User talk:Poeticbent/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 → Archive 10

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anna Poray, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Little Poland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Nazi crimes against the Polish nation may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • ], at the [[Silesian Digital Library]] (Śląska Biblioteka Cyfrowa), Poland. Retrieved May 9, 2012.]</ref> with the help of German minority living in the [[Second Polish Republic]]. The list was

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Verbrennungskommando Warschau

Gatoclass (talk) 16:03, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Anna Poray

A vertical slash is not added at the end of a category unless that category happens to be the same title as the article's title, like how Michael Jordan has his own category. Such cases are rare. When that vertical slash is put in there, it distorts where the article appears within the category. Anna Poray does not (and probably should not) have her own category. I have added some categories to Anna Poray. It may take some time to get accustomed to all of the categories that are available on Wikipedia. A person's occupation is one example of a category that can be added to most articles. I hope this helps.Hoops gza (talk) 01:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Where a person is from is also often a category that can be added. If the person is from a city or large town, the category usually exists. This does not apply in Anna Poray's case, however.Hoops gza (talk) 01:22, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Hoops gza. I noticed your improvements, much appreciated. Poeticbent talk 01:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Franciszek Ząbecki

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Treblinka extermination camp

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Treblinka extermination camp you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:30, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Treblinka extermination camp

The article Treblinka extermination camp you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Treblinka extermination camp for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:40, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Eye for an Eye

Hi, Please provide a page number for Szwagrzyk (2005). You inserted "p. 604" but that is the total number of pages, not a page number for the information. Thanks. Zerotalk 08:57, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

The statistics by Szwagrzyk (2005) relate mostly to ethnic breakdown within the Office of Public Security. Some of them might be controversial (page 62) because of almost unreasonable range (see: report of Nikołaj Seliwanowski from the Soviet NKWD). The same is true about the breakdown of prisons (page 25) with those only for Poles (page 535). The actual numbers are very reliably sourced to Tadeusz Wolsza from IPN. Poeticbent talk 18:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Prodded article you may be able to rescue

Cricot 2. What do you think? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:55, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Anna Poray

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Treblinka extermination camp

The article Treblinka extermination camp you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Treblinka extermination camp for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Human Rights Barnstar
For your work to bring Treblinka extermination camp to Good Article status through a long review process. Thanks so much for contributing on this important topic! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:31, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

...and...

The Quarter Million Award
For your contributions to bring Treblinka extermination camp (estimated annual readership: 269,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:35, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Quarter Million Award for bringing Treblinka extermination camp to Good Article status.

As a side note, I'm hoping to take a run at bringing the Holocaust article itself to GA in the next few months. I'll ping you when I start in on it if you want to drop by. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:35, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Khazar2. You are a gentleman and a scholar! Re: the Holocaust article. I wonder, would you be interested in reviewing the Holocaust in Poland perhaps, which I expanded by over 50% in recent years? If so, I would nominate it for GAN in near future with you and our friend AmericanLemming in mind. We have a good thing going here. Poeticbent talk 18:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Joanna_Pacula_1992_Film.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Joanna_Pacula_1992_Film.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey (talk) 12:06, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Joanna_Pacula_1992_Film.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Joanna_Pacula_1992_Film.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 21:08, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Berek Lajcher

Hello! Your submission of Berek Lajcher at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 11:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Please see new note on DYK nomination page. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Another new note on DYK nomination page. Yoninah (talk) 22:13, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
You could certainly request the nomination to be held until the photo is used. As for adding Treblinka to the template, I'll leave that to more knowledgeable editors. Yoninah (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Treblinka FAC

I'm guessing you're pretty new to the FAC process. I wanted to come here and talk about what's going on there, and my oppose, without filling up the FAC page with a sort of off-topic discussion.

