Talk:Rudolf Vrba

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rudolf Vrba article.
Article policies
Featured article star Rudolf Vrba is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 11, 2006.
July 31, 2006 Featured article candidate Promoted
Citation
This page was cited by Paul Lungen in The Canadian Jewish News, April 12, 2006
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Featured article

Has anyone considered nominating this article for featured article status? Looking it over, I think it would almost definitely pass inspection. Deyyaz [ Talk | Contribs ] 19:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

And so it is! Congrats to the editors involved.--Mantanmoreland 17:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh, thank you! I only noticed when I saw this post, so you were the one to pass on the good news, Mantan. ;-D SlimVirgin (talk) 21:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism of this page - should we do something about it?

I recently noticed that someone with IP 137.158.128.105 modified Vrba's page, inserting the following:

"Vrba escaped by flying away in the time machine that he made from the human soap and ashes that he found in the gas chambers, which explains the remains of any human remains actually being found atAuschwitz after the war. He also wrote "Sergeant Pepper" in 1943 whilst at Auschwitz, which was later passed on to John Lennon, who basically copied it note-for-note in the 1960s. He never received due credit for having basically invented the psychedelic music genre, and his heirs should be backpaid for "Pepper"'s royalties from the 60's! Accusations that Vrba was schizophrenic and suffered from hallucinations and delusions are just anti-semitic lies made by Neo-Nazis and terrorists."

Thankfully, Kingboyk noticed this vandalism and reverted to the previous version within less than 2 hours (thanks Kingboyk!). I looked at the list of edits that came from IP 137.158.128.105 and it seems that this guy has edited several Holocaust related entries and inserted this sort of vandalism in those entries as well. I'm new to Wikipedia but since we're fortunate here to have some very experienced users editing this page, allow me to ask: should we report this? to whom? how? Guidance from experienced Wikipedia users would be appreciated.

Escamoso 11:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

All you can do is grit your teeth and revert. I'm surprised there isn't more vandalism, given the nature of the subject matter.--Mantanmoreland 17:35, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

What's going on with the first sentence of this article? I am very new to editing Wikipedia, but I can't seen to remove it when I go to edit. Help!--Teamla 22:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, someone got it. Thanks!--Teamla 22:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Book title

I just stumbled upon this excellent article, and I had a question. Vrba's memoir, which I read years ago and still have somewhere, was entitled "I Cannot Forgive" when it was published years ago and still has that title in US editions. It stuck out in my mind not just because the book was so memorable but because it was not a very good title. I see here that it is listed in the footnotes with a different title, "I escaped from Auschwitz." Shouldn't it be referred to by its original title? Note the listing on Amazon.[1]. Someone points out in a "product Wiki" at the bottom of the Amazon page, correctly, that the book was originally entitled "I cannot forgive." I think use of the newer title is a bit confusing.--Mantanmoreland 16:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

It has been republished, along with some very useful appendices (e.g. the full Vrba-Wetzler report), so the new edition is the one we're using as a reference. However, we should make a note in the References section that it was originally called I cannot forgive. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I just checked, and we do. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, thanks for clarifying. I think the "I cannot forgive" part may have come first in the original title, but I'd have to haul out the book and it is buried somewhere.--Mantanmoreland 16:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good article

It is really a good article. But should not we restrict size to the recommended level! FAs going well beyond the size recommended does not look nice, though I am not sure of the same. --Bhadani 16:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Bhadani. I don't think there is a recommended level. I saw a discussion about length recently on the FA page, and people were saying articles should be as long as they need to be (with the stress on need, of course). SlimVirgin (talk) 17:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks SV. Now, a doubt has been cleared. The page is really nice and I learnt a lot - though I had heard the name before. --Bhadani 17:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I am growing older. I forgotr to congratulate your and Jayjg, and all others on the nice work. Congrats. --Bhadani 17:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
We the bankers say this as Need based contents. --Bhadani 17:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the congrats, which are much appreciated. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) 17:38, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Only five escaped?

I think something needs to be reworded, because I don't fully understand.

The article states he was one of 5 who escaped Auschwitz concentration camp but the article states that nearly 300 escaped.

I don't think I understand, maybe someone could word the article more accurately.

