ukrainian patriots were incarcerated. Mr. Luhovy was interviewed for The Weekly (February 3) by Fran Ponomarenko. The film, the first part of a trilogy dealing with Ukraine under three occupations - Polish, Communist and Nazi - highlights the political situation in which Western Ukrainians found themselves under Polish rule between the two world wars.

Stuff to consider Bandurist (talk) 16:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

It is certainly interesting to see more material on this. Nonetheless I'd note that documentaries are not as reliable as academic works. And the director obviously is not neutral. It would be interesting to verify the claim that Ukrainians formed majority of the internees. PS. "We were never certain of the reason. None was ever given. Ukrainians were arrested by the Polish police..." - perhaps the OUN and its campaign of assassinations and such might be one of the reasons...? Both sides were guilty or escalating the hostilities; I certainly hope he doesn't ignore that and tries to paint a black and white picture.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

You are certainly right about documentaries. In order to let the audience get a better understanding of certain things often the wrong photosd or materials are used. This happened with the Holod film {{Harvest of Despair]] where photos from the 1923 famine in the Volga were incorporated and made to look like it happened in Ukraine. This caused a lot of problems later when it was brought to the attention of School Boards and Television stations. Mr Luhovy if I remember correctly was involved with that film. Hopefully this is not the case here. Bandurist (talk) 22:16, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible expansion from Idzio

Viktor Idzio (Ідзьо) in his book: Ukrainska Povstanska Armiya - zhidno zi svidchennia nimetskykh ta radianskykh arkhiviv - Lviv, 2005 ISBN 966-665-268-4

writes: p.6 As we can see from Soviet documents (neutral with regard to describing the activities of the OUN), after the murder by members of the OUN of the minister of internal affairs of Poland B. Piernatsky, what left the greatest stain in the genocide of the Ukrainian people, at the instigation of the president I. Mostsitsky from 17 July 1934 first in Poland, long before the fascist concentration camps) The Poles in this question can be regarded as the teachers of the Fascists)) there was formed a concentration camp for Ukrainian political prisoners. The direct responsibility for the establishment of the concentration camp was the Polish Voyevoda K. Biernacki, who contemporaries characterise as "a fearful sadist, who was not mentally normal". The place for the camp became the town of Bereza Kartuzka in Belarus. The concentration camp was surrounded with barbed wire, trenches - just like in the German Fascists would in the future.

The first prisoner of the camp 17 july 1934 became the activists of the Organization of Ukrainiannnationalists: R. Shukhevych, D. Hrytsai, V. Yaniv. The German Fascists copied the the Polish model and transfered it for their own needs in sadism and terror, so we shall briefly characterise European (because there are still the Bolsheviks) - Polish teachers of the "Concentration camp" movement.

As can be seen from documents, one can see two phases in the functioning of the Polish concentration camp of Bereza Kartuzka. The first falls on 1934-1937, Ukrainians among the political prisoners, by official statistics 176 men, and by unofficial statistics from Polish sources, murdered or tortured to death during questioning, died from disease, during escape, or disappeared without trace etc - 324 Ukrainians , mainly members of OUN.

AT the beginning of 1938, when the OUN in Poland became stronger, the Polish government without appelation sent 4500 Ukrainians to Bereza Kartuzka.

The first commandant of the concentration camp was Hrefner, and from January 1935 - Ju. Kamal. The Polish authorities were not patient with the Ukrainians, as in the German Concentration camps. A comparative analysis of sources gives us the right to underline, that the the Ukrainians in the concentration camps of the Germans were treated more humanely, than in the Polish camp of Bereza Kartuzka. As has been related by the members of the OUN who testified: Beatings (they would place boards to the backs and hit them with hammers), the forced labour, in order to break character, and the constant harasment, without provocation - solitary confinement, the banning of the use of Ukrainian language amongst the inmates etc. Each of the cells held 40 inmates, and did not have benches, tables and the floors were of concrete. So that the inmates would not sit, the floor was showered with water. After release from the camp the Ukrainians had the health destroyed or just died. T. Bulba-Borovetz, the otaman of the UIA "earned" as a result of his stay in Bereza Kartuzka epilepsy.

---

Anyway, rather than put this information into the article, I thought it might be prudent to discuss the information first, rather than butchering an article that to me has been finely crafted.

Recently there has been a documentary film made of Bereza Kartuzka by Yuri Luhovy from Montreal. The Ukrainian version has been released. The English version is currently being finished. Bandurist (talk) 12:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

This passage certainly contains some useful information (such as names). The piece however seems rather biased. First, to characterize situation of Ukrainians in Second Polish Republic as genocide is completly wrong. Second, the camp was as much a precursor of Nazi concentration camps as hundreds of similar prisons and internment camps all over the world; the comparison is evidently made in bad faith (need I remind that the total number of death in Beraza was under a dozen... to compare it to the Nazi - or Soviet - death factories is a simply offensive for the victims of the latter. That said, the current article lacks inline cites, and while the above translation is not clear, Idzio states that the death toll may be as high as 174 or 324 (not that it again is anywhere close the the Nazis or Soviet death tolls). But again, to state "the Ukrainians in the concentration camps of the Germans were treated more humanely" sounds extremly controversial to me. Last question: what are the academic credentials of Viktor Idzio and are there any reviews of this book (or other works) available? Due to high amount of controversial material, the source strikes me as possibly nationalistic - a Ukrainian counterpart of Wiktor Poliszczuk. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with a lot that you have written. I also would like to say how much I enjoy having the discussion and the manner in which we are having it. The peice does sound somewhat baised. It is taken from the introduction of a book of reproductions of archival Materials Idzio found in Moscow. I shall scan the rest of the book and see what else is interesting and pertinant. The death toll is larger. What are the parameters I cannot say. Did they all die in camp, or did they die as a result of their beatings in camp etc. The numbers obviously do not correspeond with th ePolish numbers, but from what I have read, all the documents regarding the camp are in the City Archive of Brest except for a small section regarding the detention of Germans in 1939. The Russians seemed to have access to original reliable materials.

Your comment re Germans treated the Ukrainians better also is also on the mark, but still it is hard to say. Some of the inmates of Bereza wound up in Sachsenhausen where the Germans apparently treated them better than the Poles.

Viktor Idzio is the Rector of the Ukrainian University in Moscow, He is a credible source. I met up with him in Crimea and had lunch with him in Yalta at a conference in 2005 where he gave me a copy of the book. His main work is publishing archival materials from Soviet and Russian sources which he has gotten access to in Moscow. Most of his work is published in Moscow and doesn't make the rounds of Ukraine. This is one of the first books published and geared towards West Ukraine. I am unaware of reviews of the book.Bandurist (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Might the name "D. Hrytsai" be a misspelling of "Hrytsak," with a "k"? Does anyone know what given name "D." was the initial of? Nihil novi (talk) 20:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe. Maybe I did a typo. I will check when I get home. Bandurist (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

No its Hrytsai in the book. Bandurist (talk) 04:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for checking. Nihil novi (talk) 04:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

disputed location

In the article the camp was a "former tsarist barracks" but some sources say it was a former Russian monastery. [1] What is correct? Ostap (talk) 01:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia "Biaroza" article states that after the November 1830 Uprising the Carthusian monastery (which gave the town half of its Polish name, Bereza Kartuska) was closed by Tsarist authorities and in 1866, after the January 1863 Uprising, the whole complex was partly demolished and the bricks were used to construct a Russian prison and barracks. Nihil novi (talk) 02:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. That clears is up. Thanks. Ostap (talk) 03:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

It was a common practice for Russian Empire to turn Catholic monasteries and such into barracks or magazines.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The latitude and longitude given on the page are only general (degrees and minutes) and do not actually locate the prison, just the town. They also do not give the location of the former Carthusian monastery, but are rather north of it, across the railroad tracks. From the aerial photos on Google Maps, no building resembling those pictured in the Wikipedia article now stands on the grounds of the former monastery...they do really appear to be in ruins. Prairie_Dad

Illustrations

I have a hand drawn map of the Camp and its location in Ukrainian and also some crappy touristy photos of the camp. Are they worth while putting up? Bandurist (talk) 13:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Put them in, and let's see. Nihil novi (talk) 22:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course. I'd suggest creating a Wikimedia Commons category for it if there isn't one already.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

More to consider

I guess that there will be much more interest in this topic now that the film is making an impact. The Ukrainian Encyclopedias are very sparse regarding the subject, but the books are beginning to have a lot of information - but sort it out.

To me it seems that initially the camp was initially an internment camp with a small number of inmates and which evolved in approximately 1938 to something quite horrible with cramped conditions where the food was substandard and torture was used. I am not a specialist in this area, but with the flood of inquirees that I can see coming some of these questions should be addressed before hand.

Things were difficult at that time, paticularly with regard to Ukrainians. I know that the Poles are very finicky about the subject of Nazi concentration camps on their territory and precise wording and descriptions.

I do know that when the Germans came and released the Ukrainians from Bereza some 800-900 enlisted in the Wehrmacht to join the Nachtigall and Roland divisions. Bandurist (talk) 19:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

See also Polish concentration camps.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not about Bereza victims, it's about prejudices

A Ukrainian killed or imprisoned by Poles deserves in this Wikipedia about 100 more place than a Ukrainian killed or imprisoned by Soviets. This is a Wikipedia, not a Bash-the-Poles-pedia. Start with the description of Soviet camps and mass executions and when you are finished go back after 5 years of hard work.

