Talk:Ypatingasis būrys/Archive 1

Archive 1

Einsatzgruppen? Sonderkommando?

Since they weren't prisoners themselves, wouldn't it be more accurate to say that they were the Lithuanian equivalent of the Einsatzgruppen? Wilhelm Ritter 14:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

They were not equivalent, they were one of units of Einsatzgruppen (later SD, SS, directly commanded by German officers.--Lokyz 15:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

So the text should say there were Einsatzgruppen, not Sonderkommando.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Forgot to explain my mistake - Germans officially called this unit Sondercommando, see ref.--Lokyz 20:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you translate the relevant part of the ref?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Here you are: Pirmą kartą dokumentuose Vilniaus ypatingojo būrio vardas (vok. Sonderkommando) aptinkamas 1941 m. liepos 15 d. Dokumentuose kalbama apie šovinių išdavimą ypatingojo būrio reikmėms. English translation: "The first mention of the Vilnian YB by name (German - Sonderkommmando), was 1941 July 15th. The documents are related to the supply of ammunition to the YB". Translation end. As a sidenote, I think, this unit was officialy called Sonderkommando, and YB is just modern Lithuanian translation. Although I do not have any supporting reference for now . --Lokyz 21:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone out there interpret Ypatingasis Burys in a verbatim translation? Dr. Dan 21:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

How about this - Wykonawcami mordów byli żołnierze narodowości litewskiej z oddziału egzekucyjnego tzw. "Ypatingas burys"(Oddział Specjalny). Rekrutowali się oni przeważnie spośród członków paramilitarnej organizacji litewskiej "Lietuvos Sauliu Sajunga" (Związek Strzelców Litewskich). Organizatorem i komendantem tego znanego z niebywałych okrucieństw Sonderkommando, olicjalnie przydzielonego do gestapo, był Niemiec Martin Weiss.[1]--Lokyz 22:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Teraz rozumiem, "Oddział Specjalny". Dziękuje. Dr. Dan 23:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

In Polish often reffered to as szaulisi due to most of them being former members of Lietuvos Sauliu Sajunga. I am given to understand this is based on Lithuanian name for a rifleman (saulis, or similar, I am sure Lokyz can correct my likely erroneus spelling - no offence meant by my mistake).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Care to cite? Because often reffered is weaselising. As for Sauliu Sajunga - this organization was destroyed in 1940, after Lithuania was annexed by USSR, so "former members" would be better.--Lokyz 08:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Citations added.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Dubious

What do you mean by Lithuanian? Did Lithuania form those units? Were they subordinate to Lithuanian republic? Or were they subordinate to Third Reich and formed by Third Reich? Were they referred by higher commanding officers as an Ypatingasis būtys or rather Sonderkomando or Einsatzgruppen?. Just curious, no POV pushing.--Lokyz 20:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I assume it means that they were composed primarily of Lithuanians...-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Umh, this is not new for me, although it should have some field number by Third Reich army, doesn't it? Simple questions, because form th article it seems, that not for a single moment this unit was under any upper command from Germans, and furthermore it seems that it was acting under his own will, like moving all around on their own will in occupied Lithuania (or to be exact Reichskommissariat Ostland).--Lokyz 21:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Certainly it was subrdinate to the Nazi command, but as I don't know administration stucture of Lithuanian territories under German occupation, I am afraid I cannot tell you how exactly was Yb or LSP or even LLD organized. There is, however, no doubt that it was a Lithuanian organization - in the same sense that Blue Police were Polish and Jüdischer Ordnungsdienst were Jewish. No POV pushing, just a widely accepted fact.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I will repat myself, from the article as it is now, it is not clear, that this organizatrion was under Nazi command - for a person who does not have any other information about it , this might be misleading.--Lokyz 09:50, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Szaulisi? Are you trying to tell that the whole Lithuanian Šaulių Sajunga was in YB? Before it was disbanded in 1940 Šaulių Sajunga had about 60 thousand members, and YB only 108. Another salad of half-heard facts and revanchist beliefs. Here's a good example of the abstract usage of the term [2]. s far I do underastand "szaulisi" is some mythological form of evil Lithuanians, in different contexts describing different units (be it YB, Sauguma, or else) in non academic and often very exagerated works, so, in my opinion, it could be misleading.--Lokyz 10:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Obviously it's the other way around: most members of YB came from LSS - that doesn't mean that most members of LSS became members of YB.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Really, although you have stated above that I'm afraid I can not tell you how exactly was YB or LSP or even LLD organized (sic), at least you are not afraid to tell us that most members came from the LSS. Heaven help us! Dr. Dan 19:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Poles and Russians in YB?

Recently M.K. claimed using this referece that YB consisted of 'Lithuanians, Poles and Russians'. It is the first time I heard that YB consisted of anybody else then Lithuanians and Germans - please provide the quotes and translation of the relevant part of the article to back up such claims. I find it interesting that the original creator of this article, User:Legionas, didn't find such claims in the article he used for primary reference.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

This article states this Daugumą būrio narių sudarė lietuviai, tačiau buvo keletas rusų ir lenkų. And here is translation Most people in the unite were Lithuanians, although there were few Russians and Poles". Let me remind, that dr. Bubnys is much more of an expert on the matter than you are. His research is based on documents, rather than on Polish tygodniks. Have a good day.--Lokyz 15:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Now, it is not very suprising to find a few collaborators form other nationionalities in such organizations (from one perspective, it is likely that many YBs held a Polish citizenship during interwar period). It is certainly a minor but acceptable information in this article. It is certainly not ok to try to push a POV and argue that a 'few Russians and Poles' (a few usually reffering to <10) means that Ponary massacre was carried by 'Poles and Russians'.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  16:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Yup, the fact that out of 100 men (and later out of 40-50) there were 1/10th Poles and Russians is really non illustrative:>

And let me ask you, pushing POV that it was carried by "Lithuanian Police" is ok?--Lokyz 20:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a ref for 1/10? And all the refs call it a Lithuanian formation, inlcuing the short English summary of the Lit. ref which not suprisingly use the term 'Lithuanian security police' (hence the name of the article...).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, it was your estimation "not more than 10".--Lokyz 20:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

When I questioned the percentage of Ukrainians in the Blue Police, I got blue in the face waiting for an answer. But at least, now "I get the picture". Dr. Dan 20:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Nope, Dan, you received your answer there, but as usual, you decided to ignore it. It's not a big surprise that you went on to brag about it here and there, but not in the place where the answer was given... //Halibutt 11:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Never said I didn't get the answer, just that I got "Blue in the Face" waiting for it. Besides, being too lazy myself, and lacking good libraries in Chicago I expected the percentages to be calculated for me. They never were. BTW, still waiting for plenty of answers from you (but in those cases I won't be holding my breath). Nice of you to pop in though. This wouldn't be a TF time without you. Dr. Dan 16:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

According to the text [3], one Pole and two Polish-Lithuanians were arrested in Poland and convicted during the 1970-ties. Xx236 13:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Before going into the text, that Xx236 so graciously provided, it's noteworthy to point out that the text most definitely states that Vilnius (Vilna) is a Lithuanian city. It also distinguishes the unique historical and cultural aspects of Lithuanian Jewry. Both points are continually downplayed by the Polish participants of this current discussion or denied outright. So thank you for providing this additional refutation of that tiresome POV. Dr. Dan 14:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Dr Dan, how do you recognize if a city is Korean? I check the nationality of the local people and the state, in which it is situated. Wilno wasn't in Lithuania in 1941-1944 and the Lithaunians were a minority there. How can a text change basic facts? Don't you have any serious arguments to support your thesis? You may find even 1000 books calling Wilno Russian, will it change the population ratio in 1944?

What about the repatriation story? Were people born in the city repatriated? Xx236 09:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

A very interesting text, thank you. Let me cite just a few paragraphs:

Borkowski was born in 1916 near Vilnius and grew up and went to school in what was then Polish Wilno. In early August 1941, after the German occupation of Lithuania, he was fired from his job as a warehouseman because he did not speak Lithuanian. An ethnic Russian neighbor said that he could help him with a job, and together they went to the headquarters of the Ypatingas Burys. There Borkowski was asked a few questions in Russian by a Lithuanian officer, photographed for an identification card that bore Borkowski’s name in Lithuanian orthography as Jonas Barkauskas, and told to report for work the following day.

When questioned by Polish authorities about what had motivated him to spend more than two months as a killer assigned to the execution squad at Paneriai, Borkowski said that he had no reason to mourn the Jews since antisemitism had been “beaten into his head” when he served in the Polish border guards before the war and he believed that the Jews were “parasites.”

He not only shot; he also looted. From the belongings of the murdered Jews, he outfitted himself with a pair of knee-high boots and a pair of dark green trousers that, together with a Lithuanian Army shirt and cap, completed his makeshift uniform.

