Talk:Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–1950)/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

the largest movement or transfer of any single ethnic population in modern history

1. Are big ethnicities more important than the little ones? Germany transferred more than 14 million during WWII, was the tragedy less important because the victims were of many ehnicities?
2. The statement used to be limited to Europe, rather Western one. The Soviet Union implemented bigger projects, the same China. The number of Soviet citizens who run away or were deported by Germans during WWII was bigger than 12 million. Sources 5 and 10 say about Europe.
3. Some Germans want to prove the Germans were the victims of WWII. The Wikipedia should be neutral.Xx236 (talk) 07:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Summarising - the statement should be removed from the introduction.Xx236 (talk) 08:06, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

This has been discussed last September; you still need to provide WP:Reliable Sources to support your claims. HerkusMonte (talk) 11:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Dude, seriously... - Schrandit (talk) 14:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Please don't call other editors "dude". Thanks.  Dr. Loosmark  14:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

HerkusMonte, please don't make fun of tragedy of millions people to prove something (What exactly?). Xx236 (talk) 07:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I do not see where he did so. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Are claims that the Germans were main victims of the 20 Century serious or rather not?

Eva Hahn "konečně uznání obětního beránka moderních evropských dějin, které pro sebe reklamovali již nacisté" (the final recognition of the (German) scapegoat of modern European history, demanded already by the Nazis) http://www.euportal.cz/Articles/727-sudetsti-nemci-maji-novou-strategii.aspx. Xx236 (talk) 10:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

No one here, save you, is saying "main". Trying to quantify and then rank human suffering would be madness. This isn't a contest. - Schrandit (talk) 19:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Second that. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

"This isn't a contest. Really? Why was then that controversial claim about the largest population transfer in history POV pushed into the article?  Dr. Loosmark  21:21, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Because it is true? - Schrandit (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Only that it is not.  Dr. Loosmark  22:25, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

We are discussing, discussing and the lede contains still the same 3.2 million and the "Biggest transfer". Xx236 (talk) 16:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

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

No consensus except maybe to look at the related articles and maybe rewrite, split/merge to better organize the material. That does not require a discussion at WP:RM. I will add that there may be a need to discuss that on the talk page of affected articles before any significant changes are made. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:17, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Expulsion of Germans after World War II → Flight and expulsion of Germans during and after World War II — Per #Scope above - the present title is misleading as to what it's about. (The proposed new title is currently a disambiguation page, but it is not needed as the other articles referenced have different scopes.) Kotniski (talk) 08:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. - Schrandit (talk) 10:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose There is already a lot of overlap going on in this subject area. During the last move discussion (Talk:Expulsion_of_Germans_after_World_War_II/Archive_15#Requested_move) it was noted that we already have Flight and evacuation of German civilians during the end of World War II, German exodus from Eastern Europe and Flight and expulsion of Germans from Poland during and after World War II. It makes sense to have an article that deals strictly with forced expulsion.--Labattblueboy (talk) 19:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

But it doesn't deal strictly with that. Are you volunteering to rewrite the article so that it does? And then where do we put the figures and descriptions that cover the whole process? We'd need another article to put them in, basically titled what I'm proposing renaming this one to. In other words, "it makes sense to have an article that deals strictly with forced expulsion" is a reasonable aspiration, but it isn't an argument against renaming this page.--Kotniski (talk) 19:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised we have so many articles dealing with basically similar things. Would make any sense to merge at least some of them?  Dr. Loosmark  20:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposing a name change without dealing with the content issue throughout the entire topic area is an ineffective way of dealing with the issue at hand. The scope of each article within the topic should be decided upon first, in order to identify which topics should be merge and/or deleted. It doesn't help that the vernacular changes throughout the topic area. We see expulsion, flight, exodus, evacuation and frankly I feel the topic lacks a logical organization. The option of merging should be examined well before renaming. I might support a move to World War II expulsion of Germans instead of using 'during and after World War II' but I won't support the scope creep on including 'flight'.--Labattblueboy (talk) 02:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't see your logic - until we have a reorganization, we ought to name each article accurately, in accordance with the scope it does have. But certainly some reorganization is badly needed with these articles - does anyone have a game plan?--Kotniski (talk) 06:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I understand the desire to merge but the topics are a bit different and I worry that a composite areticle would be too long. - Schrandit (talk) 14:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

As I see it, this is a composite article and it is too long. However it doesn't have to be that way - a composite article can contain summaries of information which is presented in full detail in subarticles (as we have here in fact - we have articles specifically on movements from individual countries). And I think splitting it by country is a more helpful approach than splitting it by "flight vs. expulsion" or by "before and after the 'end' of the war" - I'm not an expert on the subject, but it seems to me that the former distinction is very hard to make, and the latter is rather arbitrary. --Kotniski (talk) 18:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Agree, yet the most important countries, incl. PL and CS, already have their spin-offs and only a short summary is included here. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

We Should merge:

ONE-Expulsions were only a part of the events being covered in this article. On the territory of post-war Poland 10 million ethnic Germans and bi-lingual’s resided prior to the war. At the end of the war in mid 1945 4 million were still resident on the territory of post-war Poland. 2,929,000 were eventually expelled and 1,075,000 were verified as Polish citizens. Of the 1.1 million Germans in the Soviet Kaliningrad region only 200,000 remained in 1945, they were expelled in 1947. The balance of 7 million had died in the war, were held as POWs, civilian forced laborers in the USSR or had fled to Germany during the war

Source:

Gawryszewski, Andrzej. Ludność Polski w XX wieku.Warszawa : Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania im. Stanisława Leszczyckiego PAN, 2005

Gawryszewski was on the staff of the Polish Academy of Sciences [1]

TWO_The German scholar Rudiger Overmans cited estimates by the German Federal Archives that 100,000 civilians died in the period of the expulsions from Poland after the war. Another 300,000 perished in the Soviet offensive and the forced labor in the USSR.