An example:

Category:Massacres in Ukraine

9 articles, among them

• Fântâna Albă massacre - Romanian victims
• Katyn massacre - was rather committed by Ukrainians, only a small number were victims
• Massacre of Lvov professors - Ukrainians might have prepared lists
• Kiev Pogroms (1919) - Ukrainian perpetrators
• Lviv pogroms, Pogroms in Ukraine - mostly Ukrainian perpetrators
• Babi Yar, 1941 Odessa massacre - mostly Jewish victims

Summarizing:

• Bykivnia is the only place when ethnic Ukrainians prevailed among victims. So this Wikipedia is quite anti-Ukrainian, because it doesn't inform about massacres of ethnic Ukrainians.

I add this category to Vinnytsia massacre and NKVD prisoner massacres to change the ratio. Xx236 (talk) 16:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Post 1939 fate of the camp

What happened to the camp after 1939, after 1941 and after 1944? Can we expand on that? --Kuban Cossack 14:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Good question.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Requested move

The name Bereza Kartuska Concentration Camp is a Library of Congress subject heading - see [2]. This is confirmed by a Google book search that shows many more hits on Bereza Kartuska concentration camp [3] than on Bereza Kartuska detention camp [4]. Novickas (talk) 16:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Google Books shows "concentration camp" 135, "detention camp" 7, "camp" 200.

However, if a consensus can be shown among serious, objective historians for "concentration camp," then let's "call a spade a spade"! Nihil novi (talk) 23:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

The 200 results for camp in Google Book search listed above did not exclude the word "concentration". There are other phrasings such as "a concentration camp was established at Bereza Kartuska", which would not show up on an exact quoted search on "Bereza Kartuska concentration camp". A search on bereza kartuska camp concentration -jews [5] yields 74 results. A search on bereza kartuska camp -jews -concentration [6] yields 39 results. Novickas (talk) 16:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose the most popular name is simply Bereza Camp, also the popular meaning of the word concentration camp is associated with facilities that served different role in WW2.--Molobo (talk) 22:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose. As I have explained earlier (this is the same line of reasoning Nihil Novi used above), the concentration camp is as correct as interment or detetion camp - but is is problematic due to WP:NPOV. The camp has also been called a prison, too. Therefore I see no reason to move it to the most controversial name, although I would support a move to Bereza Kartuska Internment Camp, which may be more correct than current one. PS. Some numbers from Google Print: BK Detention Camp - 1 ([7]), Detention Camp in Beraza - 1 ([8]), BK Internment Camp - 1 ([9]), B Internment Camp - 1 ([10]), Internment Camp in Beraza - 1 ([11]), BK Concentration Camp - 23 ([12]), Beraza Concentration Camp - 6 ([13]), Concentration Camp in Beraza - 7 ([14]), BK Camp - 1 ([15]), B Camp - 6 ([16]), BK Prison - 1 ([17]), B Prison - 5 ([18]).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Strong words in article titles are not prohibited. From Wikipedia:Naming conventions (events): Article names for current and historical events are often controversial. In particular, the use of strong words such as "massacre" can be a focus of heated debate. The use of particular strong words is neither universally encouraged nor discouraged. The spirit of these guidelines is to favour familiar terms used to identify the event. Rules to select a name should be applied in the following sequence: 1) If there is a particular common name for the event, it should be used even if it implies a controversial point of view. 2) If there is no common name for the event, and there is a generally accepted word used when identifying the event, the title should include the word even if it is a strong one such as "massacre" or "genocide" or "war crime". However, to keep article names short, avoid including more words than are necessary to identify the event. For example, the adjective "terrorist" is usually not needed. 3) If there is no common name for the event and no generally accepted descriptive word, use a descriptive name that does not carry POV implications.

Further on in this article is the statement "A generally accepted word is a word for which there is consensus, among scholars in the real world, on its applicability to the event." The Library of Congress' choice of "concentration camp" as a subject heading is a serious consensus, apart from its use by Harvard, Timothy Snyder, etc. Novickas (talk) 16:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Further, Piotrus' arguing against "controversial" and "strong" words in the titles is rather selective. He has no problems with various massacres, occupations, invasions, etc when those are "of Poland". When committed by Poland we strangely get him arguing against such terms and this tends to continue from article to article no matter what sources say. " Does anyone know why such inconsistency? --Irpen 02:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose. First of all, Google hits are not relevant. Radical trust for Google hits is one of reasons why Wikipedia is still laughed at in the academic world. Second, it was a detention camp. It is a huge difference between a place where people die by tens of thousands and a place where political opposition figures are detained. - Darwinek (talk) 23:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. Per Piotrus. Space Cadet (talk) 01:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppse - it's pure propaganda to use the same name for Auschwitz and Bereza. It's funny to discuss Soviet opinions about Bereza. What were Soviet opinions about Gulag?Xx236 (talk) 08:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support
• 1) The activities that happened in the camp are the activities which are associated with the definition of what a concentration camp is defined as.
• 2) All Ukrainian and Russian sources I checked, both Soviet, post Soviet and diaspora describe the camp as a concentration camp.
• 3) Professor Yaniv, who did his PhD on the psychological effects on prison in concentration camps and who was an inmate at the camp describes the camp as being a concentration camp.
• 4) Although the camp started out as an internment camp for a 3 month visit, it quickly changed, as did the environment within the camp. Inmates were not there for just 3 months, but some were interred there for 2 years. Some were tortured to the point of obtaining physical handicaps. There has been a deliberate understatement of the brutality within the camp and the true number of deaths. By 1938 conditions within the camp were disgusting. On top of this is seems that there was a cover up of these abuses and attrocities by Polish authorities.
• 5)Almost all of the camp documentation is located in the Brest archives which are in Belarus and were not available for perousal to non-Soviet scholars. This is changing. Bandurist (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• Strong support, Bereza Kartuska Concentration Camp is the most common name in English, that even more important that in Library of Congress Subject Headingsit is classified as concentration camp as well. So I do not see any reason why such popular name should not be used, and hardly "arguments" as pure propaganda is valid here. M.K. (talk) 11:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support per Bandurist --Splette :) ^{How's my driving?} 16:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support The description of camp and conditions fits the definition of concentration camp. Eduvalko (talk) 17:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Two issues involved.
  1. Does the place fit the basic dictionary definition of the term "concentration camp". It does. Look up the link and see for yourself.
  2. Is the place commonly called the "concentration camp" in other sources? Yes it does as shown earlier.
• Therefore, move to a proper name. --Irpen (talk) 21:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose There is a huge difference between a detention camp and a concentration camp. Google hits are not relevant, as they show any kind of pages, which are often created by people unfamiliar with the subject. Tymek (talk) 03:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose To cite Ukrainian and/or Russian sources to justify the move is not fair — Ukrainians were the ones, who suffered most in those camps, so their impartiality in this regard is naturally questionable. It should also be noted that the "concentration camp" name is used as anti-Polish accusaton, rather then a fact, notably by Polish communists. It was undoubtedly a gruesome place, and some atrocities have been committed there, but after the horrors of Nazi concentration camps the name came to imply a death camp, which this one wasn't. Changing it one way or the other is not going to solve anything but will rather inflame passions. Let's focus, on the contents rather then on useless battles over the name. --Hillock65 (talk) 04:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
  • My point exactly. Thank you for that voice of reason; -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 04:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Per Hillock65. Perhaps calling it an internment camp is most accurate though? Ostap (talk) 04:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Perhaps. I do wonder how to render the Polish term used for it - 'miejsce odosobnienia' - most correctly. Confinement camp, perhaps? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 05:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Why not just call it Bereza Kartuska camp and explain all of this in the article. Ostap (talk) 05:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

That's also a good idea. Or perhaps prison? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 05:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• Support. Wow, all this bad blood over this? I have never heard of the place until this discussion. Allow me to explain my position. First of all, I have to agree with Hillock65 that citing Russian and Ukrainian sources to justify the move makes no sense. The name of the camp in those languages and English do not necessarily carry over. A connotation of, for example, Ukrainian: концтабір is different in English than Ukrainian. Every language has its own word for what kind of "camp" it is, BUT we are not in the business of translation. Only sources in English need to be consulted in order to establish the name. Darwiner and Tymek raise the objection that Google hits are irrelevant...but this is not google hits. Bereza Kartuska Concentration Camp comes up most frequently in "Google Books" (I am not providing a link; please use one cite above or better yet check yourself). This fact is relevant, and reflects the state of knowledge on the subject among scholars. In English, the camp is called not "internment", "detention", or other, but "concentration camp."--Riurik^(discuss) 06:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. Having read this article and the one on Concentration camps, I don't see how this camp fits the definition, however badly the detainees there may have been treated. I suspect that the authors cited as referring to it as a concentration camp are using the term more as a pejorative than an accurate (encyclopedia-standard) description. --Kotniski (talk) 13:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support My scan of the Library of Congress catalog[19] did not indicate any English language headings, aside from the aforementioned Google Books mention. Still, my scan of various Google Books results indicates to me that "Bereza Kartuska concentration camp" is the most common terminology in English, regardless of author's background. WP is not necessarily to correct sources, but to reflect them. That the camp's status as a concentration camp or a detention camp is disputed can certainly be listed (with sources). In line with other articles at Category:Internment camps and Category:Concentration camps, only "Bereza Kartuska" should be capitalized in the title. An alternative would simply to move the article to Bereza Kartuska, which is currently a redirect to Biaroza. Olessi (talk) 21:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Disagree with the above: Surely we don't try to reflect sources when we know them to be wrong?! If we did that, Wikipedia might as well not exist at all - we could just let people do their own googling. If there are no substantial facts in any source to indicate that this place was a concentration camp (within the encyclopedic meaning of the term - the dictionary definition linked to above is so absurdly wide as to include almost any prison), then we shouldn't call it one. Of course there should be redirects from other names that have been applied to the place, including the concentration camp ones, and it should be mentioned in the article that these names are sometimes given, but we shouldn't give credence to a notion which goes against the facts just because it happens to be relatively widespread.--Kotniski (talk) 08:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles should be titled how the subject is mostly commonly known as in English publications. Various viewpoints regarding a title can be addressed within articles. From WP:NC(CN): "Wikipedia is not a place to advocate a title change in order to reflect recent scholarship. The articles themselves reflect recent scholarship but the titles should represent common usage." Olessi 19:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

