Talk:Stepan Bandera/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Nazi collaboration back in the first sentence?

I don't think there was consensus for that. He had a career that spanned decades and his on/off collaboration with Nazi Germany lasted for a fraction of that time. It's important enough to be noted in the lede but not in the first sentence, doing so would be undo emphasis. This was a good version: [1].Faustian (talk) 05:56, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Also, the first sentence should also mention that his organization fought against the Soviets and to a lesser extent the Nazis. Its anti-Soviet struggle lasted for years and is no less important than the massacre of Poles or Nazi collaboration.Faustian (talk) 06:14, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

@Faustian Please do not destroy the work of numerous editors with your mass revert. It took a lot of labour and talks to get to this version. You also removed a lot of information with your revert. Discuss first and go slow. - GizzyCatBella🍁 09:25, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree with GizzyCatBella, maybe it's better to make some small changes. The article was quite stable as it was. Mhorg (talk) 09:38, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

@Faustian do you want to alter this line first? -->

..organization responsible for massacres and ethnic cleansing, also implicated in collaboration with Nazi Germany.

How do you want it sound? (please pay attention to the sources next to it) - GizzyCatBella🍁 19:09, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I simply think that it is undue to mention his period of Nazi collaboration in the very first sentence, when that is a small portion of his career and not something he was even consistent with doing. Nor is it the reason why he is famous or celebrated. I don't think the article on Churchill has "ally of Stalin" in the first sentence. I hadn't realized the extent of the changes but the version I reverted back to had also been stable. The first sentence should indicate aspects of his biography that are long-lasting and consistent - he spent his life struggling for national liberation against non-Ukrainian governments, but was also a far right authoritarian who engaged in terrorism and whose organization killed large numbers of Poles and Jews in the course of this struggle. As it is, he is presented as a sort of Quisling and that would simply not be accurate, based on his biography. Faustian (talk) 02:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Requests for page protection due to Edit Wars

I have requested that this page be reverted to February 25 2022 and locked for further edits due to an edit war in the wake of the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

Plenty of the edits made since then are likely valid, but it's pretty clear that some passions are mixing and causing problems on the page. Problems include, but are not limited to, poor sources, major grammatical errors, abuse of reverts, and unnecessary topics and subjects in the opening paragraphs.

Please refrain from passion editing. This is a wikipedia page, not your personal Tumblr.

Charlesblack (talk) 15:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Bandera is absolutely not nazist and not collaborated with nazi germany

Have you ever read Nuremberg Court document 014-USSR? There is very clearly say that he is not nazi, maybe you nazi who write this? Ярослав Карасевич (talk) 07:22, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

In principle, what you have written above is sufficient for a block of an indefinite duration. If you ever accuse again anyone here in being nazi, the block will be imposed. Ymblanter (talk) 07:36, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2022

Stepan Bandera is not a Nazi collaborator!!!!!!! Pomidor Dubil (talk) 19:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Stepan Bandera is not a Nazi collaborator!!!!! Pomidor Dubil (talk) 19:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: This looks to be well sourced. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:39, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

What is antisemitism?

"So while Bandera and his men were responsible for killing Jews, their ideology wasn’t fundamentally anti-Semitic." [2] Very reassuring, the killers were not believers of an antisemitic ideology. Xx236 (talk) 07:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

"liberator who fought against the Soviet Union, Poland and Nazi Germany"

What? He fought Nazi germany? More like he cooperated with hitler to establish his imaginery ukraine. That's why he helped hitler massacre jewish people. 2A02:14C:327:3200:5038:3BC6:F716:C680 (talk) 19:12, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Holocaust and other feats

After skimming through this article I became painfully aware of the fact that it's actually Mr. Stepan Bandera who was responsible for the Holocaust. Not Nazi Germany as I was convinced before. Silly me.

In that case the designation of a war criminal and other fine titles by the so-called "mainstream historians" seem to be very credible. I wonder why aren't there any mentions of terrorist acts in the first sentence as well, considering the attempted assassinations of Polish authority figures by the OUN? 188.230.49.209 (talk) 20:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, "Bandera was sentenced to death for his involvement in the 1934 assassination of Poland's Minister of the Interior Bronisław Pieracki, but the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment." => Bandera was sentenced to death for his involvement in the 1934 assassination of Poland's Minister of the Interior Bronisław Pieracki, which was an act of terrorism, but the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment." How does that sound? --Jabbi (talk) 21:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

I have now read through the introduction/lead and the following

...[Bandera] was, together with his followers, largely responsible for the massacres of Polish civilians and partially for the Holocaust.

Seems to me to be way too strong. As far as I understand, Bandera was active only in a localised area around what is today Eastern Ukraine (around Lviv). He was used by and used in turn by Germans during WW2. I have however not seen anything linking responsibility for the Holocaust. There are 19 occurrences of the word Holocaust in the article, one is in the lead, the second one is in the Attitudes towards Bandera section and the 17 are in footnotes! @GizzyCatBella:, you've changed the meaning and link from the Holocaust in Ukraine to just Holocaust. That's pretty much indefensible if you ask me. I would doubt there is even credible sources to support that Bandera was partially responsible for the Holocaust in Ukraine. I'm removing that until there is something in the article to support such a statement. --Jabbi (talk) 23:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

The lede as it currently stands lacks nuance. It essentially gives the impression that Bandera directly carried out the ethnic cleansing, when he wasn't actually in Ukraine at the time, and the mainstream view among historians such as Rossolinski-Liebe is that he doesn't have any personal responsibility, but historians think, to varying degrees, that he carries indirect "moral responsibility". That's not clear from the lede (Also it's WP:LEDEBOMBing, since this is barely discussed in the body of the article) Tristario (talk) 00:19, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

(Also @Jabbi in regards to your recent edits, see Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia can't be used as a source, the content you add to the article should be cited and verifiable to reliable sources) Tristario (talk) 00:25, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

I realise this Tristario, I am trying to do a balancing act here pushed by lack of source material. The Wikipedia articles in turn are have sources in their language. Of course you should feel free to amend as you see fit.

I would prefer it if you just added things if they're cited to reliable sources (especially the kind suitable for historical topics WP:HISTRS). There's no rush to add content to the article --Tristario (talk) 00:40, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Duly noted Jabbi (talk) 00:42, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Also look at some of the guidance here if you're having any issues finding/accessing sources, if that's an issue Tristario (talk) 00:47, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, lots to fix in this article. I've just established that the original statement that Bandera was partially or otherwise responsible for the Holocaust in Ukraine was introduced with completely insufficient sources. It's been a horrible mistake from the beginning. --Jabbi (talk) 00:33, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jabbi you need to reconsider your removal of Banderas involvement in the Holocaust. RS disagree with you --> Quote:

It is a sad comment on Ukrainian memory that the man declared a Hero of Ukraine in January headed a movement that was deeply involved in the Holocaust.

Norman J.W. Goda - Professor of the Holocaust Studies

Jabbi, please restore it. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:15, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

What are the RS say next to his responsibility for the Holocaust? - GizzyCatBella🍁 01:54, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

None of the reliable sources next to that directly say Bandera was partially responsible for the holocaust, it's mostly about the OUN-B. Rossolinski-Liebe's book says he bears little to no personal responsibility for the ethnic cleansing, but bears "moral responsibility". Tristario (talk) 02:14, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

See Goda above. People from OUN-B who killed Jews in mass identified with Bandera

Quote: "The OUN joined the Ukrainian police, in 1941, and helped the Germans murder Jews in western Ukraine," said Rossolinski-Liebe, adding he had found no evidence that Bandera supported or condemned "ethnic cleansing" or killing Jews and other minorities. It was, however, important that people from OUN and UPA "identified with him." GizzyCatBella🍁 02:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I know, we say what the reliable sources say about Bandera, in accordance with WP:NPOV, and without WP:SYNTH. This topic needs to be fleshed out more in the body of the article so it can stop being ledebombed. Tristario (talk) 02:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jabbi and @Tristario if you asked me for my humble opinion (personal opinion only)... the man who headed a movement that was deeply involved in the Holocaust veneered to being not responsible himself is.. shameful. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:39, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

We say what the sources say. As I said, the general view among mainstream historians is that he doesn't bear personal responsibility, but he bears varying levels of "moral responsibility". So there isn't necessarily any disagreement here, but we need to accurately represent what the sources say. Tristario (talk) 02:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

There is an entire book on the subject by Himka. Perhaps that will help accurately define Bandera's role in the Holocaust. But again, in my humble opinion, his involvement and responsibility for the Holocaust in indisputable. GizzyCatBella🍁 03:06, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

During the WW2, the area Bandera's gangs OUN-B operated was occupied Poland at the time, not Ukraine - GizzyCatBella🍁 01:58, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jabbi - now back to your removal of Bandera and his followers involvement in killing Jews (as described now by historians, including this site - the Holocaust). The sentence, after your modification reads now - ...who (Bandera) was, together with his followers, largely responsible for the massacres of Polish civilians. Where is the mention of the mass killings of Jews by UPA now? - GizzyCatBella🍁 03:17, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

... and Jabbi ---> read the entire thing now after your modification, starting with Bandera remains a highly controversial figure in Ukraine...

