Talk:Polish–Lithuanian relations during World War II

message: The article was split from Armia Krajowa, per recommendations of Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Armia Krajowa. Please see Talk:Armia Krajowa for discussions prior to the split, which resulted in the section being tagged with 'POV' tag several times.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:17, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin

message: Do not delete tags concerns raised in other articles are valid here as noted above. M.K. 22:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please elabore here why this article is supposedly POVed, not in other articles.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV tags deletion by Lysy and Piotrus

message: The Vilnius region wasn't a mixture of Poles and Lithuanians. Unbelievable ignorance.Xx236 16:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on Ethnic history of the region of Vilnius, Belarusians and Jews were the major minorities, Lithuanians were indeed few and far in between (even Russian and German censuses give them less than 20%, and Polish around 5%).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I dint think that http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Republic-of-Central-Lithuania is proper source for that. M.K. (talk) 18:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  conflicts over the Vilnius region and Suvalkai region, areas whose population was mostly a mixture of Poles and Lithuanians 

message: The Suvalkai region doesn't inform about the ethnic proportions. Xx236 16:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please comment on that article on its talkpage. It is unreferenced and possibly OR - may warrant AfD or merger, I think.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suvalkai region 

message: Please see here for a translation of relevant part of an academic article from 2004, by Alvydas Nikzentaitis, director of Lithuanian Institute of History, discussing some biases Lithuanian historigrophay had (has?) regarding the issue of Polish-Lithuanian relations during WWII. Original article: Lithuanian, German.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lithuanian historiography 

message: A day or so ago I began an attempt to copy-edit this "joke of an Encyclopedia article". Am I mistaken, or is this one of the worst examples on English Wikipedia of childish POV pushing from the various editors involved? Dr. Dan (talk) 03:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A More Important Question 

message: With recent attempts to remove certain historic picture under variuos suggestions   (reassembles same pattern as here), I have to note that  hardly historical images can be removed  under minor edit mark as well under argument that it is not clear. Many historical images are not HQ. In other hand if contributors agrees we can move current image to Dubingiai massacre (as it presents crime scene) and the picture from Dubingiai massacre, this one, here. M.K. (talk) 13:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The other picture - also uploaded by you - is higher quality and more relevant. I see no reason we should use the bad quality photo - and keep the non-free one under fair use - when we have a better one.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  16:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Historic picture

message: It would be helpful if referenced by academic research sentences would not be modified, putting one's bias into notable scholar's mouth. Thank you in advance.--Lokyz (talk) 23:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have specific issues, please list them here.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  05:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Here you go - even after clearing the text according to the references provided (note that every fixed sentence is feferenced by Bubnys work) ,  one editor is keep inserting his "explanations", that are not present in the cited authors text with rather insulting edit summaries . Strange enough, i could not find any references in western historiography that would call LTDF a "nazi auxilairies", and even soviet historiography does not accuse them on being "auxilaries". What do I find even more unacceptable is putting Polish name on Lithuanian settlement from the interwar Lithuanian republic.--Lokyz (talk) 14:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As disruption still continues I'd like to ask whether any of the editors supporting the disrupted version can read Lithuanian and whether they could support their preferred version with proper quotations of the work cited.--Lokyz (talk) 11:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A request 