True, however please consider Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Controversial_names and WP:NCON. WP:NPOV has to be considered and I would argue that a neutral title is better than more popular but also less neutral and more controversial title.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Which is why I would support a neutral title such as "Bereza Kartuska camp." Nihil novi 22:34, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

"Bereza Kartuska camp" also seems suitable to me. Olessi 00:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

And to me - although to make it even more clear, what about "Beraza Kartuska prison"?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 02:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

"Bereza Kartuzka Prison" to me seems the most logical choice, because it wasn't really a camp. It was a monastery that was converted by the Russians to a prison, which was later initially utilised by the Poles as a measure to stop or slow down dissent in the 30's. The photographs I have are of a large, solid rock structure with 3 floors. The map of the area and the layout is that of a typical Roman Catholic Monastery. One of the buildings was originally a RC church. As soon as you name it an CAMP, the word concentration is conjured up. remove camp from the title and you remove the connotation. Bandurist 02:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

These arguments for "Bereza Kartuska prison" seem to me compelling. At first I had doubts, until I realized that the word "camp" has no historic sanction: the institution's original Polish name actually translates as "Place of Isolation at Bereza Kartuska." The only English equivalent for "place of isolation" that comes to mind, apart from "quarantine," is indeed "prison." Nihil novi 03:29, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Asylum, perhaps? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 04:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

"Hermitage," too. Nihil novi 04:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I and surely many others are waiting for your photos to be uploaded to Commons! :) -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 03:18, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I second the sentiment. The photos, and the diagrams, too. Nihil novi 03:32, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll try today. But someone has placed a really good color photo up. The phot is facing South East within the main compound. That building is the main building of the prison where the prisoners were housed. The white shack was the "kartser" which was used for isolation or solitary confinement. South of the kartser is the well for drawing water and south of that the ablutions area. This whole area was encircled with electrified barb wire. Outside of this compound across the road were the house of the commandant and barracks for the officers. As you can see, one three story building do not a camp make. Bandurist 13:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

For the record, we have commons:Category:Biaroza monastery on Commons.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately the Library of Congress stores searches in a temporary cache that is deleted within a few minutes, and cannot be saved as a one-click result. Here is how one finds the subject heading: Go to [20]. Click on Basic Search, this brings up a new screen. Select the search type Subject Browse, and within the search text box, enter Bereza Kartuska. Click Begin Search. The next page brings up Bereza Kartuzka (Concentration camp) as a subject heading. Novickas (talk) 03:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips. Olessi 00:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The LoC decides if there exists Silesian language, now it decides what is the name of the Bereza Kartuska Detention Camp. How many Central-East European experts do they have there to instruct us? Any names of the experts? Part of Cyril Northcote Parkinson’s observations are that once a core organisation exists, it will perpetuate and expand itself regardless of the reason it came into being.Xx236 (talk) 08:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Absent a consensus, to this point, to move this article from "Bereza Kartuska Detention Camp" to "Bereza Kartuska Concentration Camp," should we consider, instead, a move, as proposed above, to "Bereza Kartuska prison"? Nihil novi (talk) 10:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move discussion, above

I have closed the above discussion, as it seems there is not a strong consensus to move this article to Bereza Kartuska concentration camp. Please note I have, however, moved it to Bereza Kartuska detention camp, purely to fix the capitalisation.

There was a suggestion to move it to Bereza Kartuska prison or Bereza Kartuska internment camp - to me, these seem like a fairly elegant solution that avoids the "concentration camp/detention camp" issue, and may warrant further discussion. Neil ☎ 11:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I will start an informal poll on those two names; please vote support or oppose and we will see which one we should RM (if any).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

BK prison

• Support. It is what it was. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support Polish sources do not describe the facility as a camp. Indeed after looking at photos of the "camp" it is not a series of wooden barracks, buta three story building which was once a monastery. With the intended release of an English language version of a documentary film about the facility,a lotf controvers will be avoided it the word camp is removed. Bandurist (talk) 20:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support per above arguments. --Kotniski (talk) 21:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support. The Polish "Miejsce Odosobnienia w Berezie Kartuskiej," if that was indeed its official name, does not translate as any kind of "camp" but as "Place of Isolation at Bereza Kartuska." Nihil novi (talk) 04:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

BK internment camp

BK camp

• Support. It was called something camp, this skips the controversial something issue. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. It wasn't officially called anything camp, and "camp" alone with no qualifier is hopelessly vague (it doesn't even imply a place of detention).--Kotniski (talk) 07:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

maybe not in Polish, but english sources use camp. Ostap (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

move to any one of the three

• support They all seem more accurate than the current title. Ostap (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 05:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Camp is more accurate than detention camp? Disagree.--Kotniski (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

In the light of the above (now somewhat old) discussion, I suggest we move have moved this to Bereza Kartuska prison.--Kotniski (talk) 11:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Belarusian nationalists

Dzied Bulbash, you are changing "several" to "a number of" Belarusian nationalists being detained in Bereza. Did they make a significan portion of the inmates ? --Lysy^talk 18:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC) "Several" means "a few". The cited book says "many". "A number of" is a more neutral term. I don't have the number right away. But it was definitely not 5-6. It was in hundreds. Dzied Bulbash (talk) 19:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, I found it, the total of the inmates in 1934-1939 was about 3 thousand. Of these 43% were Poles, 33% Jews, 17% Ukrainians, 6% Belarusians, 1% Germans. So in total there were about 180 Belarusians over the period of 5 years. 84% of them were political prisoners which translates to about 150 inmates. --Lysy^talk 20:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed. In some books I have seen the number 180. Thanks. Dzied Bulbash (talk) 20:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Please clarify the source

For 7000 inmates: [21]. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Copied from Piotrus' talk page.

Please take a closer look at that one and only source. [22] It says right up-front (in its own subhead) that "all claims are unofficial". The article and its commercially driven sponsor both stir controversy for the purpose of Internet traffic. A definite candidate for AfD unless more reliable sources are found. --Poeticbent talk 19:11, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

The more I articles I see on this page [23], the more surprised I get. Looks like this is a nationalist agenda, which glorifies the Ukrainian Nazi division and UNA-UNSO (Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian National Self Defence). Look here [24], I have serious doubts, if this page can be regarded a reliable source. Tymek (talk) 22:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Still looking for information in Ukrainian sources. The author is a deputate to the Ukrainian parliament from the Volyn region, however it is disturbing to note that only the one mention can be found from 2003. One would have thought that mre would have surfaced by now.

Shall try the USS and Memorial sites this weekend. Otherwise I guess it should be removed. Bandurist (talk) 11:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Here is the same source: The inspiration for the establishment of a detention centre for political prisoners at Bereza Kartuzka came from Hermann Göring during his visit to Poland in 1934. Is there a consensus about reliability of this site? Seems not reliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hedviberit (talk • contribs) 01:17, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

References

name of the article

the latest renaming of the article was done without any discussion and it has to be undone.  Dr. Loosmark  13:40, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Motion to rename to Concentration camp

If you read the description of what a concentration camp is, the camp fits this description. See Internment

Use of the word concentration comes from the idea of concentrating a group of people who are in some way undesirable in one place, where they can be watched by those who incarcerated them. For example, in a time of insurgency, potential supporters of the insurgents are placed where they cannot provide them with supplies or information.

The term concentration camp lost some of its original meaning after Nazi concentration camps were discovered, and has ever since been understood to refer to a place of mistreatment, starvation, forced labour, and murder. The expression since then has only been used in this extremely pejorative sense; no government or organization has used it to describe its own facilities, using instead terms such as internment camp, resettlement camp, detention facility, etc, regardless of the actual circumstances of the camp, which can vary a great deal.

In all Ukrainian and Russian sources I have looked at these past days it is so described. The memoirs of Ukrainians who were interred there also fits this description. It is understood that in the 30'sd it was not referred to as such in Polish sources but it does fit the description.

I propose that the article be renamed to reflect that it was a concentration camp.

I think that the chronology should be divided setting out 1938 and 1939 separately when things drastically changed and 5000 guys were crammed into the facility. Also it maybe prudent to include a section on the internal culture of the camp. It looks like it was almost like a school for fostering anti-Polish sentiment and ideas amongst the inmates.Bandurist (talk) 12:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Richard M. Watt, in Bitter Glory: Poland and Its Fate, 1918 to 1939 (New York, Simon and Schuster, 1979, pp. 301-2) does call the Bereza Kartuska camp a "concentration camp." I wonder whether, given the various phases of the camp's history and the varied connotations of the expression "concentration camp," one might better call it "Bereza Kartuska Camp"?

Watt writes:

"There were a few other trials of persons accused of one sort of anti-government activity or another during this period, but none resulted in a long sentence, although in 1934 the government established a concentration camp for political prisoners at Bereza Kartuska near the eastern border of Poland.