Sources

Overmans, Dr. Rűdiger. (1994). Personelle Verluste der deutschen Bevölkerung durch Flucht und Vertreibung. (A parallel Polish summary was also included; this paper was a presentation at an academic conference in Warsaw in 1994.). Dzieje Najnowsze Rocznik XXI-1994 Warsaw.

Vertreibung und Vertreibungsverbrechen 1945-1978. Bericht des Bundesarchivs vom 28 Mai 1974. Archivalien und ausgewälte (this was the German government document cited by Overmans)

THREE-Another important point that should be mentioned in this article. The German Schieder commission report makes it quite clear that the security of the German speaking population in post war Poland was not possible because of the hysteria caused by Nazi crimes. To exasperate matters the communist security organs did little or nothing to protect German civilians from the depredations of local criminal elements, not the Polish people as as a whole who in many cases protected Germans.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:59, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

"Expulsion of Germans" [2] seems to be preferred over "flight and expulsion of Germans" [3]. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

This article and its close cousins are POV forks. The whole issue of the flight, forced labor in the USSR and actual expulsions are confounded and confused on Wikipedia. The whole series of articles need to to be cleaned up.--Woogie10w (talk) 22:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Woogie10w, it's all a mess. The question is now how to improve the situation.  Dr. Loosmark  23:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You're right, it's currently a mess, it's been turned into a mess. The suggested move won't improve it. That can be done under its current title. Dr. Dan (talk) 23:10, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose the flight and expulsions are not one and the same. The time frames and motivations of the events are not one and the same. The proposed renaming of the article only complicates an understanding of what happened to the expelled people following the war. Dr. Dan (talk) 23:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• The current article mixes things which "are not one and the same" so I understand you vote for the removing of the informations about the flight.

Xx236 (talk) 08:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, people who "oppose", please say what you would do with all the (quite substantial) material that would have to be removed from this article if it stays at its present name. That which is specifically about the flight and evacuation could presumably be moved to Flight and evacuation of German civilians during the end of World War II (if it isn't there already), but much of it, including pretty much all the statistics, seems to refer to the flight and expulsions combined, so doesn't belong in either of the articles under their present titles. Are we to assume that the "parent" article is German exodus from Eastern Europe? (Which goes right back to the first world war.)--Kotniski (talk) 10:02, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

• Support the flight and expulsions are indeed not one and the same. Currently the situation is that the article deals with both and not only that, it also covers what happened during the war. As such the proposal to rename the article to a more accurate title makes sense.  Dr. Loosmark  23:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

The German Schieder commission treated the flight, forced labor in the USSR and expulsions as part of the same historical episode. This has been the case in the other sources listed on this page. Only on Wikipedia does the flight, forced labor in the USSR and expulsions get forked off into separate articles. The solution to our dilemma is for editors to use only reliable sources, preferably academic sources that can be verified. The discussion page should be a forum to improve the article by citing sources for other editors to review, not a forum for discussing our own POV.--Woogie10w (talk) 23:31, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I have the distinct impression that the editors of this page acting in good faith rely exclusively on Google Books and the Google search engine. They may have actually read a scholarly book on the topic, but I have my doubts. The Germans don’t read Polish and the Poles German. The fact that both sides read English offers a glimmer of hope. This page would improve if the editors would go to a library or purchase the printed sources. Until then we will continue to spin wheels here. As we say in Brooklyn "whatayagonna do?"--Woogie10w (talk) 23:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Quite many Poles read German.

There is no clear Polish-German controversion, rather a German-German one, between BdF supporters and several German historians.

English language books quote mainly German nationalistic sources, because only such sources were available till about 1995. Xx236 (talk) 08:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Please back this up. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I have written already thousands of words, quoted plenty of texts, including German ones. Would you be so kind to not start this discussion from scratch? Read this article, it informs about Ingo Haar, doesn't it? Xx236 (talk) 12:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

You haven't provided any evidence that "English language books quote mainly German nationalistic sources", neither that there is a "controversion" [sic!] between "BdF [sic!] supporters and several German historians".

All right, if people are still "opposing" this change of title, the best solution seems to me to make Flight and expulsion of Germans during and after World War II the main (summary) article for the whole topic (it masquerades rather unconvincingly as a disambiguation page at the moment), and to move the information from this article that deals with the whole process of flight and expulsion to that page, leaving here only the (more detailed) information about the expulsions (with brief information about the flight as necessary context). Is that plan OK with everyone? (And please don't write Support/Oppose in bold letters - we're trying to discuss constructively here.)--Kotniski (talk) 11:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I am confused. Of course, this already is the mother article, and it already has subarticles which are listed in the navbar. Is this thread about the size or about the name? Dealing with either won't help the other, if fixing is needed at all, that is. I propose to keep this thread focussed on whether the "flight" should be regarded as something different enough from the "expulsion" to merit inclusion of the term in the title, or rather regarded as a subset in which case it won't be necessary to ammend the title. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, of course "flight" is not a subset of "expulsion" (nor is "during" a subset of "after") - they mean different things. If this is to be the mother article (which was my original proposal), then it needs to have "flight" in the title to make it clear what the scope is. Or if people don't want "flight" in the title of "this" article, then the information about the flight needs to be moved to the correct article. Basically we must either change the title to match the scope, or change the scope to match the title. Which would you prefer?--Kotniski (talk) 07:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

My point is that what started as "flight" became an "expulsion" by barring the refugees from returning and expelling those returnees who managed to get back home or fled anywhere within the expulsion territories. The difference between "flight" and "expulsion", in the context of this article, is that those who "fled" were not in that moment aware that their "expulsion" was already agreed on, so they would never be able to return, and that they did not personally receive a respective order from the expelling parties. This is not true for "flight" outside the expulsion territories, e.g. west of the Oder, where the conditions at the moment the flight started where the same as east of the Oder, but where the refugees status was not turned into a permanent one by an expulsion policy.

