Talk:Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists

message: Currently Ukrainian Nationalist Organisation is a redirect to here, linked from UNO (disambiguation). Some websites  support that this may be the case. A few  suggest there may have been a parallel organisation in Canada known as UNO.
Currently UNO is not mentioned in the article, in which case the link from UNO (disambiguation) is not sustainable and will need to be removed.
I am aware that articles such as this can be sensitive so I am cautious to go ahead and edit them considering I am not familiar with their content. Can someone confirm whether this organisation is or was ever called UNO and whether it should be disambiguated as such? If it should be, can you also update the article so that such a link is supported?
Thank you, --MegaSloth (talk) 15:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, that has clarified what the Canadian organisation is. Does this mean that OUN is never referred to as UNO? --MegaSloth (talk) 21:57, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was this organisation ever referred to as "UNO"? 

message: Guess why adopted in 1941 logo given instead of official OUN logo? Article need to be split - legal OUN and OUN-B appeared in April 1941. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 18:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: OUN-B logo instead OUN

message: How about this:
However, the remaining local Jews, who for many Ukrainians in Galicia were considered to be the Bolshevik helpers and associates of the NKVD. Germany forced them to clean up dead bodies. The whole operation was accompanied by violence and beatings, in which participated also by local Ukrainians. Says the Jewish alone in Lviv at the beginning of July 1941 during a three-day pogrom killed between two and six thousand Jews. In late July and August 1941, the Ukrainian police, the so-called "days Petlura, even killed about five thousand Jews in Lvov, mostly representatives of the intelligentsia. In the early days of German occupation, and state the same sources, the anti-Jewish pogroms took place in fifty eight cities and towns of western Ukraine, killing them twenty-four thousand Jews.
So participation OUN police in killing Jews is clear now?--Paweł5586 (talk) 07:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, this info is important and belongs somewhere on wikipedia, but not in the OUN article. Is more about police than OUN.  The OUN may not have controlled all the police in July 1941 (they eventually did later, in Volyn); if these crimes were thr work of the OUN I'm sure Hrycak would have said so.Faustian (talk) 13:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Per .К. Патриляк. Військова діяльність ОУН(Б) у 1940—1942 роках. — Університет імені Шевченко \Ін-т історії України НАН України Київ, 2004 OUN-B controlled own militia (no ther militia was - only OUN-B) well into mid September 1941.
Even given a report by OUN-B from 22 July 1941 (see also ОУН в 1941 році: документи: В 2-х ч Ін-т історії України НАН України К. 2006  )  - about "milita" activity "Звіт другову Стецькові від ОУН на МУЗ"- report noted "discruptions of Hungarians" which released Jews and Poles and even protect them from OUN-B militiaJo0doe (talk) 17:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, we know you can quote selectively to support your POV.Faustian (talk) 17:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Plase prove your insertion by providing "full citation" (if such exist). Source  also used text from   ОУН в 1941 році: документи: В 2-х ч Ін-т історії України НАН України К. 2006 ) - see at page p.37 - Our militia is now arresting together with the Germans numerous Jews. Before their liquidation the Jews are defending themselves with all kinds of methods, mainly with money. I was unable to find any documents or citation at ОУН в 1941 році: документи: В 2-х ч Ін-т історії України НАН України К. 2006  which prove any existance of OUN-B intend to not to exterminate Jews,Poles Russians. Can you? Please specify a page number. Thank youJo0doe (talk) 16:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You do realize you are asking to prove a negative. "I was unable to find any documents or citation at ОУН в 1941 році: документи: В 2-х ч Ін-т історії України НАН України К. 2006  which prove any existance of OUN-B intend to not to exterminate Jews,Poles Russians. Can you?"Faustian (talk) 22:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: So can you provide a page number(s) and citation from mentioned above sources which can confirm  OUN-B 1941 efforts to save/protects/treat equially Jews, Poles, and Russians. Thanks Jo0doe (talk) 08:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Yadwashem is one source, right? It's already in the article.  Himka considers Yadvashem to be mistaken.Faustian (talk) 22:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You forgot to add at least 3 (three) sources Ін-т історії України НАН України . Could you indicate a Himka consideration  that the Dr. Franziska Bruder The International Institute for Holocaust Research No. 12 -June 2008 p.37 ISSN 1565-8643   has be to be mistaken - page number and name of source please. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 08:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Link doesn't work anynore, it's been taken down. but the relevant stuff is posted on this talk page under the heading controversial. Hrrycak wrote, ""W uchwałach programowych podjętych na II (Krakowskim) Wielkim Zgromadzeniu OUN-B (kwiecień 1941) potępiono pogromy antyżydowskie, ponieważ odciągały one uwagę Ukraińców od prawdziwego wroga – reżimu bolszewickiego."  I'm restoring it.Faustian (talk) 04:39, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you specify a page at  where appeared a text which "condemned anti-Jewish pogroms" - I can't find claim which can be deemed as such. Noone from known to me scholar, including Friedman, gives a similar assesment of the Second General Congress of OUN-B. Can you suggest a more details for source (page number, publisher, a year of issue). ThanksJo0doe (talk) 09:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See my comments above. We base info on secondary not primary sources.  