Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/The Holocaust in Bohemia and Moravia

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article promoted by Indy beetle (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 23:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list

The Holocaust in Bohemia and Moravia

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Buidhe (talk)

The Holocaust in Bohemia and Moravia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Featured article candidates/The Holocaust in Bohemia and Moravia/archive1

This article just went through a GAN, kindly reviewed by Sturmvogel. I think the article meets the A-class criteria and am hoping to get it to FAC in the future, so any feedback is welcome! (t · c) buidhe 18:56, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

CommentsSupport by CPA

Drive-by Just a drive-by for now.

• There's a MOS:SANDWICH in the Aryanization and the first line of the Nisko Plan sections. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 12:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Thanks! These do not display on my device so I added clear templates, which hopefully should fix the problem. (t · c) buidhe 18:16, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

• No worries however just curious on my phone the images are pretty small and don't take that much space on my screen. I'm not sure whether or not this is my phone's problem but is there a way to widen the images to make it standardised with all screens? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

• In the standard mobile view the images are never going to sandwich text because the text is not wrapped,

Reichstag building, c. 1900

• and images display pretty much like this. I also tried it in the pseudo-desktop mode on my phone, but it did not sandwich anything either. I am not sure exactly what your settings are, but adding clear templates is pretty harmless and I guess it fixes the problem. (t · c) buidhe 18:41, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Is it possible to remove the one-sentence paragraph in the lead?
• "immediately sent back by the Polish police while others" Polish Police?

Will continue later. Cheers CPA-5 (talk) 23:02, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

• See 8 howevers is it possible to remove some?
• "At the time of the annexation, there were at least 118,310 Jews" If this is an estimate why not round it a little bit?
• "Many Jews were reluctant to leave family members behind or try to start a new life in a country where they did not know the language." Examples?
• "The Protectorate police began to close down" --> "The Protectorate's police began to close down"?

Going through Employment and forced labor later. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 22:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

• "At the time, 25,458 men and 24,028 women" Maybe round these?
• "By July, 60% of Jewish men in the Protectorate" % --> percent?
• "By mid-1941, more than 11,700 of 15,000 Jewish men" --> "By mid-1941, more than 11,700 of the 15,000 Jewish men"?
• "at which point 15,000 men and 1,000 women" Maybe switch them?
• "from visiting cinemas and theaters by the Hácha government" --> "from visiting cinemas and theaters by the Hácha Government"?
• "were forced to register with the Jewish community as "B-Jews"" What does B means?
• "reported to the government-in-exile" --> "reported to the Government-in-exile"?
• "While in Prague the deportation of the city's 46,801 Jews stretched" Maybe round it per MOS:LARGENUM?
• " At the time of liberation, 6,875 Theresienstadt prisoners" Same as above?
• "a bit less than half (28,368) were deported to Auschwitz" Same as above?
• " On 8–9 March 1944, 3,792 Jews from the family camp" Same as above?
• "Only 3,371 Czech Jews deported outside the Protectorate are reported to have survived" Same as above?
• "Jewish population of the Protectorate including 39,395 from Prague" Same as above?
• "By the end of 1944, only 6,795 Jews officially" Same as above?
• "Between January and 16 March 1945, 3,654 intermarried Jews" Same as above?
• "A total of 2,803 people considered Jews" Same as above?
• "Two to three thousand Jews" --> "2.000 to 3.000 Jews" per MOS:RANGES?
• "The names of 77,297 known victims of the Holocaust" Maybe round it?

That's everything that I could find. Btw just curious are you going to try to promote the Holocaust in both Belgium and in Poland and against Poles. If so then give me a call I'm pretty much looking forwards to them. :) Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 11:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

1. Reorganized
2. Technically the source says "Polish border officials". I don't think the capitalization makes sense because I'm not sure exactly what organization was involved. (t · c) buidhe 23:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

   1. Done
   2. This is an official figure from the Jewish Religious Community, so I'm guessing what Gruner is saying is that it doesn't include people of Jewish descent who don't practice Judaism. Edited to reflect the source.
   3. I'm getting a server error so I can't access the source right now. But I'm not sure what examples you're asking for? Individual Jews who held these attitudes? I'm not sure that's a detail that's relevant to include.
   4. I believe this is correct. Gruner actually capitalizes ("Protectorate Police") but other sources don't. (t · c) buidhe 23:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

• Maybe this goes against MOS:LARGENUM, but I'd rather use the figures given by reliable sources without editing them. Arguably the authors consider the exact figure significant if they cite it. If it's not clear how accurate the figures are, rounding to tens, hundreds, or thousands place would seem like original research.
• Changed all %-> percent
• Done
• Not done, I am not sure why switching would be an improvement

• Shouldn't it be from small number to a bigger number?

• I think the current order is easier for readers since the stats for male forced laborers are discussed earlier on.

• Not usually capitalized in reliable sources, per MOS:CAPS
• The article already defines B-Jews as "individuals of Jewish ancestry who did not identify as Jews" who had to register with the Jewish community. I'm not sure how to make this clearer.