Thus the flight from the expulsion territories, and only from there, might well be regarded a subset of the expulsions, and while the immediate push factors were the Red Army and the respective atrocity propaganda, the later and decisive push factor was the expulsion policy just as for the people who directly were ordered to leave by the new authorities following foot after the Red Army was through. This article does not cover flights that were not turned into an expulsion. The difference between the terms is, besides the immediate push factor, a semantic one, emphasizing the action of the refugee ("flight") vs the action of the expelling party ("expulsion").

Personally, I am largely indifferent whether this article is titled "Expulsion" or "Flight and expulsion", but as I pointed out above sources prefer to summarize everything from the first flights and evacuations to the last deportations under the headline "Expulsion of Germans" (693 hits vs 53 hits, and detail that further in the text, e.g.

• Johnson, Lonnie (1996). Central Europe: enemies, neighbors, friends. Oxford University Press US. p. 233. ISBN 0195100719.: "The expulsion of the Germans from East Central Europe took a number of forms. Many Germans [...] fled to avoid ending up behind the Soviet front. [...]"
• Gibney, Matthew J; Hansen, Randall (2005). Immigration and Asylum: From 1900 to the Present. p. 197. ISBN 1576077969.: "The expulsions took place in three broad phases. First, refugees fled East Prussia, Pomerania [...]"

If you look for books published between 1980 and 2009, you get the following results for the following strings

• "expulsion+of+germans" 660 hits
• "expulsion+of+the+germans" 659 hits
• "The+expulsion+of+germans" 617 hits
• "flight+and+expulsion+of+the+germans" 17 hits
• "flight+and+expulsion+of+germans" 37 hits
• "expulsions+of+germans" 182 hits
• "expulsions of the germans" 74 hits
• "expulsion+of+the+german+population" 368 hits

This has been discussed last year, and since sources seem to prefer "expulsion" over "flight and expulsion" as catchphrase, I do not see a need to change this article's title, nor do I see the need to change this article's scope in case the title is kept since sources also cover "flight"s which became expulsions under that title. In Germany, "Flucht und Vertreibung" seems to be a more well-known catchphrase than the English equivalent "flight and expulsion" in Anglo-Saxon literature, at least it is well-known to me which keeps me from !voting "oppose" at the moment but else does not really mean something for determining the most accurate title here. Skäpperöd (talk) 12:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

It's a descriptive title, right?, so we don't have to follow the exact words that sources use (particularly as Google counts don't reveal what the sources meant by the terms in question). We should be choosing titles which (within reason) give a clear indication of the scope of the article. Just because authors sometimes cut corners and include flights under "expulsions" (and presumably events during the war under events "after" the war), that's no reason for us to do likewise. To make the title shorter we could perhaps use an all-inclusive term like "German population movements", but then people will object that it doesn't sound evil enough. But flights are not expulsions, even if they are converted into expulsions later (a reader wouldn't expect to find information about the evacuations themselves under the heading "expulsion", only possibly about the later refusal to allow the refugees to return to their homes).--Kotniski (talk) 12:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the title is in part descriptive, since there is not one definite phrase that is always and exclusively used by sources - on the other hand, sources use a very limited pool of phrases, so it is not entirely descriptive. I'd say it's borderline, and that we have some freedom in choosing the article's title, but not too much, i.e. there is not the phrase that we must use, but we have to follow the sources insofar as to at least include "expulsions" and "Germans". I do not argue that "flight and expulsion" would be against policy, the question is whether it fits policy better than "expulsion" only, and that is where I have reservations due to usage in English sources. As I said, this problem does not occur to that extend in Germany, where "Flucht und Vertreibung" is a common phrase (a gbook search confirms my personal experience referred to above 680 hits), but it seems to be very uncommon in English usage as shown in the gbook searches above. Skäpperöd (talk) 13:26, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I doubt very much that a mechanical Google search proves anything here. Such search doesn't check semantics, only presence of words. Xx236 (talk) 12:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

German cold war propaganda coined the notion "Vertreibung" as a political tool. Now the cold war is over, Poland and Germany are members of the EU, but some people continue to sing the melody they learned in their kindergarden to blame anyone except the German administration, who started the war, started massacres of civilian population, started moving people around Europe, didn't evacuate civilians on time. "subset" - do you understand the word "Subset"? I doubt very much. I don't agree that you control the article. Wikipedia is a common project, this article isn't yours not German. It should inform people who lack elemenary knowledge about WWII rather than spread cold war propaganda. Xx236 (talk) 07:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Please explain the historical context of your statement, "but some people continue to sing the melody they learned in their kindergarden to blame anyone except the German administration, who started the war . . ." Is your intent to make "German administration(s)" generic i.e., no fundamental difference between Nazi period German administration vs. DDR-era German administration vs. Westgerman era German administration?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.247.204 (talk) 09:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The context of all my texts is "The year 2010, European Union".Xx236 (talk) 10:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm trying to follow your logic: Are you saying that German schools teach their kindergardeners that it was not the Nazis who started the war? (In order for such a thing to be taught the majority of German teachers in 2010 must sympathize with the Nazis -- this would seem to be too large of an episode for the European media not to miss . . . Have there been media stories to the effect that the majority of German teachers sympathize with the Nazis?)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.247.204 (talk) 07:56, 6 May 2010

X, in all seriousness, either contribute to the discussion or move on. - Schrandit (talk) 17:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Schrandit I have already asked you to not call other editors "dude". Your edit summary "seriously dude?" is uncivil. Please read WP:Civil.  Dr. Loosmark  17:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The name of this article is still "Expulsion of Germans after World War II" but its contents is different. Xx236 (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The Figures for Losses- and their Sources

The figures for these losses Civilian deaths due to the expulsion of Germans after World War II and the Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union are currently disputed. The following is a summary of the various estimates for German civilian deaths in Eastern Europe.