The FAC standards are very strenuous, so you shouldn't feel bad that the article doesn't currently meet them. If you're serious about getting this article its FA star, you have to stick with it until it meets those standards. At FAC, reviewers offer their opinions about whether the standards are met. That's what "Support" and "Oppose" comments mean -- not whether you should keep working or not -- but whether it's ready to be promoted and get the star (sometimes people also just offer "Comments", which in reality usually means "Oppose, but I know you'll fix this"). The process expects that the article nominator then works to fix any problems that have led reviewers to oppose. Someone opposes promotion, then the nominator improves the article and responds at FAC to let the reviewers know that changes have been addressed, and the reviewer gives it another look. Repeat, sometimes quite a few times. Sometimes the article gets to the point where there's a consensus to promote, and sometimes there's too much to do (keeping in mind there's also a sometimes-tricky "stability" requirement), the nomination fails, and you have to take ... erm, something like 2 or 3 weeks, I forget exactly ... to work on it before you're permitted to try again. Lots of articles take more than one run through FAC to get their star.

I know that FAC can be a pretty stressful environment for a lot of folks, and I know that the reviewers' job sometimes comes across as callous or downright mean (I'm really not, I promise). Don't let it get to you. It's hard work, but the goal is to get a historically important topic to join the list of Wikipedia's finest works. That's worth striving for. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 19:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Good luck

Nice job with Treblinka. Good luck with the ride through hell here. I have been unable to get any of my content to modern FA standards for few years now... but it still improves the article. That said, those days I focus on GAs (btw, recently DYK rules were changed and new GAs are eligible for a regular DYK slot). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:19, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Piotr. I know about the new GA/DYK rule; and already submitted Treblinka based on it. Check it out. Modern FA is a lot more strenuous, that's for sure, but it'll get done. Poeticbent talk 18:10, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014

Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:55, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Berek Lajcher

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Treblinka extermination camp

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Berek's parents

Re: "we do not anglicize names of little known commoners", I disagree with your characterization. I did not anglicize their names. Rather, I undid their Polishification. The names are Hebrew, through Yiddish. The bearers would not have spelled them Szmul and Chai - but rather שמואל‎ and חיה. What I did was simply render them in English, phonetically, in the way that we common see them rendered. The letters "sz" do not imply "sh" to our anglophone readership. -- Y not? 19:29, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I understand your concerns perfectly. Please remember also, they were the citizens of Poland with names spelled in official Polish documents written in the Polish language similar to everybody else in the country. Like popular Kazimierz (just an example), not Casimir (as it is known in English) or קז'ימייז' , the spelling of their first names can be very useful in further research across the official archives. Poeticbent talk 19:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
fair enough -- Y not? 03:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Tourism in Poland

WKS Śląsk Wrocław is at it again .... [1]. He/she must subscribe to the "more cowbell" theory of editing. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Plus using 87.99.45.74 to weave around the rules. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:57, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
We might have to reopen the report, see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/87.99.45.74/Archive. User warned about making logged-out edits, ignoring the warning. Poeticbent talk 19:11, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
We both posted to Mark Arsten the issue, he's put protection onto the page, but that will only take care of the IP sockpuppeting for a month. Ajh1492 (talk) 20:17, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

And at it again ... Ajh1492 (talk) 11:58, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I put another comment on Mark's talk page about WKS Śląsk Wrocław. At least I've got him/her engaged in some conversation on the article talk page. I've knocked down each of his complaints, but he still keeps pushing the same Wroclaw photo even though I've cut the number of lesser poland photos to three. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:59, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Willi Mentz

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Jewish Question

You were obviously correct. But this has become a power game, not an encyclopedia. Better luck next time Septentrionalis PMAnderson 06:38, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Treblinka extermination camp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Franciszek Duszeńko

Hello! Your submission of Franciszek Duszeńko at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Valenciano (talk) 19:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Franciszek Duszeńko (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Dean, Solidarity (trade union), Adjunct and Rector
Tourism in Poland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Baltic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Map 1931

Map was drawn by Polish cenzus 1931, by GUS and Hebrew was one of the languages of cenzus. Mathiasrex (talk) 12:26, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Mother tongue IN POLAND IN 1931 BY VOIVODESHIPS according to census in %

