Talk:Trawniki men

Accessibility

The horizontal list in this article is currently using images as bullet points, which does not work with my screen reader. I attempted to change this to use actual bullet points from list markup, using two different methods, but both attempts were reverted. any suggestions on how we can fix the problem? Frietjes (talk) 14:15, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean User:Frietjes. Colour bullets are the smallest and the simplest files used on a grand scale in Wikipedia, notably on every Watchlist (green, for pages that have been changed since you last visited, and navy blue for all others). Do you mean you don't see them on your screen reader? I reformatted the colour bullets for you as the straight forward "files" rather than the "templates" i.e. [[File:Bullet blue.png]] instead of the {{Image|Bullet blue.png}}. Please let me know if it works for you now. On my own screen the [[File]] and the {{Image}} look exactly the same. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 17:11, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

@Frietjes, Graham87, and Poeticbent: I believe the problem is that screen readers are probably not understanding the images as bullet points. If you check the HTML source for your "watchlist" example, you will see <li>...</li> marking each item as being a member of a list. I suppose you could include both list markup and images, but I agree that the simplest solution is to just use list markup. I am pinging Graham, since I believe he uses a screen reader as well. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, this is correct. Graham87 02:09, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Plastikspork. Please tell whether the screen readers as such pick up the more complex HTML marking similar to <LI style="List-Style-Type: circle;color:green">. I don't know how they work, Poeticbent talk 18:08, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Poeticbent I believe you can style them however you want, since spurious styling would probably be ignored by the screen reader. By the way, if you want to apply styles to every list item, I would suggest you consider {{Bulleted list}}, rather than using <li>...</li> directly. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm just asking... The challenge is that the actual list of names of the guards in humongous and in my view, needs to be kept compacted as much as possible in order to remain user-friendly. The list becomes completely unmanageable using bulleted list with only one item (i.e. one name) per each single line. I would prefer if we found the way to keep the colour bullets intact, with a bit of extra markup for the screen readers. Do you know how to do it Plastikspork? The reformatting would be easy with the Microsoft Word search-and-replace-all feature if you came up with the actual markup. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 18:33, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Plastikspork, Poeticbent.

1. The screen reader I use does not like images as bullet points. Trying to maneuver in that "list" is almost impossible.
2. You cannot use coloured bullet points as this also breaks Accessibility guidelines. There is a large percentage of the population who are coloured blind.
3. Bulleted list do not have to be one item on one line. This is where columns come in.
4. Currently, the list is confusing and is next to impossible to pick out individual names. It also is not recommend to apply one's own style to every article. Articles should have the consistent wiki look. Other people will attempt to edit this page. So, having complex formatting only discourages people from editing. People also fail to remember that grandmas and non-academics read Wikipedia. Currently, no Wikipedia article uses <ul>, so either use the wiki * for doing lists or {{Bulleted list}}. If using {{Bulleted list}}, keep in mind other WP:Accessibility issues.

Also note, the watchlist is not an article. Editors become accustomed to the watchlist features over time. Having something totally different in one article only confuses readers. They are accustomed to one way. Even editors didn't like the changing colors on watchlists and it is not the default, but that is a different story. Bgwhite (talk) 19:13, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

@Bgwhite and Poeticbent: Well said. I would suggest either a variant of this version, possibly with narrower columns or this version with the additional text after some of the names moved to footnotes. Or, something else? I tried playing around with |item_style=display:inline with the {{bulleted list}}, but that removes the bullets as well, so some additional hacks would be necessary (which is why we have hlist :)). Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:18, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Frietjes, Graham87, and Plastikspork: I've made one more test with due consideration given to our Accessibility guidelines. Please let me know if the screen reader you have access to would recognize these images as bullet points this time with the "alt" added to file description, i.e.: [[File:Bullet blue.png|alt=•]]. "Alt text" is intended for visually impaired readers or those with browsers or computers that do not display images. The only variation is that instead of the alt text, I put an actual bullet point there. Thanks in advance, Poeticbent talk 03:48, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

@Poeticbent: Unfortunately that solution isn't good enough because it does not create a proper HTML list using <li> and <ul> HTML tags. Graham87 03:55, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