Not a one single person in Ukraine today condemns Bandera for being responsible for the Holocaust (or mass killing Jews during WW2), only for his role in the mass killing of Poles? - GizzyCatBella🍁 03:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Interesting editors might also want to get familiar with The OUN, the UPA and the Holocaust by Anders Rudling - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Status on 20th September 2022

Thanks for your edits @GizzyCatBella:.

For the record, I want to state unequivocally that I am in no way alleging that Bandera was not responsible partly for the Holocaust, in Ukraine or in a wider sense but that my opinion is that there are not sufficient sources to keep the statement, as it is, in the lede. Furthermore I think that your edit, GizzyCatBella, dated on July 10th 2022 was a serious violation of WP:SYNTH and you would do well to realise that.

• When the statement is first introduced on 5 January 2018 by User:Karl.i.biased (now blocked), it was worded as follows: "...while others consider him to be a Nazi collaborationist and a war criminal largerly responsible for both the Volhynian genocide and The Holocaust in Ukraine." the sources supporting that statement are two current affairs news articles, one in Washington Post and the other in AlJazeera. I think we can agree that those sources did not support that statement sufficiently. There is no mention of the Holocaust, in Ukraine or otherwise in either article. The statement should in other words not have stood.
• By the time you remove "in Ukraine" on July 10th 2022 the list of sources had grown to four sources.
  • Not having read Rossolinski's biography nor currently having access to it, my impression is that his work attributes moral responsibility to Bandera
  • Page 89 of Arad's Holocaust in the Soviet Union addresses anti-Semitic ideology of OUN (does not attribute anything to Bandera himself) [3]
  • Jg-berlin.org, this source I think can safely be discarded, if I understand correctly it is a link to the web site of the Jewish community in Berlin
  • Finally, Himka's article on the Lviv pogrom has a focused subject that is more limited that the Holocaust

So there was no justification for your widening of Bandera's personal responsibility in the Holocaust.

Now about the current version of the lede:

• I am a big fan of footnotes but 12 cited sources at the end of the first introductory paragraph is complete WP:OVERCITE. You're simply making the article less accessible in my view.
• As I have mentioned before, there is no content to support the statement. When reading the lede one would imagine that reading on would explain how Bandera was implicated in the Holocaust. But there is nothing of the kind. See WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY.

My suggestion would therefore be to remove the statement about Bandera's implication in the Holocaust in the lede, until such time that content in the article body can better support it.

I also want to say that this is just my opinion, happy to go along with the consensus of course. --Jabbi (talk) 19:57, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Disagree %100. Read the lead again - Bandera's organization was devoted to the independence of Ukraine but was also responsible for the ethnic cleansing, pogroms, implicated in collaboration with Nazi Germany and the Holocaust.

The information is sourced, your opinion, valuable and respected but unfortunately we can’t go by what you think. - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:08, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

But this is part of the problem. “Bandera’s organisation” =/= Bandera. The current lead conflates them confusingly. Sources in the body show that members of the organisation on the ground acted autonomously. We have a whole article for the organisation so why conflate them here, in an article on him? BobFromBrockley (talk) 00:19, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

And again, regarding the Holocaust in Ukraine (I answered already, but it seems to me you missed it). Bandera and his people committed mass murders of Jewish civilians on the territories of the pre-war Second Polish Republic. Bandera was a Polish citizen. It was Occupied Poland at the time (now Western Ukraine), not occupied Ukraine, therefore the reference to the Holocaust, not the Holocaust in Ukraine. I know it might be confusing to some but I hope that’s clear now. - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:18, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Could you then, in perhaps one paragraph, explain in what way Bandera's organization was implicated in the Holocaust? A short summary, or do you feel that a single sentence is sufficient for your understanding? --Jabbi (talk) 20:33, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

My explanation is irrelevant. That question should be directed to Norman J.W. Goda and other historians sourced, who maintain that OUN-B was implicated in the Holocaust. (notice the Holocaust not Holocaust in Ukraine) --> Quote again - It is a sad comment on Ukrainian memory that the man declared a Hero of Ukraine in January headed a movement that was deeply involved in the Holocaust.' GizzyCatBella🍁 20:41, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

To be clear the OUN-B, which is sometimes referred to as "Bandera's organziation", was involved in the Holocaust. At the time Bandera was not in Ukraine and mostly in a German concentration camp, and was not directly involved in it, however he can be said to bear indirect responsibility for what the OUN-B perpetrated. Tristario (talk) 23:20, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jabbi(continuation of my above comment) If you are looking for alternative - here it is - The Holocaust in Poland. - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:33, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

I disagree that your explanation is irrelevant, it is the rationale behind your position. I hope you are not just hunting the internet for single liners. My understanding is that OUN, and Bandera himself by implication, bore moral responsibility, by incitement as it were, for the atrocities of the Lviv pogroms (1941) which were part of The Holocaust in Poland, these were pogroms, but as atrocious as they were, they were not genocidal. And so there is your vague implication. Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia which resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands, while anti-semitic, also, and perhaps primarily, targeted other minorities. In any case, I hope you take more care in the future. --Jabbi (talk) 21:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

More care of what? - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

When you edited the article to say that Bandera was personally partly responsible for the Holocaust you should have removed the statement because you didn't have sources to support that. It is today, thanks to an anonymous reader's comments that we are able to unravel the inaccuracies and come to a sufficiently accurate solution. I'm not going to respond to your other comment. --Jabbi (talk) 21:18, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Just don’t put your opinion above what the sources say. That’s all I’m asking. - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:06, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Seems to me that you still don’t understand what my edit was about despite me explaining it to you twice. Anyway...

To complete this exchange I'll deliver you yet another quote from the book Rethinking Holocaust Justice that links Bandera's terrorist organization to the Holocaust:

During this period, the OUN(b) actively infiltrated various German auxiliary police units in the occupied Soviet Union, gaining weapons training and combat experience, but also getting intimately involved in the execution of the Holocaust.. - Page 160.

If you still have questions "why" - please direct them to the author of the book (if possible) not me. - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:33, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

You're just being embarrassing now. Own up to it. That source wasn't cited in the edit. I think the current version of the article is overall factually accurate. So just take that and stop responding with silly diversions. --Jabbi (talk) 21:43, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

I would appreciate if you continued commenting on the subject not the contributor - which is my humble person ... Thank you. - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:57, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

You should consider yourself lucky you won't be topic banned. I'm not seeing any remorse or acknowledgement on your behalf. --Jabbi (talk) 16:07, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

References

Bandera's organization and independence of Ukraine

That’s correct @Tristario - (reply to your comment in a new section) Bandera personally had no part in the murders, all of that is covered in the article. People from his organization (OUN-B) committed the atrocities, followed his ideology and identified with him. After the war, Bandera never denounced the slayings of civilians committed by his people. It's also important to remember that --> Quote

..Bandera wanted a Ukrainian state, but he wanted a fascist state, an authoritarian state, one where he would have been the leader. (Rossolinski-Liebe) -->[4]

That should be clarified in the lede also. As of now, lede reads:

Bandera's organization was devoted to the independence of Ukraine...