VOIVODESHIP POLISH UKRAINIAN YIDDISH BELARUSIAN GERMAN RUSSIAN OTHER AND NOT STATED
Białystok Voivodeship 67 0 12 16 0 3 2
Kielce Voivodeship 89 0 11 0 0 0 0
Kraków Voivodeship 91 3 6 0 0 0 0
Lublin Voivodeship 85 4 10 0 1 0 0
Lwów Voivodeship 58 34 8 0 0 0 0
Łódź Voivodeship 81 0 14 0 5 0 0
Nowogródek Voivodeship 53 0 7 39 0 1 0
Polesie Voivodeship 14 5 10 6 0 2 63
Pomorze Voivodeship 88 0 2 0 10 0 0
Poznań Voivodeship 91 0 2 0 7 0 0
Stanisławów Voivodeship 23 69 7 0 1 0 0
Autonomous Silesian Voivodeship 92 0 0 0 7 0 1
Tarnopol Voivodeship 49 46 5 0 0 0 0
Warszawa Voivodeship 88 0 10 0 2 0 0
Wilno Voivodeship 60 0 8 23 0 3 6
Wołyń Voivodeship 17 68 10 0 2 1 2
Poland 69 14 9 3 2 0 3

Data from Radziwiłł A.., Roszkowski W., 2001, Historia 1871-1939. Podręcznik dla szkół średnich, Wydawnictwo Szkolne PWN, Warszawa, p.278l; ISBN 83-7195-050-0

Presumably based on Polish census of 1931.

DYK for Theodor van Eupen

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Thankee

I really enjoyed reading your essay on editing and nationalism, thankee. Keep up the great writing. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 00:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Katyn Commission

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Cas Liber's comments on Treblinka extermination camp at FAC

Helllo, PoeticBent. In your diligence to promptly address Squemish Ossifrage's lengthy list of concerns, you seem to have forgotten about the two comments that Cas Liber posted. They shouldn't take very long to address, and I've pinged Cas Liber on his talk page to remind him to finish his review of the article. AmericanLemming (talk) 03:21, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

  • Will do. Thanks for the reminder, AmericanLemming. I don't know what I would do without you. Poeticbent talk 04:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Kraków Mydlniki (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bronowice
Leon Billewicz (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Piatykhatky

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Franciszek Duszeńko

Gatoclass (talk) 20:02, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Writer's Barnstar
Nice job writing Franciszek Duszeńko and promoting it to the Main Page! Thank you for your recent contributions, too! Happy holidays, and make sure to pat someone on their back today. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:22, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome. Well deserved! ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 04:35, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mazurek (cake)

Hello! Your submission of Mazurek (cake) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Matty.007 20:36, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Róża Berger may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • During the Holocaust and Its Aftermath'' ed. by Joshua D. Zimmerman, Rutgers University Press. }}</ref> She was born in [[Kraków]] and married Josef Berger on 17 September 1911 in Kraków under the

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:05, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Białowieża Forest may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • //www.mfa.gov.by/mulateral/organization/list/unesco/ec7843627b04dc80.html Belovezhskaya pushcha]] – Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:15, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Krystyna Janda may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Orderu Odrodzenia Polski (2002) – w uznaniu wybitnych zasług dla rozwoju Telewizji Polskiej)

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:49, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Franz Stangl may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • {{quote|"My conscience is clear about what I did, myself," he said, in the same stiffly spoken words

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:16, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

ANI open on Iryna Harpy

Just in case you want to express your opinion. I brought up her in-civil behavior towards you in the AN/I raised about the Holodomor article. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User_Iryna_Harpy_.E2.80.94_report_of_WP:NPA_and_WP:TALKNO. I expect to get her wrath, but cyber-bullies need to be stood up to. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:06, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

