Talk:Stanisław Bułak-Bałachowicz

Cruelty

A quote from Mikhail Meltyukhov, "Советско-польские войны. Военно-политическое противостояние 1918—1939 гг."

removed by Irpen on 00:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC) to show Molobo an example of avoiding extensive quotes. --Irpen 00:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I will add the info to the article. Just brought it up here, so that it is not stricken out. --Irpen 02:56, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Please translate it to English so that other editors can read your quote.

--Molobo 23:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, the fact that the guy could drink all night and was still battle-worthy the following day is notable enough. //Halibutt 22:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Translation of the relevant part.

"One Polish officers wrote in the letter to his wife about B-B: "This is the person without ideology. The bandit and the murderer and his comrades - subbordinates are just like that too. They know no shame and are similar to barbarians... I witnessed throwing the cut off heads of Bolsheviks under his feet... I drank with him all night long and in the moring he with his group and me with my regiment went to the fighting. The massacre of Bolsheviks was horrific."

cited to Mikhutina, I. V. Polish-Soviet War, 1919-1920, ISBN 5900698122 (in Russian). --Irpen 00:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Although It certainly an excting story as Wiki rules go, exceptional claims require exceptional sources. So can I have some more sources confirming this ? --Molobo 00:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Molobo, this is an exceptional source! A first hand account, a diary, of the direct witness. --Irpen 00:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. I don't see this as exceptional source. This is an unsourced letter by unknown person, with unknown date, unknown place, unknown skirmish, unknown circumstances. Who knows maybe it has as much credibility as your previous revelations about "slaughter" of defencless Russian soldiers in Warsaw which proved to be false. Like I said please provide more sources. --Molobo 00:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC) Oh and a quote from me: [1] Sprzeciwił się on władzy radzieckiej, gdy ta krwawo rozprawiła się z powstaniem chłopskim na tym terytorium. Po prostu odmówił zabijania chłopów He opposed Soviet authorities when they decided to deal bloodly with uprising of peasents on this territory . He simply refused to kill peasents. --Molobo 00:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I like that one actually. And the part Irpen did not translate is nice as well: in June the Polish Red Cross filed a complain to the International Red Cross concerning the Red Army's taking of civilian hostages in Berdyczów, Żytomierz and Kiev. Those were taken and transported deep behind the front lines; during their entry to Berdyczów "the Red Army men took all sick and wounded from the local Red Cross hospital, not sparing many of the medical personnel". "The Bolshevists interrogate the prisoners, in violation of the rules of war". On the other hand the Polish Army was not free from such excesses either. - and here goes the translated part. I'd only add that execution of hostages by the Red Army was a wider phenomenon. Even now there is a monument in Daugavpils to several dozen burghers from Wilno, who were taken hostage by the Reds and then murdered there. Not to mention the execution of prisoners of war, which was done on a daily basis. //Halibutt 00:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed the site of Belarussian minority in Poland contains some usefull historic articles about Belarussians people's resistance to Bolshevik invasion of their country. I look forward to translating them. --Molobo 00:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Halibutt, to begin with, why do you think I provided the full quatation, including the reciprocal accusations on the Soviets? Exactly to make sure I preserve the context. Molobo requested the translation and I provided what's relevant to this article. I removed the original because of a related discussion with Molobo at talk:Soviet partisan to show him an example. I simply, didn't want to spend time translating the piece irrelevant for this article. I appreciate your taking time to translate another part. Besides, it shows that Meltyukhov is not a POV writer and presents claims made by all sides. It's just that not everything is relevant to this article here.

As for treatment of prisoners of war, Halibutt, this is totally irrelevant. And you really don't want to raise the issue. I have plenty of info on the Tuchola, dubbed the "death camp" at the time from within Poland itself. I will get to it in a proper time. In the meanwhile, I am surprized that you are not eager to include the first-hand witness info in the article. Fine, I will add it myself. --Irpen 00:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh Tuchola. We cleared that up in Poland with Russian historian's help : [2] I am going to sleep now, but I am sure somebody friendly will translate later the results of joint work by Polish and Russian historians. --Molobo 01:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Irpen, I don't like including first hand witness' testimonies into the article ever since certain person explained to me at the Wołodarka page that first hand witnesses are not credible. //Halibutt 09:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Halibutt, you manage to keep amazing me even though I thought I know you well by now. First of all, you persisted with your unreliable account in the Volodarka article and expulsed me from there. Too bad no one is interested in this event to bring Volodarka to normalcy. Recently, Piotrus wrote to me that Davies' WERS does not mention Volodarka at all. Similarly, I didn't find it in two books about the war I read, so it might be that this was anything but important at all rather than the usual "polish victory", the usual end of any Polish encounters with anyone, and that may explain why no one shows any interest in that article.