message: Health issues in the family have severely limited my WP time. Again, let us review. The Nazis rolled out a program across Eastern Europe to make the Holocaust appear to be a spontaneous eruption of virulent anti-Semitic "self-cleansing." "Eyewitness accounts by German officers" of neighbors killing neighbors? There is proof in black and white in Nazi correspondence where you have the official report of locals (fill in Lithuanians, Poles, Latvians, Ukrainians...) slaughtering their Jewish neighbors in the most brutal manner possible contradicted by Nazi correspondence saying the very same locals refused to participate and, instead (as an example) a small German unit was sent out to slaughter the Jews in the Lithuanian countryside, this won't look good for the Germans if the news ever gets out. Of course if the Jews are all dead, who will contradict Nazi accounts blaming the Lithuanians?
   The Nazis were planting news through sympathizers in Sweden as soon as they invaded. I would suggest the editors do a bit of research away from the sources which would appear to so decisively paint both sides as evil. Any sources built on a selection of Nazi reports purporting the most barbaric behaviors by Eastern Europeans against their neighbors are suspect. You might all start with Stahlecker’s reports. Even in Gross' neighbors bludgeoning neighbors in Jedwabne, more research has indicated many of the guilty were not local Poles, nor were those "locals" lead by ethnic Poles.
   This Polish-Lithuanian mud-wrestling match over who was the worse collaborator has to stop. And especially, there were not entire armies of Lithuanian Nazi units as being suggested here and elsewhere, instead, on the order of around 300--all other partisans being explicitly disarmed by the Nazis. —PētersV (talk) 04:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Umm, Petras... this article has little to do with Jews. It has to do with relations between Poles and Lithuanians, and - as sad as it is - both of them did not saw the Jews as a major issue. It is also quite obvious that (percentage-wise!) there were almost no Polish collaborators - and that there were many, many Lithuanian ones (and of course we can find notable exceptions to all of that). Do note that by collaborator - one working with the Nazis - we don' necessarily mean one working in the Holocaust. LVR, for example, was a major Nazi auxiliary in Lithuania - but had almost nothing to do with the Holocaust in Lithuania. The problem with this article is in Lithuania, anti-Soviet resistance heroes were at the same time Nazi collaborators, since Nazis promised some sort of autonomy and anti-Soviet support to the desperate Lithuanians. It is understandable that many Lithuanians decided to work for the "lesser evil" - and we also have to remember that the Polish phenomena of "almost no collaboration" was aided by the fact that Nazis did not care for Poles enough to be ask them to collaborate (and were busy exterminating them for Generalplan Ost). That difference in attitude to Nazi Germany - whom Poles saw as evil occupants and Lithuanians as possible allies - caused bad blood between anti-Nazi and anti-Soviet Poles and pro-Nazi, anti-Polish (due to Vilnius issue) and anti-Soviet Lithuanians. However, revisionist Lithuanians try to erase the pro-Nazi label (since nobody wants it nowadays...), and are inventing a false story about how Lithuanians were forced to work with Nazis to save themselves from the evil Poles (Armia Krajowa intended to carry out a genocide in Lithuania, etc....). Btw, those are not my speculations, this POV is supported by scholars - including honest Lithuanian scholars, like Bubnys (it was in an interview with him that I first read of this extremist Lithuanian POV). It is, after all, only an extremist fringe (Vilnija) who supports such revisionist POV, and mainstream Lithuanian scholars, like Bubnys, produce good and honest works. But every now and often, some extremist user will try to push this POV on Wikipedia - and as minor as it is, compared to more famous POVs we are familiar is, it is as dangerous. Please note that nobody is trying to intentionally emphasize the Lithuanian collaboration issue, but it is being emphasized in a response to intentional attempt to whitewash it by demonizing Poles. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  06:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Now it is obvious, that Piotrus has some agenda - he's trying to present Poles as  "no evil", dspite proofs of their wrongdoing. It is strange, that Lithuanians, who were working during the Nazi occupation are labeled as "colaborators" and were shot by AK partisans (and this is justifiable because the "collaboration"), and thousands of Poles that were working for example in railways, that were supplying munition and soldiers - are not collaborators. Isn't this selective labeling a rather dubious practice? I'm also suprised, that such expirienced editor accuses a scholar of being "extremist" and "POV" - the fact of AK plans are clear from the documents found in Bernardine church. And no there is no mentioning of genocide - they say, that Lithuanians are not ready to be independent, and after war Poland will seek to get Lithuania as it's protectorate. Also numerous selctive killing by ethnicity facys are documented. Nobody is trying to say anything general about Poles, we're just talking about documented facts.--Lokyz (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody was shooting Lithuanian railworkers. Lithuanian collaborators - usually executed by the verdict of the Special Courts, just as Polish collaborators were - were spies, high-ranking administrators/officers, and so on. I am not accusing scholars of extremism - or are you referring to Vilnija as to a scholarly organization? As for "Bernardine church" documents, as far as I remember, they are highly controversial - either their very existense or as a forgery. In any case, while political organizations in Wilno region were more radical, Polish gov't in exile was one of the very few countries that supported restoration of fully independent Lithuania (just as post-1989 Polish government was one of the first to recognize the modern Lithuanian state). Interesting, how inconvenient facts are ommitted from nationalist "Poles are evil" propaganda... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  17:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To make it more comprehensible to you - just change one word and try to understand, that "Lithunians are evil" is not less insulting. As for the "forgery" ofdocuments, this does not sound convincing, it is rather the "they are evil" thing, and I do have a reason to believe you're not neutral when assesing actions of Lithuanians.--Lokyz (talk) 19:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody is suggesting anywhere that Lithuanians are evil (albeit one can wonder about motivations of Vilnija-related hate-mongers... but they are a tiny minority, each country, Poland included, has them). Even Lithuanian Nazi collaborators were not evil, as I wrote their choice was quite understandable in their circumstances. If Poland was occupied by the Soviets and if Nazis promised Poles autonomy, instead of trying to exterminate them, Poles might have been on the same boat. As it stands, they didn't. That's a neutral fact, not a judgment. On the other hand, edits that try to negate that Lithuanian collaboration existed, or blame Poles for it, are hardly neutral.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  20:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Strange enough, every time I do put referenced information that those "colaborators" were silently doing their thing and sabotaging German orders, you do delete it on sight, or whats's worse, replace it with some Polish source with another general accusations about vile Lithuanians (including "historians" like Ratajczyk). Not to mention, that as Lithuanian author does write something documented about Polish crimes, we do get a lot of grievances about "falsified, extremist and anti-Polish" organizations behind this, even suggesting that everyone who does rely on the sources is an extremist. It is insulting, absolutely not NPOV, as it is not very productive. Strange enough, after this other editors get accused on whitewashing .--Lokyz (talk) 17:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there any specific referenced claims of yours that are not in the article? Please be so kind and describe them here, I thought we kept all the info on LVR uneasy relation with the Germans, I've even created a section dedicated to this.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  18:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whose propaganda 