Publish your interpretation, and we'll use it. Otherwise defer to Hrycak's claims. Hyrycak wrote: "Ale równocześnie stwierdzono, że Żydzi są jego najbardziej oddanym sprzymierzeńcem i awangardą moskiewskiego imperializmu na Ukrainie." Translated: "In the resolutions adopted on the second program (Krakowski) Grand Assembly of the OUN-B (April 1941) condemned anti-Jewish pogroms, since they distracted attention from the real enemy of the Ukrainians - the Bolshevik regime. But at the same time, it was found that the Jews were the most devoted ally of imperialism and Moscow's avant-garde in Ukraine."Faustian (talk) 13:21, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you suggest me a page number and publisher and year of issue of Hrycak text. I already note above a Philip Friedman. Ukrainian-Jewish Relations During the Nazi Occupation. at Yivo annual of Jewish social science Yiddish Scientific Institute, 1959 p 265 - start from ...make it amply clear, that adopting the Nazi political platform and lot of other scholar sources with clearly indicated page number( for instance - see  Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, pp.62-63) by Institute of History - National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine)  , publisher which suggest similar assesment of the  point 17 at  Grand Assembly of the OUN-B (April 1941). Seems to me Hrycak was simply misquoted-  Ідеологія і практика українського націоналізму в 30-х роках пригадує нацизм і, передусім, італійський фашизм. . ThanksJo0doe (talk) 13:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The quote I provided was his, word for word. So he was not misquoted. Your quote doesn't contradict this - "the ideology and practice of Ukrainian nationalism in the 1930's reminds one of Nazism and above all Italian fascism." You as usual quote selectively. Hrycak notes "Насправді Бандера не мав безпосереднього зв'язку з винищенням поляків на Волині в 1943 році, за що його часто осуджують. Я не кажу, що якщо б він був тоді в Україні, то не дійшло б до різні на Волині, але Бандера не був безпосередньо  причетний ані до творення УПА в 1942 році, ані до її діяльності." (saying he had nothing to do with the murder of Poles, although if he had been in Ukraine it might have still happened). Furthermore, "Бандера хотів саме такого націоналізму: з одного боку - ксенофобського, агресивного, радикального, а з іншого - романтичного, героїчного, красивого. Його головною ідеєю була національна революція, національний здвиг." Translated: Bandera wanted a nationalism that was not only xenophobic, aggressive and radical but also romantic, heroic and beautiful. He compares Bandera to the Russian narodniks, more than to the Nazis.  "Позиція Бандери була близька до російських народовців."  But you conveniently ignored that, didn't quote it do you?  It's interesting how you take a balanced article and just pick out the specific bits of info that serve your POV. Faustian (talk) 15:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I just ask for page number and year of issue for Hrytsak.  Also for sentence Бандера не мав безпосереднього зв'язку з винищенням поляків google suggest - he have not direct relation to  the murder of Poles. His indirect relation described well at Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, pp.62-63) by Institute of History - National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.Thanks P.S. Just a page and yearJo0doe (talk) 15:55, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No page or year for website interview. Text is transcribed here. Sorry that you don't like info that doesn't match your POV.Faustian (talk) 16:53, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest you to follow WP:V, WP:RS,WP:CITE policy before use of the website interview. It would be nice if you fix artilce in accordance to above mentioned sources - to follow the scholar  assesment of the event described - see anti-Semitism took one of the key places in UNO program documentations. " April 1941, on the UNO Congress in Krakow, struggling Jews was practically legalized: “Jews are the support for Bolshevist regime in Ukraine, and therefore Ukrainian Nationalists’ Organization fights Jews…”. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 07:48, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Hrycak

message: National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine publications present a dozens of scholar texts which describe the sources which Bandera's OUN used for funding. Indeed intresting to note that the so called "Бойовий фонд ОУН" (Military fund of OUN) at large extend from 1940 composed from
the Jews - victim of the Holocaust belonging  - gold, dimonds, jewellery and intresting to note - a stamps collections. "Military fund" was not captured by Soviets and was "evacuated" through Vienna in 1944. A section "OUN funding" would be intact. Suggestions?Jo0doe (talk) 12:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent idea. For verification purposes please use only sources available on-line or published by western institutions - we can't check offline writings available only in Kiev.Faustian (talk) 13:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you specify me restiction at WP:V - regarding National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine publications available at Parliament library? Thanks Jo0doe (talk) 14:09, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you choose to insert info from sources that can only be verified by going to the library of the Ukrainian parliament then expect your edits to be removed.Faustian (talk) 17:24, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that --Львівське (talk) 17:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

