On shortening the article 
Re: . Point by point.
 Although Petlura's was a junior partner, ommitting Ukrainian participation is just as wrong as omitting Lithuanian part from Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
 rm of 'Some scholars' - per WP:WEASEL; there are three citations for this and this is not contradicted by others so there is no reason to believe this is not the opinion of most, if not, all scholars
 I did restore the removal of some 'fact' tagged claims; this article needs inline citations anyway
 I don't believe the article gains anything from repeating claims of Soviet and Polish propagadna ("Soviet propaganda claimed that...The Poles denied that...). We could such claims and counter-claims to virtually any article, but what's the point?
 Since we have the Controversies of the Polish-Soviet War article, I see no need for the discussions of claims who killed/maimed/burnt who here. "The Soviet advance into Ukraine was characterized by mass killing of civilians..." As for Babel, as discussed above, in his books he presents the crimes of both sides, and his selective usage is POVish. But if we remove only him, we get a POVed para with only Soviet crimes - hence the entire para should go.
| talk