I am quite aware that the names of the guards in this article (at this time) do not form an HTML language unordered list element <ul> even though they are clearly arranged in alphabetical order from first to last. What I would like to know is whether the [[File:Bullet blue.png|alt=•]] written in the MediaWiki language works for the screen readers. Poeticbent talk 10:56, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

as Graham and others said above, it doesn't work since it doesn't create a proper list with the <li> and <ul> tags. you might be able to create some hybrid with your images and {{bulleted list}} with display:inline. but, that seems like a lot of trouble when far less complicated alternatives have already been presented, without the need for images. Frietjes (talk) 14:13, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, I guess, we probably should go back to the simplified {{hlist}} type bullets from your earlier version. I just wish the bullets could be made bigger and different in color. I have made a few more tests but to no avail. Please take a look at the Wikipedia Alt attribute entry where the screen readers are explained. If the system is supposed to work for something as complex as a "Warning!" sign, why wouldn't it work for a nice little bullet image I don't know? How about a plain word like "next" instead of a bullet? Below is a quote from Center for Persons with Disabilities 2014 WebAIM webpage: "Screen readers read most punctuation by default, such as parentheses, dashes, asterisks, and so on, but not all screen readers choose to read the same pieces of punctuation. Some do not read asterisks by default, for example. Periods, commas, and colons are usually not read out loud, but screen readers generally pause after each. Users can set the verbosity setting in their preferences so that screen readers read more or less punctuation." [1] Poeticbent talk 18:14, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

@Poeticbent: If you have problems with the small bullet point used in hlist, you can of course change it yourself by adding a line to your own common.css page that alters the bullet to whatever character you prefer: .hlist li:after {content: " * ";} for example would change what you saw to an asterisk.

Screen reader users don't want to hear the bullet, of course, which is why your attempts at making alt text is pointless. They actually want a list, marked up as a list, using <li>...</li> so that they can navigate backward and forward item-by-item and hear the text read out item-by-item as they navigate. Only by supplying the proper HTML list markup can we enable them to do that. Lists may be created using the usual wikimarkup (*), or by using templates for a horizontal or vertical list. Trying to "cook up" what you think looks like a list is doomed to failure from an accessibility point of view, as we need to cater for those who cannot see what you have devised.

Personally, I much prefer the version that used a normal list with columns because I can find each name more easily and I don't care about the space it uses: I have no problem scrolling. If you have a list with 235 entries, you must expect it to take up some real estate on screen if it is to remain readable by those of us whose eyesight isn't what it used to be. --RexxS (talk) 19:58, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I just reverted the latest incarnation. It is once again not accessibility friendly or even friendly for sighted users. It was impossible to look for a name or even go thru the names. Try out any updated list designs in a sandbox, ask for comments, then update it to the article. Bgwhite (talk) 20:48, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Complete list

Per WP:NOTDIRECTORY, do we need this list? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:12, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I second that. The list must include only persons for which a nontrivial verifiable informaion is available. Otherwise this list is next to useless. Especially keeping in mind that surnames went through several languages (German, Polish, Yiddish -> into English as a minimum) and sometimes quite corrupted. For example there is no such surname 'Deptyarev': there is Degtyarev -an obvious Latin-alphabet typo. "Hotowrowiecz" - even with my knowledge of tongues I cannot guess whether it is Hodorovich or Hodorkovich. And so on. I say, trim it mercilessly. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:52, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Support. I guess the only reliable and therefore the only acceptable spelling would have to come from the Cyrillic script in the Soviet archives. Some one thousand Trawnikis who returned, went through postwar trials. Unfortunately, we don't have their exact names and even if we did, Wikipedia would not publish them all, by the rule. Poeticbent talk 16:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Ping @ User:Frietjes, User talk:Plastikspork, User:Graham87, User:RexxS, User:Bgwhite, User:Pigsonthewing, User:Staszek Lem, User:Hoops gza. Please contribute to our final decision about this controversial spelling in triple-translation from Cyrillic. I'd like to know what the outcome is going to be. – In the old days, names in Cyrillic used to be widely transliterated into different alphabets. We don't do that anymore. Thank you all in advance, Poeticbent talk 16:03, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

removing the list would be fine with me. Frietjes (talk) 16:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Clarification: the real issue is the existence of this list. Spelling is just one of the problems. The real problem is that it is non-encyclopedic and useless. Wikipedia is not a memorial for random villains, who are not notable individually, if there is nothing to write about a person besides the fact that he existed and functioned in this or that capacity. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

The one thing I liked about the list was the emotional impact of seeing all those names. Reading a number is one thing, seeing all those names is another thing. The MOS policy about people on lists is WP:LISTPEOPLE. A person has to be notable to be on a list. Bgwhite (talk) 18:35, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

A number of men on that original list were mentioned by reliable sources in considerable detail thus conforming to our Wikipedia:Notability (people) per your comment User:Bgwhite. What role they played in the extermination process used to follow their names. However, their actual names came predominantly from the survivor memoirs with arbitrary spellings based on the sound alone by which, they could not be legally identified. You think we could bring some of them back without i-links? Poeticbent talk 19:59, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

If a person passes notability guidelines, I see no reason to keep them off the list. However, I don't see a need for long list consisting of names. Following is personal preference... Ideally, a listing would be similar to what is currently in the article, A name, short description and references. If it starts getting to long, the listing would need to be in a separate article. Bgwhite (talk) 20:22, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Starving people