In terms of motivation, Borkowski brought together self-enrichment, a confessed antisemitism, and the accident of circumstances that led him to join the Sonderkommando. He and the two others received death sentences that were commuted to twenty years in prison.

--Lokyz 13:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The text proves, that the YB were, according to the Polish law, criminals.Xx236 15:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Lokyz, don't address your texts to me, even your thank you is offensive for me.

Dan, have you been ever gracious here? Xx236 14:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, what a reaction "offensive", care to explain why? Becaus I've cited source provided by you? Interesting.

I never stated that I do find actions of YB acceptable. I did never say it is "good" organization or such. Without a slightest doubt those people were war criminals, although previously alleged "Lithuanian" subordination is now not overshadowing the true picture. These men were nazi collaborators, commanded by German officers. and teh article is much more NPOV'ed now.

And on the way to the true picture we did find out what Polish border guards were thinking about Jews. Quite interesting picture, don't you think? --Lokyz 16:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

• Sigh. Read up on Hasty generalization. This kind of logic should be avoided.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Do not try any insinuations, these words are not mine and I do not suggest anything. Or is this the true picture? Although it is really interesting how many of those former border guards were acting in Vilnius region AK units?

Maybe that's why you so hastly did remove referenced nationalities of YB from Ponary massacre.Isn't it an act of denial? Somehow this move makes me doubt about your NPOV'ness on certain issues. --Lokyz 19:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Sources

Do we have any English language secondary sources on Ypatingasis būrys, or is it only limited to Polish and Lithuanian ? --Lysy^talk 09:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The current name is not very well used ([4]), but shaulists/szaulisi yelds a much better result ([5], [6]). I'd think this means the article should be renamed (shaulists, probably). But the problem is that this nickname is applied to both Ybs in specific and Lithuanian Riflemen's Union in general so I am not going to recommend a move just yet. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

dressed in mufti

What is mufti ? --Lysy^talk 10:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Since I like you, I won't ask you if you are too lazy to look in a dictionary, or suggest that you might not have decent libraries where you live. This was a recent "civil" admonition that I received from a colleague of yours.

Mufti, is civilian dress worn by someone who would typically wear a uniform. You'll find mention of it at the blue link mufti you've provided. Right up at the top. The little itty-bitty line in the top. You can find confirmation of this in most larger English dictionaries too. Yours, Dr. Dan 18:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, I am lazy (and sometimes careless), and I do appreciate your patience with that. --Lysy^talk 18:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Lazy can be O.K., too. But don't worry, I have no intentions of having you blocked, or investigated for this or for any other sins that you may have committed. Dr. Dan 18:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

April 1944 was later than July 1944?

Should it be 1945? But Bydgoszcz wasn't under German occupation in April 1945.Xx236 13:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Subordinate to which German police?

Polish Wiki states it was subordinate to Sicherheitsdienst and Sicherheitspolizei. Would there be any objections to adding that? It should not be controversial (although references wouldn't hurt).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  00:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Polish wiki is not authority here. M.K. 13:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

What about Bubnys? Could you translate for me the following paragraph: Nacių okupacijos laikotarpiu Lietuvoje funkcionavo gana griozdiškas policinis aparatas, kurį būtų galima suskirstyti į vokiečių ir lietuvių policiją. Svarbiausios vokiečių policijos rūšys buvo vokiečių saugumo policija ir saugumo tarnyba (Sicherheitspolizei und Sicherheitsdienst, (SD)) su centrine įstaiga Kaune bei skyriais Vilniuje, Šiauliuose, Panevėžyje ir Marijampolėje bei vokiečių viešoji (tvarkos) policija, kurią sudarė miestų policija (Schutzpolizei) Kaune bei Vilniuje ir apskričių žandarmerija. The following sentence may also be important: Paprastai šaudydavo vokiečių saugumo policijos ir SD ypatingasis būrys (Sonderkommando), kurį sudarė kelios dešimtys lietuvių, vadovaujamų gestapo pareigūnų. (and sentences following it). Anyway, I am sure that article contains answer which German organization(s) was YB subordinated to, and we should certainly add that.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Later, but none of these statements concurs your speculations and btw, when did Bubnys became a reliable source to you? M.K. 09:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I will be waiting then. When was Arūnas Bubnys not a reliabe source for me?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

We are still waiting for the promised translation.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Very rough translation: Formally police aparatus could be divided in German and Lithuanian. German consisted of German security police, security department (Sicherheitspolizei and Sicherheitsdienst, (SD)) etc. Lithuanian - public police, Lithuanian security and criminal police, train police etc.//Often aided in shootings German Security Police and SD Special Squad (Sonderkommando) included in it and Lithuanians placed under German Gestapo officers command. I do not know how translate several words, so need comprehensive voc., then will translate word by word. M.K. 14:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

McQueen and Poles in YB

Currently the article references Polish participation in YB to MacQueen works, however the proof is only the following citation: When questioned by Polish es about what had motivated him to spend more than two months as a killer assigned to the execution squad at Paneriai, Borkowski said that he had no reason to mourn the Jews since antisemitism had been “beaten into his head” when he served in the Polish border guards before the war and he believed that the Jews were “parasites.” McQueen also writes that In 1972 Polish authorities arrested three men (one purely Polish, the other two of mixed Polish-Lithuanian ethnicity) on charges that they had been members of the Special Detachment (Ypatingas Burys). At best if this is the only source, saying 'Poles' is a generalization - we have one Pole and two 'mixed' individuals.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Was the "mixed" ethnicity of these individuals that you are refering to comparable to that of Jozef Pilsudski or Bruno Abakanowicz? Hmm? Dr. Dan (talk) 03:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

YB in Lithuania

Were any YB members sentenced in Lithuania?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you asking specifically about the Polish YB members? Dr. Dan (talk) 02:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Name

IZAK moved Ypatingasis būrys to Ypatingasis būrys (Lithuanian killing squad) noting this should be undertood by the English reader as Ypatingasis būrys is not used in English at all. I don't think Schutzstaffel or Einsatzgruppen are that well-known, neither. We could perhaps redirect Lithuanian killing squad here, but in any case, we don't educate people by providing descriptions in the names - that's what the article's content is for. We should expand this article, and link it from various others instead of trying to create some strange name for it.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 13:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Lithuanian or not ?

It seems that some of the Lithuanian editors are not ready to face the Lithuanian history yet, and insist that YB was not a Lithuanian collaborationist unit. The argument they use is that not 100% of the YP members were ethnic Lithuanian. Would you claim that the modern Lithuanian army is 100% ethnic Lithuanian ? --Lysy^talk 17:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

a)Lithuanian army is called Lithuanian army, YP is not called Lithuanian b) Lithuanians have full authority in Lithuanian army, in YP not c) Lithuanian army consists of several thousand personnel, in YP ~50, therefore Polish, Russian, German percentage is much more notable even if it reached only ~10 persons. M.K. (talk) 13:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)P.S. Also I suggest to deist from current rhetoric, which you currently demonstrating.

M.K, let me put it other way for you. Do you think that the Blue police was Polish or German  ? It was not autonomous, Poles had no "authority" there, not all the policemen were Polish, in fact many units were purely Ukrainian. Still, we do not call it German police. Do you know why ? --Lysy^talk 19:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

May I ask to stop posting irrelevant comparisons, at first it was Lithuanian army now Blue Police; if in such direction "arguments" will go, probably Special Republican Guard would be next. BP and YP is completely different things - was Blue Police - SD? Does BP have name something like Special SD and German Security Police Squad? Do you know why Yp is called Special SD and German Security Police Squad? BTW, thanks for bringing attention to article name, instead of Lithuanian nickname it should be used its official and full name, English one. M.K. (talk) 15:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I've only tried to give you some examples so that you understand why claiming that YB was a German unit makes not much sense, but there's no point talking to you if you don't want to listen. --Lysy^talk 18:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Try to give more relevant "examples" next time. M.K. (talk) 14:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Probably for the same reason that user: Molobo has a problem with the caption of the picture of the Blue Policeman as being under the control of the General Government. Dr. Dan (talk) 22:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. So, what is the reason ? --Lysy^talk 22:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

By replying, "Exactly," implies that you agree with me, and understand the reason. For a further and detailed explanation of his reasoning, it would be better to ask Molobo. Dr. Dan (talk) 02:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you, but I'd appreciate if you stated the reason explicitly. Why does Molobo have problem with Blue Police being under the control of GG or M.K have problem with YB being a Lithuanian unit ? --Lysy^talk 08:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