text: Ehy don't you post relevant scans to your Flikr page!--Galassi (talk) 18:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: New section suggestion

message: "The OUN was willing to support Nazi antisemitic policies if doing so would help their cause. A slogan put forth by the Bandera group and recorded in the July 16, 1941 Einsatzgruppen  report stated: "Long live Ukraine without Jews, Poles and Germans; Poles behind the river San, Germans to Berlin, and Jews to the gallows"." All available web material points back to Wikipedia. Does anyone have access to the actual slogan?.--Galassi (talk) 13:49, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the Friedman work, and referenced to it. I'll doublecheck whenever I see that book again but I don't own it. The article shouldn't be just a collection of antisemtic quotes, one is enough to illustrate the OUN's attitude. But there are plenty from the period in 1941 when the OUN was particularly interested in forging an alliance with the Germans (Himka's article online has some also). Faustian (talk) 14:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've access to actual leaflet - it stored in same collection as this one . If it will be usefull I'll upload it to WP - but it's August 1942 leafletJo0doe (talk) 14:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, although the info is sourced to a secondary source so the primary one is unnecesary.Faustian (talk) 18:07, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's only few line from the an A3 size leaflet - for educational proposes it's would be relevant to present all document, I suggestJo0doe (talk) 13:49, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: To the Gallows

message: Source published in 2004 (for Parliament Commission)   got nice text to describe OUN after WWII - see pp.471-472 for OUN-B Jo0doe (talk) 16:02, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: U don't see such a phrase there.--Galassi (talk) 11:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Institute of History - National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

message: Interesting article about this very decent man, will be incorporated when I have more time (unless someone else wants to): . It doesn't surprise me.... Faustian (talk) 22:06, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sheptytsky vs. OUN 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:BanderaOUNPeoplemilitiauniform1941.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: While Rudling's work is reliable and ought to be cited, Rudling has also been described as not completely objective and indeed has been described as a "radical revisionist": .  The lengthy footnotes and quotations comprising several paragraphs, from Rudling's work, seem to be excessive, given that he is not completely objective. His claims seem to be be given undue weight here and should be trimmed down considerably.Faustian (talk) 03:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: agreed on weight; his name definitely throws up a flag when I see it used in articles. --Львівське (говорити) 03:46, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There is more Rudling text here than there is about the OUN's prewar activities.Faustian (talk) 03:48, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  What do you suggest happen? I don't want to revert or blank or anything like that at the moment, him and I have been going back and forth on the Svoboda article so I don't want it to be some multi-article edit war -Львівське (говорити) 05:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps he can trim down or summarize what Rudling stated?  OR quote a sentence per note and leave it in the ref section, rather than have a seperate note section devoted to mostly Rudling quotations.Faustian (talk) 05:34, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The separate note section on Rudling is a bit too much, I agree. For the stuff that's cited inline - which parts specifically? Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:48, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to remove that entire notes section.  Take whatever info is relevant to this topic (many details, such as how Svoboda was formed, are not) and incorporate it into the body of the article.  A sentence or two direct quote, no more, embedded in the ref section is fine.Faustian (talk) 05:57, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

text: Yes, Kuzio's piece is not a reliable source for an article (other than as a description of Taras Kuzio's opinion), I linked to it here for discussion purposes. I would remove all the notes, and place most of the info into the article's body.  The Svoboda stuff does not belong in the lede though it can be briefly mentioned in the body.  When referencing the statements, including a sentence or direct quote  within the ref is fine. Also be careful of Rudling, as he is not very objective (I will demonstrate this later).  It is safer to stick to verifiable facts that Rudling provides in reliable sources, rather than Rudling's opinions.Faustian (talk) 13:58, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: We need actual academic sources, not websites, for this article, and material written in the last 15 years would be a plus. Also, if the beginning of the article states that the OUN is and organization that was founded… it should describe who the current members of the OUN are. Svoboda, the Congress, etc. all trace their heritage back to the OUN, sometimes proudly. That should definitely be in the intro. I'm surprised you haven't written about it yet here. -Darouet (talk) 14:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that one sentence about Svoboda claiming to trace their heritage to the OUN is sufficient for the lede. The article is about OUN, not Svoboda.Faustian (talk) 14:57, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine. I added one sentence in the first paragraph linking to the modern parties because the article begins, "The OUN is… -Darouet (talk) 17:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Excessive Rudling citations

