Talk:Wola

Untitled

WHy do u poles insist on reverting corrected information, which is properly cited?

Edit war

Hi, please could you attempt to discuss this matter here on the Talk: page? Edit warring is very unproductive. I've temporarily protected this page. — Matt Crypto 11:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd yet again revert Jadger's edits, as they are based entirely on his own POV and not on facts. First of all, the massacre was of civillians, not of Armia Krajowa soldiers. The Home Army units were simply pushed back to the city centre, the civillians were not. If the Poles had 40,000 in a single district alone, the Uprising would end up completely differently, as Poles would have some 240,000 soldiers altogether, much more than the Germans had in the area... Of course, execution of POWs did also happened, but these were not civillians or bands, as they perfectly fit the definition of a soldier as stated in the Geneva convention.

As such, they cannot be called "rebels", as you can't rebel against anyone on your own territory. It was an armed struggle of one of the branches of the Polish Army against the German army. Also, it was not execution, it was a full-scale massacre, with some 100 executions taking place in three days, at different parts of the borough of Wola (see the list and estimate of victims here).

Finally, the murdered within the hospitals were not only the wounded. In fact in the early days of the uprising the huge majority of patients were pregnant women (as in St. Lazarus' hospital at Leszno 17 Street), suffering from lung diseases (as in the case of Wola hospital at Wolska 2/4 Street), and other sick people (as the Karol and Maria hospital at Leszno 30 Street was a general one). This of course does not include the improvised field hospitals and forward medical stations, where the sick and wounded were also slaughetered.

Finally, the numbers are also somehow disputable, and the 40,000 mentioned is the lowest number I've ever seen. During the post-war exhumations there were some 55,000+ bodies found in mass graves and on the mass murder sites, and the historians often quote numbers as high as 59,000 Halibutt 12:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Having looked again, it seems that Jadger is trying to push his version against the wishes of at least 5 other editors, and he's violated the 3RR rule while doing so. Accordingly, I've blocked him for 24 hours, and I'll unprotect this page. — Matt Crypto 13:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

notice who those five other editors are crypto, they are biased Poles who have had problems with other non-Poles on other pages where they have been shown to be biased and use only parts of a source to reinforce their views, while disregarding that in their source which goes against them. And look at ur own statements Halibutt, u said a massacre was "a series of executions", so why can we not put that? I am just trying to prevent these Poles from oversensationalizing topics. why don't we have a vote on this? like in the Danzig/Gdansk topic where these biased individuals lost out and ended up intentionally disobeying the law taken up by Wikipedia afterwards, until they were threatened with punishment if they did not fall in with the facts and agree with history and teh rest of the populace.Jadger 05:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

and u need to provide sources in English Halibutt, this is enlgish Wikipedia, those sources and numbers mean nothing to us. I never said they were all soldiers, in order to fight u did not have to be a soldier, lots of the civilians rebelled with the polish home army in teh Warsaw Uprising. This is simply continued historical bullying by Halibutt and Molobo, who I've come to understand that both these users have bad reputations.Jadger 05:23, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, given that this is an article about a little-known suburb of Warsaw, it is not surprising that most of the editors involved are Poles, just like most editors of articles about Berlin suburbs are probably Germans. I will leave the sweeping bias accusation without comment, for now, as I am not sure it merits one. Balcer 05:30, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I did not mean that all Poles are biased on the matter, I said most are, because they have a vested interest in the subject. and I was pointing out that these users, you excepted Balcer have a long history of causing problems and creating POV articles. I suggest all articles written on such matters by Halibutt or Space Cadet or Molobo be automatically tagged with a possible POV tag at the top of the article, until someone else has had time to review it. and I'm sure Berlin suburbs are written by Berliners or Germans, but they have the whole history of the suburb, not just a note that it has a long history, but we wont talk about that, instead we will accuse all Germans of rape and murder.

