This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on May 25, 2010. |
Read the article written by a well-known Ukranian scholar: http://ukrlife.org/main/prosvita/petlura.htm 77.122.107.222 ( talk) 23:25, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Even more material from Taras Hunczak is given whereas no historian critical of Petlura is cited. Simply length-wise the article imbalanced. I see two possibilities: (i) add citation from the critical historians, but this will make the whole article too long. (ii) trim with the Taras Hunczak citation.
Also the historians who are critical of Petliura do not claim that lack of activity indirectly encouraged the pogroms, rather his lack of activity encouraged the pogroms and he was well aware of this.
I plan to move the reference to the Ukrainian-Jewish source to the legacy and add about the way Petliura is remembered in Israel and the Jewish world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.77.4.129 ( talk) 00:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
User Bandurist removed many changes and improvements for some reason. If there is an argument about using Soviet Union or Bolshevik Russia we can debate it. (The Soviet Union was formed in December 1922.)
Yes the papers were signed December 30 1922, but it did not come into existance until Jan 1 1923. Up until then ..... Ukrainian sources state that the USSR came into being in 1923. But is was Bolshevik Russia he fought against not the USSR Bandurist 14:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The role in pogroms is still not balanced. Also there are two problems with citations. One is "original research", pointing out to documents trying to prove a position where these document authenticity is in doubt. It is best to use this as attributed to a historian - e.g. if Taras Hunczak relied on it then say Taras Hunczak pointed out...
The citation below is not to a scholar and what this person writes has no scholarly weight on the question of the Petliura's role in the pogroms. There is some interest in this piece, since it shows how some elements in the Jewish community in Ukraine today are thinking of Petliura. So I suggest moving it Petliura's Letter Legacy. Some Jewish scholars have reconsidered Petlura's role and the situation during the Civil War. They are placed the blame for the Pogroms on either a minority, or Denikin's "White Guards" who upset at losing to the Bolsheviks, took out their rage on the local Jewish population. [8] If you want to cite a Jewish scholar who reconsidered the position you can use Henry Abramson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashkin ( talk • contribs) 11:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The article is still very biased. It does not do a good job in explaining the debate about Petliura's role and responsibility for the pogroms. The fact that he was not a rabid anti-Semite should make his case more interesting and relevant to other cases. It should be made clear that Petliura was seen as a villain by most (but not all) Jewish parties.
Also Sholom Schwartzbard is portrayed as a Soviet agent - this discussion belong in Schwatzbard's page.
Mashkin 19:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
What responisibility can this man have for pogroms which took place in Ukraine if there is no evidence that he ordered any pogroms in the first place? Where are the documents that tie this man in with any pogroms? Even if you analyse the time period in which he was active it was miniscule. May 1917 - elected head of army Committee. Later left the government after a disagreement with Vynnychenko. Jan-Feb 1918 Stopped Bolshevyk push in Kyiv. April 1918 - Lost position during the Hetman putsch and spent 4 months incarcerated. Jan 1919 - after the fall on the Hetmanate he became the leading figure fighting Bolsheviks and Denikin. By the end of 1919 he had withdrawn to Poland. As I see it the only time he would have been able to do something would have been in 1919 when he was withdrawing to Poland when he was in Kamianetz Podilsk.
The article may seem biased only if it does not agree with your owb personal POV, which it seems it does not. The association of Petlura with Pogroms is a myth which was fueled by the Soviets for their own specific purposes.
Sholom Schwartzbard was Petlura's assassin. The fact that the independant Ukrainian government recognises him as a Soviet agent also has relevance. Bandurist 20:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
You seem to be rather possessive about this and other articles and not open at all to discussion. I do not wish to discuss whether Petliura was responsible or not for the pogroms (if you think he wasn't, then you should make an effort in identifying the main culprits for Wikipedia; also according to your theory he is not a particularly significant person in Ukrainain history, after all he never had any effective control of anything). The point is that in a Wikipedia entry the viewpoints concerning his role should be given a better representation, and it should be done from a NPOV. Another issue is that the language should not insinuate (throwing around `communist').
About the debate on Perliura's role: the first schoraly argument was on the pages of the The Journal of Jewish Studies between Zosa Szajkowski and Aras Hunczak . The debate itself is an interestign enough fact that should be mentioned. In fact, it used to be mentioned, but I suppose that your zeoulous undoing got rid of it.
Also using a source that says "Zhyd in Ukrainian Means Jew" is not such a great idea.
Mashkin 10:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Petlura was very influential aminly through his editorship of and major written contributions to the journal "Ukrainskaya Zhyzn" which he edited in Moscow for the years before the Russian Revolution. Although it was published in Russian and had to be delicately written and editied, it played a major part in shaping Ukrainian thought, developing and spreading concepts such as Ukrainian self-awareness and national conciousness. These magazines were not accessable in Ukraine and indeed are still not accessable in the major Ukrainian research libraries (because most copies were destroyed) and until recently were only available in the closed archives in Moscow. (I had a very difficult time getting a copy of one article for my dissertation on the bandura because of this}. Recently a couple of books have come out about this little studied (and little researched) area of Petlura's activities, and this area in the article should be expanded considerably. However, I can only do this when I get my copies back from his nephew to whom I lent my personal copies. Petlura as a major influence though his writtings and shaped many of the political ideas of the Ukrainian intelligentsia in the time leading up to the revolution. This is the reason for his meteoric rise and support. Everyone already knew him through his articles. His leadership of the government is also one up to discussion. What was his title - President, premier, dictator, manager, secretary with a leadership which he assumed after Volodymyr Vynnychenko left for France. (By the way, Vynnychenko's wife Rosa was Jewish).
You made an incorrect assumsion.
I would like to suggest that you read through Yevhen Nakonechnyj's book: Ukradene im'ia - Chomu Rusyny staly Ukraintsiamy. The fifth edition was published in Lviv in 2004 and I believe you can read an older version online at here. It discusses the use of a variety of ethnonyms in the Ukrainian language, the differences and subtlties of their use in comparison to the languages of Ukraine's neighbours. It also discusses the use of the terms "zhyd" and "yevrei" in Ukrainian in cultural and historic context. here Bandurist 04:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I moved the huge material to the article about the assassin. However, the article is now still biased.
What is missing here, the account of the effort of the Petlura to stop the pogroms and witness testimony that he was not an anti-Semite himself.