However, if you dare to bring up my position at Volodarka article's talk regarding the witness accounts, please at least don't distort it frivolously. This is exactly what I said: " However, this is the memoires of the low-level officer. It might be interesting for factual info, but at this level people lack the perspective to draw global conclusions." Clear enough? I hope now it is also clear who is ... what was the word you used then? I think you said "lying". Take care and I will make sure this info is in the article as well as other things I found (sourced) about public exectuion this guy, dubbed "Bat'ka" just like the modern president of Belarus, carried at the territories he controlled by his so called "army". --Irpen 09:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I added a reference that called the battle a Polish victory. You claimed that no reference calls it a victory, even though you knew it's not true. You lied. Perhaps I should've called it with some other fancy word. You missed with the truth? You failed to mention the true state?

But let's get back to the topic: if that officer was unable to tell whether he withdrawn after the battle or was it the Russians to withdraw, then how come this guy is more reliable? //Halibutt 09:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I find this all interesting, particularly since "BB" was my grandfather. My grandmother was "Janna" (Irene-Jane) and my mother is Danuta. During the WWII my mother was imprisoned in the camps along with her sister (Bashia)and their half sister Aldona. My grandmother (being an american citizen) was in a POW. My mother and aunt escaped and spent the last years in the POW with my grandmother. They heard news of my granfathers assasination through the grape vine. After liberation they made their way to America, my grandmother married her high school sweetheart, my mother grew up, married and had 13 children. We have all been raised in California. We have heard many stories of our granfather and now with the internet can find more information.

Suzanne Stachowiak Reedy 8-4-2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.239.142.130 (talk) 21:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

First-hand accounts

In the discussion above, consider this regarding first-hand accounts: that they are by nature subjective doesn't inherently negate their credibility as testimony. This is relevant material like any other, providing it's correctly described and its (published) source cited. Its authority then rests on that of the publication and its editor. -- Deborahjay (talk) 06:43, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

A pogromist.

In my opinion, The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Jul., 1943), pp. 109-115, which is published by University of Pennsylvania Press is a good quality secondary source. It writes about BB's atrocities separately from the notorious Pinsk massacre. The extended quote is below:

"Then came the horrible day of April 5th 1919, when 35 Jews who had gathered in the Beth Am at a meeting on relief activities were dragged out by Polish soldiers, put against the cloister wall and mercilessly executed. The cruel excesses committed on Jews by the notorious bands of General Bulak-Balachowicz in the service of the Polish army, which entered Pinsk in October 1920 after the evacuation of the Soviet troops, constitute another chapter of the martyrdom of the sorely tried Jewish community. There were hundreds of victims of rape and murder in Pinsk and in the vicinity."

In other words, according to the source, the atrocity of Bulak-Balachowicz's "bands", which were just "in the service of the Polish army" was a separate event that took place after the Pinsk massacre proper(which, according to the source, was committed by regular Polish Army).. In addition, the word "notorious" means that Bulak-Balachowicz's troops were known to commit such pogroms systematically.

In addition, in a situation when the Mahler's article is the only reliable English source in the article, we cannot limit ourselves with Polish and (nationalist) Belorussian sources. Jewish and Russian sources must be used also to provide a balanced views. Taking into account that the these sources also write about massive Jewish pogroms committed by BB's troops, and that they describe him primarily as a pogromist, the absence of that in the article is a critical omission, which has to be fixed.--Paul Siebert (talk) 13:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry but no, a single source from 1943 claiming that 35 Jews were murdered is not enough to call Bulak-Balachowicz a "pogromist". It's not even totally clear that the pogrom really happened or that was executed by Bulak-Balachowicz's soldiers (who were hardly a band). Secondly even if the pogrom happened there is absolutely no prove that Bulak-Balachowicz either ordered the pogrom or even knew about it. As such claiming that the historians (which historians!?!?) call him a pogromist is both defamatory and untrue.  Dr. Loosmark  14:08, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