The Poles as a whole have a feeling that history has cheated them, that they are always the victim of undue hardship. They even go as far as burying the previous history of the lands they now control. And if u think that I am just pulling sh*t out of my ass like Halibutt and Molobo, read The Vanished Kingdom: Travels through the history of Prussia by James Charles Roy who is neither German, Russian or Polish, and so has no vested interests in the subject. Get over yourselfs, and instead of blaming everyone else on your situation, try to fix ur situation.Jadger 19:16, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I read the "Kingdom". Bunch of anti-Polish lies. Space Cadet 19:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

LOL, so anything that doesnt agree with your bias is a pack of lies? I bet you also believe that OJ didnt kill his wife, and any evidence to the contrary is made-up. I recall many other great books have been called a "pack of lies" by some, while scholars and others think it was a great book.Jadger 19:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

If others want to see the dispute about this book between myself and SpaceCadet, look at our talk pages. indeed Space Cadet is exactly as his name says, his head is out in space, and is full of mysterious matter from space as well, but it contains no knowledge whoatsoeverJadger 20:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Jadger, please respect the Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy. — Matt Crypto 20:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Personal attacks are all he's got, don't take that away from him. Space Cadet 21:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Space Cadet, please respect the Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy. Sciurinæ 16:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Finally someone besides myself decides to speak up against this and actually do something.Jadger 23:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Wishful thinking... Space Cadet 00:29, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Edit war 2

I've protected the page again temporarily. Dialog here would be good; better than edit warring, anyway. — Matt Crypto 21:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank You, unfortunately I am afraid that dialogue might not be useful as these people seem to be too biased to cooperate. If they are willing to compromise as I have then they should start by pointing out how I am wrong so that I may change or show them how that I am not.Jadger 03:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm happy with the current wording. --_Lysy^talk 08:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I am afraid dialog is impossible here. It seems to be a simple case of Neonazi attempts to obscure Nazi genocide in Poland. And the attempt to clasiffy children, women mass murdered in order to scare Polish soldiers as "rebels" is hideous and repeats the worst examples of Nazi propaganda during WW2.

--Molobo 12:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The current wording was the result of an edit by Jadger, and Lysy is happy with the current wording. Do you have a problem with the current version? Please discuss: dialogue is often worthwhile (although it helps if inflammatory words like "neonazi" are kept to a minimum), and, as far as I can see, very little discussion (as opposed to insult trading) has taken place here. — Matt Crypto 13:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The wording is incorrect.The massacre was made towards civilians. Its aim was to intimidate Polish Home Army into surrendering.And it was done by German Army not NSDAP party.Jadger has also erased information abut the fact that pregnant women were murdered. --Molobo 13:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The current version reads, "Wola was the scene of fierce battles against Nazi forces. It was there that, around 8 August 1944, the Nazis perpetrated the largest single massacre (circa 40,000), the victims included hospital patients, elderly, children and women, as well as insurgents during the Uprising." We currently mention that various civilians were massacred, as you say; we also mention that insurgents in the uprising were killed. Do you dispute the latter? — Matt Crypto 15:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

This is quite delicate and should be addressed as such. The massacre happended in the western district of Warsaw in the first days of the uprising. The Nazi forces (specifically, not only Germans took part in this massacre but also Russian units) were indiscriminately and systematically murdering all the civilians, block by block. It is possible that there were some insurgents among them, but as far as I know they were not the victims of the massacre. According to the accounts that I have seen, the Nazis were dragging all civilians from their houses or shelters, executing them with machine fire, pouring petrol and burning the bodies and those wounded. It is rather unlikely that insurgents were among the victims of the massacre, as they were fighting in well organised groups that did not mix with the civilians, for their obvious security. If there are any sources that confirm that any units of Armia Krajowa surrendered to the Nazis in the beginning of August in Wola, and were then massacred as POWs, it would be worth citing. Otherwise it seems a rather nasty apologetic advocacy of the murderers. These two things (the combat and the massacre of the civilian population) are easily separated in Wola. --_Lysy^talk 15:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The Nazi forces (specifically, not only Germans took part in this massacre but also Russian units) Let us be guided by institutions that researched this crime, Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland: he crimes committed by the Germans at the time of the Warsaw rising in August and September, 1944, occupy a special place among those committed in Poland during the recent war. These crimes, the victims of which were thousands of unarmed citizens, men, women and children, were committed by army troops in fulfillment of explicit orders given by the highest German army authorities; they were carried out by the germane Army and the German General Staff, institutions independent of the Gestapo. The whole question is not essentially changed by the fact that the majority of these troops consisted of a police brigade in which criminals and Volksdeutsche served and of the Vlassov army* composed of Soviet prisoner-of-war (Warsaw population usually called them Ukrainians) for these were parts of the German army, under German Command. They were thrown into action and committed common crimes by order of the German High Command.