I hope that anynody can help me with NPOV this article. Cautious 09:19, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
The bias you see is because you want to believe that Petliura was some sort of saint. He may not have been directly responsible for the pogroms that were committed and organized by the Ukrainian army-- nowhere does the article claim that he was. But he was the head of government and Commander of that army while they were going on. Thus, as it rightly notes, " Petliura's responsibility...was a widely held belief among Jews." That's a factual statement. It does not say that Petliura was responsible; it says that the belief that he was responsible was widely held by Jews.
To say that he tried to "stop the pogroms" is nice, but you provide no basis or support for your argument. Read the very balanced review of historian Henry Abramson's book listed in the external links.
The information you deleted, without comment, was taken from the articles cited in those links -- from the Ukrainian Weekly, in particular -- based on the historical accounts, court records and eyewitness-testimony. Do you deny the information therein? Do you understand the difference between your own opinion and what has been documented as true? Did your school not require you to differentiate between reality and fiction?
I have removed your change: "The problem with Petlura responsibility for the Pogroms, is that he himself was not an Anti-Semite and he tried to stop them, intrducing capital punishment for that crime. This decreased the number of the pogroms. Petlura is accused of being the head of state, on the territory of which there happenned pogroms."
Your deletion of actual, historical information and substitution with your own personal opinion is what introduces bias. This is contrary to the nature of Wiki.
If you want to improve the article, provide counter-examples -- based in documented history.
LeFlyman 13:13, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Mr Flybrain, we are supposed to make review out of external resources. It is too difficult to understans for you?? OK, you gets all material. Cautious 13:41, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Yes, your English is impossible to understand. The section you plagiarised has been removed for copyright infringement. I'd suggest you try to re-write it in your own words, but I suspect that would be a painful exercise in futility. LeFlyman 16:15, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I have edited the information on pogroms somewhat, as it seems to reflect some bias. Two sources on Ukrainian history - written by University of Toronto historian PAul MAgosci and York University prof ORest Subtelny - cite the number of victims as approximately 35,000-50,000. I'm not sure where the 100,000 figure came from (it contradicts subsequent information about the estimate total number of Jewish victims in the Russian empire ranging from a low point of 70,000), but I have retained it anyways while adding the lower estimate. I added the information about Petliura's execution of the otaman (warlord) Semesenko for committing the notorious pogrom in Proskuriv.
With respect to Solzhenitsin's figues in terms of who was to blame for the pogroms, I added some balance by provided numbers cited by Ukrainian researchers. Those numbers were included in Orest Subtelny's Ukraine: A History, published by the University of Toronto Press in 1988 ISBN 0-8020-5808-6.
The fact was, that Shalom Shwartzbard and his family lived closer to Turkey, an area which was not even part of the Ukrainian Republic at that time. And Petliura's armies could not reach him, okay, let's just admit that Schwarzbard was a Soviet agent, and he killed an innocent human being for no reason. The fact was, that the pogroms were comitted by the RUSSIAN ARMY not the Ukrainian, which was actually trying to drive them out. Second of all, Petliura had a Jewish minister in his cabinet, as well as a ministry of Jewish affairs. He actually attempted to collaborate with them against the Russian army. Adolf23653 05:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)adolf23653
The reference Symon Petlura. Against pogrom. The Appeal to Ukrainian Army. cited in the article seems dubious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergivs-en ( talk • contribs)
Well, no web-site can be held responsible for the material on remote past it posts. The said letter by Petliura is mentioned in many historic works, so no doubt it existed. True enough, I could not find the letter's full text at any academic site. So, are you saying that the text is falsified? -- Irpen 20:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
We cannot say for sure whether anything is falsified or not, especially as, unlike professional historians who work with archives, Wikipedia is written by amateurs most of who use google as their primary search for the info. Standards here are pretty lax, but I won't object to digging a little more. The idntical text, which also calls itself the Petlura letter is posted at this rather Russophile, or at least neutral, web-site. Now, I did not find indeed the letter posted at any academic site, but I found it being mentioned and quoted in Mykola Riabchuk, "Vid Malorosiii do Ukrainy: paradoksy zapizniloho natsiietvorennia", K., Krytyka, 2000, ISBN 966-7679-11-X ( LCCN 2001-364006). This book was translated and published in French as 'De la "Petite-Russie" à l'Ukraine', L'Harmattan (2003), ISBN 2747551342 ( Amazon link) and the original full Ukrainian version is available online (see [1] and [2] for a particular chapter). I think we can safely assume that the letter existed. In what I agree is that this by itself is not sufficient to conclude lack of Petlura's complicity in pogroms. This question is a complex one and historians disagree. -- Irpen 02:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The fact was, that Shalom Shwartzbard and his family lived closer to Turkey, an area which was not even part of the Ukrainian Republic at that time. And Petliura's armies could not reach him, okay, let's just admit that Schwarzbard was a Soviet agent, and he killed an innocent human being for no reason. The fact was, that the pogroms were comitted by the RUSSIAN ARMY not the Ukrainian, which was actually trying to drive them out. Second of all, Petliura had a Jewish minister in his cabinet, as well as a ministry of Jewish affairs. He actually attempted to collaborate with them against the Russian army. Adolf23653 05:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)adolf23653
These articles should be merged: Symon Petliura + Simon Petlyura
This article have an NPOV disclaimer since February. Is it still a dispute over it? Przepla 21:58, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
People, I doubt the wording "President" for formal reasons purely. I mean Leonid Kravchuk and Leonid Kuchma are f**n assho*es, but they were legitimate presidents, elected by millions, with constitutionally regulated authority. Can we apply all this to Petliura (who was, no doubt, an outstanding leader)? Pryvit, AlexPU
This has been discussed widely in the past and, yes, this seems to be an urban legend. There is no indication that such post even existed in UPR and none of the UPR's laws mentioning presidency were cited to date. -- Irpen 20:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
born May 17 [May 5, Old Style], 1879 died May 26, 1926 Lotsofissues 10:49, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
Changed ataman to Otaman.
Another spelling issue - this one is mainly for consistency. Usage of all three within the article reflects differeng views, either past or present, on how the name should be spelt. On the other hand, the article title is Symon Petlura, at the start of the article he is called Symon Petlyura, and for each subsequent subheading his name is spelt Symon Petliura. I could not say whether people who had either never heard of or read about him previously, or had not seen his name written in English before, would find this confusing or difficult to follow. I have not made any edits in relation to this issue, and just wonder what others think.