You probably didn't read the quote well. The source states that 35 Jews were murdered by Polish army, which considered by the source as separate party. BB's notorious bands entered the city after that and committed numerous pogroms, which resulted in "hundreds of victims of rape and murder in Pinsk and in the vicinity." In addition, this is not the only source that state that. For instance, Mashko VV. (" Bułak-Bałachowicz Stanislaw Nikodimovicz 1883–1940)." Nonyi Istoricheskii Vestnik, 2002, No. 2 (7), a ref no 6 in the article) quotes Boris Savinkov's words who noted that BB's troops were known to systematically plunder Jewish population. Another source [3] quotes numerous memoirs describing BB's atrocities. These atrocities are an integral part of BB's biography, and must be presented in the article.--Paul Siebert (talk) 14:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Please provide some English language sources which can be verified, thank you. Bulak-Balachowicz was a honorable man, and a decorated professional soldier. Reading his biography there are countless examples of his integrity. Of course after he defeated the Soviet Army with inferior forces he all of a sudden became a pogromist and his professionally organized Army became "a band". What a joke.  Dr. Loosmark  14:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

The only English source (Mahler) in this article has been provided by me, and it states that BB was a leader of the bands of rapists and murderers. Note, this source is written by a Jew and published in a reputable journal under auspices of one of the top-ranked American Universities, so your jokes are quite irrelevant in that case. With regard to other English sources, I am afraid not much has been written on that account [4] [5]. BB's atrocities are mentioned also in "Anti-Semitism, Volume 12", Israel pocket library, Publisher: Keter Books, 1974 ISBN 06513274, p. 133-4. In that situation we have to rely on non-English sources (what this article does). It is not clear for me, however, why should we restrict ourselves with Polish-Belorussian sources only.--Paul Siebert (talk) 15:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

states that BB was a leader of the bands of rapists and murderers. Such ridiculous claims disqualify the source as credible. Bułak-Bałachowicz was a professional soldier, decorated for bravery and he avoided the use of force whenever possible (see the Luga events). On top of everything, most of Bułak-Bałachowicz's soldiers in Belarus were ethnically Belorussians, who lived peacefully together with the Jews. Had Bułak-Bałachowicz's units really commited murders, rapes etc there would be a huge, huge number of English sources available on the topic. The reality is you produced no reliable source which would call Bułak-Bałachowicz a "pogromist". Not a single one.  Dr. Loosmark  15:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Please, go to WP:RS if you have any doubts in the source. Again, the source I provided is the only reliable English language source in this article. The absence of sources about BB in English literature (see the results of google scholars and books.google searches) demonstrates that the subject is simply not notable enough. In connection with "Bułak-Bałachowicz was a professional soldier, decorated for bravery...", I don't think Polish sources have any superiority over Jewish or Russian sources, and these sources draw quite a different portrait. The article in its present form is a national POV and deserves a tag. --Paul Siebert (talk) 16:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Don't tell me where should I go. You are making extraordinary claims and for extraordinary claims you need extraordinary sources. The burden of proof is on you not on me. So far you have produced nothing of the kind. The article in its present form is quite ok, but small wonder you want to rewrite it and defame the General who defeated the Soviets at Pinsk.  Dr. Loosmark  16:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

By providing the English language source published in a reputable English journal, which is being issued by leading American University I sustained my burden. And, if you want to question this claim, you should go to WP:RSN, or do some other things required by WP policy to prove the source is unreliable. Other option is to accept my arguments and to agree to modify the article in accordance with what non-Polish and non-Belorussian sources state.--Paul Siebert (talk) 16:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

You tried to make it look like there is a consensus that Bułak-Bałachowicz is a "pogromist" and his units were "bands" responsible for mass rapes. That's simply not true, it is an invention by yourself. The only source which you provided is a journal from 1943 which says it all. Stop defaming the general.  Dr. Loosmark  17:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Obviously, no. By contrast, you are trying to make it look like there is a consensus that Bułak-Bałachowicz was a professional soldier, decorated for bravery and he avoided the use of force whenever possible, and that no other point of view exist. By contrast to you, I did not remove sourced material to the article, I just added some well sourced material to the article to demonstrate that the picture, which is created based on only one sided sources, is in actuality far more complex. I also advise you to avoid any baseless accusations and personal attack, because that just weaken your own position.--Paul Siebert (talk) 18:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