That’s true, but what kind of Ukraine Bandera wanted the lede doesn't say. - GizzyCatBella🍁 19:22, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with GizzyCatBella. I think we should write something reading from this text: "The OUN envisioned a creation of an independent Ukrainian state that was allied with Nazi Germany and run as a dictatorship by OUN leaders. This monoethnic state [...] was supposed to include parts of modern day Russia, Poland, and Byelorussia."[5] Mhorg (talk) 19:43, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

I don’t think we should be citing Ivan Katchanovski. He is extremely contentious and this is not his area of expertise. That’s a non-peer reviewed conference paper (that I believe wasn’t published subsequently?). Given there are other good sources, why use this bad one? BobFromBrockley (talk) 00:25, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I also think that sounds reasonable Jabbi (talk) 19:53, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, "fascist state" I think it could be supported by sources. For example, Per Anders Rudling stated that "The OUN shared the fascist attributes of antiliberalism, anticonservatism, and anticommunism, an armed party, totalitarianism, anti-Semitism, Führerprinzip, and an adoption of fascist greetings. Its leaders eagerly emphasized to Hitler and Ribbentrop that they shared the Nazi Weltanschauung and a commitment to a fascist New Europe."[6] Mhorg (talk) 19:58, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:LEAD and WP:NPOV the lede should reflect the body of the article as well as representing the most neutral, and generally, commonly used description of Bandera and the OUN in reliable sources. Whatever that description is, I support it. Certainly I think the fact it was dedicated to the independence of ukraine is important to understanding what the organization is, so I'd oppose removing that (unless it was replace with something else that conveyed the same thing). Tristario (talk) 22:10, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Location

Currently it says "Bandera's organization was devoted to the independence of Ukraine but was also responsible for the ethnic cleansing, pogroms, implicated in collaboration with Nazi Germany and the Holocaust." But perhaps it would be more accurate to say "....Nazi Germany and the Holocaust in Ukraine and Poland" ? Jabbi (talk) 22:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

I think that would be more accurate Tristario (talk) 01:17, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

What the RS say? - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:32, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Reliable sources also describe where the OUN-B took part in the holocaust Tristario (talk) 02:58, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

@Tristario - There is only one Holocaust of Jews. What difference does it make? Quite frankly, I don’t understand. Bandera’s people assisted in perpetrating the Holocaust on the territories of the former Second Polish Republic or parts of today's Ukraine, that’s correct. The sources we have at the moment (3 in total) don’t specify where. Please add (do not replace) additional sources before making the change. I’m not opposed to being more area specific, but we need to locate references first. I'm sure there are some. - - GizzyCatBella🍁 03:21, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella I don't think a single citation containing a long collection of quotes and multiple page numbers is very useable, I think it would be better to make separate citations or use Template:Rp or maybe other methods on WP:CITEPAGE Tristario (talk) 03:39, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

@Tristario - Feel free to fix it. PS - The sole reason for my detailed quotations is to provide immediate verification of the sources. I witness multiple attempts of whitewashing Bandera's biography over the years. A quick access to quotations saves time debunking those endless tries. - GizzyCatBella🍁 03:53, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Jabbi and Tristario. This is the lead, summarising the body, which has ample sources specifying where. A simple “the Holocaust” is potentially misleading, as it makes it seem he was a party to the whole thing, particularly the camps (which most people see as exemplary of the Holocaust, when obviously he wasn’t. I also note several of the sources recently added are about the OUN and not a AndersBandera himself. We should stick, especially in the lead, to the actual subject of this article. (The OUN has its own.) BobFromBrockley (talk) 23:43, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

@BobFromBrockley - about Bandera you mean, right? (not Anders). I’m not opposed to moving the part about responsibility of OUN-B for all the atrocities from the lede elsewhere, but I’m strongly opposed to removing it entirely from the article. Propose a good spot for it then. - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:03, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting my mistake GizzyCatBella. Have edited. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:46, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

@BobFromBrockley, Jabbi and Tristari - I moved it to the OUN section. Is that spot okay? - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but some of those details would be more appropriate under WWII (when they occured) than the OUN section, since the OUN section is pre-WWII Tristario (talk) 06:34, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

@Tristario - I resolved this with adding "later" - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I believe it should be mentioned at least once in the lede that the plan of the OUN and Bandera was to create a mono-ethnic state, where other minorities were to be exterminated. With this latest change, all that has disappeared. Mhorg (talk) 13:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

@Mhorg - We follow RS, feel free to propose text you wish to be included in the lede. Bandera’s legacy and the negative heritage of his organization are indeed very problematic. The man made bad choices. I don’t want to take part in any minimization of his crimes, I have a significant issue with any attempts of creating heroes out of such people and hiding dark aspects of Bandera's past. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:18, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I think the new location of the text works well, and the wording has clearly distinguished SB from the organisation. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:46, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Consensus on opening sentence of antisemitism section?

Re this edit by Ymblanter, apologies if I'm missing something but I don't see the the three changes I made there discussed on this talk page. The three changes I made, all reverted, are as follows:

1. removal of a blanket statement ("Bandera was an antisemite and Nazi collaborator.") from the start of the section, the second part of which was only recently added and therefore cannot be said to have consensus. The "collaborator" simply comment is out of place in this section as we have a whole section dealing with this in a nuanced and accurate way, as well as a careful mention in the lead which I believe does have consensus. The sentence cites an intro to an academic newsletter, which is a poor link for a contentious generalisation. If we have strong academic sources saying "Bandera was an antisemite" or "Bandera was antisemitic" we could use that instead. Having started to look, I'm not sure there are academic sources that say this in such a sweeping way.
2. a citation of a subject matter expert, Alexander John Motyl, that seems completely relevant and uncontroversial
3. a citation needed tag for the claim "that had already become highly racialized in the late 19th century" which may be true but currently lacks a citation

Please can you explain/justify your three reverts Ymblanter, point me to the consensus, or self-revert? BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:52, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

It is your responsibility to show that your edits correspond to consensus, not mine. If you do not like how the article is written we have WP:RFC Ymblanter (talk) 15:57, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

That is not the most constructive way forward is it? You asserted that your edit had consensus on its side; I did not make that assertion about my edit. Presumably if you are correct it should be easy to show. Anyway, more importantly, if you can't, can you simply explain what's wrong with my three edits so we can discuss and reach consensus? BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

What you reverted was not the text I recently added, and in fact I do not think I ever added it, it was in the article for the long time. this is de facto consensus. if you want my personal opinion, claiming that the guy who literally has written in one of his programmatic texts that Jews have to be exterminated is not an antisemite is ridiculous. Ymblanter (talk) 16:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Ymblanter, I didn’t revert anything. I made a series of different edits. Which one are you referring to? BobFromBrockley (talk) 03:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley - You wrote - If we have strong academic sources saying "Bandera was an antisemite" or "Bandera was antisemitic" we could use that instead. You didn’t examine the references and Bandera's organization (OUN-B) as well as his bio elsewhere prior to removing the long-standing content? All that information is easily sourced. I’m not saying that the blanket statement is necessary here, but it appears to me (correct me if I’m wrong) that you some-how question Bandera’s connection to Nazism and everything associated with that movement. Do you need sources or you’ll find it yourself if not sure? - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

GizzyCatBella Which references do you mean? BobFromBrockley (talk) 04:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley I don’t understand. What which references? - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

You said "You didn't examine the references". The sentence I removed was referenced to the newsletter intro I already mentioned, which I did examine. If there are other references for that sentence, they're not in the current version of our article, so I don't know how I should have examined them. Or am I missing something? BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley Read CHAPTER FIVE of this book for example. - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

This source is very good on the antisemitism of the OUN-B, but it says nothing that I can see about Bandera's own specific attitudes, which it would need to do to anchor a claim about Bandera's attitudes. Nor does it contradict the Motyl quote which Ymblanter removed. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

However, I found a quote elsewhere from Goda which is unequivocal, so have added that. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Does the OUN-B slogan Long live the great, independent Ukraine without Jews, Poles ....Jews to the gallows ring the bell at all? GizzyCatBella🍁 04:30, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

That's an OUN-B slogan from late Autumn 1941, when the subject of this article was in a Gestapo prison, and therefore can almost certainly not be attributed to him. Undoubtedly, that's relevant to a section on antisemitism in the OUN-B article, but it is not evidence for the blanket claim "Bandera was an antisemite", for which surely we need an actual citation rather than doing original research/synthesis? I'm not saying no such citation could be found, but until we have it, we need to delete that sentence. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC) Correction: He was under house arrest at that point, not in a prison. Anyway, unless we have a source saying those were his words, I don't think that's enough. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, so he was prison thing again, eh? He was a founder and leader of an ant-Semitic organization, but himself maybe loved the Jews? Okay, I see that this article needs some attention. - GizzyCatBella🍁 10:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it does need attention. Most of this section is about the OUN-B and not about Bandera personally. It should definitely be in the organisation's article if it isn't already (there is a section on antisemitism in that article) but if it's not about him personally, it should be trimmed here. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:38, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley - After your recent edit, where you added and moved text around the article reads like this:

Historians and political scientists such as Jeffrey Kopstein and Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe have described Bandera as an antisemite. Bandera was an antisemite and Nazi collaborator.

In the edit summary, you asked: is this better?