The Petlura family (his brothers son) spell their name Petlura. In Ukrainian, and in particular in the Poltava region, all vowels after an l are softened. This is the case here as well Bandurist 03:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
What is missing is the 1000's of articles Petlura penned in his writing to various journals and as the editor of various journals, in particular Ukrainskaya zhyzn' in Moscow in Russian. He wrote under a number of pseudonyms. The magazine played a major role in the formation of Ukrainian thinking and was banned in the Soviet Union. From what I can gather a full set only exists in Moscow. There have been a number of studies done recently on his writings - but this wiki article has not addressed this aspect of the man but seems to dwell more on things such as pogroms which he was never directly associated with at all. Bandurist 03:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Recently they have published a ten volume collection of his writings in Kyiv. I was able to purchase Volume 4 in Kharkiv last month and sent it by mail. -- Bandurist 02:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
According to Yuri Finkelshtein, the number of Jewish civilians murdered by Petlura's army is about 500,000. He lists at least some of the massacres that took place, their location, date and number of the dead. One of the places he lists is Germanovka (Hermanivka), where my great-grandfather was killed by "soldiers" ("bandits" might be a more appropriate term) under the command of Petlura's officer Zelenyi. Among Ukrainian Jews terrible tales of Petlura are told to this day. He is remembered as the most horrible of all warlords of the period. 75.84.97.215 09:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Yuri Finkelshtein has published an excellent book on antisemitic massacres of Petlura's army[3]. He gives much a much greater number of Jewish civilians killed: 500,000 form Petlura's army alone. He puts on Petlura responsibility for doing nothing about the pogroms, provides strong evidence to show shows how consistently avoided any efforts to stop the massacres, tells about the "Whites" of Denikin who were almost as bloody as Petlura, as well as of other armies (the "Reds", Mahno) who took a different course. He argues that Petlura originally was not an antisemite, but became one because he lacked the guts to oppose extremely strong antisemitism in his army. Unfortunately, the book is available only in Russian.
The fact that the book is only available in Russian also tends to make one feel that the work has an anti-Ukrainian bias.
-- Bandurist 20:12, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I have corrected most of the phrases you complain about. I have left "lacking guts" - I don't see it as biased as long as it is clear that this is Yuri Finkelshtein's opinion. I think it would be better if you would correct what you find objectionable instead of deleting everything.
The tragedy of antisemitic pogroms in general is so huge that I don't think most of them are even known. Far less has been printed in English. In my opinion, it would be very limiting to reduce Wikipedia material in this manner, especially if it relates to events that took place in a non-English-speaking country. (For example, if the best study of the works of Taras Shevchenko is in Ukrainian and had not been translated to English, would that mean that one is obligated to ignore it?)
(I actually looked at Wikipedia entry for Taras Shevchenko, which linked me to the Encyclopedia of Ukraine's entry [3], which provides a long list of books and articles about him and his work. They are in Ukrainian, German, Russian, Swedish, Polish, French, Czech and English. How much poorer would it be if only English books and articles were to be admitted.)
"The fact that the book is only available in Russian also tends to make one feel that the work has an anti-Ukrainian bias." I am sorry, but this is a very prejudiced statement. If you are prejudices against Russians, this is your problem. Such statement tends to make one feel that you have a pro-Ukrainian bias.
Yuri Finkelshtein is an historian. He does write for Russian Jewish Newspapers in New York, but is a historian prohibited from doing so? As far as I know, he does not have any American degrees. I do not know whether he has any Soviet degrees. But in my opinion a specialist in any field, history included, should be defined by thoroughness and diligence of his investigation. (For example, since Marco Polo had no American degrees, should all his claims of having traveled to China be seen as rubbish?)
The fact that Yuri Finkelshtein's book is available only in Russian says that Finkelshtein is poor and has no grants to help him hire a translator, nor a lobby to help him promote his case. It says nothing about the quality of the book.
The formal rituals that up to now had to accompany being taken seriously have caused innumerable damage. I have myself witnessed one: when immigrants from the Soviet Union came to the U.S. in 1976-82 (approx.), some of them were excellent specialists in the country they came from. Only one ( Dimitri Simes) has achieved recognition. The rest were dismissed outright with a simple statement: "You left the USSR, so you are against it, so you are biased." This was not legitimate concern about bias, it was not even illegitimate concern about bias, it was pure protection of academic mafia against those who might have known better. They were never given any chance. Judging from what I read in American textbooks on sociology of the USSR or the Communist block in general, the level of knowledge in the US left much to be desired. Statements like "Level of income in East Germany is better than in West Germany" were the accepted wisdom. No wonder every specialist was surprised when Soviet Union fell apart.
I think that this is the beauty of Wikipedia: one does not need to go through the procrustean bed of formal rituals to be taken seriously. This might break the academic mafia. I am not naive enough, though, to think that the mafia fill leave without a fight.
Besides, since such people as Lenni Brenner, Norman Finkelstein (no relation to Yuri Finkelshtein), Jimmy Carter and other authors of extremely prejudiced and deliberately twisted materials (and sometimes outright lies) are presented as specialists, I think that Yuri Finkelshtein (who in my opinion is much more thorough, unbiased and trustworthy) deserves at least as much credit as they do.
I find it very sad that with exception of Germany, from every nation where Jews have been subjected to massacres come complete denial of any responsibility for them. From Morocco to Ukraine to Russia to Afghanistan, it is the same story everywhere: either there were no massacres, or they were greatly exaggerated, or someone else did them, or Jews themselves were guilty of causing people to kill them.
If you have read "За дела рук своих: Загадка Симона Петлюры или парадокс антисемитизма," please feel free to express your objections. But let us not get into the "he has no American degrees, so he is not entitled to speak about it" arguments. 75.84.97.215 11:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Last night I corrected and restored the paragraph on Yuri Finkelshtein's book. Today (May 28, 2007) I see it deleted with no explanation whatsoever. This is rude, to say the least. I have restored it again, and will continue to do so until I either get some meaningful reasoning from you or the whole matter is referred to some Wiki higher-up.