"In fairness, it must be said that the Piłsudski government's repressive actions toward its opponents were not very extensive nor very violent. The Bereza Kartuska concentration camp was opened only after a Ukrainian terrorist assassinated the Polish minister of the interior on June 15, 1934. The total number of people who passed through the concentration camp during the five years of its existence did not exceed five hundred – and most of these were either Ukrainian nationalists or currency-exchange offenders against whom the government may well have had fairly strong cases, but cases that could not be proved in court. Although the Piłsudski regime had certainly become authoritarian, its counteropposition activities could not be compared to those of many other European governments during this decade of emerging fascism. The government's enemies were not often persecuted; they were just ignored and reduced to the role of bystanders in the political process.

"In fact, Piłsudski regarded fascism as a menace and some of his government's most immoderate attacks were directed against it. These antifascist moves came to a head in 1934, when the government dissolved several crypto-fascist parties that had arisen out of the Right-wing National Democratic Party. One of these groups, the National Radical Camp (ONR), patterned itself closely after the German Nazis, complete with anti-Semitic extremism. Perhaps because of the frustrations caused by the Depression, these fascist-type parties quickly developed a following among Polish university students, most of whom were very conservative. But in 1934, the Piłsudski government moved against these groups. It declared them illegal and flung some of the ONR leaders into the concentration camp at Bereza Kartuska. This did not do away with fascism in Poland, however. Nor did it eliminate anti-Semitism. But for the time being, it eliminated any openly fascist activities from the Polish political scene." Nihil novi (talk) 21:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Interesting stuff. On the one hand you havemoderation and ettiquette, but on the other hand the picture being painted by the Ukrainians is somewhat different I'm getting the feeling that the whole truth is still not out there. The numbers for almost everything are different in every source.

My interpretation is bending towards what the Russians and Ukrainians are saying. To me Watt seems to not have had access to Ukrainian testimonies and materials. From what I have read, the bulk of the inmates were Ukrainian. (My estimate from what I have read is about 80%) Some were members of OUN but a percentage of these were communists and even some non-nationalists, people who stubbornly supported the Orthodox church. Polish sources however tend to focus more on Polish opponents to the regime.

Aparently the archives of the camp, all the documents are currently in the Brest City Archives. Bandurist (talk) 21:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

If credible, objective information exists on torture of inmates at the Bereza Kartuska camp, Ukrainians or otherwise, the salient points should be included in the article. (Before and during World War II, torture and murder were at times used by both Poles and Ukrainians.) Nihil novi (talk) 22:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Which article informs about anti-terrorist repressions both in pre-war Poland and SU? Numbers of imprisoned, killed? There is no gulag camps list here, no names of Ukrainian prisoners. Probably the only article mentioning Ukrainians is Kengir uprising. Xx236 (talk) 08:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall the numbers Śleszyński in his Obóz odosobnienia..., someone here at this wiki cited them as follows (in brackets I give the percentage of that ethnic group within the Polish nation according to the 1931 census):

• Poles 43% (68%)
• Jews 33% (8,6%)
• Ukrainians 17% (10%)
• Belarusians 6% (3,1%)
• Germans - 1% (2,3%)

Which IMHO proves that the 80% of Ukrainians thingie doesn't hold the water. //Halibutt 11:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

What happened later

A summary of crimes committed by former Bereza inmates would be very usuful to understand the problem. Xx236 (talk) 09:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Renaming of the article to Concentration camp Bereza Kartuska

I would like again reinitiate the topis of this article renaming, for the following reasons:

• 1) Section in this article named "Concentration camp" is a direct translated copyivo from respective Polish article
• 2) The respective section in Polish WP article and here is original research, because its source (Wojciech Śleszyński, Aspekty prawne utworzenia obozu odosobnienia w Berezie Kartuskiej i reakcje środowisk politycznych. Wybór materiałów i dokumentów, Беларускі Гістарычны Зборнік – Białoruskie Zeszyty Historyczne nr 20). I am very proficient in Polish and it is relatively easy for me to establish that this phrase "It was later popularized by communist propaganda,[14] which cited the prison as evidence that Poland's prewar government had been a "fascist" regime (despite the fact that Piłsudski had regarded fascism as a menace and that some of his government's most immoderate attacks had been directed against home-grown fascism[15])" is nowhere found in Śleszyński article. Such original research by Polish authors, in hopes that nobody knows Polish language, could be easily traced.
• 3) Ironically, not only communist opposition newspaper, but the right newspaper of the Polish authorities - „Gazeta Polska” in July 1934, named this as concentration camp (Obozy koncentracyjne in Polish). Therefore above statement which is "sourced" to Śleszyński, in fact is refuted in Śleszyński article which gives sources.
• 4) Foreign press in the same period named it as concentration camp, especially The Times, The Times "Anti-Jewish Agitation in Poland" March 24, 1938 http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/5315/articleb.jpg The Times "M. Biernacki to be tried" [2] November 23, 1946 http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/2428/bezeracamp3.jpg
• 5) Yale University professor Timothy Snyder names it concentration camp
• 6) Google search in Polish for Concentration camp Bereza Kartuska http://www.google.com/search?q=Oboz+koncentracyjny+Bereza+Kartuska shows 1910 results with unque pages leading to very interesting materials not covered in Polish WP and English WP>
• 7) Polish-British historian Tadeusz Piotrowski names it concentration camp
• 8) Polish Nobel prize-winning author Czesław Miłosz names it concentration camp http://books.google.com/books?id=11MVdBYUX5oC&pg=PA383&dq=%22whims+and+resentments%22&sig=rcBrQw2F3MDMAodBJvZNiLpT4j0
• 9) I am silent about Belarusian textbooks on history which universally name it as concentration camp. I hope that Polish authors here would show respect to this topic as it touches significantly the history of Belarus, which canot be written from only Polish POV. I suggest to make a separate section on POV of POlish historiography if Polish authors desire so.
• 10) Google search in English for http://www.google.com/search?hl=ru&q=concentration+camp+Bereza+Kartuska shows healthy 2040 results leading among all to POlish official authorities sites like www.msz.gov.pl, Hutchinson encyclopedia article (!!!).

I wonder how many Polish historians name it as a prison? Then we would list it as Polish historiography POV on Bereza Kartuska.

Copy there intial thread {source: User talk:Vlad fedorov#Bereza}:

Hi Vlad, there is a number of controversial subjects which you used to edit together with our senior Polish editors, keeping the POV balance in check. I hope that in the coming year, you won’t be tempted to take unfair advantage of the fact that they are on an involuntary leave from Eastern Europe now. Poland and Belarus are sovereign countries with their Soviet affiliations fading away into history. The same can be said about Russia, and its Soviet past. There’s no advantage in misrepresenting our mutual interests especially, that there’s nobody there anymore to argue your point. That’s why, I would love to form a common front with you to deal with historical controversies, such as Bereza Kartuska prison, for example.

I noticed, you moved the article from "prison" to "concentration camp" explaining in your edit summary that "Belarusian textbooks on history, as well as number of Foreign sources, unanimously refer to it as concentration camp." -- I checked the Google books. Please see: State Archives of Brest Region | Archives of Belarus. Quote: "The Archive holds the founds of the Bereza Kartuska prison camp, which was created by the Polish government in 1934 in the Polesie voivodeship... (archives.gov.by/eng/index.php?id=872100)[25] I think, that the title "Bereza Kartuska prison" (in accordance with both Polish and Belarusian Archives) would have been a lot more neutral in this instance. And also, the numbers quoted from the Soviet sources would have to be checked for their reliability, because of how controversial they sound. Would you be willing to work with me on that one? -- Poeticbent (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

My Dear Ryszard, I strongly urge you for the first time in your life (as an "expert" in Polish history) to read the article on Biaroza Kartuska in Polish Wikipedia. I would like especially ask you to copy into English Wikipedia the fourth Section describing the treatment of prisoners, which was created on the basis of Polish commission report created in 1939. I believe that intentional starving of people and forced meaningless labor are very akin to the methods used in Auschwitz III, the only thing missing is gas chambers and classic music orchestra playing Frederic Chopin.

I would like also remind you of the existence of those unpatriotic Polish historians who name it as concentration camp like Agnieszka Knyt and Tadeusz Piotrowski, also Polish nobel prize winner Czesław Miłosz, prof Timothy Snyder from Yale University as very NPOVish stated here in Polish Wikipedia.

Other sources: I would cite them in Polish, at your permission:

• „Gazeta Polska” 1934, czerwiec. Fragment artykułu usprawiedliwiającego powstanie obozu odosobnienia.

"Obozy koncentracyjne. Tak. Dlaczego? Dlatego, że widać owych osiem lat pracy nad wielkością Polski, osiem lat przykładu i osiem lat osiągnięć, osiem lat krzepnięcia — nie wystarczyło dla wszystkich. Pomyślcie tylko: jest tu wśród nas człowiek, który zamordował. Z tego, co wiemy o zamachu zdaje się nie ulegać wątpliwości, że nie był sam, że nie sam przygotowywał zabójstwo".

• „Wielka Polska”, 1934, listopad 18. Treść wystąpienia posłów prawicowych w sprawie powołania i funkcjonowania obozu odosobnienia w Berezie Kartuskiej.