---

In 1950 the West German government made a preliminary estimate of 3.0 million civilian deaths in the expulsions. At the same time German Red Cross began to investigate 2.8 million cases of persons reported cases of missing persons in the area of the expulsions. These early estimates are no longer considered valid because subsequent investigations provided a revised accounting of the losses

Source:

Overmans, Dr. Rűdiger. (1994). Personelle Verluste der deutschen Bevölkerung durch Flucht und Vertreibung. (A parallel Polish summary was also included; this paper was a presentation at an academic conference in Warsaw in 1994.). Dzieje Najnowsze Rocznik XXI-1994 Warsaw.

---

A 1958 West German government demographic study estimated 2,225,000 civilians died during the post war expulsions (1,339,000 from Former eastern territories of Germany and 886,000 ethnic Germans of eastern Europe , not including the Soviet Union). The figures from the 1958 German government report are often cited in English language sources dealing with the expulsions. These figures have been disputed by Polish sources listed below.

Source:

Die deutschen Vertreibungsverluste. Bevölkerungsbilanzen für die deutschen Vertreibungsgebiete 1939/50. Herausgeber: Statistisches Bundesamt - Wiesbaden. - Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer, 1958

Piotr Eberhardt, Political Migrations In Poland 1939-1948 Warsaw2006 [159]

Piotr Eberhardt, Ethnic Groups and Population Changes in Twentieth-Century Central-Eastern Europe: History, Data, Analysis Armonk, N.Y. : M.E. Sharpe, 2003. ISBN 0765606658

Schimitzek, Stanislaw, Truth or Conjecture? Warsaw 1966

---

By 1965, the Suchdienst (search service) of the German churches was able to confirm 473,013 civilian deaths in the Former eastern territories of Germany and ethnic Germans of eastern Europe plus an additional 1,905,991 unconfirmed cases of persons reported dead and missing.

Source

Overmans, Dr. Rűdiger. (1994). Personelle Verluste der deutschen Bevölkerung durch Flucht und Vertreibung. (A parallel Polish summary was also included; this paper was a presentation at an academic conference in Warsaw in 1994.). Dzieje Najnowsze Rocznik XXI-1994 Warsaw.

---

A 1974 study by the German government archives estimated a civilian death toll of about 600,000 in the Former eastern territories of Germany and among ethnic Germans of eastern Europe . Broken out as follows: Poland: Total c. 400,000(-Killed by Soviet forces and their Allies 120,000; dead during the Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union 200,000; dead in transit camps or in transit during the expulsions 100,000. Czechoslovakia Total 130,000- All killed by Soviet forces and their Allies. Yugoslavia- Total c. 80,000(-Killed by Soviet forces and their Allies 15-20,000; dead during the Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union 4,500; dead in transit camps or in transit during the expulsions c.60,000. This report did not provide an estimate for ethnic German deaths in Rumania and Hungary

Source

Overmans, Dr. Rűdiger. (1994). Personelle Verluste der deutschen Bevölkerung durch Flucht und Vertreibung. (A parallel Polish summary was also included; this paper was a presentation at an academic conference in Warsaw in 1994.). Dzieje Najnowsze Rocznik XXI-1994 Warsaw.

---

A revised demographic analysis published in 1995, which has the support of the German government, estimated 1,440,000 civilians died during the post war expulsions and 580,000 in the Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union ( 978,000 from the Former eastern territories of Germany, 732,000 ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe and 310,000 ethnic Germans living in the Soviet Union). 23, The German government maintains that the figure of about 2 million deaths is correct because it includes additional post war deaths from hunger and disease of those civilians subject to the expulsions. The German historian Ingo Haar believes that civilian losses have been set too high for decades, for postwar political reasons

Sources

Gerhard Reichling. Die deutschen Vertriebenen in Zahlen, Bonn 1995, ISBN 3-88557-046-7

Ingo Haar , Herausforderung Bevölkerung : zu Entwicklungen des modernen Denkens über die Bevölkerung vor, im und nach dem "Dritten Reich" Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften 2007 ISBN 9783531155562

---

In 1996 a joint Czech-German Historical Commission determined that between 15,000 and 30,000 Germans perished in the expulsions based primarily upon death certificates issued by the Czechoslovak authorities in concentration camps and elsewhere. The commission found that the demographic estimates by the German government of 220,000 to 270,000 civilian deaths due to expulsions from Czechoslovakia were based on faulty data. They pointed out that recent studies have found military causalities were understated and that the GDR census of 1950 understated the number of Germans who were former residents of Czechoslovakia

Source: [4]

---

Research by former ethnic Germans from Yugoslavia determined that 57,640 civilians perished after the war. Broken out as follows:-Killed by partisans 7,199; dead during the Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union 1,994; dead in transit camps or in transit during the expulsions 48,447

Source:

The Expulsion of 'German' Communities from Eastern Europe at the end of the Second World War, Steffen Prauser and Arfon Rees, European University Institute, Florence. HEC No. 2004/1. p.56

---

Polish journalist writing in the communist era maintained that the official German government report of 1958 overstated civilian losses because it listed persons as missing and presumed dead, but were actually living in the GDR, military war dead, victims of Nazi persecution and bi-lingual persons who were living in Eastern Europe but were no longer considered ethnic Germans in the census figures. This analysis estimated total German civilian deaths on Polish territory at about 600,000, mostly in the flight during the war, not due to the post war expulsions.

Source

Schimitzek, Stanislaw, Truth or Conjecture? Warsaw 1966

---

A more recent analysis by a Polish scholar found that; Generally speaking, the German estimates…are not only highly arbitrary, but also clearly tendentious in presentation of the German losses. He maintains that the German government figures from 1958 overstated the total number of the ethnic Germans living in Poland prior to war as well as the total civilian deaths due to the expulsions.

Sources

Piotr Eberhardt, Political Migrations In Poland 1939-1948 Warsaw2006 [159]

Piotr Eberhardt, Ethnic Groups and Population Changes in Twentieth-Century Central-Eastern Europe: History, Data, Analysis Armonk, N.Y. : M.E. Sharpe, 2003. ISBN 0765606658

---

Dr. Rűdiger Overmans believes that since there are only about 500,000 confirmed deaths of German civilians in eastern Europe, the balance being a demographic estimate, that new research on the number of expulsion deaths is needed. The study of German military casualties by Dr. Rüdiger Overman found 344,000 additional military deaths of Germans from the Former eastern territories of Germany and conscripted ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe. Overmans believes this will reduce the number of civilians previously listed as missing in the expulsions.