PS. I provided more than one source (see above). In addition, I presented the results of search demonstrating that materials about this person are scarce in English literature. In connection to that, I wait for explanation from you why the article relies only on Polish/Belorussian sources and ignores the sources which present alternative point of view.--Paul Siebert (talk) 18:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Am trying to make it like what? What exactly do you mean? For example Bułak-Bałachowicz was decorated by the Russian Imperial Army, are you challenging that? You have not "just added some well sourced material", you tried to make it look like as if there is consensus that Bułak-Bałachowicz was a pogromist, that his units were bands responsible for mass rapes and similar. Fortunately I caught you. Had you just added to the article something like "according to source X units under BB did Y" we would probably not had this conversation.  Dr. Loosmark  19:13, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

To answer your question, in general I am for inclusion of an alternative point of view whenever possible. The problem here is that you tried to paint this alternative view as some sort of a widely supported main view, thus your formulation that historians see Bułak-Bałachowicz as a pogromist. That is simply false.  Dr. Loosmark  19:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: "...you tried to paint this alternative view as some sort of a widely supported main view..." Based on the search in English literature, I conclude that BB was not too notable figure, so it is simply incorrect to speak about any wide support of any views on this marginally notable person. In that situation, even a single source is able to dramatically change BB's image. Yes, some Polish sources exist that describe him as a notable figure in the Polish anti-Bolshevist movement. However, at least equal amount of sources exist that describe him as an adventurer and even simple bandit, whereas Jewish sources describe him as a notorious anti-Semite and pogromist. What is false in these my words?--Paul Siebert (talk) 19:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

What is false in your words? More or less everything. Your "conclusions" on the subjects' notability are your original research. Claiming that a general who tried to declare the Bialorussian independence is only marginally notable is a bit weird to say the least. So is saying that he was a simple bandit, apparently he served with distinction in the Russian Imperial Army, did the Russian decorated simple bandits? And what about the time he was in the Red Army, did they give command positions to simple bandits? During those turbolent times the situation was pretty chaotic and many military formations took food from peasants, that much is true. The most infamous of all in that regard was probably Budyonny, but I don't see you calling him a bandit or leader of bands or rapist etc.  Dr. Loosmark  20:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Since I was not able to find anything concrete in English sources, I decided to look in other sources. Below are the quotes from some Russian-language sources with unknown reliability. I have a reasons to believe, however, that their reliability is comparable with the sources which are currently used in the article.

1. The site www.polskifilm.ru [[6]] contains the article devoted to BB's biography. This biography is rather balanced, for instance, it credits mostly BB's troops for the capture of Pinks (by the attack in the rear; the coincidence of this detail also adds credibility to the article). This article devotes a special section to BB pogrom activity:

"Станислав Никодимович был типичным продуктом своего времени и, особенно, местности, в которой вырос. Польские, белорусские и украинские евреи столетиями жили в атмосфере антисемитизма. А в период Гражданской войны вынесли на себе все ее тяготы. Практически ни одна из воюющих сторон не обходила их стороной. Даже такая культурная часть общества, как белое офицерство. Балахович не был исключением. Как и многие другие атаманы (например, Махно), в отношении евреев он проводил политику двойных стандартов. С одной стороны – красивые и правильные слова. Даже расстрелы за грабежи еврейского населения. С другой – попустительство и молчаливое согласие на то, что вытворяли его подчиненные. Польский военный прокурор полковник Лисовский, расследовавший жалобы на действия балаховцев, так описывал боевую деятельность дивизии Балаховича в борьбе за свободу Белоруссии

«…Армия Балаховича представляет собой банду разбойников, которая переправляет награбленное золото. Чтобы занять какой-нибудь город, посылается армия, солдаты которой грабят и убивают. И лишь только после многочисленных погромов, два дня спустя, приезжает Балахович со своим штабом. После грабежа начинаются пьянки. …Что касается Балаховича, он позволяет грабить, иначе они отказались бы продвигаться вперёд … каждый офицер, вступающий в армию Балаховича, обливает себя грязью, которую ничем нельзя смыть»

Расследование, проведённое полковником Лисовским в частности установило, что только в Турове балаховцами было изнасиловано 70 еврейских девочек в возрасте от 12 до 15 лет.