„Bito więzionych przy każdej sposobności; bito na korytarzach obozu, kiedy więzieni biegli na rozkaz policji, bito przy pracy, kiedy wycieńczeni totalnemi warunkami odżywiania i pomieszczenia więźniowie nie mogli sprostać ciężkiemu wysiłkowi fizycznemu. Bicie to nie stanowiło wyjątku, gdyż było wykonywaniem zasad postępowania i postanowione przez władze obozu. I tak zaraz po przywiezieniu pierwszej partji uwięzionych podinspektor Greffner, w ich obecności, zwrócił się do policjantów z poleceniem, aby „walili prosto w łeb”, w razie, jeżeli uznają to za potrzebne. Nadto jeden z zastępujących p. Greffnera komisarzy policji, przyjmując nową partię uwięzionych, odezwał się do nich: „Świat nie widział tego, co my wam urządzimy”.

• „List z obozu koncentracyjnego” — ulotka kolportowana nielegalnie w środowiskach lewicowych (brak daty i miejsca publikacji — prawdopodobnie przełom 1934 i 1935 roku).

"Celem obozu izolacyjnego w Berezie Kartuskiej jest — według oświadczenia jego komendanta Grefnera17 — bicie fizyczne i moralne aresztantów. „Dla więźnia opuszczającego Berezę, będą tylko dwie drogi — na cmentarz lub do szpitala”.

• Warszawa, 1935, październik. Rezolucja konferencji stowarzyszeń demokratycznych w sprawie amnestii dla więźniów politycznych i zlikwidowania obozu w Berezie Kartuskiej.

"1. Zebrani na konferencji zwołanej przez Ligę Obrony Praw Człowieka i Obywatela w dniu 16 października 1935 roku delegaci niżej podpisanych stowarzyszeń oraz działacze społeczni wyrażają protest przeciwko [złemu] traktowaniu więźniów politycznych, pozbawianiu ich najprymitywniejszych praw, ustawicznemu moralnemu i fizycznemu wyniszczaniu, wysuwają żądanie całkowitej niezwłocznej amnestii dla więźniów politycznych, protestują przeciwko systemowi nieludzkiego znęcania się nad więźniami Berezy Kartuskiej, przeciwko bezprawiu, jakiego wyrazem jest samo istnienie obozu dla internowanych, i domagają się niezwłocznego zlikwidowania tzw. miejsca odosobnienia w Berezie Kartuskiej, jak również uchylenia rozporządzenia Pana Prezydenta Rzeczypospolitej o miejscu odosobnienia".

The article on Biaroza Kartuska concentration camp would be of course developed by me on the basis of abovementioned and numerous other sources. Please note that here I cited sources other than Belarusian and Russian. Imagine what is written in them.

Belarusian historic treatment of Biaroza Kartuska as concentration camp is more than developed. I hoped that you and Loosmark in good faith, without usual Polish cover-ups like in Jedwabne cases, would agree to the renaming of the article. Vlad fedorov (talk) 19:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

A prison doesn't become a concentration camp because of the way prisoners were treated; it becomes one if it's used for concentration (of a population). This clearly wasn't. --Kotniski (talk) 21:09, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

• I already replied to Vlad at his talk page,[26] unaware that (in the meantime) he copy-pasted our discussion here into this article talk. But I agree, that a concentration camp serves a specific purpose usually different from a prison. --Poeticbent talk 21:48, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

My dear Polish friends,

First, Bereza Kartuska was not a prison. Could you please source your original research that it was prison? It was officially named as "miejsce odosobnienia" and shall I teach you how is it translated into English? If we follow your logic then you should exclude every mentioning in WP of Soviet "concentration camps". I am just wondering how quick were Poles at naming Soviet Gulag's as concentration camps, and how resistant are Poles for naming Bereza Kartuska as concentration camp.

I also would like to note that in Homiel (Gomel) Nazi concentration camp was very small, and it was created mainly not for concentration of population, but for extermination of Soviet prisoners of war. Why is it named concentration camp then? It was very small, it's 200 meters from my flat and it had a half-square of "8th March" plant.

Gulag's also were not created as a place for concentration of population or for extermination, yet they are called concentration camps.

Pan Kotnicki amused me by his unique and original understanding of concentration camp. Polish definitions are always a source of miracles and wonders. Please make a search in Wikipedia or please have a look in:

The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed. defines concentration camp as: a camp where non-combatants of a district are accommodated, such as those instituted by Lord Kitchener during the South African war of 1899-1902; one for the internment of political prisoners, foreign nationals, etc., esp. as organized by the Nazi regime in Germany before and during the war of 1939-45. Literally, a Concentration Camp is a place where enemies, perceived undesirables and others are "concentrated", or all placed together, in one controlled environment, usually extremely unpleasantly.

I guess this definition "for the internment of political prisoners, foreign nationals, etc." clearly makes Bereza Kartuska a concentration camp.

We have so many sources naming it as concentration camp, List of concentration and internment camps already lists Bereza Kartuska. Why you hinder renaming?

Jewish comminity names Polish Ghettoes as concentration camps. What then could be said about Bereza Kartuska?

German community regards Bereza Kartuska as concentration camp http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/deathinpoland/dp10.html.Vlad fedorov (talk) 05:19, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

The place was clearly a prison, if the article is in any way accurate - it was a place where prisoners were locked up. Bad things allegedly happened to many of those prisoners - that doesn't make the place any less of a prison. I don't understand this insistence on calling it a "concentration camp" (the point seems to be to make it seem a worse place, which is also the apparent motivation of the other authors who have called it thus). It certainly seems ridiculous to put "citation needed" tags after the word "prison". A more pressing problem with this article than playing games with the name would seem to be to resolve the huge discrepancy between what Idzio says and what the other sources say (800 vs. 4500 prisoners; 17 vs. hundreds of deaths etc.) Do we know whether this Idzio is reliable? What are his sources?--Kotniski (talk) 07:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I concur. Well stated. Nihil novi (talk) 08:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

My God, when you tell prison, then people whom you send to prison (prisoners), must be people who were sentenced by the judicial body (court). When dictatorship state, like Pilsudski sanation Poland, adminsitratively (eg. without any due process, without any courts) send specific group to specific place, because they are political opponents, then how could it be a prison? If Bereza Kartuska is prison, then any Soviet Gulag camp is world class penitentiary establishment, because every single prisoner of Gulag was sentenced in the courts, unlike in Poland where people were literally taken from homes and streets and thrown into this concentration camp.

And you still haven't provided reputable verifiable sources for the term "prison", please do not remove my markers if you don't support it with sources. I again remind you that even Polish WP article doesn't name it as prison. Vlad fedorov (talk) 12:24, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

A prison is a place where prisoners are imprisoned. It doesn't imply it's a nice place or that they came to be there through any legitimate process. We are not in the business of moral judgment here, just description. Concentration camp is a different type of thing, not necessarily better or worse, than a prison.--Kotniski (talk) 12:35, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Imprisonment is criminal law punishment applied by the court (judicial body). Every lawyer would say that imprisonment is a legal remedy, but in case with Bereza Kartuska, Poland was illegaly and in contradiction to its own Constitution detaining people in isolation camp.

I have asked you to provide sources which support the naming Bereza Kartuska as "prison", and you haven't provided them. Vlad fedorov (talk) 13:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok first I'd like to say that I renamed the article back because the move was done without any discussion whatsoever. Now to adress some points of debate here:
1) To compare a concentration camp like Auschwitz, where over a million (1000000) Jewish people died in gas chambers, with a prison like Bereza Kartuska where 10 or 20 prisoners died is simply crazy.
2) Pilsudski's regime was not fascist, it was in fact socialist-leftist.
3) Bereza Kartuska was a political prison, among the first prisoners were Polish ring-wing nationalists and fascists, which was probably a good thing.
4) If this prison is renamed into a concentration camp then we have to rename tons of Soviet prisons which operated under similar or worse conditions as concentration camps. I think that would be silly.  Dr. Loosmark  13:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Your answer is not clearly an answer, it is emotions. Where is your reasoning why it should be called prison? Please, consider the proposal below. Vlad fedorov (talk) 13:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

What emotions? And you have already accused me on your talk page that I am playing games with the EEML (when I am not a member of the EEML and wasn't even aware that anybody else oposed the move). It would be nice if you withdraw the personal attacks. But just to make it clear I'm not saying it should be named just "prison" I am only against being it called "concentration camp" which it was not.  Dr. Loosmark  14:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

One small but important clarification, I wrote it as part of response to Poeticbent as it could be clearly seen on my talk page, who clearly was EEML member , and I just notified you of my response. I dont' know how it came that you have interpreted EEML part addressed to Poeticbent, as directed at you. Przepraszam, jezeli Pan straktowal to inaczej. Vlad fedorov (talk) 14:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposal

Ok, let us leave "concentration camp" as it is. However, I think proposal to rename it to its original name - "oboz odosobienia" - "isolation camp" is more than fair, and it would then correspond to Polish wikipedia line. How it goes? It was not "ordinary" prison. It was illegal camp for political opponents of Great Poland and contradicted to the Constitution of Poland.Vlad fedorov (talk) 13:47, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm concerned that you keep talking as if it's our job to make judgments as to the legality or morality of this place. Whether it contradicted some constitution, or whether the prisoners were mistreated, is quite irrelevant to what we call it (though we should certainly try to sort out these matters in the article, since we have rather confused and contradictory statements at the moment). That said, I agree that some name involving "camp" might be more helpful than "prison". We could use "Isolation Camp" as a translation of the Polish name (though I guess it's not really used in English), or we could use "internment camp" or "detention camp" as a fair description. --Kotniski (talk) 14:27, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with you that it's not our job to make judgements, what I ask for is sources. And I find no reason for it to be named a prison, because there are no mainstream sources naming it so. Neither official authorities, nor political forces used such a term during Defenzywa. Vlad fedorov (talk) 14:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

However, independent interbellum sources most certainly did refer to Bereza Kartuska as a concentration camp.Varsovian (talk) 12:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

The article on pl wikipedia is called "Place of detention in Bereza Kartuska".  Dr. Loosmark  14:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

The Polish "Miejsce Odosobnienia" ("Place of Isolation") perfectly describes the former Alcatraz Prison in San Francisco Bay, California, which was established at that site precisely because it was isolated (and thought to be escape-proof). Yet it was called a "prison," not a "concentration camp." The Polish term might otherwise be rendered in English as "Bereza Kartuska Isolation Site." "Bereza Kartuska Prison" (with "Prison" capitalized) seems to me simpler and handier.