If one does not need a degree to write or edit articles in Wikipedia, why would one need a degree to be quoted on Wikipedia? It seems to me that this would defeat the very purpose of open encyclopedia 75.84.97.215 23:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Yuri Finkelshtein has published a book about antisemitic massacres of Petlura's army<ref>Юрий Финкельштейн. …За дела рук своих: Загадка Симона Петлюры или парадокс антисемитизма. N-Y., Слово-World, 1995.)</ref>. He gives a much greater number of Jewish civilians killed: 500,000 form Petlura's army alone. He claims Petlura carried responsibility for doing nothing about the pogroms, provides evidence to show how he avoided any efforts to stop the massacres, tells about the White Army of Denikin who proved to be almost as bloody as Petlura, as well as of other armies (the Red Army, Makhno) who took a different course. He argues that Petlura originally was not an antisemite, but became one because he lacked the guts to oppose extremely strong antisemitism in his army. Unfortunately, the book is available only in Russian.
1) Where did the author come up with 500,000 Jewish civilians killed? 2) Why was Denikin almost a bloody as Petlura ? On what evidence is this sweeping statement made. 3) When did he become an anti-semite? Before 1905, during the revolution, after 1917, in Paris? Where and when? On what evidence? If he was originally an anti-semite when did he become one? 4) "Lacked guts" - Tis is not language fit for a Wikipedia article.
Statements like "Unfortunately, the book is available only in Russian." also do not fit in a Wikipedia article.
So what did Petlura think about Jews? In the recently published materials from the State Archives of Ukraine (Symon Petlura - Stattia, Lysty Dokumenty Vol 4. p 10) in a letter to the minister of of the army Petlura states his thoughts: "By our laws, we do not have the right to make any restrictions to the Jews. Especially, and in particular, when they fulfill all of the general requirements placed to the seniors of our army who are of other nationality or faith. In the case of religious association one should look more to state association, taking as an example the French army, where the nationality of Jewish-officers or Kozaks has not impeded them from being good French patriots. Such a policy will sooner turn to our side our Jewish elements, rather than with policies of restrictions and persecution, because firstly and finally, this will place us Ukrainians on the wrong side of Moses's vow, and secondly will create enemies of our statehood who will decompose it from the insides."
This is a very preliminary answer for now. Unfortunately I don't have the book with me. Besides, I am very tired, so I need time to recuperate and to think about it.
There are many good questions in your reply. Yuri Finkelshtein would be the best person to ask them.
As far as a "scholarly source," see what I wrote above. I think any book that honestly tells us what happened is a good source. On the other hand, you can look into plenty of "scholarly sources" written by people with Ph.D.s, saying all kinds of nonsense.
Not getting (for now) into the questions you raise (which, as I said, are good questions, and therefore require the time and effort I currently don't have), I would like to clear one misunderstanding. I am certainly not anti-Ukrainian. I am simply trying to put responsibility on one man for what he did or failed to do. This does not imply some kind of collective guilt on Ukrainians. I am completely in agreement with the quote from Margolin. So is Yuri Finkelshtein. There are pages and pages of this "no collective guilt" stuff in his book. So taking offense for my posting is inappropriate. I do not blame the Ukrainian Government of the Central Rada or Hetman Skoropadski.
In fact, I think there is something strange when one feels one must protect every person of one's nationality, no matter what his crimes. I feel no sympathy for Trotsky, for example.
It is true that the USSR regime accused Petlura and Ukrainian nationalism of anti-Jewish crimes. But it did the same with Nestor Makhno. In fact, it liked to paint them with the same brush: Ukrainian nationalists. It is also true that many Ukrainian Jews were confused by this propaganda. However, greater openness, change of country, availability of previously unknown materials have made many of us, including myself, and including Yuri Finkelshtein to rethink it all.
I wonder when Petlura wrote the paragraph you quote. According to Yuri Finkelshtein, Petlura became antisemitic in early 1919, when his army started the first massacres. Up till then, he made many really good statements, like the one you quote.
However, it seems obvious to me that deeds count more than words. When Halyna Kuzmenko (wife of Nestor Makhno) personally shot ataman Nikifor Grigoriev for committing anti-semitic pogroms, that was a real statement, much better than any writings.
The problem with Petlura is that he failed to stop the pogroms committed by his subordinates. That was his statement of antisemitism.
Finkelshtein writes it all in detail. I will quote from his book after I get it.
One more very important point. Elsewhere in Wikipedia I find all sorts of inanities. If you want, I can show them to you. Particularly when it comes to anything to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict or current islamofascist terror. For example, article on Jabotinsky lists Lenni Brenner's book as a good source of information. However, Lenni Brenner is a Trotskiist, and his views on Zionism and Jabotinsky are extremely twisted; and boldly presented in his book in this twisted form. At least he gets gets quotes right, which I cannot say about Norman Finkelstein. He is an outright liar, nothing he says can be taken at face value. At one point he claimed that common Israeli name Ari (Ariel) comes from "Arian" and thus describes the true nature of Zionism. (Actually, Ariel comes from 'arieh,' which means 'lion' in Hebrew). He is a professor at DePaul University in Chicago. So much for scholarship.
There are also articles so incredibly badly written, or so POV, glorifying terrorism-supporters, demonizing those who fight against them. If you want, I can show you what I mean. There are paragraphs and paragraphs of purely political speech or propaganda with no meaning whatsoever.
In general, as the same Norman Finkelstein said, "In academia, you can say anything as long as it is footnoted." In other words, one cannot simply write things by oneself, unless one is ready to quote someone else in support; but one can quote or present the claims of anyone one likes. And if one does not like what is written, one should find a counter-opinion and place it next to this one. One does not just erase someone else's material. So as I presented the claims of Yuri Finkelshtein, you can go and present your quotes as counter-claims.
In comparison to all that, the demands you place of accuracy and scholarship of each sentence are enormous. Wikipedia would be very different if your standards were applied everywhere.
There is not need to reply to this. These are just my disorganized thoughts for now. Let me get the book, then I will be in better shape to answer your questions.
Regards, 75.84.97.215 10:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
1) That Petlura was not directly involved in the Pogroms and did not instigate any pogroms. 2) Under the Petlura government you had the first Ministry of Jewish affairs in Europe in history. 3) Under the Petlura government you had monetary units with notation in Yiddish for the first time in Europe. 4) Under the Petlura government you had government ministers and ambassadors who were Jewish.