The Soviet P.O.W.s were starving, not in any camps, in fields, without water. [2] Xx236 (talk) 14:29, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks for noticing. The treatment of the Soviet POWs during Operation Barbarossa is a known historical fact, but we need to keep an eye on the timeline as well. The Holocaust Encyclopedia informs that the starvation rations of just 2,200 calories per day for working Soviet prisoners of war were introduced in August 1941. The SS camp at Trawniki in the Lublin District of the General Government existed from July 1941.[3] Karl Streibel who visited the POW camps and recruited Ukrainian, Latvian and Lithuanian volunteers – wrote Browning (Ordinary men) – "offered an escape from probable starvation." ^{[p. 52]} The men who accepted "his offer" had never starved. Poeticbent talk 16:52, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Your source says "The Treatment of Soviet POWs: Starvation, Disease, and Shootings, June 1941–January 1942".

How many prisoners worked in August 1941? Certainly not all of them.

https://www.sobiborinterviews.nl/en/extermination-camp/structure-of-the-camp/46 Xx236 (talk) 13:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/21/secondworldwar-russia Xx236 (talk) 13:16, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

• Quoting websites with broad but anonymous entries (along with daily papers) is unacceptable. My main source of information is Christopher Browning, Ordinary men. The area of recruitment did not include the vast Soviet expanse where the entire Soviet armies were taken prisoner by the Wehrmacht. Streibel travelled in the area of prewar Poland immediately beyond the Nazi-Soviet frontier, only days after the onset of Operation Barbarossa. Here's what Browning wrote:

  Globocnik prevailed upon Himmler to recruit non­-Polish auxiliaries from the Soviet border regions. The key person on Globocnik's Operation Reinhard staff for this task was Karl Streibel. He and his men visited the POW camps and recruited... "volunteers" (Hilfswillige, or Hiwis) who were screened on the basis of their anti-Communist (and hence almost invariably anti-Semitic) sentiments, offered an escape from probable starvation, and promised that they would not be used in combat against the Soviet army. These "volunteers" were taken to the SS camp at Trawniki for training. Under German SS officers and ethnic German noncommissioned officers, they were formed into units on the basis of nationality. Alongside the Order Police, they constituted the second major manpower pool from which Globocnik would form his private armies for the ghetto-clearing campaign.^[p.52]
  [..]
  What is wrong with the German portrayals is a multifaceted distortion in perspective. The policemen [who testified in postwar trials] were all but silent about Polish help to Jews and German punishment for such help... Nor was any note made of the fact that large units of murderous auxiliaries – the notorious Hiwis –­ were not recruited from the Polish population, in stark contrast to other nationalities in pervasively anti-Semitic eastern Europe.^[p.158]

Notably, some 6,000 so-called "ethnic Germans," or Volksdeutsche who had lived outside Germany prior to 1939, were recruited directly into the ranks of the Orpo battalions.^[p.5] Some of them participated in the Holocaust along with Trawnikis, but not as Hiwis. Poeticbent talk 17:41, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• John Demjanjuk 2.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Credibility of Petro Mirchuk's statement

Petro Mirchuk was prominent Ukrainian nationalist, and, as a very competent propagandist, he used given political and historical situation during the Cold War to fulfill his goals of making Ukraine independent from USSR and its system. Due to that fact, his statement, mentioned in the article, should be approached with caution, and double checked with other credible sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.225.1 (talk) 15:28, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I removed this paragraph and well as the subsequent one. I initially caught an apparent formatting error and referenced the cited text to ensure accuracy. To my surprise, the quote was nowhere to be found. (I did many keyword searches for different words and phrases, since there were no page numbers cited). Apparently, the "...least of all Ukrainians, although for some reason..." quote is either misattributed or fabricated entirely. Further, the (incorrectly cited) Mirchuk text is a polemical primary source that, based on my cursory skimming, seems problematic in its own right.

The subsequent paragraph included both a questionable source and original research meant to imply that ethnic Ukrainians comprised a negligible portion of the Trawnikimänner, which appears to be a poorly supported fringe position.

I traced these two paragraphs to a 2019 edit by DanielLerish, who seems to have been banned for disruptive editing/use of sock accounts shortly thereafter. Virtually all of these edits involved importing biased and/or poor quality sources to support extreme Ukrainian nationalist positions. On this page, it seems clear that this user added these paragraphs to minimize the role of ethnic Ukrainians and Ukrainian nationalists in the Holocaust and Nazi collaboration, which in my (not-insignificant) experience are typical talking points for the Ukrainian far right. These edits border on Holocaust denialism, and I recommend keeping an eye on this page in case there's further meddling. It may also be worthwhile to review the rest of DanielLerish's edits. Walker Elliott (talk) 17:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)