But otherwise, it is a very good job. Congrats. The0208 00:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Similarly I was confused by this. I think the opening para is unclear in that either they were the 1st two of 5 who escaped and gave credible reports or simply 2 of 5 who escaped and that they also gave credible reports. And, experimenting, does the tag [ambiguous] work? Paul Beardsell 07:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
The second footnote explains it. Overall, 667 prisoners are known to have tried to escape, 270 of whom were caught and killed; the fate of the others is unknown. Of the 667, 76 Jews succeeded, five of whom managed to pass information about the camp to the Allies. Vrba and Wetzler were the second and third of those five. SlimVirgin (talk) 10:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I know. But the point is simply this: The sentence is ambiguous. It is always better that this is not the case. And if there isn't an [ambiguous] tag there could usefully be one. Paul Beardsell 11:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
It's best not to put tags on featured articles. I don't find the sentence ambiguous myself, but perhaps you could suggest a way to make it less so, but retain its accuracy. Here it is:
"In April 1944, Vrba and Alfréd Wetzler became the second and third of only five Jews to escape successfully from the German death camp at Auschwitz and pass information to the Allies about the mass murder that was taking place there."
I read it to mean that they were the second and third Jews to escape and pass details to the Allies i.e. there was one Jew before them who managed to escape and pass details, and two after them. (The reason Vrba's information is regarded as important is that it was the first to be taken seriously, not the first overall, as the article and footnotes say.) SlimVirgin (talk) 11:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


When the Nazis abandoned Auschiwitz I thought that several/many thousands of prisoners voluntarily retreated westward with the SS troops. The numbers mentioned above included only those who stayed behind waiting for the Russian troops - those too sick, etc to travel. I am sure the SS didn't just take 5 or 6 or 300 prisoners with them.


Only 5 of 76 gave daming info to the Allies - how about after the war? This seems strange. Any info on the names of the other 71+, not counting the voluntary evacuees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.105.80.219 (talk • contribs)

Most of the 76 were recaptured (so "escaped" includes "escaped temporarily" - this could be clarified in the article). The following from Erich Kulka, "Attempts by Jewish Escapees to Stop Mass Extermination", Jewish Social Studies 47:3/4 (1985:Summer/Fall) 295-306 may help:

"A total of seventy-six Jewish prisoners fled from Auschwitz-Birkenau, but for lack of assistance from the Polish resistance movement and lack of connections in the world outside the barbed wire, most were recaptured. Barely a dozen successful Jewish escapees were traced after the war."

Kulka cites Tadeusz Iwaszko, "Haftlingsfluchten aus dem Konzentrationslager Auschwitz," Hefte von Auschwitz, 7 (1964), 49ff. --Zerotalk 13:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Another source of confusion here is that some of the figures are for escapes from the main camp, and others are for the Auschwitz complex (main camp and many sub-camps). Kulka is clear that the 667 figure was for the whole complex and includes those recaptured. --Zerotalk 13:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A milstone

A milestone! Really a great job. --Bhadani 02:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redundant article The Vrba-Wetzler report

The article The Vrba-Wetzler report appears to be redundant. Can certain portions be merged?

"Redundant" in what sense of the word? Paul Beardsell 07:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It voluminously repeates the exact same thing.