  • Thanks for making a note of that 2013-11-10 talk page comment, I appreciate it. Let's wait for what user Iryna Harpy says in her reply to your posting at AN/I. Poeticbent talk 15:26, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Franciszek Ząbecki

Cześć, zerknij proszę na to. Artykuł powstał w dużej mierze dzięki Tobie, i Twojemu zainteresowaniu tą niezwykłą postacią. Jest też zdjęcie grobu p. Franciszka, z datą Jego śmierci. Pozdrawiam serdecznie, i korzystając z okazji – Wesołych Świąt, i tysięcy edycji w 2014:) PS. Szkoda, że nie jesteś bardziej aktywny na pl-Wiki. Może rozważyłbyś, aby przynajmniej najważniejsze kwestie edytować równolegle? Jeszcze raz wszystkiego najlepszego! Boston9 (talk) 11:28, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

  • Serdeczne dzięki. Wprowadziłem już dodatkowe informacje z życia Ząbeckiego do artykułu o nim samym wraz z jakże niezwykle poręcznym źródłem, publikowanym w autentycznej prasie w myśl wp:rs. Rozpiera mnie ciekawość. Proszę powiedz jak udało się dotrzeć do Piotra Ząbeckiego? Kto i gdzie go odnalazł? Kto nakłonił go do stworzenia całej opowieści o ojcu, pomijając garść danych personalnych? Czy to ty? Can you satisfy my curiosity, please? Thanks Boston9. Poeticbent talk 20:49, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Of course, I can:) To wyłącznie Twoja zasługa, bo z informacji jakie otrzymałem to Twoje pytanie uruchomiło ten proces:) Pan Edward Kopówka zaangażował się w to osobiście, i poprosił o pomoc swoich przyjaciół w regionie. No i udało się. Udało się dotrzeć do p. Piotra i jego domowego archiwum, żeby opowiedział tę historię. Wydaje mi się, że dzięki tym materiałom nasz bohater powinien być także niedługo bardziej upamiętniony w Muzeum w Treblince. Strasznie się cieszę, że się udało. Gratuluję Ci. Boston9 (talk) 22:02, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Dzięki, Boston9. Na marginesie, napisałem też artykulik o panu Edwardzie Kopówce. Nie wiem na ile bliski jest mu język angielski, ale dobrze byłoby aby sam się zapoznał z jego treścią na wypadek gdyby informacje z dostępnych mi źródeł nie zgadzały się w stu procentach z tzw. rzeczywistością. Z góry dziękuję za odpowiedź, Poeticbent talk 22:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Third Treblinka extermination camp review done

Three days, 150 edits, and 45 comments later, I have finished my third (and hopefully final) review/copy edit of Treblinka extermination camp. Once you address all of my comments, you can probably go straight back to FAC on December 29, if that's what you want to do. I'll probably have a non-Wikipedian proofread it too, just to make sure I didn't miss anything. AmericanLemming (talk) 14:39, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