It seems that you worked on Blue Police quite often and yet did not noticed that problem there is also - name of the collaborationist Polish police in the General Government during the Second World War. Are you going to do with it something (thanks for bringing this article for deeper scrutiny)? And by the way problem on this article appeared few weeks ago without any reasonable rationale was inserted undiscussed POV and WP:UNDUE information.M.K. (talk) 15:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Different case-here we have willing volunteers ready to work for goals of Nazi Reich and murdering Jews, there we have people from former police forced by German occupation to change their name and administration and working primarily against criminal activity. Two different situations.--Molobo (talk) 12:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Molobo, please take the time to read reference no. 11 at the bottom of the article again, where you'll find Polish YB volunteer, Borkowski, explaining that his penchant to act as a killer stemmed from the anti-semitism beaten into his head when he was a Polish custom guard, before the war. Since you are emphacizing the "volunteer" nature of this organization (formed under the auspices of the occupation), I suggest you help expand the article on the Polnisches Schutzmannschaftsbataillon 202. It too was a Nazi-sponsored volunteer organization. I know you are very interested in the subject of Polish-German relations during WWII. Dr. Dan (talk) 14:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

And ? A one non-Lithuanian volunteer in a Lithuanian force doesn't change its Lithuanian nature. As to German forced draft to create German led Schuma 202 after volunteer efforts failed to bring more then 2 recruits, I will certainly expand on it.--Molobo (talk) 16:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

There is a name for what you are doing, Dan. It's called a fallacy of the lonely fact :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Molobo, the "special" issue for you to consider is that this one non-Lithuanian volunteer was a Pole, who worked as a Polish custom guard, in Poland, who said that his murdering Jews was motivated by anti-Semitism being "beaten into his head" during his work as a Polish customs guard.

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus, there is nothing hasty nor is there any generalization about Borkowski. As for it being a lonely fact, here's three more facts so that Borkowski is not so "lonely". 1. Pinsk massacre (1919), 2. Jedwabne massacre (1941), 3. Kielce pogrom (1946). Before, during, and after the Nazis. There are plenty more examples, if you like. Do you want to compare Poland vs. Lithuania on this plane? Dr. Dan (talk) 21:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

It seems you do want to compare and bring totally offtopic cases to the discussion about a specifc Lithuanian killing squad. Of course Nazi-Lithuanian relations are topic worth describing(considering (Lithuanian Activist Front, or the killing of over 20.000 Jews in three operations by Lithuanian units).It would be better if would focus on the article however, I hope we can engage in discussion then. If you are interested in Lithuanian patricipation in Holocaust you might be interested in this book[7], certainly nothing like that or in this scale in Poland.--Molobo (talk) 21:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Molobo, please focus like a laser, what was OT about the issue that I presented to you? It was completely related to the article and this discussion. Feel free to explain what Borkowski meant. Dr. Dan (talk) 21:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

If you are interested in scale of Holocaust in Lithuania:

• [8]

"Out of the 203-207,000 Jews who had remained in Lithuania under German occupation, less than 5 percent survived; among them, less than 1 percent within Lithuania and in the forests of west Belorussia. This number (or percentage) of surviving Jews was one of the lowest in comparision to other countries in Europe under German occupation. The explanation lies in the widescale collaboration with the Germans on the part of the local people and the large numbers among them who enlisted voluntarily into the police units that carried out most of the murder actions against the Lithuanian Jews and participated in the killings of Jews in Belorussla, the Ukraine, and the Generalgouvernement of Poland"

• [9]

"Prior to the invasion of the Baltics, no mass extermination was enacted on such an all encompassing scale. In Lithuania, before the Nazis arrived, there were at least 40 pogroms in as many Jewish communities. These pogroms were perpetrated by the local populace against the Jews. Women were raped and Rabbis tortured. (Levin, p.333)In Kaunas, Col. J. Bobelis of the Lithuanian army issued a statement that condemned the Jews as the enemies of both the Germans and the Lithuanians. At his instigation gangs sought out Jews to murder and torture. On June 25, 1941 1,200 Jewish men, women and children in the Kaunas suburb of Slobodka were pitilessly massacred. According to Dov Levin the perpetrators of these crimes called themselves Lithuanian partisans. Over the next several nights 2,300 more Lithuanian Jews suffered the same fate." As to one single member of the Lithuanian killing squad thought, I do not go against Wikipedia's Original Research. What did the majority Lithuanians thought when they formed this unit ? --Molobo (talk) 21:54, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what anybody "thought", but I do know they didn't form (sic) this unit, any more than Poles formed (sic) the Blue Police. Dr. Dan (talk) 23:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I asked Dr.Efraim Zuroff and he replied: "I am almost certain that there were several non-Lithuanians in the Ypatinga, but the unit was overwhelmingly Lithuanian by ethnic/national composition and was always considered a "Lithuanian" unit." Hopefully this should clarify this once and for all.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to disagree again, P.K. aka P.P., but I think your e-mail to Dr. Zuroff did not pan out exactly as you hoped. Nevertheless, this Nazi inspired unit, promulgated during the occupation of Lithuania by the Germans during WWII, was as Lithuanian as the Blue Police or the General Government were Polish. And Btw, the recent project you've been working on, that the Polish Underground was a State is really something to ponder. It's stretching reality to a new level. Dr. Dan (talk) 23:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Lithuanian Jews site in Israel names this unit as Special Lithuanian Platoon

[10]. Seems notable other name to be included.--Molobo (talk) 22:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Molobo, for the links regarding the Holocaust in the Baltic States. I'm also grateful that you brought in more confirmation that Vilnius is a Lithuanian city, that its Jewish inhabitants were Lithuanian, and Vilnius was considered by Jewish scholars as the "Lithuanian Jerusalem", in spite of Polish censuses. What do these scholars know, right? But let me still digress again to Borkowski, the Polish volunteer in YB, (perhaps you can help me get rid of the red, and start an article on him too). I'm by no means asking you to do original research on him (WP:OR). Enough research exists. Since he probably was a customs guard in Poland during the Bench ghetto period of the Second Polish Republic, when Poland was not under Soviet or Nazi occupation, I need an objective opinion as to what he meant when he said his killing was the result of his having anti-semitism "beaten into him" while he served in Poland, prior to the war, as a custom's guard. Dr. Dan (talk) 04:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Is Borkowski famous for being the single Pole in the YB ? --Lysy^talk 06:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea if he was the only Pole in YB. He certainly was more infamous than famous, and I think his remarks warrant some scrutiny and discussion. That might determine whether or not his explanation for murdering people deserves to be mentioned in the article or not. Dr. Dan (talk) 23:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I wonder why there were no more Poles in YP. After all, they formed the majority of Vilnius population, while Lithuanians were only a tiny minority. Yet practically all the YB personnel were Lithuanian, not Polish. Ever considered this ? --Lysy^talk 01:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Instead of wondering, have you confirmed that there were no other Poles in the organization?

But before you start digging, kindly offer your spin on what Borkowski's explanation of his conduct was from his work in Poland's civil service during the Polish Second Republic. My specific interest in this stems from the fact that this period was free from Nazi and Soviet occupation. Dr. Dan (talk) 01:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Dan, I don't think I understand you. What is your specific problem here ? --Lysy^talk 02:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Borkowski's statement. Dr. Dan (talk) 02:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but what is your question ? --Lysy^talk 02:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you are having a problem comprehending this issue. It's pointless to repeat his ugly quote, but the subject is open to anyone, not exclusively to you. Dr. Dan (talk) 02:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

All right, your digression explained, let's move back to the topic. Given that even the Association of Lithuanian Jews in Israel acknowledges it, do you agree that YP was a Lithuanian unit ? --Lysy^talk 02:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

If you remove Borkowski from it, yes. If you include him, no. Still want to understand what Borkowski was telling us though. Dr. Dan (talk) 02:58, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Ever wondered why his name was Jonas Barkauskas when he volunteered to YB ? --Lysy^talk —Preceding comment was added at 13:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

No, but I'm still wondering why there is no forthcoming answer as to what was being beaten into the heads of Polish civil servants prior to WWII. If indeed it was, as Borkowski claims. Dr. Dan (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Because we could only speculate on this. There are no detailed secondary sources covering his story. Why are you so interested in this particular individual ? And why weren't the other YB members brought to court in Lithuania ? --Lysy^talk 14:22, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I keep getting questions, and more questions, (another two more in your above post), which I keep answering, but can't seem to get any answers to my own question to you, or anyone else. Until I get some, I'll follow suit. But one last time, and I'm not asking about "speculation" as to what Borkowski thought, just a simple explanation of what he said. Otherwise, over and out. Dr. Dan (talk) 14:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Taking a cue from Lieutenant Columbo, "Just one more thing", regarding the Jonas Barkauskas question. It's probably similar to the Jozef Korzeniowski name change, or in the worst case senario, one of those "ridiculous Lithuanizations" of Polish names that should be challenged as in the Praniauskaite article by user:Halibutt. Dr. Dan (talk) 04:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Dr Dan, were Conrad and Proniewska members of this unit? Was it you who wrote elsewhere we don't don't have to stick to the topic although it helps. So you are trying to give me a lesson, while being a teacher of dubious integrity. Tymek (talk) 20:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Original research