message: I thought I'd continue the above here. The main problem with the article right now is that it inappropriately mixes the Holocaust in Lithuania and later Lithuanian mobilization against the Red Army as all being Nazi collaborators, Holocaust perpetrators, etc. This is completely inaccurate. The Holocaust and who collaborated is one topic. Who was mobilized--whether or not Nazi allowed or concripted or supported or sponsored--in 1943/1944 is a completely different topic. These units did not consider themselves Nazi. Nor were they part of the Nazis "convicted at Nuremberg" as the Soviets so often love to declare even those which were Waffen SS. It's unfortunate that we have a Polish source that tars Lithuanians with the same Nazi brush regardless of the historical circumstances--that tarring is not accurate.
   For further reading you might try here.
   Rather than revert the last edit, the whole "Armed conflict" section needs to be redone and split into the appropriate periods:
* Soviet occupation
* Nazi invasion and Holocaust
* Soviet advance
* Soviet reoccupation
Hope this helps. "Nazi-sponsored" for the LVR in 1944 is a completely inaccurate characterization of the situation. —PētersV (talk) 18:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate mixing 

message: This (namely killed hundreds of mostly Lithuanian policemen, members of village self-defence units, servants of local administration, soldiers of Nazi-sponsored[16] Lithuanian Territorial Defense Force, teachers, foresters and farmers, who were collaborating with the Nazi regime.) This is synthesis of different sources. Arūnas Bubnys did not wrote that those killed teachers, foresters and farmers were collaborated with Nazis, and Snyder did not wrote about those teachers, farmers etc in provided source. So basically that was done - was taken different sources and merged together. So it is textbook case of synthesis, and original research is not allowed on WP main space. Therefore I removing this. M.K. (talk) 14:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact the victims were mostly collaborators is of crucial importance. But I agree that this can be simplified; I'll remove the more dubious part indeed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  15:40, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Provide Snyder's original quote, there according to you he described foresters as collaborators with NAzi. Btw, care to provide rationale about removal of other sources/material? M.K. (talk) 16:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Simply, per reliable ref. Snyder notes that AK attacked the collaborators. Bubnys goes into details, telling out their professions. Their accounts are supplementary, not contradictory. The less reliable and verifiable source, in this case, is Bubnys, whose offline article in Lithuanian may in any case agree with Snyder. I would actually expect a good scholar like Bubnys to make such a statement - that those targeted by AK were collaborators - somewhere in his article.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  16:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I cant access that Snyder's page, this why I asking to provide quote. BtW, do you have a ref that their accounts are supplementary? How do you know that Bubnys would not dispute Synder, etc?  M.K. (talk) 16:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