  • I'm truly impressed by your resilience AmericanLemming. Needless to say, the closing of FAC nomination was rather a shock to me considering just how active our discussion was until the last minute. A complete 'shut-down' was pronounced virtually in mid sentence without much care about etiquette. I've been following your copy-edits very closely since yesterday and I like how the article improves steadily. Thanks for doing this. Now that you're finished, I can pick it up from here. Poeticbent talk 15:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
  • By the way, I looked through my collection of history books (I have 20 to 30), especially the ones on Germany in World War II, and I found three or four that have some stuff on Treblinka. I don't think the article is missing any major facts about Treblinka, but my sources might clear up a few details, like the relationship between Treblinka and the Warsaw Ghetto/Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. AmericanLemming (talk) 06:11, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for sharing, AmericanLemming. I'm in the process of surfing the net in search of some answers also. Re: comments from Hamilstonstone. One of the least reliable sources in our article is Shoah (film), and yet it is used in such way that Hamilstonstone immediately picked up on it, i.e. statement about the number of people who "could be killed in a matter of two or three hours". We are going to have to solve this. Poeticbent talk 06:27, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Addendum. I just finished re-reading the whole relevant chapter in Kopówka. Apparently, there's no such exact statement in his book. I need to find out from actual transcripts who and when might have said that. Poeticbent talk 06:53, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Here's what we know. SS-Unterscharführer Franz Suchomel told Lanzmann in an illegally taped interview some 30 years after the fact (quote): "In the new gas chamber perhaps 200 could fit in at a time and 3,000 people could be "done" in two hours."[2] Suchomel was probably correct in his estimation because Mark S. Smith, who wrote Sperling's biography, said also (quote): "Franz Stangl, the commander of Treblinka, boasted they could go from train to death in two hours."[3] However, when Lanzmann asked Suchomel (quote): "How was it possible in Treblinka in peak days to "process" 18,000 people? [...] I read that figure – he said – in [Düsseldorf 1965] court reports" ... Suchomel replied (quote): "18,000 is too high [...] To "process" 18,000 people. To liquidate them. Mr Lanzmann, that's an exaggeration. Believe me. How many? 12,000 to 15,000. But we had to spend half the night at it."[4] At maximum capacity the gas chambers would have to operate for about 10 hours (15,000:3,000x2=10) in order to process the number of victims claimed by Suchomel (which is not entirely out of line) even though he could easily be considered a hostile witness. ARC 2006 says it differently (quote): "In the initial phase, a section of twenty wagons containing 2,000-3,000 people could be liquidated within 3-4 hours [no citation]. Later the Germans "gained experience" and reduced the duration of the killing process to an hour and a half." (again, not a specific source mentioned, just a list of authors).[5] No-one says it in exactly the same way. Wiernik wrote: "there were periods when as many as 30,000 people were gassed in one day, with all 13 gas chambers in operation."[6] which means that "processing" would have to last for 20 hours a day, still possible (I mean in a 24-hour-day) although such estimate would have been contested across the board from the German side and I don't know if it ever happened. Stangl also said in the following statement: "When the work lasted for about fourteen hours, 12,000 to 15,000 people were annihilated."Arad, 1987 & Cymet, 2012 so the work did last for 14 hours when needed. — Anyhow, we have to decide how to present this to the reading public. Poeticbent talk 00:43, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Finally, new and larger gas-chambers were built. I think that there were now five or six large gas-chambers. I cannot say exactly how many people these large gas-chambers held. If the small gas-chambers could hold 80-100 people, the large ones could probably hold twice that number [i.e. 200].
— 'It was my job to shoot these people'. Willi Mentz, the Gunman of Treblinka (in) Klee, Ernst, The Good Old Days [7]


Höß [who visited Treblinka] confirms the capacity estimates of the new gas chambers built in the middle of 1942 made by Willi Mentz as being 200. Given six chambers (there were possibly ten, according to [Höß, 3868­PS/33,275­79] some witnesses), 1,200 people could have been gassed at a time. Assuming, therefore, Matthes' estimate of thirty minutes for each operation, to execute a trainload of 5,000 would have taken just over two hours, certainly a little longer when removal of the bodies and cleaning up are considered, but nothing that would take anything approaching a whole day. 800,000 Jews could have easily been killed in 160 days at this rate (the date for the statistic of 713,555 listed in the Hofle memorandum is 31 December, 163 days from the commencement of arrivals), leaving enough time to gas a further 1,235,000 before arrivals slowed drastically in August of 1943, should they have been shipped there. Other estimates place the capacity of the chambers at 300 each and the duration of the gassing at 15 minutes, which would increase the efficiency of the killing operation even more.— Obviously, the killing capacity of Treblinka is beyond questioning. Even if the demands on the Treblinka staff and their facilities had been more than doubled, the trains would have continued running on time.
— Ziel Treblinka / "Final Destination Treblinka" By Stephen Potyondi © 2006 [8] [9]