Sources:

Rűdiger Overmans. Deutsche militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg. Oldenbourg 2000. ISBN 3-486-56531-1

Overmans, Dr. Rűdiger. (1994). Personelle Verluste der deutschen Bevölkerung durch Flucht und Vertreibung. (A parallel Polish summary was also included; this paper was a presentation at an academic conference in Warsaw in 1994.). Dzieje Najnowsze Rocznik XXI-1994 Warsaw.

---

We may not agree with these numbers but in order to maintain a neutral POV they need to be presented. When these figures are disputed we must provide a reliable source explaining why they are disputed, not our own opinion or POV--Woogie10w (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Nice work. Maybe a table with a summary explaining what the current historical consensus is and why? - Schrandit (talk) 16:14, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

You wrote what the current historical consensus is and why Amen, lets end the unsourced political blog on this page.--Woogie10w (talk) 16:24, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the work. Not only to maintain NPOV is this needed, but I would think also to filter the numbers. Those including constricted, just as an example, are imho not suitable as source for expulsion-related numbers. --G-41614 (talk) 16:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

filter the numbers? What do you mean? --Woogie10w (talk) 16:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

We already have all these numbers in the casualties section, don't we? Skäpperöd (talk) 17:00, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

You are quite right, maybe some users skipped that section. BTW I am off to the New York Public Library to read Ingo Haar's book. Regards--Woogie10w (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Our problem in a nutshell is that politicians in Poland and Germany have used these figures as a means for their own ends. Some Poles pick the lowest number possible, the Germans at the Bdv the high end figures. We need to somehow present the sources and the scholarly analysis of their merits, not the political rhetoric in the media. --Woogie10w (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Good work all. How about expanding the Casualties section to give 1 paragraph with the highest numbers and who they come from, then a paragraph with the lowest numbers and who they come from and then a closing paragraph with the general historical consensus (Whatever that may be)? - Schrandit (talk) 20:21, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

The numbers are already in the article. From an accountants POV the casualties section needs to be cleaned up. Data from the German official reports I summarized above is the source for the figures used in the political debates and in our published historical works. The politicians, journalists and scholars on both sides of the divide take all their figures from these sources --Woogie10w (talk) 21:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Filter is perhaps a bad word here. I meant just what I said in the following sentence - assuming I knew what I was doing when I wrote "constricted". "Forced recruitment" might be more in the direction of what I was thinking of - civilians being pressed into military service. I would think those are not victims of expulsion. --G-41614 (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

When you wrote "constricted" I assume you mean nachprufen, to check or audit the figures.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

The German sources all assert that only civilians are included in the above figures. However, Dr. Rüdiger Overman found 344,000 additional military deaths of Germans from the Former eastern territories of Germany and conscripted ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe. Overmans believes this will reduce the number of civilians previously listed as missing in the expulsions in the 1958 figures.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:03, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

A 2009 Polish-German book (Ingo Haar, Jerzy Kochanowski) gives allegedly the number of 286 723 deaths East to Oder-Neisse line. I don't have the book and I don't know which period the book describes.Xx236 (talk) 17:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC) Polska-Niemcy. Wojna i pamięć, pod red. Jerzego Kochanowskiego i Beate Kosmala, Warszawa/Poczdam 2009 Xx236 (talk) 17:23, 10 May 2010 (UTC) German version - Deutschland, Polen und der Zweite Weltkrieg. Geschichte und Erinnerung, Hrsg. von Jerzy Kochanowski und Beate Kosmala, Potsdam 2009 Xx236 (talk) 17:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Yours source derived its data from the Suchdienst (search service) of the German churches. This information is disputed and not the final definitive answer the issue. At this point to maintain a NPOV we need to present both sides of the argument.

Dr.Rüdiger Overmans gave a summary of this unpublished data at a 1994 historical symposium in Poland. Overmans pointed out that the figures are incomplete and only a partial not an exact accounting of total deaths. Overmans believes that since there are only about 500,000 confirmed deaths of German civilians in eastern Europe, the balance being a demographic estimate, that new research on the number of expulsion deaths is needed.

In his 1994 article in Dzieje Najnowsze Overmans makes these important points regarding the validity of the figure of 473,000 from the search service of the German churches.

1-The figures are incomplete and only a partial not an exact accounting and cannot be used to compute total deaths.

2-Non Germans may also be in the total.

3-Military dead may also be in the total.

4-Civilians killed during the war and forced labor in the USSR are included in the total

5- The information provided from the then GDR and the USSR was not reliable.

Source

Dr. Rűdiger Overmans- Personelle Verluste der deutschen Bevölkerung durch Flucht und Vertreibung. (A summary of the article in Polish was also included, this paper was a presentation at an academic conference in Warsaw Poland in 1994), Dzieje Najnowsze Rocznik XXI-1994

However, the German historian Ingo Harr believes that the Church Service records provide a more realistic view of the total deaths due to the expulsions [5]

--Woogie10w (talk) 18:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Our problem in a nutshell is that politicians in Poland and Germany have used these figures as a means for their own ends. Some Poles pick the lowest number possible, the Germans at the Bdv the high end figures. We need to somehow present the sources and the scholarly analysis of their merits, not the political rhetoric in the media

We may not agree with these numbers but in order to maintain a neutral POV they need to be presented. When these figures are disputed we must provide a reliable source explaining why they are disputed, not our own opinion or POV

--Woogie10w (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The German Archives report of 1974 provides a better overview of the losses in Poland Total c. 400,000(-Killed by Soviet forces and their Allies 120,000; dead during the Forced labor of Germans in the Soviet Union 200,000; dead in transit camps or in transit during the expulsions 100,000.) Bear in mind that this 5% the 8 million German civilians on post war Poland in Jan 1945. When the German government mentions total losses, that includes additional post war deaths from hunger and disease of those civilians subject to the expulsions. We must remember also that in Poland in 1945-46 deaths increased because of the conditions after the war, there was a famine in the USSR. When these expellees arrived in the Soviet Zone of Germany there was little or no food, the people of Germany were starving also when they arrived. The German government today does not hold Poland responsible for these conditions, on the contrary they were caused by Hitler’s war and a communist occupation that both Poles and Germans detested.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

"politicians in Poland and Germany" -

• I don't know any serious politician in Poland estimating the number of German victims, correct me if I'm wrong. The Polish politicians

react when Erika Steinbach attacks Poland.