message: https://www.academia.edu/454566/Terrorists_or_National_Heroes_Politics_of_the_OUN_and_the_UPA_In_Ukraine Xx236 (talk) 06:55, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorist organisation 

message: Would someone make a page called Banderist/s redirecting here--74.57.167.219 (talk) 21:58, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banderists 

message: This article states: "Antisemitism was an attribute OUN shared with other agrarian radical right-wing Eastern European organizations".
However that is a very biased statement. Antisemitism was allover also among the communists and other left-wing parties, in the Ukraine and abroad.
Don't ask me why (that warrants a study of it's own) but it was. So it would be nice if this article would be changed accordingly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.169.23.138 (talk) 18:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antisemitism  

message: The section is relatively long comparing to limited nimber of Jewish victims of OUN. There is no "OUN and antipolonism" section. Xx236 (talk) 06:59, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  OUN and antisemitism 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070930140122/http://www.kices.org/downloads/KICES_WP_04.pdf to http://www.kices.org/downloads/KICES_WP_04.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325095016/http://history.org.ua/oun_upa/upa/2.pdf to http://history.org.ua/oun_upa/upa/2.pdf
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) 16:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. 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/20090615050644/http://www.gazeta.lviv.ua/articles/2005/10/07/9554/ to http://www.gazeta.lviv.ua/articles/2005/10/07/9554/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080411144040/http://history.org.ua/oun_upa/upa/11.pdf to http://history.org.ua/oun_upa/upa/11.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100528190021/http://wyborcza.pl/1,86758,5198591,Bandera___romantyczny_terrorysta.html to http://wyborcza.pl/1,86758,5198591,Bandera___romantyczny_terrorysta.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www1.yadvashem.org/about_holocaust/chronology/1939-1941/1941/chronology_1941_13.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www1.yadvashem.org/about_holocaust/chronology/1939-1941/1941/chronology_1941_18.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:22, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In this edit  says . I'm appending this to that section, but I can't see in the section actual discussion of that phrase or of the infobox. What is clear in this discussion is that there are numerous reliable sources linking OUN to fascism, beyond the point of contestation, but no scholarly consensus that the OUN was itself straightforwardly fascist (several reputable scholars say it was; others say it wasn't); while three editors (Gizzy, , ) were satisfied this was enough to call it fascist, three other editors (, , me) disagreed. In short, opinions don't vary over the degree to which it was fascist (which implies they all say it was, but some more so than others), but whether it was or not. I think therefore a summary that better reflects the consensus in the above discussion would be one that shows there is no clear consensus among scholars, e.g. Fascism (disputed).  BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there any scholars that say OUN was not related or not resembled Fascism at all? GizzyCatBella🍁 15:15, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Then we can say disputed I guess. - GizzyCatBella🍁 15:21, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If pretty much all scholars at least acknowledge fascist elements I think I'm fine with "Opinions vary to what degree". If there are some that dispute it being fascist outright then "Disputed" is better. I'm not informed enough on what different scholars say on this to give a definitive answer Tristario (talk) 23:36, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I think all scholars acknowledge a relationship or resemblance to fascism, but this is not the same as being fascist. However, it looks like the consensus is leaning towards the current phrasing. BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: , why did you  the following statement from the lead?
 There is a contemporary organization claiming to be the same Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists still active in Ukraine.
-- Jabbi (talk) 09:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That's still in the lede, they just moved it to the end of the lede Tristario (talk) 09:56, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ohh cool, didn't notice that. Thanks --Jabbi (talk) 10:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contemporary status 

message: Done in Ukraine in september 2022, see here -- Jabbi (talk) 00:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very interesting poll 

message: Editors here might want to look at the above article, which I think would benefit from use of more balanced and scholarly sources about the OUN. BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations]] 

message: Expect for the two words in the Infobox, there is no information about this group's economic views. Was it closer to bourgeois Hitlerism or left-wing Strasserism? 2A02:3030:80B:99C2:1:0:7DE1:47AB (talk) 00:55, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economic views? 

message: There is no source for saying "Slogan: 'Slava Ukraini!'" in box.
Please provide reliable source, or it will be deleted. MBUSHIstory (talk) 21:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: source added Mhorg (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No source for saying "Slogan 'Slava Ukraini!' 

message: I would like to add a better image of Stepan Bandera to the article. The current photo is so heavily airbrushed that it barely resembles the actual person. The original photo was a damaged low resolution image. My preferred replacement is this one. Llados (talk) 19:37, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:BEBOLD, it's uncontroversial, already dicussed move, just change it Marcelus (talk) 20:19, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I unfortunately do not yet have permission to do so, I am not yet extended confirmed. Llados (talk) 20:32, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: A better image of Bandera