text: The Nazi regime allowed Lithuanians to serve as security police (Saugumas) which legitimized Lithuanian attacks on Poles in Wilno. Whereas in 1939-1940 independent state discriminated against Poles in Wilno, and in 1940-1941 Soviet Union deported Poles from Wilno, in 1941-1944 the Lithuanian security police and its German masters killed Poles in Wilno... From autumn 1943, the Polish underground Home Army attacked and disarmed collaborating police units in and around Wilno. Lithuanian policemen responded by executing Polish civilians. This was followed by retributive attacks on Lithuanian villages by Poles.
There, don't say I never did anything for you.radek (talk) 19:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for proving my point. Seeing original citation and there it was used in original text and WP article, it is 100 % synthesis of different sources, in other words pure OR. And no Bubnys is categorical - ... that Armia Krajowa, as the main enemy in Lithuania, regarded Lithuanians in general, not only who worked in police and local self-government. M.K. (talk) 12:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am afraid your translation is dubious. "As the main enemy in Lithuania"... just doesn't make much sense. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  16:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The only dubious thing is the conclusion made by involving synthesis of different sources. M.K. (talk) 12:51, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:SYNTH]]

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Polish–Lithuanian relations during World War II. 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/20091027041339/http://geocities.com/skrzydla/ to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Footnotes
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Considering that this article is about Polish-Lithuanian relations during ww2, would it be ok if i added a list of battles? @Piotrus @Marcelus Olek Novy (talk) 11:55, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for asking. Will need to see how it looks but it sounds ok to me for now. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:43, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure if adding separate list of battles would be useful here Marcelus (talk) 08:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Battles 

message: The current Polish-Lithuanian Ethnic Conflict should be merged into the Polish–Lithuanian relations during World War II because the current scope of the article about "Ethnic Conflict" is essentially just World War II (despite the tensions existing before and arguably after the war) and it just seems to be an incoherent and low-quality translation that is missing even dots to complete the sentences. Instead of outright deleting the article, maybe some salvageable parts can be just added to a more established article that deserves some work as is.
This case is almost identical to the Polish–Ukrainian ethnic conflict, which was proposed by Marcelus to be renamed to Polish–Ukrainian relations (1939–1947). +JMJ+ (talk) 12:41, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; both articles should be merged under a title of Polish–Lithuanian relations during World War II Marcelus (talk) 16:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's better to stay with ethnic conflict, relationships don't fit in too well after that how to combine these two articles please tell me to do it well Wladekimperialny (talk) 17:23, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: As I have created an article about the conflict and its consequences, and the article is underdeveloped with little detail and some points are not clarified and thoughts are dropped, I propose to move some things to my article and delete the whole article Wladekimperialny (talk) 14:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to remove the article and replace it with [[Polish-Lithuanian Ethnic Conflict]]. 

message: @Querty1231 please self-revert and restore the stable version, and let's discuss the changes you want to make here. This is a massive change to a controversial topic. Please avoid edit war. Marcelus (talk) 18:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: well, I changed it because for me the article is well written, but it does not contain a thorough explanation of the dispute and the conflict itself for someone reading it, it is more adektwat such a detailed description of events in addition there is no outline for the Świeciany massacre. Querty1231 (talk) 18:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a valid point, but you removed a lot of other sourced information, also added a lot of new texts that isn't well written, lacks sources, and frankly sometimes seems unnecessary. Can you please first self-revert and restore the stable version? Marcelus (talk) 18:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I will analyze well and the sources are given I can give others too, at your request I will do a scan on a bot that detects errors to correct later on. ;) thank you for help Querty1231 (talk) 18:16, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but that's not all. You need to restore the previous version becasue the article is about Polish-Lithuanian relations and not about Polish-Lithuanian ethnic conflict. If you want to change the scope so drastically, you need to start the discussion. Also your text is written very poorly and simply cannot stand as it is now. Marcelus (talk) 18:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: as it is written poorly, you cannot simply say that it is "poor" as it contains a lot of details, and the footnotes are there, in addition the article on the Polish-Lithuanian ethnic Conflict is literally the same as the Polish-Lithuanian Relations ww2, even +JMJ+ suggested to re-direct these articles into one, because it is , the same thing Querty1231 (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Read: WP:SCOPE. The English of the article is poor, and the footnotes are lacking. Marcelus (talk) 19:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: how it lacks footnotes every text has footnotes, in addition how poorly written I ask you again to show an example, maybe The causes of the conflict may not be coherent but the rest is right. Querty1231 (talk) 19:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

text: You are welcome to expand it but you also changed to the scope by moving the article to a more problematic name. You should discuss your changes here or at least introduce them in a series of edits, with detailed edit summaries for each, explaining what is being changed (removed/added/rewritten). Your new version removed much existing content and/or referenced to it - for example, you removed all (three) references to Timothy Snyder, and reduced referenced to Tadeusz Piotrowski from over a dozen to two, without justifying this at all. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's discuss proposed changes