Before several weeks sentence was introduced [11] with reference, which should support alleged statement: No member of Ypatingasis būrys was ever tried or punished by the authorities of post-war Lithuania. However such info is not present in provided source, and as different contributor already noted [12] that it is improper here. However yet another attempt occurred to reintroduce this original research [13]. Despite the fact that WP policy strictly prohibits to install Original research. Therefore I removed it again per WP:NOR and per WP:LEAD. M.K. (talk) 14:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the problem. The article mentions YB and lists the few people that were indicted on Holocaust related chargers in Lithuania; not a single one of them seems to have a connection with YB. Perhaps we should add a clarification 'as of 2001' to the claim that they have not been persecuted; it is possible that they were since then (if anybody can present references for that, that would be great).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Again I repeat myself, provided source [14], do not state anything close to sentence which was inserted repeatedly in this article: No member of Ypatingasis būrys was ever tried or punished by the authorities of post-war Lithuania. This is most evident original research and personal speculation of specific continuators. Therefore per WP:NOR, which explicitly prohibits original thoughts and per WP:V, I removed it again.M.K. (talk) 11:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Piotrus, according to WP:NOR, you can only write "An article such and such has not mentioned any members of YB that were tried or punished by the authorities of post-war Lithuania". However this sentence would not be really relevant to the YB article. --Doopdoop (talk) 13:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why attribution is needed here - the claim is not controversial. I agree that we can clarify this with a year of publication (I will do so right away). In related news, can anybody provide requested references for the 10 YB members (named) sentenced by the Soviets and 20 in Poland? I cannot find any refs other than the ones I've added for the four sentenced in Poland in the 70s. I believe that the above claims come from here, but I have trouble translating the Lithuanian text. Again, if anybody has any sources about any YB members sentenced in Lithuania, please add them! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I will repeat myself that such re installed information is Original research, as used source [15] which should support this claims has nothing similar to No member of Ypatingasis būrys was ever tried or punished by the authorities of post-war Lithuania., therefore such policies as WP:NOR and WP:V should be reinforced, plus cropping one part of text and merging with other also prohibited per WP:SYN. Therefore current sentence is result of personal interpretation and speculation of factually incorrect information. M.K. (talk) 13:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

There is no OR in stating that. The article lists the people persecuted for Nazi-time crimes and don't lists any YB members in it, it's quite clear.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe the list wasn't complete and authors did not intend to make strong claim that you have inferred.--Doopdoop (talk) 21:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe? Now that's sounds like ORish speculation :) As for the "strong claims", let cite the author himself: "The Lithuanians did not do anything to fulfill their duty as a free country. They did not bring to court or punish even one murderer of Jews during the Second World War.The Lithuanians did not fulfill the agreement in which they promised to supply information to the Israeli Lithuanian Committee, which was created in order to check the immunity given to the murderers of Jews. [...] What did Jews expect from the newly independent Lithuania? To start with, the least that we could expect was an unequivocal explicit admission of guilt and a sincere apology, a serious attempt to prosecute murderers and a determination to teach the truth about what happened in Lithuania during the Holocaust. Today, from the perspective of more than a decade, we can say that very little has actually been done. [...] the Lithuanian authorities introduced a wide-scale rehabilitation program [...] at least dozens, if not hundreds and perhaps thousands of Lithuanian Nazi murderers had been granted rehabilitation. [...] Today, if we sum up what the Lithuanian government has achieved on these issues: 2 indictments against Lithuanian murderers [...] 1 extradition request to Great Britain [...] 47 rehabilitations cancelled." No, I am pretty sure that the current version of the article summarizes the author's claim from 2001 quite well. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Piotrus here, it is clear that justice wasn't served.--Molobo (talk) 23:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you and P.P., unfortunately "you can't alway get what you want", as was the case regarding Morel. Dr. Dan (talk) 03:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, regarding the statement, No member of Ypatingasis būrys was ever tried or punished by the authorities of post-war Lithuania, I should hope that you, Molobo, more than anyone, would know that "the authorities" in post-war Lithuania, hardly were Lithuanian, and those that were couldn't even "peep" without Moscow calling the shots. As the song went, Whatever Lola Wanted, Stalin Got. Dr. Dan (talk) 21:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Soviet till 1990 or so, independent Lithuanian afterwards. Feel free to clarify that in the article; note that the article in question criticizes the modern independent authorities (reasonably, few expected much justice from the Soviets anyway).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I am responding to a request for a Third opinion. It seems to me that editors have resolved this dispute. If not, please reply here. — Athaenara ✉ 17:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for responding for my third party request so quickly. And no, I still think that presented sentence violates core policies such as WP:NOR and WP:V. Please take your time and carefully read presented objections and provided material. I will answer as soon as I receive more time. Cheers, M.K. (talk) 17:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I restored the third opinion request per your reply. — Athaenara ✉ 17:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Since we already got two opinions agreeing with me, and there are six editors discussing here, I'd suggest either a WP:RFC or WP:NORN for more exposure.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, your friend user:Molobo agrees with you, but that is another "opinion agreeing with you"? M.K. (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

• Hi. I was invited to weigh in on this conversation by M.K. on my talk page, presumably on the basis of my participation as a WP:3O at Talk:Sejny a few months back. Looking solely at the use of this sentence and with no background in the subject, I am inclined to agree with Doopdoop. The source used does not seem to WP:V the statement. There are more possibilities for indictment than murder; the article can be interpreted to indicate that only two have been indicted for murder, but does not indicate that none were indicted on other charges. Of course, there's nothing to substantiate that none of them were punished, which could include fines and dismissal or many other things that fall sort of imprisonment. I also cannot tell if the article excluded the possibility that some members were tried at the time that others were "rehabilitated". I don't know if the two indictments cited are meant specifically to refer to those rehabilitated and that of those not rehabilitated some were tried or if it means to suggest that of all Lithuanians, rehabilitated or not, only two were indicted for murder. Are there no clearer sources that discuss this issue that can be used to tackle the question of post-WWII response? I've tried doing a google search, but fear I will be useless in this regard as I'm limited to English sources. If these individuals were not punished for their crimes, that certainly bears mentioning in the article. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:09, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the statment. yes I invaded you on the basis of your participation as a WP:3O at Talk:Sejny. I hope it is ok. Let me a bit expand the rationale for insisting on WP:V and WP:NOR. The only part there the presented source [16] speaks about YB is this The “Ypatingas Burys” (Special Lithuanian Platoon) traveled the length and breadth of Lithuania killing tens of thousands of Jews. without any clear connections with other part of text. Form such small part it is hardly can be drawn any conclusions as did here, therefore WP:NOR comes in mind, pus WP:V, which clearly states The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. is also neglected. It should be also stressed that sentence by itself is factually false, particularly; this source[17] (which is in article, BTW) stressed that was held Military court, which sentenced to death particular individuals (trial and punishment occurred). Therefore sentence which can't be verified per WP:V and claims that No member of Ypatingasis būrys was ever tried or punished...of post-war Lithuania, is misleading and factually incorrect invention.M.K. (talk) 12:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It would be useful if you'd follow up the translation request and translate the relevant parts of the source to verify your claims.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The information which I pointed (namely Military court) is in the current version of the article and relevant information with translation and source was added by user:Legionas back in 2006 (!). So there is nothing new or unexpected, therefore it is good idea to actually read the article before adding new unsupported information. M.K. (talk) 10:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Moonriddengirl, could you clearly indicate is disputed sentence in present state do not violate and WP:OR as it failed to meet basic WP:V policy. I and other party have completely different view on it.M.K. (talk) 10:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that WP:V and WP:OR are closely entwined. I do not believe the used source can sustain the statement without unnecessary interpretation, which does edge into the area of WP:OR as "unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas". I believe the sentence should be removed until and unless a source that can sustain it is located. (I'm not sure an e-mail will qualify, but I will be much interested in hearing what response Piotrus gets. :) Maybe he will offer up a source that can be used.) A good bit of the paragraph in which the sentence appears seems to fail WP:V. I see two consecutive statements that have evidently been challenged--on the 1945 executions and the 20 convictions. The source for "four of them in the 70s" gives me a "404 Not Found." (http://www.adwokatura.pl/aktualnosci_sprawozdania_1112.htm) Is information on this topic obscure? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the statment. I also will try to search for additional info on this field. Yes I too have "404 Not Found.". Maybe it is temporary down? M.K. (talk) 11:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

For the record, I've emailed professor Efraim Zuroff and asked him for clarification; hopefully he will reply soon.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Per my comments in the section below we now have a different source that confirms the same things (that YB members were not tried in Lithuania). I think this is quite clear and denial of this fact will not help.