[edit] First two sentences

Should the second sentence be the first? Per inverted pyramid, its more important that he escaped from Auschwitz and passed info to the allies than that he was a professor of pharmacology. Marskell 08:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Marskell, my reasoning was to first of all say who he was i.e. when he died, what his position in life was. And then to say what he was known for. SlimVirgin (talk) 09:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps: "Walter Rosenberg (September 11, 1924 – March 27, 2006), was an escapee of the German death camp at Auschwitz, Holocaust documentarian, and later Professor Emeritus in the Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics at the University of British Columbia in Canada." Nothing else would need to change, except there'd be no need to repeat "German death camp" in the next sentence.
done.Sfahey 14:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Great article BTW. Marskell 13:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) 18:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Marskell, I'm really not keen on the first sentence saying he was an escapee, and particularly not a "Holocaust documentarian." He was a professor of pharmacology. Escaping Auschwitz was something he did, not something he was. And others documented it; he just told them what had happened. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand at all. He is notable because of his escape. The article details his documentarian work. He was an important Auschwitz escapee. That's broadly why this article exists. Per any existing stylistic standard you want, the lead sentence should note this. I have absolutely no desire to revert something you've worked on so greatly (and particularly with Jayjg editing) but...I don't understand at all. Marskell 20:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Marskell, I'm not sure I can explain it clearly. It's that escaping from Auschwitz isn't something he was, but something he did. He became known because he did X, not because he was an X-er. So you're right: that has to be very near the top. But first you want to answer the question: Who is this person? The answer is: Name, a professor of pharmacology. And the reason we're telling you his story is? He escaped from Auschwitz.
That intuitively feels like the best flow to me. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
On a kind of ontological level, I do understand your second sentence...but then I'd quibble (of course I would :). That profession is "is-ness" is debatable, personally and in terms of writing a Wiki page. He was man. He was a husband. He was a Jew. He was (maybe) an optimist or a pessimist, a Cancer or a Virgo. If you could ask him, I'm sure some of those would occur before "Holocaust escapee". But the primary question here is: why are you reading this? Answer: because he escaped Auschwitz and passed info to the allies. This shouldn't be near the top, it should be at the top. And, presentation-wise, order of primacy in the lead should reflect order of primacy in the body. We have "50 papers" in the first sentence now, but this doesn't occur in the body until after half the article is done. One or the other should be changed.
Now then! I've had one article on the main page and it's a very stressful day. I don't want to be too pedantic, picking apart 0.25k when you've done up the other 84.75 so well. The first sentence does matter, and I don't agree with it as it stands, but perhaps tomorrow will provide a compromise. Cheers, Marskell 21:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for understanding about today! Tomorrow would be great. ;-D SlimVirgin (talk) 21:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Circumstances of death

Usually in a biographical article where the subject is deceased, the circumstances of the death are given. Icemuon 13:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. It was in an earlier version then was moved during a series of edits, and not put back. It's there now. SlimVirgin (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can someone fix ... =

... the tortuous second paragraph of "Vrba's accusations". There's a long, meaningless sentence in there that smacks of "too many cooks". I don't know the story well enough to do it. Sfahey 14:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Which is the sentence you don't like? SlimVirgin (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible vandal?

The mention of sexual orientation in this sentence doesn't look quite kosher, but I don't know enough about the subject to rip it out myself: "He decided to return to Slovakia, but was caught by homosexual Hungarian border guards while crossing back over the Hungary-Slovakia border." --Robertb-dc 17:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Robert. Not quite kosher is right. :-D SlimVirgin (talk) 18:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

At the bottom of the page, after Further Reading, this appears.

    [[he:רודולף ורבה nigger fuck shit
    ]]

I don't know what the Hebrew says, but I'm positive that the English is offensive. Bobbit bob 18:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Bob. The Hebrew is just his name; the other stuff has gone, I think — at least for now. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Improved source needed for sentence

Hi, This note is regarding the sentence that reads: "It is regarded as one of the most important documents of the 20th century[5][6] because it was the first detailed information about the camp to reach the Allies that they accepted as credible.[7]"

  • The sentence uses a "weasel word" formulation "it is regarded" ("Here are some weasel words that are often found in Wikipedia articles:"...is widely regarded as..."...From Weasel words wiki-page). The wiki-page on "weasel words" goes on to say "It is better to put a name and a face on an opinion than to assign an opinion to an anonymous source." An editor has pointed out that this sentence is footnoted. However, the footnoted sources (BC bookworld author bank, from abcbookword.com, and Jewish News Weekly of Northern California) are not sources that would normally be used in an academic context. Wikipedia's verifiability policy states that Information on Wikipedia must be reliable and verifiable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. As such, it would help if we could find a more scholarly source (e.g., a journal article, encyclopedia article, etc).Nazamo 02:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


Pressac was mentioned in the lead article - is there any truth to the story that he concealed a memo that implies that the gas chambers were actually gas shelters? He supposedly had the memo in his possession for a few years before his death and it remained hidden until recently. Link to this info? The existence of this memo would tend to further ruin his story - I notice in the article that several of the good guys "historians" already question Vbra's testimony, at least partially. The internet has almost nothing on Vbra - not even Zundel who he gave evidence against. Is this story a hoax? He seems to be little regarded as a reliable source of info even by his "own side".