Well, no. It's not. I would say you entirely failed on the stylistic front. Why don't you wait for comments from others and consensus to develop before making rapid edits that bruise the article? - GizzyCatBella🍁 11:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

OK, I'll undo that. I'm assuming you don't have a problem with the addition of the Goda quote? BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:34, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I don’t even have a problem with discarding the blanket statement (your words). However, please keep in mind, that Bandera (to some a "freedom fighter") and his terrorist organization is responsible for deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. This article requires mindful editing. - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

The citation to justify the "anti-semite" statement is from the Newsletter of the European Politics and Society Section of the American Political Science Association. It is also a simple statement without references: "Bandera was an anti-Semite and Nazi collaborator." While this may be true, I'm sure the standards of Wikipedia require a much better reference than this.

This statement should be removed until a much better reference is found. 126.219.61.20 (talk) 07:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I think Rossoliński-Liebe explained Bandera's attitude towards anti-Semitism. There is no point in removing that statement from the article. I agree with Ymblanter and GizzyCatBella. Mhorg (talk) 08:31, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I think that @Bobfrombrockley's edits here are reasonable. It might seem clear from the OUN-B and original research that bandera can be clearly described as an antisemite. However such relatively strong statements still need to be verifiable to quality sources (which the newsletter isn't)

I've been reviewing what different sources say on this matter in order to figure out what is the neutral, verifiable description, and I haven't found any quality sources that directly say Bandera was an antisemite, however a few come close to varying degrees, so I think something close, but not as direct as that should be said. Perhaps "For a large proportion of his life, Bandera held antisemitic views." (Rossolinski-Liebe notes that Bandera eschewed open antisemitism post-war, which is another argument against the more direct statement.)

Does that sound fine @Bobfrombrockley and others? There may be relevant sources or passages that I've missed. Tristario (talk) 07:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I definitely agree. We should say exactly what the historians say and not exceed it. I mangled some of my edits discussed above, but I think the best formulation is to say "Rossolinksi-Lieve says XX" and not have the blanket first sentence. Meanwhile, I noticed that the material on Bandera disapproving of Jewish wives was sourced from this: Carynnyk, M. (2011). Foes of our rebirth: Ukrainian nationalist discussions about Jews, 1929-1947. Nationalities Papers, 39(3), 315-352. doi:10.1080/00905992.2011.570327 Unless I'm going blind, it says nothing about Bandera at all, so I've replaced with cn tag. The article however looks like it would be useful for our OUN article. BobFromBrockley (talk) 08:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine with either just attribution or the kind of first sentence I suggested, or both.

Also that source does mention Bandera (I'll add a page to the citation), but I don't think the text totally matches the source, so I might change the wording Tristario (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Bandera wasn't directly involved in the slayings of civilians but he was the head of OUN-B that committed the murders in his name. Bandera also openly declared that Jews had no place in Ukraine. Keep that in mind. - GizzyCatBella🍁 09:54, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, Bandera wasn’t in jail when his organization unleashed pogroms soon after the Soviets retreated from Poland in 1941. - GizzyCatBella🍁 10:05, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

And finally, Bandera is described as such directly by historians. Here is one example - quote:

Stepan Bandera, an inmate of Sachsenhausen camp at this time, an ironic situation for an anti-Semite, later emerged as their best-known leader, still commemorated today as a national hero despite his collaboration with the Nazis. - GizzyCatBella🍁 10:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I understand why you and other people may feel strongly about this topic, however the job of a wikipedia article is to represent reliable sources, with a preference for stronger ones, in accordance with the policies of wikipedia, including WP:NPOV, WP:V, and WP:OR. Thanks for finding that source, however it's a passing mention in a book that isn't about bandera or the OUN. Per WP:RSCONTEXT we should use sources that are focused on Bandera, especially if we're making strong, wikivoice statements like this. As far as I can tell none of the sources I've found that are focused on Bandera directly call him an antisemite, however they come close, so we should do something similar. Tristario (talk) 11:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I added 3 more sources into the article that call Bandera directly an-Antisemite. - GizzyCatBella🍁 11:34, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

... and note that the Ukrainian Jewish community apparently has a unified stance on the issue also - see --> Ukraine’s new heroes: Anti-Semites and murderers of Jews. - GizzyCatBella🍁 11:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

See WP:NOTFORUM. The two extra sources you added are books written by journalists, one is a passing mention, and the other is arguably a passing mention. You already said you don't have an issue with discarding the "blanket statement", so I'm sure there's a compromise we can find. Is there a particular wording you would suggest based on sources such as the ones I cited in my above comment? Tristario (talk) 12:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

These seem like passing references to me, with authors of varying expertise. Better to use more specific experts, as proposed by Tristario, imho. BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

@Bobfrombrockley and Tristario - I think that sentence could be modified to something like " Bandera held anti-semitic views" but anything less than that will go against the sources. Anyway, that's my humble opinion for you. - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I think that seems fine. @Bobfrombrockley Do you see any issues with that? Tristario (talk) 12:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Can live with that but I strongly think we need to trim out the material here that relates to OUN and not specifically to Bandera, and to lean more heavily on texts that clearly reflect the state of the art scholarship on the subject of this article rather than general non-expert accounts of WWII etc BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

This is probably a good idea, currently the section is a little confusing partially because it jumps between Ukrainian nationalism, the OUN, and bandera in a fairly unstructured way. WP:SYNTH should be avoided, too Tristario (talk) 06:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

PS - Tristario name those two journalists because I see only one and please don’t give me WP:NOTFORUM notes, okay? - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:18, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Arthur Allen (author) and Christopher Hale. Perhaps Christopher Hale technically isn't a journalist, but something close Tristario (talk) 12:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I just removed I think all of the content from the views section that was not about Bandera or not specifically connected to Bandera himself by the sources, as discussed here. The sources and content I removed may still be useful to this and other articles, so here's a link to the revision before I deleted it all. Tristario (talk) 11:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Tristario, I think that's a big improvement. BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

References

RfC

Please comment - GizzyCatBella🍁 15:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Bandera as a symbol

It is interesting to consider to what degree Bandera is a symbol as opposed to an (active) leader or an ideologue. It seems apparent that he was not a thinker, and, as he practically did not go to Ukraine after WW2, a question I am not sure how to answer is, what did Bandera actually do? There is considerable coverage of Bandera's views but not much to suggest that they were actually translated into policy. As far as I understand, the OUN sought inspiration to Dmytro Dontsov.

Here is an excerpt from an interview with Yaroslav Hrytsak taken in 2008, a bit before the nationalist surge in Ukrainian politics (when Bandera, while of course controversial, was not as much in the spotlight). In the interview, Yaroslav emphasises the regional difference in attitudes towards Bandera (positive in the West, negative in the East) and seemingly downplays his importance:

...In fact, Bandera had no direct connection with the murders of the Polish population in Volhynia in 1943, of which he is often accused. I am not saying that if he had been in Ukraine, there would have been no massacres in Volhynia, but Bandera was not personally involved in the creation of the UPA in 1942...After his arrest in the summer of 1941, Bandera was isolated and did not quite understand what was happening in the country. There was serious friction between him and Mykoła Łebed, who remained in place. Several years ago, there was a discussion in Lviv as to whether someone else should be turned into a symbol of the Ukrainian military independence movement in place of Bandera. ... [7]

I'm not suggesting here that Bandera isn't historically important. Just food for thought --Jabbi (talk) 23:01, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jabbi, you wrote --> ..he practically did not go to Ukraine after WW2 - Bandera, couldn’t go back. He would be quickly captured by the NKVD and executed after a show trial if he returned to Ukraine. He didn’t have a choice. - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

I've also read similar things in sources Tristario (talk) 23:58, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Indeed he couldn't go back after 1945 but what's more significant is he didn't go back when he was freed in 1944. (I've corrected the implication in the lede that he did.) It's interesting how little our article has to say about what he himself actually did after his arrest in 1941. His actions indeed seem fairly thin, compared to his huge symbolic importance. BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2022 (UTC) A more concise rendering of the Hrytsak quote might not be amiss in the WWII part of the body of this article. BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

In 1944, when Bandera was freed, Ukraine was already taken over by the Soviets. If he came back (how? parachute into the Soviet-controlled territory?) he would end up as Chuprynka (another "Герой") dead. It was also clear by that time that Germany lost the war, I imagine he was more concerned about his own survival (and his family I’m sure) than anything else. BTW - Those in Ukraine today who promote the glory of Bandera only harm the Ukrainian cause. Such a huge mistake, so painful. We can witness how smoothly and successfully the Russian propaganda exploits this fact. - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

[8] .. 🤷‍♀️ - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:56, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

See --> This is what I'm talking about!

