Talk:Poles in Belarus

message: Probably an isolated incident not worth including in the article but... "Neo-nazis in Belarus attack Poles".-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  02:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hmmm 

message: Based on the census data from Demographics Weekly, I get the following numbers:
*8,054,648 inhabitants of the BSSR in 1959
*538,881 Poles or 6.69 as a percentage
*9,002,338 inhabitants of the BSSR in 1970
*382,600 Poles or 4.25 as a percentage
*9,532,516 inhabitants of the BSSR in 1979
*403,169 Poles or 4.23 as a percentage
*10,151,806 inhabitants of the BSSR in 1989
*417,720 Poles or 4.11 as a percentage
Prussia1231 (talk) 06:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic Demographics? 

message: The map is unsourced and badly formatted, would the authors please at least add the sources to it. --Czalex 21:33, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: I might be mistaken, but there doesn't seem to be any direct mentioning of the Polish-Soviet War/Polish-Belarussian Conflicts, outside of:
"Polish influence was restored over West Belarus in the interwar period. The Polish government continued the policy of active polonization of the local population, stimulating local people to take Polish identity."
It seems like this would be sort of an important issue to the history of Poles in Belarus (it is, after all, mentioned on the article for Belarussians in Poland). Even if there isn't much information available, it seems as though the war itself should be mentioned, instead of just "...in the interwar period", which seems somewhat vague in of itself.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.87.73 (talk) 17:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  It should be mentioned? 

message: Ellman summarises (p. 690) his discussion of the operation thus: 
This is not the same as "[The operation] amounted to an ethnic genocide as defined by the UN convention, concluded historian Michael Ellman", no? Without Ellman, the rest of the paragraph does not make sense, because his "conclusion" is being misrepresented. I.e. Montefiore (in passing) mentions a "mini-genocide"; this is not a "similar conclusion" as the article claims: . What's a mini-genocide anyway? A genocide is a genocide. Tomasz Sommer is a journalist and author, not a scholar; his opinion is undue. Etc. I suggest reviewing sources and proposing something that is a. true to sources, and b. not a coatrack. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:22, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The part that you're omitting, is the part which follows that sentence, where he considers arguments against the notion that it was a genocide, and then proceeds to debunk them.Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

text: In my edit, I introduced three in-depth academic works in English that each address Belarus specifically, and included in the article data on what happened in Belarus.  - your edit is an improvement, however it still does not address Belarus, has several errors (e.g. not all of the dead (our article currently says "111,091 ethnic Poles") in "Polish operation" were Poles - some 80% were across the USSR, and less than 50% in Belarus), uses non-mainstream sources (e.g. Sommer), non-RS (e.g. Sommer's book description at a book store, polish club), and misrepresents others (e.g. McDermott). The content was added to this article by a blocked sock (and others socks from the some farm added this to other articles), and has stood unchallenged (in this little edited article up to now. Given this state of affairs - those reverting this content back in take responsibility for the sock's edits - and these count as newly introduced material to this article. I suggest you take a look at this mainstream English writing:Petrov, Nikita, and Arsenii Roginskii. "The “Polish Operation” of the NKVD, 1937–8." Stalin’s Terror. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2003. 153-172.Martin, Terry. "The origins of Soviet ethnic cleansing." The Journal of Modern History 70.4 (1998): 813-861.Morris, James. "The Polish terror: spy mania and ethnic cleansing in the great terror." Europe-Asia Studies 56.5 (2004): 751-766. Icewhiz (talk) 03:27, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: What Ellman said

message: *Edellman mentions the "Polish operation" in two locations: pp. 686-687 and in "Conclusion" p. 690. Here's what he says:
And
In both cases, he uses the language of "might well qualify", "may qualify" and "there is as yet no authoritative ruling on the
legal characterisation". This is not the same as "[The operation] amounted to an ethnic genocide as defined by the UN convention, concluded historian Michael Ellman", no? 
Without Ellman, the rest of the paragraph does not make sense, because his "conclusion" is being misrepresented. I.e. Montefiore (in passing) mentions a "mini-genocide"; this is not a "similar conclusion" as the article claims: . What's a mini-genocide anyway? A genocide is a genocide. Tomasz Sommer is a journalist and author, not a scholar; his opinion is undue. Etc. I suggest reviewing sources and proposing something that is a. true to sources, and b. not a coatrack. --K.e.coffman (talk) 06:09, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Ellman concludes that it was a genocide but considers the possibility that others may disagree. That's all there is too it. If you want to reword Montefiore etc. that's fine, but please stop removing the material wholesale and blind reverting.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:45, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Quite precious - given blind reverts such as this one. Ellman does not conclude anything. Please justify removal of Belarus specific information sourced to actual published academic works, in English, by - Morris, Marin, and Petrov&Roginsky. Please justify each of the sources you introduced (as you are responsible for this content, given article history that was pointed out to you) - including a book description at an on-line store and a politician/journlist (editor of Najwyższy Czas!) interviewed in a Polish language tabloid - Super Express. Icewhiz (talk) 06:54, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Ellman again