In Wiki article on Nestor Makhno, there is the following, "In March 1918, the RIAU succeeded in defeating the Germans, Austrians, Ukrainian Nationalists of Symon Petlura, and multiple regiments of the White Army." Therefore, I am adding Makhno to the list of those Petlura fought. 75.84.97.215 11:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
What is interesting is that Makhno himself was present at the table at Petlura's birthday party-dinner in Paris in 1926 and actually foiled an attempt to assasinate him then. Makhno stated that Petlura had saved his life in 1923 in Poland and he owed him. Bandurist 11:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
To User:Mona23653, writing something like "and a convicted bank robber" when describing Schwartzbard makes no sense. You may as well write that he was a decorated Foreign Legion veteran. The place for those things is at the entry for Schwartzbard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashkin ( talk • contribs) 23:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
To Bandurist, you simply erased the changes I made. In particular I find it offensive to Ukrainians and Jews that you treat pogroms as a force of nature. Mashkin 01:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
On May 25, 1926, while walking on rue Racine not far from boulevard Saint-Michel, Petlura was approached by Sholom Schwartzbard, a Jewish anarchist and twice convicted criminal who had lost his family in the 1919 pogroms. Schwartzbard asked him in Ukrainian, "Are you Mr. Petlura?" Petlura raised his cane and Schwartzbard pulled out a gun, shooting him five times. When police rushed to him to make their arrest, he reportedly calmly handed over his weapon, saying, "I have killed a great assassin."
Schwartzbald's parents were among fifteen members of his family murdered in the Russian pogroms.
You have a some sort of morbid fixation on Pogroms, and specifically mentioning anti-Jewish pogroms. If you look up the definition of a pogrom, in English it associated with Judaism. It is like saying Jewish antisemitism. Have you ever heard of any other type of antisemitism like say n'tArabic or Syrian etc? I certainly haven't
The fact that Schwarzbard was a convicted felon is however important, to put the assassination in context and the travesty that happened in the following trial.
Where is the evidence that Petlura was directly associated with any Pogrom? Where is the evidence that Petlura was directly involved with killing Schwarzbards family? There isn't any - because Petlura was not a killer or an assassin (as Schartzbard called him). On the other hand Schwartzbard was an assassin. He killed Petlura and he confessed to the crime. Bandurist 11:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Mashkin 16:02, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
To User:Mona23653, you have erased an important reference to a table with numbers on the victims. This is abusive behavior! There is simply no justification to your behavior. This is right after I complained about the imbalance in length of the paragraphs! Quit doing such things.
1) Schwartzbard was a Jewish poet, anarchist (he participated in anarchists' robberies in Austro-Hungary) and decorated veteran of the French Foreign Legion, whose
What has Schwartzbards poetry have in common with his murdering Petlura. If my memory serves he started writing late in life and was not known for his writting at the time when he brutally murdered Petlura. Anarchist robberies. Armed robbery is armed robbery. It is criminal act, - at least in all the countries I have lived in. What has anarchism got to do with it.
Decoration - OK. however I feel that that should go in the discussion re the trial, as that would be a strong mitigating circumstance for the Juries decision. Normally murderers are not decorated, and in most cases any decorations they may have had are taken away with criminal acts.
Ukrainian outlets (emigrants at the time and nowadays the Ukrainian government) describe Schwartzbard as a Soviet agent is poor writing and non-encyclopeidic, particularly the use of the word nowdays. It should be changed back to The Ukrainian emigration and the Ukrainian government consider Schwartzbard a Soviet agent
ThIS SORT OF STUFF IS HATE MATERIAL + In Israel and the Jewish world Petlura is mostly remembered as a leader responsible for vicious pogroms (see for instance the Holocaust Encyclopedia<ref name="USHMM">{{cite web | author = | year = | url = http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?ModuleId=10005171 | title = Lwów | format = | work = [[Holocaust Encyclopedia]] | publisher = United States Holocaust Memorial Museum | accessdate = | accessyear = 2006}}</ref>, Yad Vashem <ref name="Yad_Vashem">{{cite web | author = | year = 2004 | url = http://www1.yadvashem.org/about_holocaust/chronology/1939-1941/1941/chronology_1941_18.html | title = July 25: Pogrom in Lwów | format = | work = Chronology of the Holocaust | publisher = [[Yad Vashem]] | accessdate = | accessyear = 2006}}</ref> and the writing on the street sign honoring Schwartzbard in Beersheba). aND SHOULD BE REMOVED
Mashkin 00:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
20:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Mashkin 00:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Bandurist, just as you have added very interesting material regarding Petlura in folklore and music and have included what the communist did, so should Petlura's legacy in various communities be given. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mashkin (
talk •
contribs) 02:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree with 20:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Mona23653 14:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)mona23653
User:Mona23653 keeps removing the reference to an important reference to a table with numbers on the victims. This user provides no explanation to the action. This is right after I complained about the imbalance in length of the paragraphs and asked the User to quit doing such things. This is simply abusive behavior with no justification.
I have a sentence with the whole life story of Schwartzbard, not need to repeat it.
Mashkin 18:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
It is necessarry to put down that Schwarzbard was a convicted criminal, to not make him appear like an angel, or some avebger of Jews' deaths. Oh by the way, citing biased sources does not prove anything. This article should be restored to the way it was a month ago. Petliura was not responsible for any pogroms. Capitol pun ishment was introduced for a reason. What else could he have done? SAnd plus, why do u remove the fact that Schwartz bard was a convicted criminal. I think that should be called abusive behaviour without justification. Mona23653 00:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)mona23653
Remember that this is Wikipedia and not the Mona Encyclopedia of Ukrainian History. Wikipedia takes a NPOV. Therefore the description is for the debate among historians regarding Petlura's role in the pogroms. (This description can be improved, but that's a different matter.) There should not be an attempt to judge who wins the debate. Regarding how Schwartzbard is portrayed, then I originally thought tht most details should be given only in the entry on Schwartzbard. But given that several users thought they should be given in the article itself I composed a sentence describing him (that includes the robberies!).