During the entire time I was in Treblinka, I served in the upper camp... Usually Fritz Schmidt was in charge of the engine room. In my opinion, as a civilian he was either a mechanic or a driver... All together, six gas chambers were active [see above, 1942]. According to my estimate, about 300 people could enter each gas chamber. The people went into the gas chamber without resistance. Those who were at the end, the Ukrainian guards had to push inside... The gas chambers were closed for about thirty minutes. Then Schmidt stopped the gassing, and the two Ukrainians who were in the engine room opened the gas chambers from the other side.
— Testimony of SS Oberscharfuehrer Heinrich Matthes from Treblinka quoted in "BELZEC, SOBIBOR, TREBLINKA - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps", Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 121. [10]


When asked during his trial how many people could be murdered in one day, Stangl answered: Regarding the question of what was the optimum amount of people gassed in one day, I can state: according to my estimation a transport of thirty freight cars with 3,000 people was liquidated in three hours. When the work lasted for about fourteen hours, 12,000 to 15,000 people were annihilated. There were many days that the work lasted from the early morning until the evening.
— Excerpted from BELZEC, SOBIBOR, TREBLINKA - the Operation Reinhard Death Camps Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987. ISBN 0-253-3429-7. [11]

Before I think about how to insert this information into the article, I will throw in the information I've found. The three quotes below reflect everything my four sources have on Treblinka's killing capacity, I'm afraid. They have lots of other good information, though. :) AmericanLemming (talk) 09:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Other major annihilation centers were built in the so-called General Government area of Poland; intended principally for the annihilation of Jews were Chelmno (340,000), Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka each with a daily killing capacity of 15,000-25,000.
— Excerpted from Germany: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present - Joseph A. Biesinger, 2006. page 313.


Rudolf Höss: "Another improvement we made over Treblinka was that we built our gas chambers to accommodate 2,000 people at one time, whereas at Treblinka their 10 gas chambers only accommodated 200 people each."
— Excerpted from The Rise and Fall of Nazi Germany: A History of the Third Reich - William Shirer, 1960. page 968.


By the end of Auguts 1942, 312,000 Jews, not only from Warsaw but also from Radom and Lublin, had been gassed at Treblinka.
— Excerpted from The Third Reich At War - Richard J. Evans., 2008. page 290.

As I see it, there are two main difficulties in trying to report Treblinka's daily killing capacity:

1. The daily killing capacity increased when Stangl took over in September 1942 because Stangl was a more efficient administrator than Eberl.
2. The daily killing capacity increased again when when the new gas chambers became operational sometime in the fall of 1942.

I'm not sure how much of the "Person X says the killing capacity was this and Person Y says the killing capacity was that" we should include in the article, but we should definitely at least mention the two reasons why the killing capacity increased over time, as I've listed above. Do let me know what you think. AmericanLemming (talk) 10:05, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't agree with you more. Presenting ranges is a whole new ball game. Estimates would invariably expose the weak points of postwar evidence and often conflicting claims which are readily available in reference section anyway. It's best to take a broad view because of how popular this article is out there. Poeticbent talk 10:59, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
If you've been following my changes to Treblinka, I added two quotations from Rudolf Höss to the article and (eventually) figured out how to properly do Harvard citations and shortened footnotes. But I'm going to call it quits for now; feel free to add stuff about the daily killing capacity or address any other comments of Hamiltonstone's or mine. I won't be adding any more info to the article for 18-24 hours. AmericanLemming (talk) 11:19, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I have to visit someone at the hospital today. Just enough time to read the article, but not enough for another overhaul. I do intend to address the comments in full at the next available opportunity of course. Thanks for the "talkquotes" AmericanLemming. Their multitude can help us avoid the pitfalls of making claims based on partial observations. Poeticbent talk 18:47, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

hook for Mazurek in Queue 5

FYI - they are discussing the wording of the hook. DYK Lead hook in Queue 5 — Maile (talk) 17:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Mazurek (cake)

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Poeticbent/Archive_6&oldid=1091532475"