Выдержка из показаний Х.Гданского и М.Блюменкранка следствию, приведенных в книге польского исследователя Марека Кабановского «Генерал Станислав Булак-Балахович» (Варшава, 1993):

«… По дороге туда встретили капитана-балаховца. Он спросил:

— Кого ведете?

— Евреев…

— Расстрелять их.

С нами был еще один еврей — Маршалкович. Конвоиры приказали спустить исподние штаны и лизать друг другу задницы. Потом также заставили мочиться друг другу в рот и делать другие мерзости… А мужиков собрали вокруг и приказали за всем этим наблюдать… Заставляли нас делать половой акт с телкой. Изнасиловали нас и напаскудили нам на лица… Блюменкранк не мог перенести издевательств и просил, чтобы его застрелили. Маршалкович еще болеет после перенесенных издевательств»

Житель Мозыря А.Найдич так описывал события в столице БНР Мозыре после взятия города балаховцами (ГА РФ. Ф. 1339. Оп. 1. Д. 459. Л. 2-3.):

«В 5 час. вечера балаховцы вступили в город. Крестьянское население радостно встретило балаховцев, но евреи попрятались по квартирам. Сейчас же начался погром с массовыми изнасилованиями, избиениями, издевательствами и убийствами. Офицеры участвовали в погроме наравне с солдатами. Незначительная часть русского населения грабила лавки, вскрытые балаховцами. Всю ночь по городу стояли душу раздирающие крики…»

В докладе комиссии по регистрации жертв набега Балаховича в Мозырском уезде говорилось, что

«Насилию подвергались девочки от 12 лет, женщины 80 лет, женщины с 8-месячной беременностью…, причем насилия совершались от 15 до 20 раз. Хотя образовавшейся местной комиссией для обследования и оказания помощи было обещано полное сохранение врачебной тайны, число обращающихся за помощью достигает всего лишь около 300 женщин, большую часть которых составляют заболевшие венерическими болезнями или забеременевшие…»

You can see that the source cites the archival materials from the State Archive of Russian federation (ГА РФ), which are as a rule regarded as reliable. This source also cites the book of Marek Cabanowski, (Generał Stanisław Bułak-Bałachowicz. Zapomniany bohater, Warszawa 1993). Interestingly, although this Polish has been used in the article, the information about anti-Semite excesses of BB troops has been completely ignored in this WP article. That can be a sign that the present article does not fully reflect even the Polish sources cited in it.

1. The article from New Historical Gerald (Novyi istoricheskii vestnik), an electronic journal edited by Russian professional historians [7] has already been cited by me. This article (which is also quite neutral) also note that anti-Semite excesses were common in BB's troops. BTW, both sources present the story of Yudenich's arrest in somewhat different way: according to these two sources BB really tried to obtain money from Yudenich, however, he failed to obtain the money, and it remained unknown if he really planned to give them to his soldiers. I am going to modify the article's text accordingly.--Paul Siebert (talk) 20:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