I have updated the citation required fact; since M.K. refused to translate the fragment I required to verify them (surely not because Bubnys also states that YB members were not tried...) or even replace the tags themselves we had to wait for another Lithuanian speaker to do so.

The adwokatura link must have rotted in the past few days as I looked at it again recently; in any case Internet Archive link is here and if the link stays rotten for a few more days, we should probably replace it; for the record here is the relevant claim: "W Polsce skazanych zostało w latach siedemdziesiątych czterech członków “Sonderkommando”, którzy pod koniec wojny uciekli do Polski."--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I strongly suggest you to assume good faith, and for the record this is not the first time then nonconstructive approach is demonstrated by certain editors [18][19] And again your your presentation is nothing nor nothing more then WP:OR. Not speaking that in post war Lithuania there was no "Lithuanian goverment", because Lithuania was occupied by soviet union and Soviet regime conducted necessary "job". This is exactly info which is present from 2006 user:Legionas article version. It amazing that some editors actually not read article yet. Speaking about one of the sources how log it going to be ignored fact that this peace have nothing about YB, but is kept as ref, especially knowing that YB members lives in other countries. So now it is not ok with our policies. M.K. (talk) 11:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I have received a reply from Dr. Zuroff with a permission to post it here. I have also edited the article to reflect his comments and clarifications.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

“ Frankly, I am a bit surprised by the subject of the debate that you brought to my attention, since nowhere in my article did I state that none of the men who served in the Ypatinga burys was ever tried in Lithuania. In fact, as far as I know, quite a few of those killers were put on trial but in SOVIET Lithuania. Others were tried in COMMUNIST Poland.

In fact, I think that only one of the men from the unit was still alive and unprosecuted when Lithuania regained its independence and that was Leonas Pazusis, who was living in Brisbane, Australia.
The real question is whether independent Lithuania would have prosecuted and punished members of the Ypatinga who had never been brought to trial, had any been found living in Lithuania after 1991. Given Lithuania's abysmal record in prosecuting and punishing Lithuanian Nazi war criminals, one can only wonder if they could have achieved justice in these cases.
Please feel free to post my response.
With best wishes,
Dr.Efraim Zuroff

”

Hmm! Dr. Zuroff contradicts your "sourced" contention that YB members were not punished by the Lithuanian government. And my contention that there was no "Lithuanian" government, too. As for whether the earlier government would have persecuted (sic) (an innapropriate term that you are fond of) the criminals, is a moot point since he was already buried in Cleveland. With one remaining YB member remaining in Australia after Lithuania regained independence after 1991, they probably would have been as successful as Poland was regarding the Morel case. But that's all speculation. Btw, did you also ask Zuroff his opinion as to why the Polish government failed to punish the perpetrators of the Pinsk massacre? Dr. Dan (talk) 21:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, well well. Actually the same thing as argued by my and others editors was concurred by Zuroff. I can image Zuroff then he saw that his words there twisted and misinterpreted. I think that at least user:Dr. Dan is deserved an apology from Piotrus... M.K. (talk) 22:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I have added the conviction by Soviet authorities to the article long ago. I wonder, however, what's the reason for "Lithuania's abysmal record in prosecuting and punishing Lithuanian Nazi war criminals". Since you don't mind off topic speculations, I am sure you will tell us your opinion of that, right? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 07:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Ask Zuroff.M.K. (talk) 14:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

No I'm happy to respond to Piotrus. First the reality of the situation was that the "Soviet authorities" were the defacto Lithuanian government, whether you, I, or anyone else likes that fact or doesn't like it. There was no other Lithuanian government in existence. Therefore the premise that the "Lithuanian" government did not bring the majority of YB members to justice is incorrect. Sometimes "opinions" are brought forth as facts, and the error is compounded by the next person who reads the original fallacy, and perpetuates it. An example is that the Polish Army attacked German tanks with their cavalry. Many people believe this. Yet thanks to the "myths" section on WP regarding the Invasion of Poland, there has been an attempt to correct this. So instead of trying to perpetuate missinformation presented on the project, one would hope that you might work more diligently to correct this. As one originating from that unique part of Europe, you must be very aware of the ignorance and bias (including that of "scholars") that has been written regarding it for a very long time. Fortunately that is changing. As for your question regarding ...Lithuania's abysmal record...punishing...Nazi war criminals. My opinion would be just that, an opinion. The premise itself is an opinion too, like Prime Minister Shamir's opinion, That Poles inbibe anti-Semitism suckling the milk from their mother's breast (paraphrased). My opinion regarding these kinds of comments is that they are "opinions", rather than facts (sometimes true, sometimes not, sometimes a mixture of both). The motivations of statements like these also have to be taken into consideration when analyzing them. Dr. Dan (talk) 14:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for translation

Relevant to discussion above, and likely fullfilling some citation requested tags in the article, is part of the cited article by Arūnas Bubnys (Vokiečių ir lietuvių saugumo policija (1941–1944)). I have posted a fragment which I highly believe to be relevant here; if anybody could translate the Lithuanian text into English (or Polish, which in turn I could translate into English) it would be appreciated.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Mind copyright violations then copying major part of original text. M.K. (talk) 11:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Very rough & quick: As the front approached, at the beginning of July 1944 YB was transported to Kaunas and settled in 9th fort. M. Weiss also came here. Members YB guarded the place and before retreating from Kaunas shot around 100 prisoners of the 9th fort. YB departed to Tilsit. There YB was borded on a train and transported to Stutthof. Soon YB got assignment to transport about 1200 Jewish women to Torun and to lead them to a special camp. YB stayed there until beginning of April 1945 when they were assigned to march Jewish women towards Bromberg. As the front approached, first to abandon the YB was Weiss, soon others followed. The marched Jewish women were not shot. Some members of YB retreated deeper into Germany, others remained in the zone occupied by the Red Army. That was the end of YB history.

Even today it is hard two answer two questions: how many members YB had and how many people they killed. In a list complied by a Polish historian Helena Pasierbska there are 108 names. That probably corresponds to a number of people who took part in YB. However, it must be added that not all YB members took part in killings. The number of people killed is even harder to determine. Historical literature usually cites 100,000 number. According to the author the number of people killed in Paneriai is inflated. Accounting for the fact that Paneriai massacre was carried out not only by YB but also by groups, the number of YB victims should be several tens of thousands.

What is the destiny of YB members? Majority of YB killers got what they deserved for their crimes, even though they were not tried by Lithuanian government. On January 29, 1945 Military Commission of the USSR Supreme Court sentenced to death ten YB members: Jonas Oželis-Kazlauskas, Juozas Macis, Stasys Ukrinas, Mikas Bogotkevičius, Povilas Vaitulionis, Jonas Dvilainis, Vladas Mandeikas, Borisas Baltūsis, Juozas Augustas, Jonas Norkevičius.

In total to this day 20 YB members received various punishments from the Soviet and Polish governments. Other members died or were killed in after-war years, others yet still live in various countries.

A paragraph with general thoughts about horrible Nazi regime - no substance.

Renata (talk) 14:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much; I find the above quite interesting. I wonder why certain of our discutants here, with proficient knowledge of Lithuanian language, ignored my request for so long. I am sure it is not because Bubnys confirms that "YB killers... were not tried by Lithuanian government".--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea why certain of our discutants (sic) or other persons "ignored" you (btw, in an attempt to find out the meaning of discutant, the online dictionary asked if I meant "discoherent"). You keep spinning a weird question, because there was no Lithuanian government, just the apparatus of Joseph Stalin, and it did try and execute YB members. The rest is smoke and mirrors, that is becoming some bizarre mind game. Hopefully if you establish contact with Efraim Zuroff, you can also ask him about "The Twenty" (the 20 YB members tried in Poland, as late as the 70's). If you're too busy, I'll try and ask him myself. And although his specialty is the WWII era, perhaps he can also elucidate as to why the Polish government did not earlier (as an independent country) try the perpetrators of the Pinsk massacre. Dr. Dan (talk) 17:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Changing the topic, Dr. Dan, will not help your case much. Both Zuroff and Bubnys speak of a Lithuanian government. I think those respected scholars know what they are talking about, whether they discuss the not-so-autonomous-indeed government of Lithuanian SSR or the quite autonomous government of modern Lithuania - and they both say they took no action with regards to YB members.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:33, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