The morality or constitutionality of the institution is somewhat beside the point. Many prisons in the world are run in an immoral or unconstitutional way. And the historic British, German, Soviet, American and other concentration camps were presumably legal in the eyes of their governments. Nihil novi (talk) 15:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Alcatraz Prison is called a prison because it is a part of the criminal justice system. The prisoners at Alcatraz had been charged with and convicted of various crimes. They were also not treated in an inhumane way, unlike the poor sods at Bereza Kartuska.Varsovian (talk) 12:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

So you think the lucky sods at Abu Ghraib prison were properly convicted and humanely treated? (Hint: no. The use of the word "prison" in English doesn't imply any of these things.)--Kotniski (talk) 13:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

The prisoners in the prison were convicted. The detainees were held in 'camps'. Please read Abu Ghraib prison and pay particular attention to "The prison is used for housing only convicted criminals, with suspected criminals, insurgents or those arrested and awaiting trial held at other facilities, commonly known as "camps" in U.S. military parlance."Varsovian (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

That may have been true at the particular time that sentence was written (note the present tense). Manadel al-Jamadi, for one, doesn't seem to have had much of a trial.--Kotniski (talk) 14:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

You are entirely correct that he didn't get a trial. However, a number of guards at the Abu Ghraib facility did get trials and were mostly found guilty. How many guards at Bereza Kartuska were convicted of mistreating inmates? Varsovian (talk) 14:20, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

The question should be - how many Bereza Kartuska guards were murdered without a fair trial or were imprisoned and tortured like Wacław Kostek-Biernacki. Xx236 (talk) 09:15, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I support "detention camp". "Isolation camp" sounds weird for English language and the place was actually really far from being a "concentration camp" or merely a "prison". For all involved, especially for Vlad, I suggest to read book or article by Wojciech Śleszyński, which I've added to references year and half ago. It is based on extensive research of historical documents and relations of detainees. Just one more comment to the article itself. The section about the name should be filled with sources using other names and Idzio's controversial unreferenced claims removed. After that the NPOV tag should be removed, as the rest of the article is quite neutral. - Darwinek (talk) 22:27, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Darwinek, if you write about original research, then it's exactly because I've read Sleszynski (I have no Polish keyboard) I have found no such thing "Bereza was used by Soviet propaganda to prove that Poland is fascist". Vlad fedorov (talk) 15:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Interesting source

Макар, Володимир - Makar Volodymyr

Береза Картузька - Bereza Kartuzka (Спомини з 1934-35 рр.) - Memoires from 1934-35

Торонто 1956 - Toronto 1956

Can be downloaded as a pdf file from here: [[27]] Bandurist (talk) 22:53, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Number of casualties

Norman Davies in his God's Playground, widely recognized as one of the most authoritative histories of Poland, confirms 17 as the number of death. The article states however that: Ukrainian historian, Viktor Idzio, states that according to official statistics, 176 men – by unofficial Polish statistics, 324 Ukrainians – were murdered or tortured to death during questioning, or died from disease, while escaping, or disappeared without trace. First of all, are we sure that Idzio claims that there were 176 to 324 fatalities, or just that that many people were tortured? What are his sources? Is he a reliable historian? I am afraid that we need to consider WP:UNDUE/WP:FRINGE here. PS. I also find dubious his claims that majority of prisoners were OUN members; Encyklopedia Interia does not even mention Ukrainians in its short enumeration of prisoner types ("communists, left-wing activists, some right-wing and peasant party's activists, economic criminals"). Perhaps it is time sensitive; Subtelny notes that in 1934 when the camp was estabilished, most of its 2000 prisoners were Ukrainian (this makes sense as it was created in the aftermath of OUN assassination of Pieracki); but he notes on the following page that in 1935 there was a stabilization of Polish-Ukrainian relations and "most of the Ukrainian prisoners of Bereza were freed". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The numbers Idzio gives in his book are what is on the page. I could scan it and send it to you if you would like. As far as I know, Idzio is a respected scholar. I personally know him, and he is extremely careful living in Moscow and working the archives that he has access to.

Here is a translation of the passage on pag 7:

The first prisoners of the concentration camp 17th July 1934 became the prominant activists of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists: R. Shukhevych, D. Hrytsai, V. Yaniv. The German fascists practically copied the Polish model and used it for their own needs for the fulfillment of sadism and terror, so we will breifly characterise the European (there are also the Russian Bolshevik) - Polish teachers of the "Concentration camp" movement.

As shown by the documents, one can see two phases in the functioning of the Polish concentration camp of Bereza Kartuzka. The first falls on 1934-37, where there were Ukrainians among the political prisoners, by official statistics, 176 men, by unofficial witnesses from the Polish side, murdered, tortured to death during questioning, deaths from disease, escapees, people who disappeared without trace and others - 324 Ukrainians, mainly members of the OUN.

At the beginning of 1938, when the OUN movement in Poland became stronger, the Polish administration threw into Bereza Kartuzka without appeal 4500 Ukrainians.

The first commandant of the concentration cam was Hrefner and from January 1935 - Yu. Kamal'. The attitude of the Polish administration to the Ukrainians was intolerable, as it was later in the German concentration camps. A comparitive analysis of the sources gives us the right to note that to the Ukrainians in the concentration camps the Germans were much more humane than the Poles in Bereza Kartuzka. As told by the members of the OUN who were interned there: beatings (they placed boards to ones back and hit it with heavy hammers), compulsory physical labour, in order to break the will, the constant fast pace, constant nagging, without povocation - solitary confinement, the ban on the speaking of Ukrainian language amongst each other etc.

In each of the cells an average of 40 prisoners were interned, there were no benches, tables and the floor was concrete. So that the prisoners would not sit, they were covered with water. Most Ukrainian prisoners after being released had poor health or soon died. As a result T. Bulba-Borovetz, the otaman of the first groupings of the UPA "earned" in Bereza Kartuzka epilepsy.

(Page 7)

Bandurist (talk) 11:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The real world number, e.g., exactly how many were OUN, is not the editing question. Idizio is the historian we are citing, so we say "according to" and leave it at that. I've done so and removed the 5 year old dubious tag. – S. Rich (talk) 17:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Naming controversy

The section covers the subject. There is no need to rewrite the article to concentration camp. If you have authoritative sources you should rather ask for renaming to concentration camp rather than editing the article without quoting sources.Xx236 (talk) 06:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Ploease dicuss any changes here, not on my page.Xx236 (talk) 12:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Please read an extensive discussion on this subject in this talk page, which ended fruitlessly by the end of 2009 (probably sizzled by the Christnmas/New Year times). Staszek Lem (talk) 20:23, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

See also article section Bereza Kartuska prison#Naming controversy. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:34, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

• Only in extremely rare circumstances do we call a detached, singular, and self-sustaining prison building, a concentration camp. In most cases however, a prison building made of red brick and surrounded by a fence like all prisons, is called a prison. Then of course, there's the Soviet-era nomenclature with all the propaganda bells and whistles painting Poland black. We do not call Montelupich Prison, nor Pawiak a concentration camp regardless of their grizzly World War II history under Nazi Germany. Poeticbent talk 02:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Bereza Kartuska saved Polish communists

Communist propaganda criticised Bereza prison, but the prison saved lives of many Polish communists. The ones not imprisoned went to Moscow and died.Xx236 (talk) 07:25, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bereza Kartuska prison. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100226215403/http://kresy24.pl:80/showArticles/article_id/39 to http://kresy24.pl/showArticles/article_id/39/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722135314/http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/5315/articleb.jpg to http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/5315/articleb.jpg
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/2428/bezeracamp3.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927014150/http://www.trybuna.com.pl/n_show.php?code=2005021703 to http://www.trybuna.com.pl/n_show.php?code=2005021703

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:55, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bereza Kartuska prison. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080115150327/http://niniwa2.cba.pl:80/bereza_kartuska.htm to http://niniwa2.cba.pl/bereza_kartuska.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Naming controversy

Following the today's fashion of naming concentration camps from the place where they are now located (as in Auschwitz being Polish concentration camp because of its current location on the territory that is now governed by the Republic of Poland), Bereza Kartuska should probably be now advertised as a Byelarussian concentration camp. Therefore I expect a long campaign in "independent" media to establish this name equally as they are trying to establish that Auschwitz and other German death camps are Polish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.249.94.191 (talk) 01:18, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

What is a concentration camp?