Piotrowski writes that the majority of Ukrainische Hilfspolizei came from OUN-B, Bandera's OUN issued instructions for it's members to join auxiliary police etc, etc. But we have a new editor claiming that Bandera had nothing in common with this. GizzyCatBella🍁 10:12, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Babi Yar as a Symbol of Holocaust Distortion in Post-Maidan Ukraine GizzyCatBella🍁 10:51, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella:, I find your arguments a little difficult to follow. Would you mind stating clearly who you accuse of what exactly? And perhaps furthermore, why it is an issue? --Jabbi (talk) 12:24, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I’m sorry you can’t fully apprehend what I'm writing about, but don’t worry, I also have difficulty understanding what you are talking about. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:48, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I strongly encourage you to drop the fake humility and try to engage in a collaborative way. [EDIT] Also, if there is something you don't understand that I say feel free to ask and I will try to explain better. --Jabbi (talk) 15:00, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Continuation of the above exchange - GizzyCatBella🍁 16:00, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Short description

Short description is "Ukrainian politician (1909–1959)", but he never held a political post. Che Guevara was a "Marxist revolutionary". A section on the talk page is titled "liberator who fought against the Soviet Union, Poland and Nazi Germany", perhaps Bandera was a liberator? Simon Bolivar is titled as "Liberator of South American Countries".

It seems that Bandera was first and foremost symbolic for the Ukrainian independence struggle during WW2. As per discussions above there seems to be scant evidence of how he actually contributed to that cause aside from his activities in the 1930s, pre-war: "At the same time, Stepan Bandera was actively recruiting groups of Ukrainian nationalists in both Western and Eastern Ukraine. He was arrested six times for unlawful crossings of the Polish-Czechoslovak frontier while smuggling prohibited OUN periodicals into Poland."

My guess is that West Ukraine would approve of him being titled as liberator but the East would not. Unlike Bolivar, Bandera is divisive. So perhaps he would be accurately described as a "revolutionary", perhaps even "fascist revolutionary"? Jabbi (talk) 10:38, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Good call --Jabbi (talk) 11:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I think just "Ukrainian nationalist leader" maybe. That's roughly how he's most commonly described (and he isn't universally described as fascist either) Tristario (talk) 10:46, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Jabbi, but that would be WP:OR. Do we have any sources that describe Bandera a "revolutionary" or "fascist revolutionary"? - GizzyCatBella🍁 10:46, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Good point @GizzyCatBella:. I suppose I was being a bit too creative. --Jabbi (talk) 11:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Neutrality is broken, article needs rework

Biased and unreliable sources are used, e.g. citations of pro-soviet Marxists and polish material, back that time with which was mutual National violent conflict with war crimes from both sides.

Numerous redactions and alterations by anonymous users that introduced Russian or Polish bias or even Russian propaganda myths and narratives that should be reviewed

False and unproven accusations in fascism and antisemitism. Especially antisemitism - that caused by fact that soviets won ideological war among Jewish people in Ukraine and many of them were collaborating with soviet occupants and were going to work in police or special state services, occupants had a strong demand and stuff shortage during establishing control over newly occupied lands. So exploiting fact of majority of Jewish people among soviet collaborators in NKWD forces redactors are manipulating and trying to put equality sign between fight against Bolshevik totalitarianism and antisemiticism.

As for racism accusations some of Jewish people also were a part of Ukrainian Insurgency army for e.g. prominent painter Leyba-Itzko Dobrovsky, UPA was not mono-ethnic, there were Russians, Uzbeks, Armenians, any who want fight back Bolshevik occupants was a friend and brother-in-arms.

Facts missing or misleading , e.g stating about how comfortable for Bandera family were concentration camps and not mentioning that his brother was killed in Auschwitz in order to force Bandera for collaboration. 2001:871:263:8464:1867:3429:B87A:CE96 (talk) 19:17, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

? False and unproven accusations in fascism and antisemitism?....? antisemitism - that caused by fact that soviets won ideological war among Jewish peoplef majority of Jewish people among soviet collaborators in NKWD?!

Jewish people in Ukraine and many of them were collaborating with soviet occupants!?✋

Tempting to remove entire above comment instead of responding - GizzyCatBella🍁 19:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I don’t understand your outrage instead of following facts. I’m trying to communicate that in Russian Empire Jewish people were heavily oppressed and marginalised nation and when Russian Bolsheviks started Ukraine occupation they used rhetoric that “now all oppressions of Jewish people will end, all damage would be redeemed and compensated and benefits provided, we are building International Heaven with equality for those who take part in establishing and concrete Soviet control”

It resulted in fact that in NKVD forces of newly created muppet state UkrainianSSR chief stuff was 62% of Jewish people by national distribution, it is in Russian statistics “Who led the NKVD 1934-1941. Reference book” by N. V. Petrov and K. V. Skorkin, the central apparatus of the NKVD of the USSR in 1934–1937. in the book "NKVD of the USSR: structure, leadership, uniform, insignia 1934-1937" V. Yu. Voronov and A. I. Shishkin.

That is indicator of using by Bolsheviks this ethnic group against Ukrainians as a tool, as Russians always did by manipulating minorities, on Caucasus, Karabach any other former colony. These numbers were source of frustration and irritation for leaders of UIA, they constantly were highlighting in personal letters how involved and used ethnic group was against Ukrainian Independency movement and though ideological war is lost, we failed to communicate need of fight for Independency to minorities, that communication was perverted and used as base for antisemitic accusations.

Almost all assassinations of Ukrainian political leaders as Petlura, Rebet Lev and many others were staged by KGB as did “by Jewish people for redemption”.

After spine of Insurgent Army was broken the need in using Jewish or Ukrainian collaborators disappeared, Nikolai Yezhov come to power and started cleansing of collaborators in militia and NKVD forces replacing them with reliable and loyal Russian origin.

“Former deputy head of the NKVD for the Chernihiv region, captain of the State Security Service A. I. Gepler. In his complaint, he wrote that after his arrest in March 1938, Moscow Chekists beat him, saying: “Your Ukrainian shop is over, we will disperse all Jews and Ukrainians””

Again, I see every UIA related English article is redacted providing Russian narrative and using along same very controversial and subjective materials of Per Anders Rudling or Russians sources citations. It just indicates your material of choice and not historical truth or facts. 37.143.178.116 (talk) 10:44, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

So where are those who according to you narrate historical truth and facts? In Edmonton and Munich? Just wondering. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm just pointing out how come that majority of ethnic group were on other side of Ukraine Independence movement. It is wrong to put blame of anti-Semitism on Bandera and OUN, cause:

1. Bandera had no influence on whole OUN, it was shattered on OUN(b), OUN(m)

2. Most violent pogroms was outside operative region of OUN or UIA, it was no any need of political influence for that from OUN(b), Ukraine had a violent history of pogroms and antisemitism long before any OUN existence, see map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogroms_of_the_Russian_Civil_War

3. For OUN(b) had no any matter what national origin Soviet occupation collaborator is

4. UIA-Nazi collaboration ended with 2 regiments went basic training and refused to signify loyalty to Hitler, after that regiments were dismissed, the first place collaboration occurred cause at WW1 Germans were guarantors of Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (Ukraine–Central Powers) and helped to fight back Russians

You are trying to depict devil that never existed, nor by scale, nor influence, but described and inflated by Soviet propaganda, just a politician communicating by manifests and literature limited to Western regions of organization with underground activity that was hiding in forests 37.143.178.116 (talk) 14:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Have a look at WP:HISTRS. If you have sources that meet the criteria there you can provide them here, along with page numbers and quotes. On wikipedia we don't do original research, we say what the sources say Tristario (talk) 22:47, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Citations are a mess

Citation #7 contains several page references and longer quotes and is cited several time over the article. There is no way to know which citation corresponds to which page in the citation or quote. I'm not sure this can easily be unraveled/salvaged. --Jabbi (talk) 02:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

the citations have now broken the layout as they are nested inside the thumbnail image text at the start of the World War II section. I am really not excited about the prospect of cross-referencing the article's edit history in ordered to reconstruct where each page citation is supposed to go to. I suggest we try to stick with using either the rp template or the hastag-ref command with group=nb where we want to include a direct quotation, e.g.