German soldiers and members of the Vlassov army in German uniform together committed atrocities on an unarmed civilian population.It is not material that certain of their criminal deeds, such, as the violation of women, were done principally by Vlassov’s men; these facts were known to the German officers who allowed them to happen. Vlassov’s troops were merely carrying out the crimes; they were pawns in a general criminal scheme. Everything that happened in the tragic days of the Warsaw Rising was know to and approved by the German Command.

Before we begin a detailed account of the German proceedings during the Rising, supported by the testimony of German generals and the texts of military orders, we shall first publish a series of reports of German crimes given by eyewitnesses. These consist of evidence taken from people who were present while the crimes were actually being committed; some of it from persons who were themselves victims of these crimes, but were lucky enough to remain alive.

These reports, which are undoubtedly truthful, cover only certain districts of the town and do not by any means account for all the crimes that were committed. They give, however, sufficient material to enable us to understand the methods employed and the kind of offences perpetrated on the civilian population of Warsaw. Military operations — in the proper meaning of the word — against the insurgents constituted only a small part of the German misdeeds; military operations directed against a tiny group of insurgents, which were justified from the military point of view, should not have brought about the death of tens of thousands of unarmed men, women and children, or the complete destruction and burning of the city. The crimes committed in Warsaw during the Rising were deliberately directed against the inhabitants, who had nothing to do with the activities of the insurgents; they were committed in districts where there were no insurgents, and where no action was dictated by military considerations. The following statements by witnesses and victims of German crimes in Warsaw constitute irrefragable evidence, which is at the same time an accusation against the German military authorities. --Molobo 16:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Thus the proper wording is German, as those crimes have been made under the command of German Army which as stated knew, aproved and took part in the actions, and was independent from Gestapo or NSDAP. --Molobo 16:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly however, the Hungarian units that were brought by Germans refused to participate in the slaughter and even considered joining the uprising in the defence of the civilians. --_Lysy^talk 16:56, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Interesting and worthy to be put in to Uprising article, this information further proves that we need to use the wording German as Nazi's could implicate all Axis forces-including the Hungarians you mentioned. --Molobo 17:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

How about writing a separate article on Wola massacre that deals with the subject in more detail ? --_Lysy^talk 18:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes we can write a more detailed account on the German mass murder of Poles in Wola later, nothing however stops us from mentioning this atrocity here. --Molobo 18:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I notice that u do not give us any source to read from Molobo, only stating a post-war report, but u don't tell us who it was by (it should be by a non-partisan and unbiased group)and where anyone can find a copy of this? ur right, nothing stops us from writing a separate article on the massacre, but the subject of this is on the whole sector of Warsaw, which "During the Warsaw Uprising (August-October 1944), Wola was the scene of fierce battles against Nazi forces." means that there was battle, are u saying that the polish home army as they fought the nazis never lost a single casualty in Wola? and it was not the german Army that was in command, as u earlier stated the Dirlewanger and other notorious brigades took part in the massacre, which are SS units which answer directly to the party, not the OKW.

Why are we to only concentrate on the actions of one side, why don't we talk about the many instances throughout the battle were the Polish home army (as they called themselves to try and give them false credibility) intentionally waged warfare in civilian occupied zones, knowing that civilians will be injured, these are blatant examples of human sheild tactics. I erased the "fact" that pregnant women died in the massacre as it was obvious and didnt need to be stated, it was being used to sensationalize the topic. If we were to always talk as that sentence was stated, we would say that in a topic about Canada that there are many men in Canada, some of whom are named Bob. it is unneeded as it is assumed that it was most likely the case.

as for the assumption that there were no insurgents as members of the Polish Home Army that were a part of the massacred, Are u saying that none ever surrendered? of course some surrendered in the fighting then brutally murdered by the conquering forces, this would include them in the list of those massacred.

i would like Molobo punished for constantly personally attacking and insulting me, calling me a Neo-Nazi is no way to carry on a dialogue. I do not see his reasoning in calling me a NeoNazi, as I am part Native American, which means I am part of the sub-human races and not "Aryan", for me to be a neo-nazi would be like saying mustard and ketchup.Jadger 03:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Jadger, have you at all read what I wrote above ? I think it's time to provide some sources. I'm also concerned that the article about the district of Warsaw is dominated by a single sad historic event. I'd like to encourage you to write more about the district itself and also more about its earlier history. --_Lysy^talk 06:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh I forgot the source- from memorial site for Warsaw Uprising http://www.warsawuprising.com/witness/atrocities1.htm

Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland. Excerpts from: German Crimes in Poland. Howard Fertig, New York, 1982.