• The German government finances the Federation and the Center/Sign rather than delegating the task to existing academic institutions.
  • Erika Steinbach is a German politician and quite important one. According to http://www.z-g-v.de/aktuelles/?id=58

1944 – 1948

• 2.209.000

Deutsche Polen / Sowjetunion Ostdeutschland / Ostpreußen West- / Mitteldeutschland

299.000

1945 - 1948 5.820.000 Deutsche Polen Ostdeutschland / Pommern, Ost- Brandenburg, Schlesien 914.000

1945 – 1948

• 367.000

Deutsche Polen Freistaat Danzig 83.00

the number of German victims expelled by Poland was above 1 000 000.

• According to Rudi Rummel, extensively quoted in this article, "the total democide ...places Poland among the megamurderers."

This discussion continues since 4 or 5 years. Anybody is happy that Poles are megamurderers and Germans main ethnic victims of WWII.

You must be joking, Sirs.Xx236 (talk) 12:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Sir, for the last time, NO ONE is advancing that position. - Schrandit (talk) 17:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Rudi Rummel is extensively quoted in the article. It means he is regarded here as reliable. "Statistics Of Poland's Democide" - if "NO ONE is advancing that position" - who is advancing it here?"Xx236 (talk) 11:35, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The section Political issues says that only Poles criticize the Centre Against Expulsions, so the Centre is regarded here a serious project and the Poles as radicals. So either the ideology of the Centre is described here or the critics should be moved to the Centre's article.

The lede still says - till "3.2 million deaths of German civilians". Xx236 (talk) 07:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Erika Steinbach is not a reliable source, she is merely quoting figures from the 1958 German government report that is disputed by scholars. We need to cite the figures from this official report itself, that still has the support of the German government, and then point out the scholars Rudiger Overmans, Ingo Haar and Pitor Eberhardt all find the statistical foundations of the report to be questionable.

Rudi Rummel is an American scholar , he is not German. Rummel relies only on English language sources. He considers the figures from the 1958 German government report to be correct. Rummel dismisses the Polish critics of the report. In my opinion Rudi Rummel is a poor choice as a source because he relies solely on English language sources that accept the figures from the 1958 German government report as being correct. For example Rudi Rummel in his 1997 Statistics of Democide did not mention the 1994 historical conference in Warsaw Poland where the statistical foundations of the German data was criticized by Rudiger Overmans.--Woogie10w (talk) 13:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

This source has a scholarly analysis of the numerical data

PIOTR EBERHARDT, POLITICAL MIGRATIONS IN POLAND [6]--Woogie10w (talk) 14:18, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Based on Polish data about 4 million Germans remained in Poland in mid 1945, if 100,000 died in the actual expulsions losses were 2.5%. That means 97.5% made it to Germany.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Figure of 500,000 Deaths-Clarification

The source of the figure of 500,000 deaths in the expulsions referred to in the review of the book War in the Empty Air is:

Rűdiger Overmans.Deutsche militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg. Oldenbourg 2000. ISBN 3-486-56531-1

The Overmans study only covered military dead and missing, his project did not deal with civilian losses. Overmans did not derive the figure of 500,000 himself, he rounded up the figure of confirmed dead of 473,013 that was listed in an 1965 internal unpublished document of the Suchdienst (search service) of the German churches. Overmans has make it very clear that new research is necessary since only one quarter of the 2 million deaths in German government reports are confirmed and the remains an unresolved demographic balance. Overmans does not take a firm position one way or the other as to the validity of the figure of 500,000, he points out that the issue of total Expulsion deaths is still uncertain at this time.

In his 1994 article in Dzieje Najnowsze Overmans makes these important points regarding the validity of the figure of 473,000 from the search service of the German churches.

1-The figures are incomplete and only a partial not an exact accounting and cannot be used to compute total deaths.

2-Non Germans may also be in the total.

3-Military dead may also be in the total.

4-Civilians killed during the war and forced labor in the USSR are included in the total

5- The information provided from the then GDR and the USSR was not reliable.

Source

Dr. Rűdiger Overmans- Personelle Verluste der deutschen Bevölkerung durch Flucht und Vertreibung. (A summary of the article in Polish was also included, this paper was a presentation at an academic conference in Warsaw Poland in 1994), Dzieje Najnowsze Rocznik XXI-1994

Dzieje Najnowsze is a Polish academic journal that is available at the New York Public Library, where I was able to view it.

--Woogie10w (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Should Only Confirmed Deaths be Counted?