{{#tag:ref|This study investigates the life and the political cult of Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian far-right leader who lived between 1909 and 1959. ... In 1932–1933 Stepan Bandera was arrested six times for matters such as an illegal crossing of the Polish- Czechoslovak border, smuggling illegal OUN journals to Poland. ... Because of the extremist nature of the OUN and its involvement in the Holocaust and other kinds of ethnic and political mass violence during and after the Second World War, OUN émigrés and UPA veterans began producing forged or manipulated documents during the Cold War, by means of which they whitewashed their own history... In terms of extreme nationalism, violence, fascism, and antisemitism, the two factions did not differ greatly from each other."<ref name=":11" />|group=nb}}

I'm at a bit of a loss how to resolve the current problem. --Jabbi (talk) 18:07, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll have a go using Who wrote that? or wikiblame Jabbi (talk) 10:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

FYI : Wikipedia:Help_desk#Best_practices_for_extensive_citations --Jabbi (talk) 11:56, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for trying to fix this, I did notice that very long citation earlier. I'm not sure what the best approach is Tristario (talk) 09:29, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Acceptable nomenclature

Terminology sourced from the same external links that currently exist within the article can't be removed without also removing all existing links and references:

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/search/site/Stepan%20Bandera?f%5B0%5D=im_field_collection%3A1834881 jonnynut 00:19, 16 October 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnynut (talk • contribs)

"...guerrilla bands led by Stepan Bandera..." jonnynut 00:20, 16 October 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnynut (talk • contribs)

"...Ukrainian nationalist partisan leader Bandera..." jonnynut 00:22, 16 October 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnynut (talk • contribs)

These are primary sources. Also see here about signing your comments on talk pages --Tristario (talk) 00:50, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Actually, by the definition on the page you refer to, secondary sources are "...generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources...", which leads to those being explicitly secondary. --Jonnynut (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:15, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

It depends on the context. In the context of history these are primary sources. Read primary source, which makes it more clear. Either way they don't meet the reliable sources guidelines, nor the more stringent requirements for history (WP:HISTRS) Tristario (talk) 01:32, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

The link at the top of this topic is in no way a primary source, in no historical context. If anything, the excerpt stating:

" The weekly Moscow magazine 0,~!anyek reported i n its No. G,6 November 1963 issue the discovery of a secret cloister containing ten nuns in Lvov. The article alleged that flags of the lkrainian nationalist partisan leader Bandera were found there."

would be a tertiary sources referencing a secondary source...that is unless you're suggesting the weekly Moscow magazine 0,~!anyek doesn't meet reliable sources guidelines, in which case there will be much to revert on subjective labeling that would fall in line with other such excerpts.

Is that an accurate appraisal of your position? --Jonnynut (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:55, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

That's a newspaper article from 1966. It's not a reliable source for this, and in the context of history would generally be seen as a primary source. Read through the links I gave you, and note WP:AGE MATTERS and WP:HISTRH and the more stringent guidelines for history. Generally we aren't using newspaper articles for historical information in this article unless they're quoting an expert Tristario (talk) 02:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended Confirmed Abuse?

@GrizzyCatBella Undid revision 1116287692

Is Wikipedia not supposed to strive for impartial objectivity?

If well intentioned users make attempts to uphold those values, and get blocked from doing so by moderators who won't bring level-headed reasoning to the table, with the net outcome being the loss of credibility, degradation of integrity and dissuasion of participants from adding to what Wikipedia was supposed to represent, all that will remain is a barrage of bot-farmed propaganda vs. insular reverters who won't give the time of day to anyone with less "wiki-cred" and experienced know-how than them.

How wonderful! jonnynut 02:32, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

I understand this is frustrating, however I personally am just trying to help you understand wikipedia policy. GizzyCatBella undid that because there is a ruling that applies to this article that means you need to have over 500 edits and have an account for 30 days in order to edit it. Please assume good faith note that we, or me personally at least, are not trying to drive you away. I hope you can understand how wikipedia works better and start to have a better time here. Look at the links on the welcome message on your talk page for good places to start on wikipedia, and you can look at WP:JOBS if you want ideas on what to do, which can be a good way to get used to how wikipedia works.--Tristario (talk) 02:54, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

@Jonnynut Yes, stay. Please comment here for now until you reach 500 edits. - GizzyCatBella🍁 03:48, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

BTW, just from an unfamiliar user's perspective, with all the header templates at the top of talk pages (such as this one) being completely absent when trying to contribute using the mobile site on a small screen, it seems much of the anticipated norms and expected decorum typically found behind curated articles may often get missed unintentionally by anybody who's oblivious to such differences – I just came across that fact by fluke when trying to see whether HotCat functionality works on a phone...thanks for your guidance so far!

jonnynut 19:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC) jonnynut 19:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnynut (talk • contribs)

I really do appreciate your efforts, but trust you recognize the lunacy of many having so little possibility to cumulatively make any significant impact on the blatantly gamed state of the article, of few being capable of so much damaging influence by way of ever more restrictive policy conditions, and of anyone in the middle (such as yourself) only able to reinforce that divide in the name of doing things the way you do them because that's how it works...

If I can get 500 well intentioned individuals, who already contribute to society in various beneficial ways, all of various different ages and skills, to diligently put a nominal effort apart from existing roles and responsibilities, into making a daily edit each, it would still take a year and a half to even have the ability to make a difference, and increasing the number of volunteers wouldn't change that in any regard, while a well-financed shop of trolls could achieve much more in a month!

I'm in no way whatsoever going to NOT follow your suggestions, because I believe in the principals, at least for as long as attention for another cause does not yank away the limited dedication of free time available to me, but should the realities above not merit some form of consideration which hereto with has not yet been devised?

፡( jonnynut 03:48, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @GizzyCatBella

Question: do things like "categorizing" count towards 500 edits? jonnynut 04:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnynut (talk • contribs)

Yes. Also please remember to sign your comments on talk pages --Tristario (talk) 04:07, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Unrelated sources

The second source has nothing to Bandera. This article is about Ukrainian People's Revolutionary Army (Looks like the author and editor were confused by similarities of UPA (b) where B = Bandera and UPA (b) where B = Bulba). This sentence "This was done by the banderovtsy [the Sich]" is a historical mess, forgivable for somebody who used to call all Ukrainian revolutionaries "banderovtsy" but not for a historian. AntonSork (talk) 12:20, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect - The source talks about Bandera ( quote .far right-wing nationalist leader Stepan Bandera ...) and a street named after him in the capital Kyiv. - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

So this article was provided just because of mentioning of Bandera? Even although rest of 99 percents have nothing about Bandera and don't contain any topic related researches? Looks like a manipulation. There are even enough sources where said that there is Bandera street in Kiev, and enough where Bandera called far-right but editor has chosen this one about non related massacre... AntonSork (talk) 13:30, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

You said - quote: The second source has nothing to Bandera. That was incorrect. - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:48, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

It's totally not about Bandera. 99,999999% AntonSork (talk) 20:05, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Sentence on who released Bandera from jail

@Jabbi what is nonsensical about that sentence discussing who released bandera from jail? Seems like an important detail to me Tristario (talk) 01:18, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

@Tristario and @Jabbi - One thing (I will locate sources if required).. after the German attack on Poland in 1939 and the rapid advancement of the German Army, all prisoners were freed from Polish jails (accorss Poland) due to the the September 1939 decree of the Polish president Mościcki. All jails were opened and inmates released in advance of the German take over. That's why Bandera was freed. Hypotheses of who unlocked the door to his cell might not be noteworthy. - GizzyCatBella🍁 01:42, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Just as long as it isn't WP:OR, it needs to be a source that specifically says that about Bandera. Personally I am interested in who freed him or how he was freed so it's a detail I'd like in the article, as long as it's well sourced Tristario (talk) 01:51, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I found it problematic for a couple of reasons:

1. Seems to me that if he was being held in Bereza Kartuska Prison it would not be Ukrainian jailers that freed him as the first source states, but rather Polish. It was a Polish prison in today's Belarus. This source, apparently his autobiography, indicates he was freed along with other inmates, some of whom were Ukrainian nationalists. Google Translate suggests he was freed by Ukrainian prisoners, but that then begs the question, who freed them. ("I was freed by nationalist prisoners who somehow found out that I was sitting there in strict isolation")

2. The second theory just says "Poles" but on closer inspection, Snyder's article states "In a gesture that seems a touchstone of a lost age, Poland freed its political prisoners, including Ukrainian terrorists such as Mykola Lebed' and Stepan Bandera, in early September 1939. The intention was to spare prisoners the trials of German captivity but these particular prisoners awaited the Germans with hope." (p. 205-6) This source then points to an interesting fact about the circumstances Bandera was freed.

3. I can't review all of the sources for the third assertion, but Rossolinski's book just referenced Bandera's claim in his autobiography that he escaped with the help of other Ukrainian prisoners. see here. The Lemberg Mosaic is not accessible to me, but there is no page citation anyway. Anna Reid's book, Borderlands, is well known as an introductory, lightweight even, overview of Ukrainian history and should be removed in any case IMO. And actually, Reid states clearly that Germans released Bandera see here. I still would say that this is not a trusted source as Anna Reid is a journalist with a wide scope, she specialises in East Europe in a general sense.