• But I mean what does the B stand for?

• I don't think it stands for anything, and can't find any indication that it does based on reliable sources. Apparently Jews by religion were referred to as "A-Jews".

• Government in exile is not usually capitalized

• Why not isn't it usually an organisation's name?

• I think the name of the organization was either "Provisional Government of Czechoslovakia" or "Czechoslovak National Liberation Committee", and government-in-exile is a way of referring to the organization.

• 2,000 to 3,000 Jews would violate another MOS rule, not starting a sentence with a numeral

• Well my point was really to change it to "Two thousand to three thousand" Jews.

• Done.

Thanks so much for your review! (t · c) buidhe 18:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

• Have replied.

• Support. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 03:49, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Support from Vami

Reserving a spot. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 07:27, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

• @Buidhe: It's time :) –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:07, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Lead

• Comparing this lead to your previous "The Holocaust in [Nation]", I note the lack of a note for what the Protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia is, and a sentence containing pre-Nazi Jewish population and the death toll in that region in the first paragraph. It is sparse as is.
  • Added the first. But it's hard to say what the "pre-Nazi" population would be. We have figures for March and September 1939, but these were affected by the influx of Jews from the Sudetenland and Nazi-stimulated emigration. The 1930 census also covers the Sudeten areas that were not incorporated into the Protectorate.
• [...] initially to Łódź Ghetto. [...] departed for Theresienstadt Ghetto. The Łódź/Theresienstadt Ghetto.
  • I'm not sure what change you're asking for here?
    • Add a "the" before these two. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
      • Maybe an engvar issue? It sounds more correct to me without "the". I would say, "I'm going to Theresienstadt Ghetto" the same grammatical format as, "I'm going to X High School". I guess some people do say, "I'm going to the X high school", but not where I live. (t · c) buidhe 11:22, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
• [...] the Czech minority. Was this one of this situations where the Czechs were a minority in the region but the largest of its minority groups?
  • Typo for majority—my bad!
• The sweeping under the rug of the Shoah by Communist Czechoslovakia is worth mentioning in the lead.
  • Done

Background

• Zionism also made inroads among the Jews of the periphery (Moravia and the Sudetenland). Link Zionism; why not replace "the periphery" with "Moravia and the Sudetenland"?
  • Done

Second Czechoslovak Republic

• During the mid-1930s, Czechoslovakia accepted thousands of German Jews fleeing persecution, although right-wing politics eventually led to immigration restrictions and an end to racial persecution as an accepted reason for seeking asylum.[21][22] In the mid-1930s, antisemitism was on the rise in Czechoslovakia.[23] Is there a way to combine these two sentences but without having it become overly long? They both start with "[...] the mid-1930s".
  • Tweaked wording
• [...] in the no-man's land [...] Is this a literal or metaphorical no-man's land? If the former, what land be this?
  • This means they were stranded at the border with both sides rejecting them. The use of the term "no-man's land" for this seems to be pretty common in the context of people stranded along borders in mid-20th century Europe, and I'm not sure what term could be clearer. (t · c) buidhe 02:44, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Persecution of Jews

• In Iglau (Jihlava), [...] Does the German name need to be given? Was Jihlava annexed into Germany?
  • All of the protectorate was partly annexed. But I think the majority of sources use Czech names for places in the Protectorate so I changed it back.
• In September 1939 another wave of arrests targeted Protectorate citizens who could be used as hostages and those with ties to Poland. These arrests also disproportionately affected Jews. Affected or targeted?
  • The source does say targeted but that would require repeating the word too much.
• At once, [...] At once from what? The establishment of the Protectorate?
  • Clarified
• Czech–Jewish marriages were initially still allowed, the regulation of such was left to the Protectorate government. I feel this comma is unnecessary. Maybe "Czech-Jewish marriages were initially still allowed and regulated by the Protectorate government."
  • Rephrased but not as you suggested. I think it could be misleading because initially such marriages were not subject to special regulation.
• However, the Reich Protector's office [...] Who is the Reich Protector?
  • Mentioned this in the German occupation section
• [...] emigrated between Munich and March 1939. Huh?
  • Rephrased
• The term Anschluss is used only once in the article, which doesn't connect it to the annexation of Austria. A reader would have to know this connection before reading this article to not be confused by this.
  • Rephrased

• I also note that none of the Nazi big whigs are introduced/given their titles, but this is a specific article on the Shoah so I'd assume a reader would know who Himmler and Göring are, if not Eichmann and Heydrich. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:07, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

• I made some tweaks to aid accessibility (t · c) buidhe 02:44, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

• As an aim Germanization was [...] This wording confuses me.
  • Removed
• I have reservations about the use of the word "employment" to describe forced labor, salaried or otherwise.
  • This section uses "employment" to describe the voluntary employment that was barred to Jews during the Aryanization process.
• By the summer, [...] Per MOS:SEASON, I advise greater specificity or "By the middle of the year, [...]".
  • Done
• Segregated labor details for Jews only were introduced. When?
  • The first half of 1941