Poland has been able to confirm only 1.5 million war dead as of last year [7]

The IPN reported in August of last year that Poland lost 5.6-5.8 million persons in the war. [8]

Yad Vashem has has collected and recorded the names of half of the six million Jews murdered by the Nazis. Millions more still remain unidentified:[9]

It seems that there is a double standard when the German Government asserts that 2 million civilians died in Eastern Europe. We may question the cause of death, many were killed in the 1945 military battles or in Red Army atrocities, the forced labor in the USSR and due to hungar and disease in post war Germnay, only a fraction in the actual Expulsions. --Woogie10w (talk) 22:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Just above, you cited Overmans evaluating the 500,000-confirmed-deaths figure: "The figures are incomplete and only a partial not an exact accounting and cannot be used to compute total deaths." You further say Yad Vashem has only been able to confirm 3 million Jewish deaths so far, which certainly is not the total. These arguments rather point out that counting confirmed deaths only gives a minimum value, which only approaches the real value if every single fate can be traced with certainty. Why do you conclude from the above arguments that only confirmed deaths should be counted, and that the German government applies a double standard? It rather seems that research tracing individual fates is useful to adjust the input values for population balances and partially confirm the results of such balances by giving an empirical minimum value, but that it is not useful for calculating the total as long as there are still unresearched fates. Skäpperöd (talk) 06:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

There is a big difference between the Holocaust, during and after which Nazis destroied evidences - documents, dead bodies, remnants of burned bodies, eyewitnesses. The Communists believed to rule without the end and they didn't care about dead Germans in 1989, they destroied rather lists of informants. The majority of Polish-communist documents regarding Germans has been available and many of them published. The last try to blame the Poles regarding mass graves in Malbork failed. Poland informed German authorities several times about mass graves of German civilians murdered by NKVD or Red Army, no German investigation has been started. The choice is quite simple - the Nord Stream or the truth.

About 600 Poles perished as the result of the Augustów chase 1945, Russia still refuses to admit the responsibility. Soviet soldiers raped not only German women, but even Russian inmates of Nazi camps. Germany documented the Soviet crimes, no other nation occupied by the Soviets was able to do it. Xx236 (talk) 16:00, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Let me clarify my remarks, German Government is not applying a double standard, on the contrary its critics are doing so.--Woogie10w (talk) 08:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Ethnic Germans deported from the Sudetenland in cattle trains

1. The article containes the same picture twice, one instance of it should be replaced.
2. The caption misinforms, as anyone can see the cars on the picture weren't Stock car (rail) but Boxcar#Passenger and wartime use. The same cars were used to transport Germans to the West and Poles to the East, and Poles expelled from the SU. Soldiers in Poland travelled in such cars even many years after the war. Germans transported Polish and Jewish prisoners mainly in such cars, the exception was 1945, when many prisoners died in winter in open cars. Xx236 (talk) 16:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

One pic removed. --G-41614 (talk) 09:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The seccond picture, adds a bit with the caption. Is there anyway we could chang up the template picture for this article? - Schrandit (talk) 17:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Of course there is a way but why would we do that?  Dr. Loosmark  17:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

To convey a greater ammount of information to the reader. - Schrandit (talk) 17:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

What exactly do you have in mind?  Dr. Loosmark  17:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The template is a separate file Template:Expulsion of Germans, it's used in several articles.Xx236 (talk) 06:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The evacuation

It's not true that - as the article suggests - only civilian Germans were evacuated. Evacuated Germans included also: -any kind of police including the Gestapo and SS, -prisoners (some of them were German: Reichs- oder Volksdeutsch) and their guards. Any numbers of German victims include looses of the above groups. Xx236 (talk) 06:20, 12 May 2010 (UTC) Death marches (Holocaust) article should be mentioned in this article as part of the evacuation.Xx236 (talk) 07:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The scope of the article is the expulsion of Germans, so evacuations that did not turn into an expuilsion do not need to be covered here, but in their respective articles. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:26, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Size

Data sheet

Size computed with User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js by Skäpperöd (talk) 09:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)						Are there dedicated subarticles?
Section	Prose size (incl. all HTML code)	Refe- rences (incl. all HTML code)	Wiki text	Prose size (text only) ="readable prose size"	Refe- rences (text only)
Background	7637 B	1199 B	8888 B	3879 B (594 words)	63 B	yes
Late-war movements	7448 B	2190 B	8644 B	3927 B (629 words)	119 B	yes
Expulsions foll. Nazi Germany's defeat	43000 B	9085 B	45000 B	24000 B (3751 words)	539 B	yes
Demography*	23000 B	5412 B	24000 B	13000 B (2135 words)	310 B	yes
(*) subsection "Casualties"	17000 B	4059 B	18000 B	10192 B (1610 words)	224 B
Expellees in post-war Germany	9882 B	1314 B	12000 B	7389 B (1153 words)	69 B	no
War children	1165 B	189 B	1130 B	629 B (98 words)	9 B	yes
Reasons and justifications	11 kB	2111 B	18000 B	6645 B (1029 words)	117 B	no
Legacy	15 kB	3238 B	24000 B	9219 B (1453 words)	196 B	no
See also+Sources+Further read.+Ext. Links	127 B	0 B	10000 B	120 B (15 words)	0 B	(-)
Article size	120000 B	202000 B	155000 B	69000 B (11083 words)	46000 B	(-)

Proposals to reduce size

Merge part of "Demography" to dedicated subarticle Demographic estimates of the flight and expulsion of Germans

• 24 kB is too large for a summary of the subarticle. Especially the "Casualties" subsection is given too much weight (18kB). If we keep an overview of say 5 kB and merge the rest, we would reduce the article size by 20 kB. Skäpperöd (talk) 09:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Remove part of the "Sources" and "Further reading" sections

• All of the article is sourced, and the references are spelled out in the reflist. The "Sources" section is thus not a bibliography of the references, but eventually should be part of the "Further reading" section, including some redundancies with the reflist. Though for many users (including me) wikipedia actually serves as a bibliography and key word collection rather than a reliable source of information, 10 kB is too much given the accessibility issues which come along with the size. Skäpperöd (talk) 09:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with this proposal. Looking at the article from the standpoint of a professional Accountant, I must say that the article needs a “cleanup” The statistical data relating to casualties needs to presented in a clear and concise manner. We need to present the disputed figures in a manner consistent with the Wikipedia guideline WP:UNDUE --Woogie10w (talk) 11:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Note/invitation: A fruitful discussion concerning the revamping of the demography subarticle has emerged at my talk page. Woogie10w and me are in the process of adding the missing data sets to the subarticle so we will be able to trim the respective section in this article soon. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:26, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