The paragraph incorrectly stated that it was possible that Bandera was freed by Ukranian jailers, Poles or Germans. It did not discuss the context, why it matters. The paragraph did therefore not add any new knowledge, it only listed all the parties that could possibly have freed Bandera, which should be fairly obvious by simple inferral.

I realise that I should probably have tried to improve the paragraph having taken a closer look. What can we use from it do you think? @GizzyCatBella: Good catch! Jabbi (talk) 02:02, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

From what I remember:

Around April 1939, Bandera was transferred from Bereza Kartuska to the prison in Brest. (all in Poland back then) From there, he was released on September 5 or 10, 1939 due to this presidential decree from September 2, 1939.

Then Bandera went on foot towards Lwów. Then in October 1939, he illegally crossed the border (with his brother Wasil) of the Soviet-German occupation zones and went to Krakow in GG. I frankly don't think the detail of who opened the door to his cell is important. Most likely, the Brest prison was unlocked by the administration after September 2nd, and all detainees walk out to freedom. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:35, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I would prefer not to rely on original research here, if that's the case there should be a source that says that's how it worked for bandera. As for what the other sources say they appear to either be weak sources or a passing mention, but we can include what Rossolinski-Liebe's book says (which includes Bandera's claim, but also says on page 167 without attribution that he escaped, on 13 September), and possibly what snyder says

And thanks for going through that Jabbi, it looks like there were some issues with that sentence Tristario (talk) 03:35, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

That’s what sources say. Notice that almost all sources say that Bandera was released from prison here page 332, here page 373, here page 1984, here page 192 etc, etc. He didn’t escape because jails were wide opened due to the presidential decree I mentioned before. Even logic dictates that he was among tens of thousands of inmates that were freed from prisons at the beginning of September 1939, because of the war and amnesty. Nothing special here. - GizzyCatBella🍁 05:39, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

But does any source say that the reason he was released was due to that presidential decree? Released is not a very informative word. Unless there's a source that says that this is WP:OR. And those sources you just linked are either passing mentions or pre-1990, and one is a book about translation Tristario (talk) 06:14, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

It's not about whether it's special or not, by the way, but I'd like this article to accurately reflect what good quality sources say about the circumstances of his release Tristario (talk) 06:32, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I doubt whether anyone investigated the detailed circumstances of Bandera's release because there is nothing to investigate. There was nothing unusual about it. In Banderas case, the jail he was kept (Brześć) would be taken by the Soviet troops. (by the way, if Poles didn’t opened the jails, picture what would happen to Bandera two years later) Historians even speculate about the exact date of his release, which ranges from 5 September to 13 September. GizzyCatBella🍁 08:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

My opinion is that there is enough ambiguity about the circumstances to warrant a brief note explaining it. The current two paragraphs describing this period read:

In September 5-10, 1939, as a result of the invasion of Poland, he was freed from Bereza Kartuska Prison, and moved to Kraków, in the German-occupied zone of Poland, where he established close connections with the German Abwehr and Wehrmacht.

Soon thereafter Eastern Poland was occupied by the Soviet Union. Upon release from prison, Bandera moved to Kraków, the capital of Germany's occupational General Government. There, he came in contact with the leader of the OUN, Andriy Atanasovych Melnyk. In 1940, the political differences and expectations between the two leaders caused the OUN to split into two factions, OUN-B and OUN-M (Banderites and Melnykites) each one claiming legitimacy.

How about (and feel free to consider the following a draft you can edit):

In September 5-10, 1939, as a result of the invasion of Poland, Bandera was freed from Bereza Kartuska Prison under unclear circumstances. Soon thereafter Eastern Poland was occupied by the Soviet Union. Upon release from prison, Bandera moved to Kraków, the capital of Germany's occupational General Government, where he established close connections with the German Abwehr and Wehrmacht. There, he also came into contact with the leader of the OUN, Andriy Atanasovych Melnyk. In 1940, the political differences and expectations between the two leaders caused the OUN to split into two factions, OUN-B and OUN-M (Banderites and Melnykites) each one claiming legitimacy.

--Jabbi (talk) 14:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I’m not sure .. and you know what? He he wasn’t in Bereza anymore at the time of his release but (last 5 months before September 1939) in Brześć prison ... I’ll try to locate sources later today. - GizzyCatBella🍁 16:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Okay, here it is --> quote:

From the prison in Wronki, Bandera was taken in early 1939 to a penal institution in Brest (Brześć), in eastern Poland. According to his brief autobiography, he escaped on 13 September 1939, during the turmoil of the Second World War, with the help of Ukrainian prisoners. (page 166)

So the fairy tale of his escape comes from the primary source (Bandera) but historians write that he had walked out of the prison in 1939 following the German invasion of Poland, slipping through Soviet hands or that he was released GizzyCatBella🍁 17:27, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I can dig to find what day the Brześć prison was opened in September 1939 but use logic. The fight for Brześć started on September 14, 1939 so they emptied jails on the 13th, Bandera walks out that day (as per his autobiography, 13th). You know what? I would just say that he was freed from prison, that's it, and remove Bereza because he walked out from Brześć. GizzyCatBella🍁 17:41, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

We should just say what the best quality sources say, in accordance with WP:NPOV. Thanks for providing two more sources Tristario (talk) 22:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I suppose something along those lines could work, although we don't need to include Reid since it's a weak source. As long as it complies with WP:NPOV and is verifiable Tristario (talk) 22:32, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

This is what two of the better sources on Bandera say about this. Another source Tristario (talk) 22:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Great stuff. Only thing is that Marples is being cited for two different, mutually exclusive propositions. Which one is it? --Jabbi (talk) 02:34, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

The reason I cited him twice was because he says "the imprisoned OUN leaders were either released or escaped - there are various versions of what actually occurred." So it supports that accounts exist for both scenarios. But I admit that citing him twice like that is a bit confusing Tristario (talk) 02:53, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

References

Cold War Allies: The Origins of CIA's Relationship with Ukrainian Nationalists

@Tristario:, Cold War Allies: The Origins of CIA's Relationship with Ukrainian Nationalists seems to be an internal CIA source made available via FOIA I would not expect the author or the title to become recognised outwith the CIA. The fact that the resource is made available via the CIA website indicates legitimacy to me. Jabbi (talk) 04:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I would exercise a great deal of caution using resources made available via FOIA from the CIA since many would be primary sources or of unclear reliability as sources for history. Perhaps it's suitable for this particular purpose though Tristario (talk) 05:03, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Indeed. I am aware of the dangers of using primary sources and in the two instances I've added content relying on primary sources I have indicated clearly that it is contemporary material produced by a specific organisation/institution, i.e. the purpose of including that content is to show what those actors at the time thought. Jabbi (talk) 15:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Bandera Family 1933.png (discussion)
• Генеральна рада «Загону Червона калина» в Академічному домі у Львові, 21 жовтня 1928 року.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

UPA

The infobox currently gives his military service including “ UPA (1942–1956)”. Unless I am not reading properly, the body of the article does not support that. We either need to remove this from the infobox, or substantiate it in the body.

The UPA article infobox, also listed him as a leader, but that was not substantiated in the body of that article. This needs clarifying. BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:01, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Good observations. I've just looked at a few sources to see what they say about this, and the answer doesn't seem very clear. Bandera is strongly associated with the UPA, and the people that fought in the UPA identified with him strongly, although he was not personally involved in it during WWII up until his release at least. Following WWII, when he left to Germany, there seems to have been some slightly complicated OUN and Ukrainian nationalist politics where two different factions competed for the loyalty of the UPA, and it's not clear to me whether Bandera could be said to be a leader of the UPA or not. (This is mostly based on a skim of Rossolinski-Liebe's book and Hitler's Shadows)

However I think describing him as having military service in the UPA is misleading so I'd be inclined to remove it Tristario (talk) 23:35, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

An attempted coup

@Bobfrombrockley, regarding this edit - can you fully quote it here? Thanks. (it needs to support --> However, the German authorities saw it (the proclamation) as an attempted coup) - GizzyCatBella🍁 09:28, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

This is what it says, in the body with footnotes: “a Nazi document dated 25 November 1941 stated that "the Bandera Movement is preparing a revolt in the Reichskommissariat which has as its ultimate aim the establishment of an independent Ukraine. All functionaries of the Bandera Movement must be arrested at once and, after thorough interrogation, are to be liquidated".[62] On 5 July, Bandera was placed under house arrest[63]”. BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:26, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

But they don’t say the declaration was an attempted coup - I fixed it already so never mind. I removed the tag also. - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:31, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

A coup has fairly specific connotations so it's probably better to avoid using the word unless a source uses it Tristario (talk) 22:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks guys. BobFromBrockley (talk) 07:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

russians wrote this article. Ukrainian historic should have. And editing is impossible