Up to #Restrictions on civil rights now. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:07, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks so much for your review :) (t · c) buidhe 02:44, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

• Failure to wear it was vigorously enforced [...] Re-word; the thing being enforced was the wearing of the star.
  • Rephrased
• By September 1941, [...] In September 1941, [...] Another "[...] the mid-1930s" situation here.
  • Rephrased

Final Solution

• [...] deport 60,000 Jews from the Reich and the Protectorate to Łódź Ghetto [...] Should be "the Łódź Ghetto"
• Kulmhof extermination camp was opened in fall 1941 [...] MOS:SEASON again.
  • Fixed
• [...] only around 250 people survived. Out of whom?
  • Clarified
• Mischlinge Link and explain.
  • done
• Those who had the greatest chance of surviving was the small group who had never been registered as Jews. Should be "were" instead of "was", or else "greatest chance of survival".
  • Done

Aftermath

• Besides those who emigrated, about fourteen thousand Jews survived in other ways. [...] Although two thousand Jews counted as Germans [...] These are the only times vocabulary rather than numerals are used for a number this large in the article.
  • Partly done, in the "German" Jews section I have spelled out low thousands numbers it two places and it would be awkward (and perhaps imply too much exactitude) to write "2,000–3,000" compared to "two to three thousand"
• People who denounced Jews or helped to purge them from associations were punished harshly, unlike Aryanizers. Could you expand on this? Collaborators were prosecuted and dealt with as their like deserve, but "Aryanizers" weren't? Who were these people anyway?
  • OK, so after WWII more than 100,000 people in Czechoslovakia were prosecuted for alleged collaboration or war crimes. But, most of this had nothing to do with the Holocaust. In fact, people could be prosecuted for such "crimes" as having a romantic relationship with a "German". Certain types of collaboration in the Holocaust were taken seriously, and others (so-called economic crimes, of being complicit in Aryanization) were swept under the rug. I'm not sure if there's another phrasing that might get the point across better? (t · c) buidhe 11:22, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
    • Maybe "those who had financially benefited from Aryanization"? –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:31, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
      • Done! (t · c) buidhe 12:19, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Legacy

• [...] which many academic theses relating to the Holocaust being published. Did you mean "with many" here?
  • Typo, fixed.

Reading finished. Depressing read. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Support –♠Vami_IV†♠ 12:20, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

HF - support

• "Jews were expelled from most of the royal cities in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries." - can it briefly be explained why? Was it just anti-semitism?
  • Clarified
• "Prague (35,403 Jews, who made up 4.2% of the population)," - are we sure this is right? The 1930 Czech census is showing a population of about 950,000 for Prague (if I'm translating "hlavní město Praha" correctly), which would be more like 3.7% of the population
  • All the figures and percentages are from Gruner. No calculations involved. I don't really want to second guess it.
• "However, the Reich Protector's office dismissed the proposal as too mild in its definition of "Jew", and therefore issued its own resolution on 21 June" - how did this resolution define it?
  • Clarified
• "was another barrier to their emigration, which was banned by the Security Service in May 1939" - was the Security Service a German or a Czechoslovak organization?
  • It was a Nazi organization, now linked.
• "Interior of the Olomouc Synagogue, burned on 16 March 1939" - the exact date in the caption needs a citation. The 16 March date isn't in either the article text or sourced on the file documentation page
  • Removed the exact date since I can't find a good source
• "resettling Volksdeutsche in the Warthegau and West Prussia." - Meaning of Volksdeutsche is unclear; needs either glossed or linked
  • Fixed
• I think it can be more directly stated that Jews married to non-Jews were originally not subject to deportation. This is obliquely mentioned several times, but never directly stated.
  • Done
• "The Security Service reported that some non-Jewish Czechs tried to help Jews avoid deportation. In 1943, it reported that attitudes had changed and non-Jewish Czechs were grateful that the occupiers rid them of the Jewish population." - This sounds like propaganda. Is it really due weight?
  • The SD public opinion reports, although biased, are basically the only source on public opinion in Nazi Germany after 1939 and are widely used by scholars despite their known bias. I think if Lanicek considers it important enough to discuss at length it's not UNDUE here. As he states: "This report cannot be dismissed purely as German propaganda, especially when taking into account previous SD reports condemning Czechs for their sympathy towards persecuted Jews."
• The 1948 Communist coup mentioned in the lead doesn't seem to be directly mentioned in the body?
  • Oops, now fixed.
• Sources/images look good

Hog Farm _Talk 04:26, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks so much for your review! (t · c) buidhe 07:01, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

The sources all seem to me to be appropriately reliable and I can see no formatting issues. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Image review - Pass

• I am struggling to see the original source for the information presented in "Czechoslovakia 1939.SVG". Gog the Mild (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

  Hi Gog, thanks so much for your review! I'm not sure what source was used to create this map, but the info can be confirmed here. Added to image description. (t · c) buidhe 03:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.