"Poland, including former German territories" - unprecize, biased

• Kamusella estimates numbers twice (p. 22 and the quoted p. 29) and there is a discrepancy between the two estimates.
  • Tomasz Kamusella cites estimates of 7 million expelled during both the "wild" and "legal" - Kamusella is obviously wrong, 7 million is a total number of refugees and deported, see Demographic estimates of the flight and expulsion of Germans.The number should be also removed. Xx236 (talk) 07:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
• Kamusella writes about the context ("significant but a part") and non-German nationalities (Silesians and Kashubians).
• According to Paczkowski http://www.videofact.com/mark/represje/Sov_represjePolakow.html 25 000 - 30 000 of civilians were deported to the SU, among them 15 000 miners. The 25 000 - 30 000 came from ethnically mixed areas and there is no serious estimate how many of them were Polish, German, Silesian or Kashubian.Xx236 (talk) 11:29, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
• http://www.igipz.pan.pl/wydaw/Monografie_5/rozdz11_3.pdf says "more than 25 000 miners". The academic text summarizes German deportation of Poles and deportations of forced workers to Germany.Xx236 (talk) 11:38, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
• According to Reichling , p. 28, 520 000 Germans were deported to Soviet Union from (contemporary) Poland, more than 185 000 of them died there. Kamusella says in the article that 165 000 only were deported. So how many? In fact the sentence can be understood, that 165 000 returned in 1955 and the number of deported to Siberia isn't quoted. Xx236 (talk) 12:45, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
• The text informs only about Polish and Soviet crimes on Germans. However http://books.google.de/books?id=ARxnK1u_WOEC&pg=PA53&dq=expulsion+cleansing+germans&lr=&as_brr=3#v=onepage&q=expulsion%20cleansing%20germans&f=false says p. 52 "assaults, thefts and rapes, sometimes committed by Soviet soldiers and sailors with German cooperation, on Poles."Xx236 (talk) 13:34, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Template for this page

We need to include this line in the Template for this talk page-

This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

There are way too many posts that are just plain blog not related to article improvement.

I don't know how to edit the template, otherwise I would have done it myself--Woogie10w (talk) 20:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

See Talk:Gaza War. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I guess I am blod today, I can't find this on Gaza. Maybe you know how to fix it.--Woogie10w (talk) 21:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

U meanz like dis? --G-41614 (talk) 14:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Evacuation and flight to areas within Nazi Germany

The section "Evacuation and flight to areas within Nazi Germany" limits the evacuation to the end of the war. In fact evacuation of Black See Germans started 1943/1944 . The section should also be rewritten.Xx236 (talk) 08:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Suicides

The article doesn't discuss mass suicides toward the end of the war, see http://books.google.com/books?id=EIjccRg7_UYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=suicide+in+nazi+germany&source=bl&ots=aF3BL7hKD-&sig=B854f-M2jL6d65bASu4S72rNcgM&hl=pl&ei=u7nrS_nwOsOXOJWuue4H&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false . For example in Breslau 90 000 died trying to leave the city and 30 000 civilan died during the siege, including 3 000 suicides http://www.rogermoorhouse.com/article3.html.Xx236 (talk) 08:39, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

3.2 - the source?

I haven't found here here source supporting the 3.2 million. The number should be removed from the lede, because it misinforms.Xx236 (talk) 10:20, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

In the article, the figure of 3.14 million is mentioned and sourced. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:26, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

The figure of 3.140 million was a preliminary estimate from 1953, and is no longer considered valid. The 1958 Report of German gov superceded it.--Woogie10w (talk) 09:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Incomplete Background

The background should include Sudetengerman role.Xx236 (talk) 12:14, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

"Already from the second half of the 13th century onwards the border regions of Czech lands, called Sudetenland in the 20th century, were settled by ethnic Germans, who were invited by the Bohemian kings – especially by Ottokar II and Wenceslaus II. The border was set by the signing of the Peace of Eger in 1459." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.247.204 (talk) 21:15, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

What about the 1933-1945 period?Xx236 (talk) 07:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

In the ca 1919-1921 period the majority of the Sudetengermans voted to have their territory joined either with Germany, or with the newly formed Austrian rump state. They learned that the victors of World War 1 believed in ethnic self-determination (one of US President Wilson's 14 Points) for everyone except various communities of ethnic Germans. Also, the Austrians voted to join Germany during that time frame, and the answer was the same for them as it was for the Sudetengermans: the double-standard "no". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.247.204 (talk) 12:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

the limited attempts of ethnic cleansings in Nazi-occupied Europe

Are you sure you want such language here?Xx236 (talk) 15:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

limited attempts is not NPOV, it should be deleted--Woogie10w (talk) 15:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I have already reverted that, plus I have also reverted the change from "atrocities and ethnic cleansings" into "measures". atrocities might have been called "measures" by the Nazis but this is wikipedia so will try not to use their brainwashed terminology.  Dr. Loosmark  16:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Loosmark good work, please try to avoid expressions like their brainwashed terminology, it might be used against you. In private it would be fine, Wikipedia is like being at work, we watch what we say to get ahead and not get fired. Jimbo does not have to pay Unemployment.--Woogie10w (talk) 16:33, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Calling the Nazi ideology brainwashed might be "used against me"!? May I ask what are you talking about?  Dr. Loosmark  17:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

It would better to have said "rv unsourced material, please provide source", try to keep a NPOV. Use and discuss only material directlly related to reliable sources, keep your POV off Wiki. There may be other editors looking for an excuse to ban you. Don't give them ammunition, they might say "he called so and so a Nazi". I know you edit in good faith, just keep your cool and use reliable sources and you can always win the day. --Woogie10w (talk) 18:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The German Schieder commission treated the flight, forced labor in the USSR and expulsions as part of the same historical episode

It's how the German POV was created - Nazi administration acting according to Stalin's orders? Generally WWII is regarded as a war and post-war migrations as post-war migrations. The Expulsion was special - eg. Soviet crimes East to Oder-Neisse are "Expulsion" and the same crimes in the West aren't. Lack of definitions is the basis of this article.Xx236 (talk) 07:22, 31 May 2010 (UTC)