Talk:Andrej Hlinka

Slovak Hitler

Source, [1] The Irish Times, www.ireland.com; "Honour for 'Slovak Hitler' prompts outrage SLOVAKIA: Slovakia's parliament has voted to honour a politician and Catholic priest who compared himself to Hitler, prompting outrage from Jewish groups...". Andrej Hlinka claimed he was the 'Slovak Hitler', yet nothing can be found in the article to this effect only a weak reference that "the higher staff of Father Hlinka's party were in the pay of the Nazis.." Should this topic be covered in the article? Sadly the full article on this topic can only be accessed by subscribers of The Irish Times it seems. Hobartimus (talk) 21:22, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Found another source "He is infamous for proclaiming in 1936: 'I am the Slovak Hitler. I will restore order in Slovakia like Hitler did in Germany.'" And another one from the same article, "After his death in 1938, Hlinka was honoured as a national hero by Jozef Tiso's short-lived pro-Nazi Slovak regime during World War II but was then considered a 'clerico-fascist' by the following communist regime." Apparently he was a hero to fascist, but a fascist himself to communists. source [2]. Hobartimus (talk) 23:35, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Newspaper is not a very reliable source. No offense, but I have read a newspaper article saying that Ljublana is the capital of Slovakia and a nice map of Croatia was attached to it, so I don't believe everything written in newspapers...147.175.98.213 (talk) 13:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you find some monography or better, a historical record?147.175.98.213 (talk) 13:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

One of the above sources here is the The Irish Times (an Irish daily broadsheet news paper launched in the late 1850s.) which has its own Wikipedia article as you can see and is highly reliable. Further sources [[3]] about Slovak activists demonstrating against Hlinka with signs saying "Hitler, Hlinka – jedna linka" maybe you could translate that for us. Another source [[4]] confirms again "Andrej Hlinka 1936-ban egy nagygyűlésen kijelentette: "Én vagyok a szlovák Hitler, olyan rendet csinálok itt, mint Hitler Németországban."" (translation, Hlinka said in 1936 " I am the Slovak Hitler I will bring order to Slovakia like Hitler did in Germany" This source also mentions a Slovak paper "Plus 7 dní" who also wrote about this subject. Hobartimus (talk) 19:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

You answered with more newspapers... You wrote about "priest who compared himself to Hitler". You gave references to other people comparing him to Hitler.

At the time, he is supposed to have said this, there were newspapers, broadcast, television... Is it recorded somewhere? That is what I mean by "historical record". Not an article in "Plus 7 dní", which is known to print everything that looks like a sensation.

I don't say it is not true. I say, that your references are not reliable.

147.175.98.213 (talk) 22:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't write any of this I merely quoted these sources. Please really read The Irish Times article before you call it not reliable. Also in 1936 they barely started the first TV broadcasts from the Berlin Olympics they did not follow every politician's every speech like they do today it was a rarity. I just checked and found the following sentence "The Czechoslovak Television started broadcasting in 1953 from Prague" so they could hardly cover an 1936 speech. There were newspapers of course probably thats how the information survived to this day. Instead of wondering about TV broadcasts you could really check some Slovak language sources and find out everything about this quickly. Hobartimus (talk) 22:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

It is easy to argue with an article in The Irish Times, I don't have access to (and most people don't). Image and sound recording was invented in the 19th century and were used here from the beginning of the century. Regular radio broadcasting in Bratislava started in 1926 and even earlier in Praha.

If it is true, there sure are some records, at least some comments from that time. Find one of these sources please. Or at least a source citing one of these sources.

That "Slovak Hitler" sentece was printed only in communistic newspapers "Slovenské zvesti", nowhere else. In fact Hlinka called Hitler as "cultural beast" at the meeting with German minority politics. [[5]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.216.154.233 (talk) 20:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The "bias" mark was added by me due to several reasons: 1) Hlinka is portrayed as "fascist" only by Communist propaganda, Christophobic or Anti-Catholic writers, or tabloids (such as Plus 7 Dni - sorry, but it is like quoting Daily Mirror in Britain). This article is only based on selective sources, in fact, only on one source. 2) The Slovak version of this article provides a completely different picture of this historical figure and uses a considerably wider source base. 3) The English article neither contains historical context, nor a controversy section - however, these are crucial in understanding Hlinka. The term "facist" can only be appropriately used if you provide room for both - the opponents and supporters of Hlinka. The use of this term in the heading is inappropriate and unjustifiable. 4) Wikipedia's mission is to make the readers understand history and make them start asking questions, and not to provide them with someone's biassed answers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.112.68.0 (talk) 20:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed material

Hobartimus asked me to provide the reason for my "removing material realting (sic!) to Hlinka's cooperation with Hitler from the article". While his blanket reverting of all my changes is unacceptable (see below), he is entitled for an explanation (though the reasons should be clear). He refers to the following passages:

At the Nuremberg trials, a US prosecutor described the party as "the semi-fascist Catholic Peoples Party of Monsignor Andrew Hlinka."