I am part Native American, which means I am part of the sub-human races and not "Aryan" Not really. Hitler liked Native Americans. Many Nazis admire Native American beliefs. Just to let you know. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1574410652/104-2677516-2975169?v=glance&n=283155 Of unique interest to me was was how the Third Reich attempted to sway Native Americans against the American government, even to the extent of declaring the Sioux Nation "Aryan" and promising to repatriate the annexed lands back to native people should they rebel against their country. --Molobo 19:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I am not a member of the Sioux nation, I am not even from the same tribal area or cultural group, and NOT a Nazi. also, why is this topic re-opened? we have not resolved the dispute, and space cadet is not taking part in discussion, yet will continue to edit war this topic.

as for your source, I was asking for the actual report, not some webpage that picks out the parts relevant to its argument. but also according to that source u gave me http://www.warsawuprising.com/paper/rona.htm "After the war, SS General Erich von dem Bach, the commander of all German forces suppressing the Uprising, testified that:" that underlines my point clearly an SS General is not a member of the Wehrmacht, so u cannot use the term "Nazi German", as it was not ordinary Germans, but Nazis and the "ukrainians".

so I repeat again, can u give a source of this report, who created the report, what renowned people participated in it? etc. etc.

admin please punish Molobo, he keeps trying to paint me as a Nazi, personal attacks are not allowed, now please make him obey the rules for onceJadger 02:16, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Jadger, I think we are trying to discuss a couple of things at once. Let's try to look at the issues separately:

1. Were the units that massacred the population Nazi ?
2. Were they German ?
3. Were there any POWs among the victims of the massacre or just civilians ?

--_Lysy^talk 02:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Whether one likes it or not, it is standard practice in English to use either German or Nazi, almost interchangably, when discussing the events of this period. Take a look, for example, at Lidice or Oradour-sur-Glane articles. If you really want to enforce the use of only one term, take it up on some general Wikipedia policy page, and not here, as this mixed usage occurs in many other articles.

Also, I invite Jadger to present some sources of his own. Specifically, since Jadger insists that insurgents were killed in the massacre, let him present specific evidence to prove that point. Balcer 03:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

1. the units that massacred were Nazi as in SS (as it states in the article, the dirlewanger brigade), the leader of the fight against the rebels was a SS general who has no command or rank in the wehrmacht. 2. no they weren't German, as in the discussion there were Russian Cossacks "Ukrainians" as well as the Dirlewanger and other SS brigades. 3. they don't have to be POWs, but rather just insurgents. it states in the article that there was fierce fighting in the district, if there was fierce fighting one must ask: between who? the innocent civilians couldnt have fought, or else they wouldnt of been innocent or civilians. 4. I do not need to provide my own sources, the ones provided by the others (the warsaw uprising site) prove my point if u care to read the different pages on that webpage. Jadger 17:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Jadger, now I see what puzzles you. Take a look at e.g. "Rising'44" by Davies. He explains there that while the fights took place in the eastern parts of Wola (closer to the city centre), the massacre happened mostly in the western part. The massacre and the fighting were two distinct things. According to German (yes, German!) accounts in his book, the civilians were both shot with machine gun fire and then those wounded were burned with gasoline. The way you put it ("executed") simply gives a false impression of what happened. I understand your desire to whitewash German history, but some things unfortunately just happened and cannot be undone by your good will editing. --_Lysy^talk 07:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Understood now, thanks for clarifying that, that is all that I was asking, was for some clarification for everyone so that it doesnt look like the Axis forces just walked into this part of the city and started killing ppl because there were rebels elsewhere. executed I do not feel gives a false impression, as under the Nazis, more ppl were executed by the Guillotine then before the Third Reich, and that is just as gruesome, execution is basically a murder sanctioned by authority (in this case the SS), and that was my point.Jadger 21:07, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, you are right that people can be executed with machine fire. I don't think we need to continue this and it's not my intention to expose the details of the atrocities in this article, but for the record: in one of you edit summaries you said that Nazis were not setting people on fire. You are wrong on this: they specifically ordered the victims to hold pieces of wood so that they would burn better and then poured gasoline on them. I know this must be shocking to you as it was to me but I'm able to provide non-Polish, reliable references confirming that if you'd prefer to check for yourself. I don't think this has to be explained in the article about Wola, though. --Lysy^talk 23:11, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sowinski na szancach Woli.jpg

Image:Sowinski na szancach Woli.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)