More spinning doesn't change the fact that the Soviet government did try and punish YB members, or help your case much either. Or was the Lithuanian government following WWII autonomous? Just where did these "Soviet trials" take place? Do you know? If they took place in Lithuania, would that negate the statements of these respected scholars? Semantics aside, "the Twenty" YB members tried in Poland, what have you found out about them? Dr. Dan (talk) 18:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Semantics aside? The sources state what they state ("Lithuanian government has not punished YB members"). You may want to work on consistency; first you claim that "there was no Lithuanian government, just the apparatus of Joseph Stalin, and it did try and execute YB members" and then you claim that since the Soviet trials took place in Lithuania, they were carried out by Lithuanian government. Not that I am surpised; after all the same logic dictates that "good" Poles like Miłosz or Piłsudski are Polish-Lithuanian (if not Polonized Lithuanians or just Lithuanians), and "bad" "Poles" like Borkowski are, of course, purely 100% certified Poles. I think it is really high time to translate pl:Kali (postać literacka) so we could have a blue link for Kali's mentality :) As amusing as this is, I will not engage in more meaningless discussion (this is not Usenet) until you provide a single source that would support a claim that "Lithuanian government has tried YB members". I provided two academic ones that claim otherwise, and that satisfies all of our policies.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I think it satisfies you more than our policies. As to the nationality question, I think your involvement with Frederick Chopin, half French, half Polish, or Jan Matejko, half Czech, one quarter German, one quarter Polish, but both "undoubtably" 100% Polish (of course), speaks for itself. Not to say that Pilsudski, or his family, had anything to do with Lithuania either. Because even when a Lithuanian has the remotest connection with Poland, he becomes a "Polish-Lithuanian", whereas when a "Polish-Lithuanian" doesn't fit into your POV, the "Lithuanian" aspect of the combination mysteriously vanishes. And references from historians, and other academics, or encyclopedias stating otherwise are, are well of no consequence. Too bad. Dr. Dan (talk) 19:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The "Twenty"

The article states that 20 YB members were brought to justice in presumably Communist Poland, even as late as the 1970's. Were any of these individuals Polish? Dr. Dan (talk) 18:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Or held a Polish citizenship (since when)? How did the Polish law enforcement get custody of them? Good questions.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

But still no good answers. Dr. Dan (talk) 19:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I would hope you would have a better ability to find the answers out, than me. Maybe putting the question up on the Portal: Poland (notice board) might help. Probably the IPN would have some information too. Dr. Dan (talk) 22:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Well not much now, I only found information that the whole list of names is stored in Lithuanian archive, as members of the unit signed in 1942 a petition for more heating fuel during the winter. However the information is stored in conservative newspaper. Looking for one name provided I stumbled on a list with those names, but as it was posted on forum, It can't be used as source.--Molobo (talk) 23:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

What about the trials in Poland in the 1970's? What do the sources say about them? Surely they're not locked up in some Lithuanian archive. Dr. Dan (talk) 01:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Still it would be interesting to look at the sources of the above information. Could you give the link? Also, what do you mean by "stored in conservative newspaper"? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[20] It mentions sentencing of Viktoras Galvanauskas in Poland after the war and the list.

Looking for that name I only found a cached page of Kurier Wilenski, where some Polish nationalist fought with Lithuanian one, and started to quote the list(alongside insults) [21]

Obviously this can't be used, but perhaps some info will be a good trail. --Molobo (talk) 23:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope that these twenty are not somehow Polish, as that would dramatically change the percentage of non-Lithuanians in YB. Since Communist Poland's law enforcement agencies presumably didn't kidnap these individuals, one would have assume that the post-war Soviet-Lithuanian authorities handed them over to the PRL. But a concrete explanation is preferable to any speculation. I also hope that Viktoras Galvanauskas doesn't turn out to be a "ridiculous" Lithuanization of Wiktor Gałwonewski or Golwonowski, like some claim Praniauskaitė is. Dr. Dan (talk) 01:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Local Lithuanian politicians could decide to extradite Soviet citizens ?--Molobo (talk) 01:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. The Constitution of the U.S.S.R. calls the republics "sovereign". I'm just as anxious as you are to get to the bottom of "the twenty". Dr. Dan (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Well it seems that a Pole Jan Borkowski, who regarded Jews as parasites, is one of them. M.K. (talk) 11:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure? Is Borkowski really one of the "Twenty"? Do you know if the other 19 were Polish too? Dr. Dan (talk) 16:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, lets see. Source clearly state that Jan Borkowski was a Pole. Plus Bubnys clearly states that there were more Poles in this squad. So just need to find the other names. M.K. (talk) 10:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

And are we sure he was a Pole, not a Polonized Lithuanian? :> --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hard to say. Do you mean like him? Dr. Dan (talk) 13:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe the "Polish" border guards who "beat antisemitism into Borkowski's head" were also "Polonised-Lithuanians"?--Lokyz (talk) 22:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you think Jan Borkowski, Władysław Butkun, and Józef Miakisz (three of the YB members tried in Poland) represented the 2% statistic of Lithuanians from "Wilno" or the 98% of non-Lithuanians in the beloved census? Dr. Dan (talk) 16:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting that the two sources which I find online mentioning the name "Władysław Butkun" both refer to him "aka Vladas Butkunas"; and Józef Miakisz is referred to as "aka Juozas Mikašius" ([The Conversion of Looted Jewish Assets to Run the German War Machine], [22]). Borkowski is noted as an "ethnic Pole" who chose to Ltihuanize himself during the war to join the "winning" Lithuanian side; the two others were of "mixed two of mixed Polish-Lithuanian ethnicity"; all three chose to "reassert their Polish identity" after the war, again joining the winning side. They were sentenced to death by a Polish court, commuted to 20 years in prison. So in terms of numbers, if we count the other two as half Polish, we will indeed find that 2% of YB was Polish, and 100% of Poles were persecuted by the Polish government. As you well know, the Lithuanian population outside Wilno in the countryside was higher (the contemporary censuses vary from 20% to 40% - see Ethnic history of the Vilnius region). This is not that suprising when we consider what historians wrote. Jürgen Matthäus: "the incredible death toll to Lithuanian Jewry resulted from... the acceptance within parts of Lithuanian society of the notion that Jews should have no place in the country... there were few regions under Nazi rule where the killing process unfolded as quickly, violently, and totally as it did in Lithuania..."; "It was in Lithuania that the Holocaust, defined as the organized mass murder of the Jewish population, first took shape."; "Lithuanian activists felt that there was hardly a better way of placing Lithuania on the map of Nazi-dominated Europe than to demonstrate zeal and determination in addressing the domestic “Jewish question.” Traditional Lithuanian antisemitism merged with Nazi racial policy that had increasingly gathered momentum since 1933." McQueen: "In numerous small towns and villages across Lithuania, peasant killer-looters murdered local Jews and then helped themselves to their property." I could cite more but I think that what we should do instead is to write an article on Holocaust in Lithuania - I should thank the editors here for inspiring me to take upon this task.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

February 2008: Chairman of Yad Vashem states: "Destructive historical revisionism seems to be taking place in Lithuania". Somehow I am not completely surprised - we have been and still are witnessing attempts to push such POV on Wikipedia in related articles... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand that you have been recently blocked from editing. But this is not the proper place to spill the stress nor accuse parties of wrongdoings.M.K. (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Your attempt to get me blocked was hastily overturned by several admins, who also blocked the anon sock responsible for it. Changing the topic will not help your case any more than previous attempts.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree that yes this is not the proper place to discuss the block, but if you noted the unblock reason was ... both parties are guilty and he was also dealing with IP edits... BTW, anon sock? this is something new to me, but lets keep going on topic. M.K. (talk) 20:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

The topic and question here is "the Twenty", i.e., the twenty Polish YB members tried by the Polish government, not blocks, not Polish anti-Semitism, or any other pronouncements of future articles to be "written" and "sourced" by an administrator who can't explain why the the Polish government failed to try and punish the perpetrators of the Pinsk massacre. This entire discussion has constantly veered off topic, so I have no problem posing that question here again. If you prefer we can go somewhere else with that, if necessary. As for our Polish trombonist and murderer, Jan Borkowski, the unanswered question remains, who?, "beat" anti-Semitism into his head while he was a Polish border guard? Wasn't that part of his defense? Another question might be whether these men were tried under their Polish names or "ridiculous Lithuanizations" of their Polish names (an "invented" language, by some reckoning as I recall). Plus that only covers three of the "twenty". P.P., what light can you shed on the other seventeen? Dr. Dan (talk) 01:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

The question who beat anti-Semitism into his head is indeed interesting and it should be followed by another one: Why so many Lithuanians decided to join this unit of murderers and why so many of them mercilessly murdered Jews, Poles or Russians? My hunch is that they were not anti-Semites. I guess these brave good boys were perhaps hoping to see the world, and somehow they ended up killing innocent civilians. Anti-Semites in Lithuania? This is impossible. Tymek (talk) 15:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Polish participation in squad