Throwing away unfounded accusations of abuse is abusive in itself! Mashkin 07:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Yet i don't understand why you keep on always removing the fact that Schwarzbard was a convicted bank robber Mona23653 14:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)mona23653
The spelling (petlura) in the article doesn't match the title (petliura). If this is the correct spelling, perhaps a page move should be discussed? Ostap 22:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
When he emigrated to Lviv, it was called Lemberg and it was an Ukrainian city no less than it was Polish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.163.61.178 ( talk) 11:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Why in the role of pogroms section, does it say Petliura's invasion of UKraine? I think this needs to be clarified —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mona23653 ( talk • contribs) 15:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
This was deleted without explanation: Jonathan Littell in his 2006 novel Les Bienveillantes describes a pogrom agains Jews committed at the beginning of the war by Ukrainian militias "wearing blue and yellow ribbons", the national colours of the Ukraine. The new German occupation authorities tolerate and encourage this under the name "Aktion Petliura". -- Alex1011 ( talk) 16:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
Latter is the opposite of former, while later is the opposite of sooner. I think in this section discusses Petlura's influence after his death, so later rather than sooner.
Thanks, Horlo ( talk) 09:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
This is a controversial issue and the article should reflect all viewpoints rather than emphasize one viewpoint. We should also be careful to avoid original research. Faustian ( talk) 02:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
In the Ukraine which together with Galicia has a population of 40 millions there live 3 1/2 million (8%) Jews. After the Revolution the ruling power in the Ukraine rested in a parliament in which all parties of the country, including Jewish, were represented. That parliament ("Tsentralna Rada") granted the Jews more freedom and rights than they had anywhere in Europe at any time. All national minorities, of course Jews too, were granted autonomy. It must be stressed also that the Central Council (the Parliament) set up a Supreme Court to which those lawyers were appointed as judges, who had had courage to take a stand against the Russian government during the Beilis trial. -
Here Margolin narrated the fate of the Ukraine after the overthrow of the Tsentralna Rada and during the rule of Hetman Skoropadksy, and then continued:
Hetman's rule lasted only eight months. [After its overthrow] the Petlura Government renewed the autonomy of national minorities and again appointed Jewish ministers, viz. Mr. Goldelman and myself. Jews belong also to the diplomatic missions which have been sent abroad by the Ukrainian government. The noted Jewish historian, Dr. Wischintzer, one of the editors of the Jewish Encyclopedia, is the secretary of the Ukrainian legation in England.
How does this government's attitude agree with the fact of anti-Jewish pogroms?
There is a difference between pogroms which, unfortunately, have occurred now in the Ukraine, and pogroms in Russia during the tsarist regime. While the tsarist government had itself instigated and organized pogroms, the Ukrainian government is in no way responsible for them. In November 1918 I myself saw the proclamations of the government in the Ukrainian villages and cities which very vehemently condemned the pogroms and explained to the Ukrainian people that the Jews are Ukrainian fellow-citizens and brothers to whom full rights are due. When, however, demoralization had set in the units of the Ukrainian army, its worst elements began to plunder. Again the Ukrainian government rose vigorously against the pogroms, punishing with death the perpetrators of the pogroms and expressing its sorrow for the victims. To my regret, I must state that the latest pogroms which, as far as I know, took place during the months of February and March were exceedingly serious. They have been perpetrated by the people of the Black Hundred and by provocateurs for the purpose of discrediting the Ukrainian government.
These occurences made a shocking impression upon me, and at the end of March I tendered the government my resignation. I recognized that fact that the government was blameless; I found it, however, hard to occupy an official post in a country in which my brothers were slaughtered. My resignation was not accepted and the government requested me to continue in my official duties, at least abroad. Now I am one of the four representatives of the Ukraine at the Peace Conference. There is no anti-Semitic tendency in the Ukrainian government.
Here's an interesting book review on the topic by Colin Schindler: [6]. Faustian ( talk) 04:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
It seems to me that the issue was significant enough (it was the excuse for his assassination and took center stage in the subsequent trial), and for better or worse, associated with Petliura, that it deserves some sort of mention in the article's lead in a nuetral way. I'm not going to revert war over it, but that is my opinion. Faustian ( talk) 04:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
{It would be far better to put more information on his prose stories, or his poetry, or his religious convictions than putting such a statement on the lead. {Yes there was a significant number of Jews living in Ukraine. Some 8% of the population because the Pale of Jewish settlement included most of Ukrainian ethnic territory, yes, there were numerous pogroms in Ukraine at the time when Petlura was struggling to put together a government but they also occurred before and after him and during the Skoropadsky reign when the Germans were in controls (Yet nobody blames Skoropadsky or the Germans). Remember that the Skoropadsky had Petlura incarcerated where he remained for most of 1918 (up until November). Was he clandestinely in charge of Pogroms then? And then seizing control of the government in November and holding on to it in Kyiv until January 25 arguing with Vynnychenko - Do you think he had the tome to do anything then? Or maybe from his train carriage moving from Kyiv to Western Ukraine.
More streets named after him then only in Rivne and Kyiv ( Lviv)? How bout 1 in Donetsk ;) ! — Mariah-Yulia ( talk) 22:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
The current link does not work but I've found this article at the same site in Russian - [7].
This is the passage from the article referenced by Frenkel's work:
“ | Some Ukrainian-Jewish leaders have reconsidered Petlura's role and the situation in Ukraine during the Civil War. They are placing the blame for these Pogroms on either a minority, or Denikin's "White Guards" who upset at losing to the Bolsheviks, took out their rage on the local Jewish population. [26] | ” |
There are several problems here: first, Mikhail Frenkel [8] is one of, not some Ukrainian-Jewish leaders.
Second, he doesn't quite shift the blame from Petlyura to some mysterious minority or to Denikin's forces in the article (and the reasoning about their anger about losing to Bolsheviks as a cause of their actions is also nowhere to be found). This is what he actually says:
“ | В советские времена Петлюра рисовался врагом человеческим рангом Гитлера. Сегодня же иные украинские историки рисуют его благороднейшим и великим «отцом нации», безвинно убитым не то большевистским, не то сионистским «агентом». Но, думается, как это бывает нередко, истина лежит посередине. С одной стороны, никаких антисемитских универсалов Петлюра не издавал. С другой — он не смог или не захотел защитить еврейское население Украины от собственных войск.
Для справедливости заметим, что еще большими погромщиками оказались деникинцы. |
” |
“ | In Soviet times Petliura was portrayed as an enemy of the humanity comparable to Hitler. Now certain Ukrainian historians describe him as a great and noble "father of the nation", murdered for no reason by Bolshevik (or maybe Zioniost) agent. In my opinion the truth is somewhere between. On one hand Petliura indeed did not issue any anti-Semitic decrees; on the other - he could not or would not defend Ukrainian Jewry from his own army.