There are a lot of misunderstandings, so I will quote the definition used in scholarly sources:

What is a concentration camp? A working definition is that it is an isolated, circumscribed site with fixed structures designed to incarcerate civilians. A concentration camp is not normally a death camp, although death camps in the context of the Holocaust obviously derived from concentration camps and the killing of asylum patients (the so-called ‘Euthanasia programme’) in terms of their institutional history. No one was ‘concentrated’ in the Nazi death camps of Chełmno (which was actually not really a ‘camp’ in any meaningful sense), Sobibór, Bełżec, or Treblinka, where Jews (and a small number of Roma and Sinti) were sent to die....
these very large numbers of people [inmates] are ‘irreconcilable opponents’ insofar as the regime in power perceives them to be, they are not necessarily people who have committed a crime. Indeed, they are highly unlikely to be criminals in any proper legal sense, although there are usually real criminals in concentration camps to give some appearance of truth to the regime’s claims and—in the case of Nazi Germany at least—to aid the regime’s goal of ‘social cleansing’. They are ‘enemies’ only because the regime has defined them as such, due to some characteristic—appearance, ‘race’, class, political identification, religion—that the regime perceives as intolerable or threatening. They are also, most important, usually civilians (one should note that sometimes POWs or resistance fighters have also been held in concentration camps). These civilians are not armed opponents of a regime—rebels, terrorists, or insurrectionists—who have been incarcerated and are treated according to the laws of warfare. Quite to the contrary, and here is the crucial point that Gordon Walker hints at but does not explicitly set out: the inmates of concentration camps (I will try to avoid the word ‘prisoners’ because this connotes legal incarceration following a trial for a criminal activity) are outside the law... But as this book will explore, a concentration camp need not look like a Nazi camp in order to qualify as such. In the far north or far east of the Soviet Union, for example, there was no need for barbed wire fences—if an inmate ‘escaped’, there was nowhere to go.

— Dan Stone (historian), Concentration Camps: A Short History, OUP

According to this definition, and the agreement of notable scholars already quoted in this article, this site is a concentration camp, even if the Polish government does not like this label. (t · c) buidhe 11:24, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Applying this definition yourself however is WP:OR. We already have a discussion of the issue within the article. Volunteer Marek 15:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

It is not WP:OR. The article itself notes that several noteworthy historians call it a "concentration camp" while the term "detention camp" is not cited to anyone in particular (perhaps that label is made up by wikieditors). The definition above is provided to avoid confusion about the definition. It is worth noting that some scholars consider immigration detention in the United States to be "concentration camps". (t · c) buidhe 18:46, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I referenced it.[28] This matter has been discussed so many times. No OR please. - GizzyCatBella🍁 19:18, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Also, translate the official description of that time from Polish - "Miejsce odosobnienia" = "Place of Isolation" - Not - "Concentration camp" = "Obóz Koncentracyjny” - Bereza Kartuska was a prison.[29]GizzyCatBella🍁 19:27, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

We do not borrow the (WP:OFFICIALNAME) names given to something by a government entity. We use those which are found in reliable, independent sources. From the scholarly perspective, it seems that "prison camp" is a subset of "concentration camp", see Stone. And more sources use the label "concentration camp". (Google Scholar result for Bereza Kartuska "concentration camp", "prison camp")

Seriously? That's pure straw man argument. Nobody is calling it a "Bereza Kartuska prison camp", there is no such thing as a prison camp, so of course that result will be "bad". So while "Bereza Kartuska" "prison camp" yields 13 results compared to a 118 for "Bereza Kartuska" "concentration camp", a search for "Bereza Kartuska" prison trumps it with 235 results. Further, let's check "Bereza Kartuska concentration camp" - measily 6 results, compared to "Bereza Kartuska prison", 22 results. So, COMMONAME in English? Sure. And it is prison. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:37, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Piotrus, If you look in the history you will see that GCB added language calling it a "prison camp". Also, just because something is indexed in Google Scholar does not make it reliable. looking at the results of your search one sees many obscure publications whose reliability is doubtful, not the sort of mainstream, peer-reviewed academic journals. Your search also deliberately excludes the many results which refer to "concentration camp at Bereza Kartuska" or similar phrasings. (t · c) buidhe 18:35, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

"at BK" doesn't change the fact I noted above which is that a search for a search for "Bereza Kartuska" prison gives 235 results and "Bereza Kartuska" "concentration camp" 118. There is no way you can spin it into arguing the other name is more common, picking at a few low quality results won't help given the numbers here. Not unless you feel like discrediting about a hundred of them. Oh, and here's the relevant Google Books search: "Bereza Kartuska" prison vs "Bereza Kartuska" "concentration camp" with 4,010 results to 1,890 results. 2:1 again. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:06, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Here are just a few sources which call it a concentration camp, in addition to those already cited in the article. Notably, the USHMM also calls it a "concentration camp"[30] (t · c) buidhe 19:57, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

References

Nah, USHMM just uses this term alongside with prison: [31]. Ex. " there was a famous prison in Poland called Bereza Kartuska".--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

No, actually the only result which directly refers to it as a "prison" is a direct quote from an interview. The topic is indexed under "Bereza Kartuska (Concentration camp)" in Keywords & Subjects. (t · c) buidhe 18:37, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Huh. Well, it's a good reminder USHMM can be biased / make errors too particularly when they move away from their core competentce (Holocaust studies). Not everything fits in the seme cookie-cutter model. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:08, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Why are you so convinced that this isn't a concentration camp? Doesn't it meet the definition used in scholarship? Are Timothy Snyder, Tadeusz Piotrowski, and other experts all wrong? (t · c) buidhe 01:22, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Buidhe, I am not disputing that many reliable scholars call it a concentration camp, and I support mentioning this name in the lead. But my literature review suggests that calling it prison is more common, and there are also some other terms like internment camp or just camp. Prison seems the most obvious name for it, particularly since it is more neutral than the controversial term cc. Also, WP:DFTT - if a likely sock an indef banned user wants to POV push things here and draw his favorite parallels along the lines of "Poles were no different and maybe even worse than Nazis", we should not encourage it. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:32, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Piotrus, IDK what this editor is doing, but the comparison to Nazi concentration camps is not an inapt one. If you are doing an apples-to-apples comparison, aka with the prewar Nazi concentration camps (especially pre-1938 when almost all prisoners were politicals), the conditions were probably comparable. To be fair, the Nazis did imprison more people. (t · c) buidhe 03:15, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Buidhe I agree and I think what we are seeing is a problem with the term cc being known mostly for the WWII era, whereas at other times and places it was less drastic. Not sure to what degree this needs to be clarified here, but in general, comparing anything to a concentration camp in lead, IMHO, for most people gives the impression that 'oh, so it was like Auschwitz, right'? And this is an issue that needs to be avoided. I am unsure how to sove it (a note that could be added to non-WWII era cc articles, perhaps?), and it is likely a broader issue that may be worth re-discussing at talk of the main cc article. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:14, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

We don’t borrow anything, this has been discussed endless amount of times including top-notch historians who describe those claims as "absurd" on page 316.. Bereza was a prison, interment camp - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:56, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I cannot access the page, and anyway I don't see why Davies is the be-and-end all of all historians. You will note that concentration camp redirects to internment as scholarly sources say that a concentration camp is just somewhere that internment takes place. (t · c) buidhe 21:10, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Most scholarship uses concentration camp for this dreadful place where ethnic minorities and political prisoners were tortured. Carpathian fox (talk) 06:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that's accurate. So far none of the opponents of this name have shown that their preferred choice is the most common one in English, per WP:COMMONNAME. (t · c) buidhe 07:21, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I will try to find time to look at sources in few days, but this should not be moved without a WP:RM (which I may even support, after my review of sources). PS. I think the neutral name is the official name, i.e. "Place of Isolation at Bereza Kartuska" or whatever is the best translation (ping User:Nihil novi). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:33, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Only sometimes does wikipedia use the WP:OFFICIALNAME; usually, that is only when it coincides with the WP:COMMONNAME in reliable, English-language sources (WP:USEENGLISH). Most English sources that discuss this topic do not mention the full, official Polish name. (t · c) buidhe 07:44, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

It was patterned after Hitler's Dachau concentration camp, though it often outdid Dachau in cruelty. This source too uses concentration camp. Carpathian fox (talk) 07:44, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

References

The lead - what was BK? A prison or a camp?

"Bereza Kartuska Prison was a prison" is indeed not a very elegant sentence. I suggest using the full name, "Bereza Kartuska Isolation Camp". Then the sentence will read nicely ("BKIC was a prison, also called an internment camp, concentration camp or just a camp"). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:35, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

It isn't quite accurate to call this facility a prison, which according to Oxford English Dictionary is defined as, "A building in which people are legally held as a punishment for a crime they have committed or while awaiting trial."[32] This is a site of extrajudicial detention of civilians so it is more accurately defined as an internment/concentration camp (the two terms are synonymous; both redirect to internment). (t · c) buidhe 03:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

If those terms are anonymous, internment camp seems less controversial and would be my preferred term to use. We do have redirects, but I think the lead should mention the term prison is often used (and there are still others, ex confinement center, detention camp, political jail, prison-camp...). After all, per statistics above, it seems to be twice as popular as cc, so COMMONNAME etc. PS. I think the most neutral way to solve this is to say "official name was a facility known as a, b, or c'". This follows NPOV and represents all POVs in the lead without endorsing one or another. Then we can rename the article to the neutral (official) name, which uses the uncontroversial 'isolation' term, so BK isolaton camp or such (if there is a better translation, grammar and common-name-wise). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:10, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Except that it isn't a prison. You have been here longer than I have, so I'm sure you're aware that when it comes to content, quality of sources trumps quantity. Where are the historians of Snyder, Piotrowski, Davies' caliber (the latter two, as you know, known for their pro-Polish interpretations) or institutions as prominent as the USHMM that endorse the description as prison? I think you won't find them (I didn't), because it is fundamentally misleading: it is not a prison but a place of extrajudicial detention.