His leadership was to prove fateful. Hlinka's lack of respect for democracy and his antipathy to "irreligious free-thinking Czechs" made him invaluable to Hitler who was intent on dismembering Czechoslovakia in order quietly to absorb the fragments . As the Nuremberg prosecutor showed, "the higher staff of Father Hlinka's party" were in the pay of the Nazis. Hlinka died in 1938, before he could see that his co-operation with Hitler had helped to launch the war.

• First of all, all this material is entirely unsourced.
• Then, it is also written in unencyclopedic language like "his leadership proved fateful" and includes hard-to-prove allegations like "lack of respect for democracy". That Hlinka "helped to launch the war" is clearly inaccurate as the Second World War did not begin because of issues concerning Czechoslovakia (though this was Hitler's intention) but in September 1939 with the attack on Poland.
• The passage is also not written from a NPOV as only Hlinka's and Hitler's malvolence towards the CSR is mentioned but not the concerns of the German and Slovak populations. The passage also portrays Hlinka as thinking highly of Hitler - but note also the claim that Hlinka called him a "beast". Both are currently unsourced but it is telling that only the "Hlinka loves Hitler" line is pursued in the article.

Note that the section was tagged for cleanup and rewrite. This I did. I have absolutely no problem with a sourced and neutral treatment of any cooperation between Hlinka's party and the Nazis. But there is no reason that unsourced POV pushing should be included.

Also note also that your blanket reverting - reverting all my edits because you disagree with some of them - is unacceptable. In this case, you also removed a source, reverted the "Slovak parliament" line back to a former state (when by now the parliament has made that decision).Str1977 ^(talk) 09:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

• If I'm not mistaken procedure is, if something is unsourced you can tag it with citation needed tag.
• If you dont want your edit reverted don't do many controversial changes at a time in a single edit your own revert was the same "blanket reverting" that you didn't like. But to address your criticism I reinserted the source from the Slovak Spectator so now both versions have it.
• "Helped to launch the war" possibly refers to the tanks, material, manpower and war capacity acquired after the Slovak declaration of independence provided diplomatic cover for Hitler in march '39. Clearly without this step launching the war would have been harder if not impossible.
• "but note also the claim that Hlinka called him a "beast"." Note the sources above on talk about Hlinka calling himself the Slovak Hitler and stating that he will create order in Slovakia, similar to that of Nazi Germany.
• My main concern is to avoid the whitewhashing of the article
• Per WP:BRD this is how I see it. You were bold, made many controversial changes, it was reverted this time. Now we should discuss before you make further reverts. (as a side note usually at 50 edits/day editing pace people take down the busy in real life sign from the user page as it can be misleading) Hobartimus (talk) 13:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

• As I told you above, the removed material was not only unsourced but also POV. Hence I removed it.
• I did not make all in a single edit, hence your excuse for blanket reverting falls flat. And even then, it is your job to argue why you disagree with all you revert, not mine.
• Re the "beast" vs. "Slovak Hitler" issue: and I inserted neither. But it goes to show that the relationship is not as clear as you put it.
• I agree that there should be no whitewashing. But there should be no "blackwashing" either. The parts I removed and you restored are not a neutral treatment of these issues.
• Also, we have a section on "opinions" and if the currently unsourced statement by the Nuremberg prosecutor (an opinion, not a fact) would have to go there, once it is sourced.
• Ungrammatical changes like this don't help either.
• We may discuss this but I will not grant you a preference for your POV version. Re your statements regarding the outbreak of war: World War II started in September 1939 with Hitler's invasion of Poland, not with Hitler's unopposed invasion of Czechia. And all this happened after Hlinka, who was concerned with Slovak autonomy or independence, had died. (And a dead man certainly had no influence in any way on how tanks were distributed.) Now, of course many things are interrelated but you could just as much blame people like Benes who helped create a situation in which the CSR's Germans and Slovaks sided with outside forces.
• Finally, what I put on my user page is my concern and not yours. Str1977 ^(talk) 08:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

As for the one you removed the "unreferenced" tag - the article is still suffering from a lack of references and hence the tag has to stay. One reference doesn't make this article referenced. Str1977 ^(talk) 09:00, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

"I will not grant you a preference for your POV version" we have a major misunderstanding here, you better check the history of the article. As anyone can see I did not write a single byte of the text of the article my only edit is where I merely preserved the long established version of the article against a major undiscussed deletion attempt. In fact I never edited this article before your edits removed all information relating to what the Nuremberg trials said about Hlinka and the Hlinka-Hitler cooperation. Now it is true that the info was unreferenced but all of the article was unreferenced at that point could have just as well removed that Hlinka is on whatever coin or whatever else is in the article. In such cases adding a citation tag is the usual thing. Hobartimus (talk) 20:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

There is a misunderstanding indeed. I did not say you wrote the version - but you at least appeared to endorse it. And no, I did not remove any mentioning of Hitler. But serious, probably controversial allegations need serious sourcing more than whether he was put on a coin. And you are still not getting the POV problem. Str1977 ^(talk) 23:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Andrej Hlinka. 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/20110912052316/http://www.historickarevue.com/archiv_60.html to http://www.historickarevue.com/archiv_60.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:18, 5 July 2017 (UTC)