As above part of discussion was derailed by shameful accusations [23], not the first one in this field [24][25] I feel need to discuss further Polish involvement in this killing squad. This is that we got now: Bubnys notes there was Poles in the squad separately. So far we know that In 1972 Polish authorities arrested three men (one purely Polish, the other two of mixed Polish-Lithuanian ethnicity) (I assume that this pure Pole was Jan Barkowski, former Polish border guard) Therefore any attempt to twist the facts that there was no Polish involvement (as was done in the past) and play down it should stop as well. Simple googling lead me to this site [26] by any chance anybody have access to it? M.K. (talk) 11:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

If out of hundreds or so people one was Polish that is not a notable involvment. The unit was overwhelmingly Lithuanian. We could add that it included one Pole but it would be strange to say the least.For example son of Chiang Kai Shek Chiang_Wei-kuo served in Wehrmacht, but we don't speak of Wehrmacht as German army with Germans and Chinese soldiers.--Molobo (talk) 02:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure, but right now we are still dealing with the conundrum of just how many Poles actually participated in the organization. The sources say that there were 108 original members, later honed down to about 50. The article states that 20 members of the group were tried in Poland. Of the three tried in Poland in the 70's, we know for certain that one murderer was the 1st trombonist of the Warsaw Opera Orchestra and was Polish (and that his defense was that anti-Semitism was "beaten" into his head while working as a Polish customs official in Poland prior to WWII). Everyone should be working on finding out more about the other 17 tried in Poland. Then we might be better able to judge Molobo's analogy of Chinese participation in the Wehrmacht vs. Polish participation in YB. It would be interesting to know the percentages of both groups in both organizations. Maybe some mathematicians can help too. Dr. Dan (talk) 16:35, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

50 members ? Since when ? Where ? As to being tried in Poland, indeed after the war many non-ethnic Poles were tried for crimes made on Polish territory. As to percentages how much percentage makes one person out of 108 ?--Molobo (talk) 16:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Since when? Maybe you should re-read the article. And do try to help with some information on the other 17 YB members tried in Poland, rather than speculating about it. That's still uresolved. Please don't bother to pursue statistics regarding Chinese participation in the Wehrmacht either. Dr. Dan (talk) 16:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I ask again. What percentage of 108 does 1 make ?--Molobo (talk) 17:01, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Have the source that there was only 1 Pole? M.K. (talk) 09:47, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Molobo, surely, you're not being serious. Since you aren't asking "50 members?" "Since when?" or "Where?" again, I assume you did re-read the article per my suggestion, and that matter is clearer to you now. If so, I hope you're welcome. Forgive me me for associating mathematics with this discussion, because we're actually dealing with simple arithmetic here. Take one divided by 108 (which isn't hundreds, Btw) and you'll have the answer to your question. In order to have the answer to my question, we will have to investigate how many Poles (of the "twenty") were members of YB. That's not been determined yet. Then we'll be able to determine the final percentage, and I'll be happy to calculate it for you, if you like. Dr. Dan (talk) 22:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Dr. Dan, perhaps you could try to help with information on the all 108 members that are held in the Lithuanian archives? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Molobo instead of dealing with false accusations could you please visit nearest library and read material on the subject? library and archives - not a google is a source of true knowledge. So please, would you, since the court was Polish? And Piotrus - would you please name the archive you think all the documents "are held in the Lithuanian archives"? Please? didn't you hear about Soviet occupation and stealing of documents? And a personal request - would you please try to act more like Encyclopedist, not a prosecutor or, as sometimes seems persecutor for the articles you seem not to like. The WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:AGF and the other stuff, would you? Thank you in advance.--Lokyz (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure Lokyz, when I will find what I can in my free time about this one man. Could you btw go to the archives to provide us information about hundreds of Lithuanians listed from that unit ? Also please try to remain civil and don't insult or start personal attacks against fellow editors. --Molobo (talk) 21:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Molobo, what attacks, and please, 50 or 40 doesn't make "hundreds", nor does 108, make hundreds, nor "thousands", or "tens of thousands" (which is good news regarding this mess, even though such numbers might dilute Polish participation in the unit a little more). Dr. Dan (talk) 22:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

It had 50 at the beginning, later it grew to hundreds:[27] " Na początku, w lipcu 1941 r., oddział ten liczył zaledwie 50 ochotników, lecz w niedługim czasie rozrósł się do kilkuset." "At the beginning, in July 1941 the unit had only 50 volunteers, but in short time it grew to hundreds."

As written by doctor of history Czesław Michaliski[28] article presented by Pedagogical Acadamy of Kraków.

69 members of the Lithuanian Special Platoon lived in Wilno alone [29] --Molobo (talk) 23:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Just remembered that Bubnys notes that from squad in killings particpated arboud ~7 people. So he we managed to identify not only 1 Pole but and Jew killer as well. M.K. (talk) 09:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Bubnys also claims the squad numbered 40 to 50 people, while German records show 69 living in Wilno alone. Understandably I have reservations about this Lithuanian writer as a reliable source. And what's with the "Jew killer"?--Molobo (talk) 10:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

You can have those reservations.M.K. (talk) 10:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

M.K., the topic is Polish participation in YB. Molobo has reservations on Arūnas Bubnys being a reliable source. He has provided more reliable sources instead. Czesław Michalski (not Michaliski), Tadeusz Piotrowski aka Thaddeus Piotrowski, Helena Pasierbska (who has made many contributions to Nasz Dziennik), and Maria Wardzyńska and some others, with links to the various articles (mostly in the Polish language) that might enlighten the discussion in an NPOV and unbiased manner. Dr. Dan (talk) 22:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, I would be very glad if some enlightened and NPOV users, such as Dr Dan or MK, would finally answer the question: How many Poles were there in this shameful Lithuanian unit? From what I see, there was only one, and please do not write that such and such number was tried in Poland after the war, as this is irrelevant (see Juergen Stroop). Thank you and I am waiting for the answer. Tymek (talk) 15:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Name

I am wondering why the Polish name of this unit (Strzelcy Ponarscy) is included in the article. I do not see a Lithuanian name here: Blue Police. Or perhaps we should add German, Russian and Belorusian names of the Lithuanian killing squad Ypatingasis brys Tymek (talk) 19:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Your note alerted my additionally, particularly that this articles name should probably be changed into Special SD and German Security Police Squad as Ypatingasis būrys is just a nick name. And oh, please do not change text which is referenced with academic publication. It is specifically stated that there were Poles.M.K. (talk) 09:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Obviously, when I find info about Lithuanians in SS, NKVD and Stasi, I will add Lithuanian names to the articles about these organizatons. Glad we understand each other. How many Poles were there in this squad? Tymek (talk) 13:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Obviously, you'll undoubtably find tons of material on the Lithuanians in the Stasi. Looking forward to your contributions on the matter, Tymek. Dr. Dan (talk) 00:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Please stop inserting unsupported by academic sources personal speculations in the main space. Thanks, M.K. (talk) 08:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Sources inform us of one person. Or would you like to disagree? Please name the Polish members then, with references.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 13:49, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

How many Poles?

Since user MK has suddenly lost ability to read, I am repeating the question. How many Poles were there in this unit of Lithuanian, pro-Nazi murderers? We know of one, yet MK insists on adding the phrase "Poles". Please provide sources that support your POV. Thank you. Tymek (talk) 13:41, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I refuse to participate in this "discussion" then such shameful personal attacks are used. M.K. (talk) 10:05, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Just answer the question. Tymek (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

How many Poles? Probably none. Borkowski must have actually been a "closet" Lithuanian. Like the population of the Republic of Central Lithuania. There were no Polish Quislings, and no Polish collaboration with the Nazis whatsoever. Is that better? Dr. Dan (talk) 18:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Dr Dan, thank you for the reply. Please make necessary changes to the article about the unit of Nazi Lituanian murderes. Tymek (talk) 19:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Another round of original research