The article should be moved, as WP:AT states that "inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources." (t · c) buidhe 02:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I am fine with de-stressing the term prison, because I agree this was more than that. But I don't think saying that it was a concentration camp is sufficient. I proposed a solution above, and I also edited the lead accordingly. I suggest we start a WP:RM. For the title I propose either Bereza_Kartuska Internment Camp, Bereza_Kartuska Isolation Camp, or Place of Isolation at Bereza Kartuska, but I am open to other suggestions. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:37, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

No Piotrus, - @Buidhe, I'm really stunned by your unwillingness to compromise. What is prison definition? Let me tell you - Prison is a place or institution of confinement, especially of long-term confinement for those convicted of serious crimes or otherwise considered undesirable by the government. Agree? Okay. Then look at here --> Prisons - (quote)--> "can also be used as a tool of political repression by authoritarian regimes. Their perceived opponents may be imprisoned for political crimes, often another legal due process; this use is illegal under most forms of international law governing fair administration of justice". Correct? So political opponents were kept in prisons, not concentration camps. Not in pre-war, pre-1939 Poland. Bereza Kartuska was a prison, yes, sometimes referred to as Prison Camp or Concentration Camp but we have all that in the lead, with references. You keep saying "sources". So tell me what this source says? [33] Bereza Kartuska prison - correct? Tell me what this source says? [34] - Prison at Bereza Kartuska. Tell me what this source says? [35] Prison at Bereza Kartuska. Tell me what this source says? [36] Isolation Kamp at Bereza Kartuska. Tell me what this source says? [37] Prison Camp at Bereza Kartuska. Should I keep going? Should I start bringing sources in Polish? Maybe I'll stop here, okay? You also keep bringing Davies as a source, but the very Davies says on page 316 here[38] - (check it for yourself because I can't quote one word from there, so I'll exclude that) quote from Davis ---> "For example to compare the rigours on the Polish internment camp at Bereza Kartuska .....with the Stalinist purges.... or to hint that the discomforts of the Jews under Polish rule were some way related to horrors of.... IS ABSURD. - That's what Davis says, and you keep bringing him up, claiming otherwise. And that's the problem Buidhe. You have prison in the lead; you have camp in the lead, you have concentration camp in the lead... What else do we have to provide to you to confirm that you are mistaken? - GizzyCatBella🍁 03:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Last time I checked, Wikipedia is not reliable source.

You are citing various sources of uncertain reliability, not all of which call it a "prison" (I am not sure what "prison camp" or "isolation camp" are, exactly). And, you do not follow up on my suggestion that quality not quantity matters, therefore you should cite sources that are equally authoritative as those which call the place a concentration or internment camp.

Citing Polish language sources is not advisable, part of this difficulty may be that these terms "prison" and "concentration camp" mean something different in Polish.

It seems that Davies says it is an internment camp, just not as bad as Nazi concentration camps (over their entire history) or Soviet gulags. I don't disagree with that. He does not support the idea that it was a prison, as you are claiming. (t · c) buidhe 03:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Buidhe -

1. - I'm not presenting Wikipedia as a source, I recommended it to read it, so you can get familiar with the term prison; please do not use this sarcastically in your argument
2. - I gave you references that define Bereza Kartuska as a prison, a prison camp, an internment camp, isolation camp, BUT you keep insisting on describing it EXCLUSIVELY as a concentration camp
3. - your claim that your sources are more "authoritative" than other sources. What that supposed to mean? According to whom?
4. - "Prison" and "Concentration camp" in Polish means precisely the same as in English, no difference, and Polish sources are as good if not better than English. That's where most history scholars specializing in Polish history are from, hundreds of them as opposed to a few who write on Bereza Kartuska subject in English.
5. - I didn't claim that Davies described Bereza Kartuska as a prison. YOU suggested he described it as a "concentration camp" by saying this - part quote --> "Where are the historians....Davies' caliber...that endorse the description as a prison?" No, Davies dos not described it as a prison, but neither he described it as a "concentration camp." In fact, Davies argues that comparing Bereza Kartuska to the Soviet or Nazi Concentration Camps is "ABSURD". That's EXACTLY what he says, right here[39] page 316. So if you have such an admiration for Davies and he DOES NOT describe Bereza Kartuska as a concentration camp and even argues that such claims are ABSURD, why you keep insisting on using that term EXCLUSIVELY. Should I present all the reverts you have done introducing the term "concentration camp" over, and over, and over in the last two days? Even supporting[40] the move[41] of the entire page to "Bereza Kartuska concentration camp" by most likely sock puppet? - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:03, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

   1. I do not consider the definition of prison according to Wikipedia, only according to WP:RS.
   2. No, I said above that it would be equally accurate to call it an internment camp.
   3. When I said "authoritative", I meant that the author is a notable, recognized authority on a related topic such as concentration camps or Polish history. Such authorities receive more WP:DUE weight.
   4. I will take your word for it.
   5. There are many examples of concentration camps in history. Calling it a "concentration camp" does not imply a comparison with any particular concentration camp system. (t · c) buidhe 06:11, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm glad about seeing some progress. I'll leave now Buidhe and will let you and Piotrus settle this to your best judgments. You know my position, and I trust you two will agree on how to carry it from here as far as the title goes. Bereza Kartuska Prison, Bereza Kartuska Prison Camp, Bereza Kartuska Camp everything works, but Bereza Kartuska Concentration Camp, which brings disturbing implications as it was not such a place according to the reliable sources. Likely sock puppet moved the page to "concentration camp"[42] and linked it to Dachau[43] that was so misleading - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

While as I said before, I feel this particular discussion belongs on Talk:Concentration camp, re: "There are many examples of concentration camps in history. Calling it a "concentration camp" does not imply a comparison with any particular concentration camp system.", here's what I get from google query "what is a concentration camp": "a place where large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution. The term is most strongly associated with the several hundred camps established by the Nazis in Germany and occupied Europe in 1933–45, among the most infamous being Dachau, Belsen, and Auschwitz." on the right side of the screen, with a right side displaying info about "Nazi concentration camp. From 1933 to 1945, Nazi Germany operated more than a thousand concentration camps on its own territory and in parts of German-occupied Europe. The first camps were established in March 1933 immediately after Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany." This is followed by a link to Nazi concentration camps on Wikipedia, than a Britannica entry that doesn't mention Nazis just "Concentration camp, internment center for political prisoners and members of national or minority groups who are confined for reasons of state security" then Nazi Camps | The Holocaust Encyclopedia at USHMM. It seems quite obvous that Nazi-era camps are the primary association here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it's true that in popular discourse "concentration camps" is associated with the Nazi version, and confused with Nazi death camps. BUT this is not true in scholarly discourse, where it is a technical term which is used to describe sites of internment. (I assume that Google puts "Nazi concentration camps" in the sidebar, somewhat erroneously, because there is no wiki article "concentration camp"—it redirects to internment.) (t · c) buidhe 07:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Encyclopedias are intended for general audience, not only academics, and we need to keep that in mind. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:33, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Move to Bereza Kartuska

The WP:PRIMARY topic for the name "Bereza Kartuska" is this place (certainly in English and probably also in Polish); whereas, many sources in English and Polish refer to it simply as "Bereza Kartuska". The town is now called by its Belarusian name. Are there any objections to this move? (t · c) buidhe 14:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

OBJECT: Why introduce needless potential confusion? In pre-World War II Poland, Bereza Kartuska was a town in eastern Poland where the prison happened to be located. To save a few syllables, the prison was often referred to simply as "Bereza Kartuska" – much as San Quentin State Prison, which happens to be located in the town of San Quentin, California, is similarly, for short, often referred to simply as "San Quentin". But the California town is found on Wikipedia under "San Quentin, California"; the prison, under "San Quentin State Prison".

Nihil novi (talk) 21:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Unlike San Quentin State Prison, this place was not really a prison since people were detained without trial or charges. (t · c) buidhe 06:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Object per NN, this is just a Polish name of the town. This article should be renamed to the Isolation Camp or such. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:32, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Both "isolation camp" and "prison" are euphemisms. The place is more accurately an internment or concentration camp. (t · c) buidhe 06:48, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

What's the difference between a camp (in this context) and a prison, really? Bereza Kartuska Internment Camp would also be a possible name. The only one we should avoid is the concentration camp, as misleading (due to the association with Nazi camps discussed above). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

As I stated several times above, a prison is a place where people are detained pursuant to a criminal charge. If there is no charge, trial, or conviction, it meets the definition of a concentration camp. (t · c) buidhe 07:00, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Or of a detention center. There are also places like drunk tanks. And you familiar with the concept of Remand (detention), right? Real world is not white and black, as some simple definitions of concepts would like us think. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:58, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Wiktionary defines "prison" as "a place or institution of confinement, especially of long-term confinement for those convicted of serious crimes or otherwise considered undesirable by the government".

The definition seems to fit.

My personal dictionaries give similar definitions, including (as the first of 3 definitions) "a place where persons are confined" (Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language). The second definition is "a building... where convicted criminals are confined or accused persons are held awaiting trial."

Nihil novi (talk) 11:29, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

OBJECT - Bereza Kartuska is the name of the town. So again - "no", Bereza Kartuska is not the proper name for Bereza Kartuska prison. (Note prior discussions WP:REHASH Buidhe is bringing the same arguments repeatedly, and we are going in circles here. Thanks) - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)