For the sake of justice, Denikin's forces were even greater 'pogromschiks'... |
” |
So in his opinion White Army was responsible for more pogroms than Petlyura's forces but this is not shifting of blame from Petlyura. White Army's behaviour is in fact rather irrelevant to this article, although it should be fully described elsewhere. Alæxis ¿question? 17:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, could you translate that quote into English, please? Thanks, Horlo ( talk) 07:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
This is what is written in the article:
“ | Recently uncovered documents and letters to prominent Jewish community leaders demonstrate Petlura's support for the re-establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. In a letter representing the Jewish population of Ukraine, minister Pinchos Krasny thanked Petlura for his support for the vote in the League of Nations of July 24, 1922 regarding the formation of a Jewish state in Palestine. | ” |
Unfortunately the only information I could find about Pinchas Krasny (the Red) was a short article from Short Jewish Encyclopaedia at an Israeli site. This is what written there:
“ | В конце 1920 г. Красный эмигрировал, а в 1927 г. вернулся в Советский Союз. (Krasny emigrated [from Ukraine] in the end of 1920 and returned to Soviet Union in 1927) | ” |
“ | В 1928 г. вышла книга «Трагедия украинского еврейства (к процессу Шварцбарда)» (см. Ш. Шварцбард), в которой Красный обвинил Директорию и ее председателя С. Петлюру в организации еврейских погромов. (A book "Tragedy of Ukrainian Jewry" was published in 1928 in which Krasny accused the Directotate and its chairman Symon Petlyura of organising anti-Jewish pogroms) | ” |
So, how could he represent the Jewish population of Ukraine in any way in 1922 or later?
Second, Krasny's letter of gratitude (provided it existed) should be taken in context of his later work.
I don't have the access to Serhiychuk's paper but either he was inaccurate or misinterpreted (if someone has the article at hand, please check it). In both cases there exist doubts about the accuracy of the information that is currently sourced by this paper so I'd ask for alternative sources (Western or Israeli, preferably) backing Sehiychuk's claims. Alæxis ¿question? 18:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
(Outdent) Hello, once again, could you please try to provide quotes in English? Thanks, Horlo ( talk) 07:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
As Petluria personally killed several members of my family after the Czar was killed, I find this page to be very biased and non NPOV...
Case in point: On May 25, 1919 Peturia entered the town synagogue of the town of Radomsyzl, Ukraine, and shot the Rabbi of the town and his son in cold blood, for no reason. JJ211219 ( talk) 12:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
and you lie often ? "Petluria entered the town synagogue..." pfff... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.250.144.31 ( talk) 20:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
You have been reading too many comic books. If it were true that he personally did this it would be cited everywhere. Bandurist ( talk) 02:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
The spelling used on Petlura's gave in paris is PETLURA rather than Petliura. His family living in North America also uses the spelling PETLURA in English. In Ukrainian, and particularly in the Poltava dialect, all vowels after an L are pronounced soft. I.e. Moloko become molioko, klas becomes klias etc. The library and materials in french also use the PETLURA spelling
Література: Тютюнник Ю. З поляками проти Вкраїни. X. 1924; Documents de Simon Petlura a Paris. Париж 1927; Лотоцький О. Симон Петлюра. В. 1936; Симон Петлюра в молодості. 36. споминів під ред. А. Жука. Л. 1936; Зленко П. Симон Петлюра (Матеріяли для бібліографічного покажчика). Париж 1939; Іванис В. Симон Петлюра - президент України, 1879-1926. Торонто 1952; Петлюра С. Статті, листи, документи. Нью-Йорк 1956; Документ суд. помилки. Париж 1958; En notre âme et conscience - la verité sur Simon Petlura. Париж 1958; Desroches A. Le problème ukrainien et Simon Petlura. Le Feu et le Cendre. Париж 1962.
I propose to change the spelling used to PETLURA.
Bandurist (
talk) 02:52, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Petlura gives me 126,000 hits Petliura gives me 79,200 hits
So it seems that common usage is Petlura. Bandurist ( talk) 02:28, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I've regularized the name in the article to Petliura simply for consistency because that's the current article title. (The previous impression was that it was full of typos.) If the article is moved to a different spelling, please regularize the name in line with whatever decision is made. I have no preference for which spelling is used, although it should be in line with current English-language scholarship on the issue. Doremo ( talk) 11:06, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Here is a recent find of an anti-pogrom leaflet signed by Petlura http://www.istpravda.com.ua/articles/2011/05/26/40621/ . Comments anyone? Bandurist ( talk) 11:39, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Sholom could not: "He participated in the Jewish self-defense of Balta in 1882" because he was born 1886! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.172.141.121 ( talk) 06:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
The German historian Götz Aly just published some commentary on this article in German newspaper. The gist of it is, that the treatment of Petliura is somewhat biased and not critical enough, which is partially due to a selective use of literature. According to him important literature has not been evaluted/is missing:
-- Kmhkmh ( talk) 03:20, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hero, mass murderer or whatever! Please make sure whatever view of him you plan to include that it is sourced by reputable publication/Literature (preferably scholarly publication). Do not include unsourced views as this is clear policy violation.-- Kmhkmh ( talk) 15:24, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
How about family evidence? Does it count as a source? Also, Petliura's military units committed the pogroms - no one seems to deny that. So is Petliura as their chief commander personally clean on that? If we take that view may be Hitler too was nor responsible for the massacres, which were committed by his troops, not him personally. User:AA999
Currently the hyperlink under the section heading Role in pogroms (#6 in the Contents list) is Pogroms in Ukraine. Since that page automatically redirects to Antisemitism in Ukraine it should be changed. Mcljlm ( talk) 01:39, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Symon Petliura. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:19, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Symon Petliura. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,731176,00.html{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/1996/209613.shtm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/1999/509914.shtmWhen 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:46, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