PS. Anticipating possible criticism in Russian nationalism (which would be ridiculous for some reasons) I reiterate again: I decided to look in Russian sources only because no English sources on BB were found. In addition, I did not use any Soviet time or Russian nationalist sources which use only black paint for drawing BB's portrait: every source which used the words "bandit" or "criminal" to describe BB were excluded by me immediately.--Paul Siebert (talk) 20:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks for taking the time to check those sources. Can you please provide a translation of the text in Cyrillic?  Dr. Loosmark  20:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Re: "What is false in your words? More or less everything." Let's see.
Re: "Your "conclusions" on the subjects' notability are your original research." Per WP:NOTABILITY it is up to Wikipedians to decide if the subject is notable enough. The decision is based on what the sources say. In any event, if you have any doubts about my behaviour, feel free to go to appropriate noticeboard.
Re:"Claiming that a general who tried to declare the Bialorussian independence is only marginally notable is a bit weird to say the least." I claim nothing, I just make a conclusion based on what the sources says. If you disagree, then... see above.
Re: "So is saying that he was a simple bandit, apparently he served with distinction in the Russian Imperial Army, did the Russian decorated simple bandits?" I have no desire to do my own original research on that subject, I just tell what the scarce sources tell about BB.
Re: "And what about the time he was in the Red Army, did they give command positions to simple bandits?" In my opinion, many Eastern European editors believe that the Red Army was composed mostly of bandits, and, as far as I know, the number of bandits was very high in the Red Army at least at the beginning (hence its poor performance during 1918)
Re: "During those turbulent times the situation was pretty chaotic and many military formations took food from peasants, that much is true. The most infamous of all in that regard was probably Budyonny, but I don't see you calling him a bandit or leader of bands or rapist etc." There is a notion in appropriate WP article that some of Budionny troops did commit Jewish pogroms. However, one way or the another, the last your statement is fully correct and I am sure that everyone will agree that all military formations took food from peasants. The problem is that not only BB's troops "took food from peasants", they massively looted, killed and raped Jewish population, and this phenomenon was far above a normal level of violence. I provided needed sources to demonstrate that I was right, so I sustained my burden of proof. By contrast, you supported your statements just by your own conclusions. I see no reasons to continue this discussion unless you change your manner to conduct a discussion.--Paul Siebert (talk) 21:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Per WP:NOTABILITY it is up to Wikipedians to decide if the subject is notable enough. The decision is based on what the sources say. In any event, if you have any doubts about my behaviour, feel free to go to appropriate noticeboard. Ugh, yeah and BB is certainly notable so what point are you trying to make is beyond me. And would you stop sending me to "appropriate noticeboards", go there yourself if you so wish.

Re: I claim nothing, I just make a conclusion based on what the sources says. If you disagree, then... see above. You are making things up plain and simple. No source say that he was a marginal figure, that's your WP:OR conclusion.

Re: In my opinion, many Eastern European editors believe that the Red Army was composed mostly of bandits, and, as far as I know, the number of bandits was very high in the Red Army at least at the beginning (hence its poor performance during 1918) Interesting, you might want to add that to the Red Army article and the articles about other bandits which served in the Red Army. Or is that only that only the Polish general has "privilege" to be classified as a bandit?

Re: There is a notion in appropriate WP article that some of Budionny troops did commit Jewish pogroms. Like where? I have just checked and there is nothing in the Budionny article, not even a mention, let alone describing him a pogromist and leader of a band of rapist as you have tried to do with the Polish general. But the comment clearly shows your ideological bias, for Budionny it would be enough to have a notion that some of his troops did commit Jewish pogroms while BB has to be called a pogromist and the leader of a band of rapist.

Re: The problem is that not only BB's troops "took food from peasants", they massively looted, killed and raped Jewish population, and this phenomenon was far above a normal level of violence. I provided needed sources to demonstrate that I was right, so I sustained my burden of proof. Oh now is "they massively looted, killed and raped Jewish population". Whatever.  Dr. Loosmark  21:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: "yeah and BB is certainly notable" Sources, please. The search result provided by me provide a ground for conclusion that, judging by English sources BB is marginally notable, and I have a right to make conclusions of this type per WP guidelines. Can you provide a ground your conclusion is based on?

Re: "No source say that he was a marginal figure" Straw man. "Marginally notable" ≠ "marginal".

Re: "Or is that only that only the Polish general has "privilege" to be classified as a bandit" This article tells nothing about any Polish generals. This is an article about a person who, according to Pilsudski's words is "not only a bandit, but a man, who today is a Russian, tomorrow will be a Pole, a day after tomorrow will be a Belorussian and the next day will be a negro".

Re: "I have just checked and there is nothing in the Budionny article" Soviet war crimes;

And, finally, I again encourage you to switch from demagogy to some concrete and productive discussion. --Paul Siebert (talk) 01:50, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Well a general who commanded an army should be more than just marginally notable. A quick search reveals he is in many English language book: The Cambridge history of Poland, Wilsonian East Central Europe: current perspectives, War & society, Warsaw in exile, Warsaw 1920: Lenin's failed conquest of Europe, etc etc. Interesting that there isn't anything in Budionny article on the war crimes. Do you agree that the information should be added and he called a pogromist and leader of bands who plundered?  Dr. Loosmark  10:38, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

B-class review

This article is currently at start/C class, but could be improved to B-class if it had more (inline) citations. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 18:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Cam i request that pending a final decision, you at least note the controversy on SBB's page? after all, the much weaker case against Petlura is referenced on his wiki page Tim Bucknall79.69.228.210 (talk) 14:59, 18 April 2015 (UTC)