I am very concerned about spreading such lies about Stepan Bandera. 2A01:598:D837:1615:71E1:721D:E198:EBFF (talk) 04:16, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I guess you are in a wrong place then. Ymblanter (talk) 05:22, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

@2A01:598:D837:1615:71E1:721D:E198:EBFF Did you know him personally? Cyanscarf (talk) 18:17, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Volhynia genocide

As a lead in Adolf Hitler is containing The Holocaust, Bandera first lines should be filled with Volhynia genocide. The word „genocide” didn’t happen in text not even once(sic! zero, zilch, null), but in titles of sourced it is 11 times. One again: 11 quoted article are titled “genocide” and in text itself genocide didn’t happen once. I heard not to used historical negationism or genocide denial, but I don’t know how to call it... Joaziela (talk) 20:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

We simply follow WP:COMMON NAME or a good descriptive title, which are The Holocaust and Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia. Creating a redirect, as you just did [9]] does not prove your point. Quite the opposite. If you think the title of the page "Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia" should be changed (as you seem to argue), you might open a discussion on talk of page "Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia", but such discussions probably took place already and resulted in the current title. My very best wishes (talk) 23:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

It is so common, that there are 11 sources with “genocide” in title, but somehow it get by accident erased in article. Bandera is a genocide criminal and it should be pointed out in his biography, on top of it, just like with Hitler. It’s like write a whole article about Hitlers’ paintings, moustache, dog and that he was a vegetarian, but not mentioning the Holocaust and WW2, this is what been done with Bandera. Joaziela (talk) 13:41, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

@Joaziela: Thank you for your contributions here. It is great that you are trying to improve Wikipedia. I want to suggest that you try to be patient in your editing. It would help perhaps if you could make a concrete suggestion. I should let you know that there is not an academic consensus to call the massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia a genocide. In order to do so here on Wikipedia we need reliable sources. Jabbi (talk) 00:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

New Statesman article

Here, if anyone wants to improve parts of the article on perception of Bandera in Ukraine today. Ymblanter (talk) 11:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I read that article, it's good - balanced. It's important to highlight that Bandera is mostly revered for fighting for the independence of Ukraine, while other more horrible historical aspects are either glossed over or out right denied, and that fascist elements in contemporary Ukraine are not mainstream. I won't be editing that section just now. Doesn't appeal to me either. --Jabbi (talk) 13:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Assessment

I wonder if this article merits progressing from grade C -> B ? --Jabbi (talk) 17:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

1 Jan 2023 Verkhovna Rada commemoration

The Verkhovna Rada's official twitter and facebook accounts posted the following commemoration of Stepan Bandera on the 114th anniversary of his birth: (rough translation from the twitter version)

"January 1 marks the 114th anniversary of the birth of Stepan Bandera (1909-1959). Stepan Bandera: When the people choose bread between bread and freedom, they ultimately lose everything, including bread. If the people choose freedom, they will have bread grown by themselves and not taken away by anyone.

Realizing that God is with us is the surest and greatest help for all of us. The complete and supreme victory of Ukrainian nationalism will be when the Russian Empire ceases to exist.

Now the struggle against the Russian empire continues. And these instructions of Stepan Bandera are well understood by the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valery Zaluzhny. Voice of Ukraine"

https://twitter.com/verkhovna_rada/status/1609544721101389831 https://www.facebook.com/verkhovna.rada.ukraine/posts/pfbid02XY2Vf47kd3RXVFUi8zWCrdMUyKu84y1Aw9QT1VDnvPBdd5sSG6FXHh37q1DUN3BSl

Eduard Dolinsky, director general of the Ukrainian Jewish Committee, reported celebrations of Bandera's birth in Lviv attended by the mayor of Lviv (https://twitter.com/edolinsky/status/1609585381879455746?s=20&t=55iCuN9gHPNWjRfYX9sKIw) and Ivano-Frankivsk (https://twitter.com/edolinsky/status/1609608346491027458?s=20&t=55iCuN9gHPNWjRfYX9sKIw).

I think at least the Rada declaration should be included in the Russian invasion section. It currently contains the Russian propaganda angle, but not if or how the legacy of Bandera has changed in response to the invasion. The quote they attributed to Bandera appears to be a misattribution or a fabrication and the translation isn't precise, so I'm not sure how to best include this information. Thanks.

Aachenshinto (talk) 02:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Valery Zaluzhny - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:11, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

[10] - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

There has been some controversy before but it was debunked by WP:RS France24. I’m not sure what to do about this one? What do you think @Tristario? - GizzyCatBella🍁 04:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

You mean whether that debunked bracelet controversy should be included in his biography? That seems too insignificant to include, in my view. That also doesn't have any connection with bandera as far as I'm aware.

As for whether anything about him and bandera should be included in his biography, we'd need some pretty good secondary sources for that. For whether anything about those social media posts should be included in this article, we'd need some secondary sources and it would need to be WP:DUE. There may be some secondary sources (preferably better quality ones) covering attitudes towards bandera in Ukraine during the invasion etc. which may be relevant and due enough to include in this article Tristario (talk) 05:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I see there is a Haaretz article but I don't really see it warranting more than a sentence if it was to be included. Mellk (talk) 12:46, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

The Polish PM, opposition leader, and various senior figures in Polish politics have spoken against the statement: https://notesfrompoland.com/2023/01/02/poland-condemns-ukraines-commemoration-of-wartime-nationalist-leader-bandera/

> Subsequently, the prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, told PAP that the government took “an extremely critical [stance] towards any glorification or even remembrance of Bandera”. He added that there had been “terrible Ukrainian crimes” during the war, including “genocide”.

Morawiecki pledged that he would raise the issue during his next conversation with Ukrainian counterpart Denys Shmyhal.

I think at least a sentence is needed, looks like it has caused a minor diplomatic incident. Aachenshinto (talk) 10:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

https://www.pap.pl/node/1516667 <- English language reporting on the Polish MFA's statement.

https://www.pap.pl/aktualnosci/news%2C1516689%2Cpremier-bedzie-rozmawiac-z-szefem-ukrainskiego-rzadu-o-banderze-jestesmy <- Polish language reporting on the PM's statement.

Aachenshinto (talk) 10:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Tristario - The photo and commemoration of Stepan Bandera has been removed today from the Verkhovna Rada's official twitter account - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:52, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

From Facebook also - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I posted without checking discussion: „On January 1, 2023 Ukrainian parliament Verkhovna Rada Twitter account published a Valerii Zaluzhnyi (Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine) selfie with a portrait of Bandera with his books quotes (celebrated the 114th anniversary of his birth), deleted after strong international criticism, especially from Poland: President, Prime Minister, Ministry of Foreign Affairsand Deputy Marshal of the Sejm.”

it is well sourced, huge scandal, it is like „Official Bundestag Twitter post a Mein Kampf quotes with photo of Federal Ministry of Defence (Germany) posing with Adolf Hitler portrait, with strong reaction of Israel state authorities” the same happened to Ukraine and Poland. I see some concern that it is bad for Ukrainian propaganda and good for Russian propaganda. Wikipedia is not for any propaganda, is about neutral fact that happened. And it doesn’t metter that it already delete as @GizzyCatBella suggest. You could also inform me that discussion is going also here, because Talk:Valerii Zaluzhnyi#Bandera and Verkhovna Rada you only say that „Bandera to Hiter are not even close”.

David Irving belief even that Hiter knew nothing of the Holocaust, some Ukrainians have positief feels for Bandera. But common sense and international consensus is that Hitler knew about Holocaust and Bandera is involved in killing Jews and Poles at Volhynia genocide. but it’s not competition how is “greatest genociderby numbers”! Some will say that Hitler is also not even close by numbers to Mao Zedong- but genocide is genocide, not a competition.

@GizzyCatBella why you roast me at BLP and ANI

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#User:Joaziela

User:Joaziela and personal attacks but dont tell me that discussion Its going on here as well Joaziela (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a newspaper and it would be WP:RECENTISM to give space in this biography to this very minor diplomatic incident. At most, a brief sentence or added ref to the "Legacy" section. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

References

• @Joaziela. This page has a large section "Legacy" that describes attitudes towards Bandera in Ukraine. What you have suggested adds little to nothing. My very best wishes (talk) 02:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2023

Stephen bandera was a Ukrainian who would murder thousands of poles in wolyn in Poland it is said that he killed over 100,000 people. Still today there are alot of people in Ukraine who support him and call him the hero. For polish people he is just like hitler. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.29.211.113 (talk) 05:36, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. CJ-Moki (talk) 07:32, 4 February 2023 (UTC)