Talk:Anders' Army

Anders or Anders's?

I reviewed Wikipedia:MOS#Possessives and I stand corrected: Anders's would be correct as well, from the grammar perspective. But before the move, please - can we see some proof that this is indeed a more common version of the name? PS. Davies, for example, uses "Anders' army" - so ' without an s and lower case army. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 02:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Both Anders' and Anders's are fine by me, as both are equally popular in the English language sources. The only form that seems unacceptable is Anders Army, as "Anders" was not the name of this army (neither "Army of the Rhine" case nor "Prusy Army" case), it was an "Army of a guy named Anders", to mimic the Accusative in Polish language. See google books for comparison.

But it's not about whether "Anders Army" is more popular than "Anders' Army" or "Anders's Army", but whether it's a correct translation of the original term. It is not. The Polish term is "Armia Andersa", not "Armia Anders", as would be the case if Anders was a name of the army ("Armia Prusy" - "Prusy Army" case). //Halibutt 18:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. If you don't mind, I'd suggest Anders', per Davies. If that's fine with you, please move this article. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 17:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Can't, I'm not an admin. //Halibutt 00:44, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Neither am I. WP:RM is that'a'way. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 01:24, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Anders' Army. Favonian (talk) 16:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

---

Anders Army → Anders' Army – Per the discussion above (in short: correct translation, sources use it). Anders's Army could do just as fine. //Halibutt 17:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

• Support per above. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 17:48, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support -- It obviously needs the apostrophe. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:37, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support -- clearly better this way. Should the consensus be clear, I as an admin can make the required move. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support per above. Linguistically correct name. - Darwinek (talk) 21:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

lede vs. text

The lede appears to be longer than the main body of the article. Some of the info form the lede should simply be split off into an article section. I would do it but don't know if I'll have time so if anyone else wants to play... VolunteerMarek 21:04, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Terrrorism

"Irgun planted land mines in Arab markets and attacked Arab buses, and was labelled a terrorist organization by Britain and the Jewish Agency." That is POV, in my view. Any organization that "plants land mines in ...markets and attacked ...buses" is a terrorist organization. I suggest deletion of the words "labelled a terrorist organization by Britain and the Jewish Agency".119.224.91.84 (talk) 07:15, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

While I would dispute the neutrality criticism, I removed the sentence for being unreferenced, per WP:V. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:29, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Anders' Army. 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/20091107175858/http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns069.htm to http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns069.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070430203034/http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns073.htm to http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns073.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070430142631/http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns074.htm to http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns074.htm

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) 21:52, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Jerusalem memorial - where is it?

"In 2006, a memorial to Anders' Army was erected in the Jewish Orthodox cemetery on Mount Zion in Jerusalem." This unsourced info sounds quite dubious. How come it's not at the Catholic cemetery? The text initially said "orthodox" (with small letter, sic), but the link was to Orthodox Judaism. There is a Catholic cemetery there too, as well as a Christian Orthodox seminary. Most of Anders' soldiers were Catholic, while the Belarus soldiers were probably Orthodox. Maybe in 2006 a place at the Jewish cemetery was more easily available, but that's a far shot. Who has a reliable source for this? The photo doesn't indicate the location, nor did Google (English) help. Arminden (talk) 14:17, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

@Arminden: Good start is to tag this claim with {{fact}}. In few months if nobody cares to add a ref, we can remove it. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

the HC report quoted here as number [9] source should be considered as unreliable as it is a product of a Soviet spy Tom Driberg. Occurence of this report in April 1944 is not accidental either so the whole paragraph should be rewritten. Soviets were starting to get to the terytories that were absolutely not Soviet prior to the war they needed to defame legitimate Polish government and its armed forces. Especially that they were the same people who left Soviet Russia and can describe in detail life and suffering under the Soviet boot. So the black propaganda and smearing and discreditaion of the soldiers was absolutely neccessary. Just to make them in to unreliable information sources as nasty as nazis due to their supposed antisemitism. As at the moment it is biased and politically motivated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.202.156 (talk) 20:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Antisemitism

Why was this removed?! PDF is about army's antisemitism and has: "The dominant influence underlying the relationship of the army command to Jews was undoubtedly the anti-Semitism so deeply imbedded in the souls of many Poles. This antagonistic attitude was particularly prevalent among the officer class, and it thus found expression in army life" BarNarDar (talk) 06:30, 19 May 2020 (UTC)