This series of edits by user Piznajko looks POVish to me. Why the entire section which mentioned Israel was removed? Maybe this should not be a whole section, but this needs to be mentioned. Also, making an argument in the lead that his role in pogroms was exaggerated by the Soviet propaganda is not a good idea. Somewhere in the body of page, - yes, why not? But copy-pasting this also to lead was not good. My very best wishes ( talk) 16:15, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
[13]. Some of your content, of course, can be salvaged and presented in a due manner. Miacek (talk) 16:51, 5 May 2018 (UTC)деятельность Директории, которой фактически управляла «атаманская группа» во главе с Петлюрой, ознаменовалась кровавыми еврейскими погромами. Отступавшие зимой 1919 г. под ударами Красной армии войска Директории превратились в банды убийц и грабителей, нападавшие на евреев во многих городах и местечках Украины (Житомир, Проскуров /см. Хмельницкий/ и другие). По данным комиссии Красного Креста, во время этих погромов было убито около пятидесяти тысяч евреев. Петлюра не мог (согласно многочисленным свидетельствам, и не пытался) положить конец кровавым бесчинствам, которые творила его армия. На одну из просьб евреев, чтобы он, воспользовавшись своей властью, прекратил погромы и наказал погромщиков, Петлюра ответил: «Не ссорьте меня с моей армией». Лишь в июле 1919 г. Петлюра направил войскам циркулярную телеграмму, а в августе 1919 г. издал приказ по армии, резко осуждавший погромы
"that create the impression that Petlyura's troops never hurt a fly and the Volunteer Army was exclusively responsible for the pogroms", one knows you're lying because Consensus version of the section maintained WP:Neutrality by mentioning both that Petliura's forces were involved in pogroms, but also that Denikin's Russian White Army (what you're calling "Volunteer Army") and Soviet Bolshevik troops were also responsible for pogroms. Your so-called "cherry picked" sources, are respected Western academics like Peter Kenez. Also, when you claim that Electronic Jewish Encyclopedia 's summary of Petliura's involvement in pogroms represents "Consensus" version - that's simple "WP:Bending the truth" - that Jewsish encyclopedia is just one of the sources, e.g., you can't just remove a bunch of paragraphs (like 'My very best wishes' did) and claim that all that information is "UNDUE" because Electronic Jewish Encyclopedia says differently; if you wanted to truly improve the article, you wouldn't just delete well-sourced paragraphs left and right, but instead would add position on Petliura that was metnioend in Electronic Jewish Encyclopedia into the article. In summary, what you @hMiacek and @My very best wishes are doing is removing WP:Neutrality from the section 'Role in pogroms'.-- Piznajko ( talk) 17:46, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
During the Russian Civil War, between 1918 and 1921 a total of 1,236 violent incidents against Jews occurred in 524 towns in Ukraine. The estimates of the number of killed range between 30,000 and 60,000. [1] [2] Of the recorded 1,236 pogroms and excesses, 493 were carried out by Ukrainian People's Republic soldiers under command of Symon Petliura, 307 by independent Ukrainian warlords, 213 by Denikin's army, 106 by the Red Army and 32 by the Polish Army. [3]
−
[reverting new edits per WP:BRD ] is not a good idea, unless this contributor was indeed "not here" or completely incompetentFalse statement; WP:BRD states
Revert an edit if it is not an improvement, and it cannot be immediately fixed by refinement, in other words an editor doesn't have to be WP:NOTHERE or completely incompetent (as claimed above) for his new, bold edits to be reverted. WP:BRD further states
BRD does not encourage reverting, but recognizes that reversions happen. When reverting, be specific about your reasons in the edit summary and use links if needed.- precisely what I've tried doing multiple times above - I've explained what I see as the problem with you recent edits and that's why I would like us to follow WP:Bold, revert, discuss process, whereas we return to the last Consensus version, then discuss new changes (such as eliminating slight repetition) and achieve new Consensus and then do those edits. ps. But unfortunately, per reasons explained above, I will not initiate such BRD process given uncertainty in how Swarm might interpret it.-- Piznajko ( talk) 22:21, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
"However, Denikin’s AFSR was responsible for the most organized actions against the Jewish population and consequently also responsible for the largest number of victims. It has been estimated that about half of the murdered Jews fell victim to the soldiers of the AFSR. Anti-Semitism was indeed an integral phenomenon of the White regime."
and it references the same book "Pogroms and white ideology in the Russian Civil War" by Peter Kenez as did the article. I think source can also be added to the article. I also read a couple of other articles on the subject that state that, "unlike UNR, anti-Semitism was a fundamental ideology of the Russian White Army movement. -- Yakudza ( talk) 23:34, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
before the advent of Hitler, the greatest modern mass murder of Jews occurred in Ukraine, during the Civil War. All the participants in the conflict were guilty of murdering Jews, even the Bolsheviks. However, the Volunteer Army [ed. Denikin's Russian White Army] had the largest number of victims. Its pogroms differed from mass killings carried out by its competitors; they were the most thorough, they had the most elaborate superstructure, or to put it differently, they were the most modern ... Other pogroms were the work of peasants. The pogroms of the Volunteer Army, on the other hand, had three different participants: the peasant, the Cossack and the Russian officer ... The particularly bloody nature of these massacres can be explained by the fact that these three types of murderers reinforced one another
The violent Jewish pogroms that claimed more that 30,000 lives were perhaps the most tragic conseqence of the chaos in Ukraine in 1919. All sices in the Civil War perpetrated pogroms: the Whites, the Directory troops, the independent otamans, and the Red Army. With the exception of some White ideologically motivated pogroms, the anti-Jewish violence was usually carried out by drunken mobs of anti-Semitic freebooters against authorities' orders.
The article here is about Petlyura, not about Denikin and not about who killed more Jews. They all were guilty. Other sources can be found, that say Petlyura is responsible for more deaths than Denikin. Let us concentrate on Petlyura and just mention Volunteer Army as well as to some extent Red Army also were responsible, in addition to Petlyura.
Miacek
(talk) 13:25, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
The sources that would diminish (they lie) Petliura's role in trying to stop the pogroms (22 to 27) are all massively biased. Ukrainian Historical Association? Letters and articles? A dead link? Ghastly. Petliura was a rabid anti-semite and so were (and have always been) the Ukrainian "nationalists". 177.66.6.107 ( talk) 14:46, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
"It has been documented that Petliura actively sought to halt anti-Jewish violence on numerous occasions, introducing capital punishment for the crime of pogroming"
This (at the very end) includes several citations from the same author. I do not think any of the sources cited are reliable but at the very least the same author shouldn't get 3 or 4 of the citations... 2600:1700:A1C1:9C20:580F:2570:9FD6:479E ( talk) 04:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)