Just managed to solve similar original research example here and now, new place is found for similar activities. Particularly [30][31] [32]. Not surprisingly, because there was even an attempt to remove from similar article the same referenced statement which holds information about Polish involvement [33]. Up to this date there are no single source presented which would say although a few Germans, one Pole served in this squad. In contrast to Arūnas Bubnys' article [34], which is in article for a year now, in which author clearly states that PoleS served in this squad rather then ONE pole. Therefore assertion of "one" Pole is clear Original research, and per WP:NOR and WP:V such "claims" is removed from main space. M.K. (talk) 10:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Above references speak only about one Pole.--Molobo (talk) 15:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Present source which says that in this sondercomando server only "one Pole". AFAIK, there is none such and Bubnys clearly says that there were Poles. Without proper source this info is removed per WP:NOR and WP:V and Bubnys research are restored instead OR claim.M.K. (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Please quote and translate your source for Poles (plural).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Some time ago you personally asked about the same Bubnys source and his assertions that in squad participated POLES and fellow wikipedian provided necessary original quote and translation that "were few Russians and PoleS", it seem that all parties understood that was written: argue that a 'few Russians and Poles' (a few usually reffering to <10). So, I am very disappointed to see current edit warring [35]sources inform us of one, [36] started only because someone is trying to eliminate well discussed information, which is available to everybody. Therefore per WP:POINT, WP:NOR and WP:V I remove and newest "improvements" as well. M.K. (talk) 07:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

That still has left the unreferenced claims about a few Germans.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, adding Germans, but later becoming unsure about it, so why it was added in the first place? Only later to tag it? Nevertheless, Bubnys do not write that there were a few Russians and a few Poles, his original assertion is there were few Russians and Poles [37]. Knowing what drama these lines made in the past and what type of attacks are made now I insist that we strictly follow WP:NOR and WP:V, so there should be were few Russians and Poles like in Bubnys assertion. Even more, currently we see another examples [38][39][40] again MacQueen in here [41] do not write anything similar that in the whole there was only one Pole in the unit as "cited" in the article now, therefore per WP:NOR and particularly WP:V, which suggest that the source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. such invented sentences should be removed ASAP. I will stress that currently we do not have any source which would state that there was only one Pole in the unit, it is gross invention and OR, reflecting personal contributor's preferences. M.K. (talk) 08:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion

Since there's confusion over what the sources says in regards to "poles" vs. "one pole", why not quote the source directly? As for the inclusion of "Germans", just go by the source- it the source says there were Germans, include it; if not, leave it out. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 21:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Jeremy McCracken, for coming on this venue as I am stuck with this. You questioned why not quote the source directly, actually I was trying to do this ([42] [43][44]) but all my attempts to do so meets reverts and even more original research . As I said Arūnas Bubnys (in this source), clearly states that although there were few Russians and Poles [translation]. And there is no single source which would say that there was one Pole. However after subsequent revert warring other party dropped claims that there is ONE Pole now, but presented the newest claim [45], that there were a few Poles, obliviously nor Bubnys source (which is cited in article directly) nor any other do not have information that there were a few Poles (failing to meet WP:NOR and WP:V). Therefore my original suggestion was and is to stick to the original Bubnys assertion, namely ...although there were few Russians and Poles per presented source. However this is not the only one instance of OR. Other party inserting another "information" which is not supported by single source, namely - and a few Poles (or Polish-Lithuanians) used MacQueen's source ([46]) which allegedly should source this "statment". Of cource there is nothing similar in MacQueen's source which would imply that in this squad, in general, served Poles or Polish-Lithuanians (as other party claims [47]). What MacQueen wrote is a case study of single member of this squad, namely Polish criminal Jan Borkowski, assertions [see 10 p. in PDF], he also notes that In 1972 Polish authorities arrested three men (one purely Polish, the other two of mixed Polish-Lithuanian ethnicity) on charges that they had been members of the Special Detachment (Ypatingas Burys. It is evident that MacQueen not only make no generalization who served, but rather presents single event in 1972 without stating anything similar to Poles (or Polish-Lithuanians). What was done is obvious - merged different sources claims and part of text attached to completely different theme, therefore such practice not meet WP:NOR per WP:SYN, as well as WP:V per the source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. To sum it up those claims not meet basic principles and policies of WP. I hope, JeremyMcCracken, you will advise how to proceed. Best, M.K. (talk) 07:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I would say there's an impasse here. You might want to keep going through the dispute resolution process- try a request for comment; if the RfC draws a large consensus, anyone going against it may be blocked from editing the article. If it's close, or no consensus at all, mediation may be the way to go. Cheers, JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 13:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I added RfC request, somehow I last time used it, there was some glitch. Could you investigate is my request made properly? You are also welcome to express personal opinion on current situation . Cheers, M.K. (talk) 13:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

It was indeed made properly; you can see it in the list here: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography. I don't need to give a further opinion since I did in the 3O. I'm also going to place a subheading for the outsiders coming from RfC, to make sure their comments aren't confused with the 3O heading. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 14:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

First of all, I question the translation from Lithuanian by user M.K. It is obvious that the number of Poles in this group was very small; we have names of one Pole and two Poles-Lithuanians. The proper English phrase would be at the very least "a few Russians and a few Poles" to avoid any confusion. What is and has been clear is attempt by some editors to deny/dillute (those examples should make it clear how: [48], [49]), what dr Zuroff clearly stated: "there were several non-Lithuanians in the Ypatinga, but the unit was overwhelmingly Lithuanian by ethnic/national composition and was always considered a "Lithuanian" unit." PS. I support removing the unreferenced German claim which I added long time ago, before I fully understood WP:V. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

a)We have names of one Pole and two Poles-Lithuanians just whom there arrested in Poland in 1972 b) find the source that a few Russians and a few Poles per WP:V and WP:NOR, at this moment there are none c) So called argument that to avoid confusion have no ground because popper and original Bubnys quote very well address all points. d) find the source for few Russians and a few Poles (or Polish–Lithuanians) as well per WP:V and WP:NOR (particularly WP:SYN), at this moment there are none e) I will wait for uninvolved neutral contributors' position over this and we will see do personal user's preferences prevail over core WP policies such as WP:V and WP:NOR, if so we wil have new established precedent.M.K. (talk) 08:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

RfC comments

Uninvolved editor 1

• (Popping by as an uninvolved editor from NOR/N) One main issue I see is that there appears to be only two source used for the conflicting choices of phrase (correct me if I'm wrong): an untranslated Polish source (which might be fine for WP in Polish, but isn't verifiable by people on en.WP who don't speak Polish ), and a PDF with a single-case mention related to discussing the arrest of a particular Pole (while mentioning in passing the arrest of two others of mixed heritage). We cannot rightly assume only one Pole based on a single-case mention, unless it was a RS saying "only" one Pole, nor can we assume lack of mention meant there were more than one. My opinion there is insufficient RS to draw a conclusion either way, and as such, the phrase should be excised entirely until it can be WP:V one way or the other with decent RS. --Faith (talk) 10:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. You are a bit wrong, there is a Lithuanian source and no Polish one (if I not confusing anything :) ). And Lithuanian source's primary information is translated here: Talk:Ypatingasis_būrys#Poles_and_Russians_in_YB.3F, particularly although there were few Russians and PoleS, written by Arūnas Bubnys, who's competence is unquestionable and the source [50] is the most comprehensive in this article about the subject, therefore it passes WP:RS in my view. And I just saying that there is no single source for ONE Pole or as it now written and a few Poles (or Polish–Lithuanians) (this was done with WP:SYN). Hope this clarify some issues. M.K. (talk) 11:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)P.S. take a notice that PDF talks only about 1972 arrest, while Bubnys presents more general data then squad was active

Thank you for clarifying the language and the date of the arrest, but neither fine-tuning of the understanding of the evidence is subtaintial enough to change my opinion on the matter, with my previous points still valid. WP:VUE does not disallow non-English sources; however, it does state, for verifiablity reasons, that an English translation from a source other than a WP editor is preferred. As this has been challenged, and it's acting as the sole reliable source for the point, my opinion is that there should be another RS found in English which supports the point. The counter-point, conversely, has no evidence, as regardless of the date, the arrest report does not indicate only three (or only one) Poles/Pole-mix were the sole persons of that heritage involved. My opinion stands for removal of both phrasing versions, until such time an English RS can be found to support the non-English source, or a RS can confirm the WP:V of the other point. If conflicting information is found from RS, then both should be listed and let the reader decide. Thank you for allowing me input. Popping back out, --Faith (talk) 14:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that, in my knowledge at this point, there is no EN sources, which discusses the issue in detail, therefore we have to stick to non-EN RS sources (otherwise the most part of the article should be deleted as it relies mostly on non EN sources). The possible solution was presented in this version here - cite Bubnys source precisely (per WP:V and as noted per WP:3O) - primarily of Lithuanians, although few Russians and Poles served in it too and use PDF information in the proper place with precise citation like - In 1972 Polish authorities arrested three men, one Polish the other two of mixed Polish–Lithuanian ethnicity.... And the problem would be solved. M.K. (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Anti-Polish bias of the article

The article quotes a Polish criminal's defence. Accused was criminals aren't reliable. The squad raped and killed young Polish girls. Was it also the result of Polish border guard training?

The article doesn't quote any non-Polish criminal. The quoted article by MacQueen isn't about Polish collaboration. Xx236 (talk) 10:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)