[edit] In 1942 Karski reported to the Polish, British and U.S. governments on the situation in Poland

In 1942 Karski reported to the Polish, British and U.S. governments on the situation in Poland, especially the destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto and the Holocaust of the Jews. He met with Polish politicians in exile including the prime minister, as well as members of political parties such as the PPS, SN, SP, SL, Jewish Bund and Poalej-Syjon. He also spoke to Anthony Eden, the British foreign secretary, and included a detailed statement on what he had seen in Warsaw and Bełżec. He then traveled to the United States and reported to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His report was a major factor in informing the West, but no action followed.

In July 1943, Karski again personally reported to Roosevelt about the situation in Poland. He also met with many other government and civic leaders in the United States, including Felix Frankfurter, Cordell Hull, William Joseph Donovan, Samuel Cardinal Stritch, and Stephen Wise. Karski also presented his report to media, bishops of various denominations, members of the Hollywood film industry and artists, but without success. Many of those he spoke to did not believe him, or supposed that his testimony was much exaggerated or was propaganda from the Polish government in exile. It is possible, however, that Karski's descriptions influenced FDR to create a War Refugee Board several months later in January of 1944. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.156.86.41 (talk) 21:10, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Witold Pilecki a member of the Armia Krajowa (Home Army)informed the Western Allies of Nazi Germany's camp atrocities

Witold Pilecki (May 13, 1901 – May 25, 1948; pronounced ['vitɔld pi'leʦki]; codenames Roman Jezierski, Tomasz Serafiński, Druh, Witold) was a soldier of the Second Polish Republic, the founder of the resistance movement, Secret Polish Army (Tajna Armia Polska), and a member of the Home Army (Armia Krajowa). During World War II, he became the only known person to volunteer to be imprisoned at Auschwitz Concentration Camp. While there, he organized inmate resistance, and as early as 1940, informed the Western Allies of Nazi Germany's camp atrocities. He escaped from Auschwitz in 1943 and took part in the Warsaw Uprising (August–October 1944). Pilecki was executed in 1948 by the communists. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.156.86.41 (talk) 21:19, 8 April 2007 (UTC).


Very odd article - Yehuda Bauer calls him a hero and a liar in one sentence. No mention is made of his testimony in the Zundel trial where Bauer turne out half right - he was a liar. Odd.159.105.80.141 15:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of sourced material

Editor Slimvirgin, please stop removing sourced material. --72.209.9.246 (talk) 01:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I've going to treat this as vandalism, as you're following me around with this and one other IP address. I've just checked the source and he doesn't make that claim, at least not on that page. If you think differently, supply a citation. SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 01:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Judenrampe... and other mistakes

There are several mistakes in the text:

  • Picture marked Judenrampe is not a picture from the Judenrampe but from Rampe in Auschwitz II. "Die Judenrampe" was (is) about 1 km from this camp between Auschwitz I and II.
  • After coming to Auschwitz II Vrba were definitely not tattoed with prison number. He had been tattoed shortly after arrival to Auschwitz I (have a look in his memories, i don´t know which page is it in english version, but in czech it is page 103 of 333 pages).¨
  • Vrba did not went trouhg "selection" and definitely not after he was transferred to Birkenau camp.

I am not going to correct these points as I am not English speaker... --88.146.4.41 (talk) 08:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for pointing these out.
Regarding the Judenrampe, there is some information about it here. If you scroll down, you'll see a sketch of how it looked at the time, drawn by a prisoner, where you can see the Birkenau gatehouse in the background. That seems to be the same perspective as the photograph we are using. There's a map here, though it's not clear from this where the gatehouse was. The ramp was located a third of a mile southeast of the gate. In or around May 1944, in order to deal with the large numbers coming from Hungary, the railway track was extended to go right into the camp, so the Judenrampe stopped being used.
Perhaps we should write to Yad Vashem and ask whether the image we got from their site is the Judenrampe.
Regarding whether Vrba was tatooed at Birkenau, my memory is that he contradicts himself in the book, so we relied on a secondary source. I'll look it up again and try to remember what the problem was. I think we had the same problem with whether he went through selection. SlimVirgin talk|edits 14:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the Judenrampe: I was on that place 3 times, so I know that the picture is definitely not from the Judenrampe but from camp. If you have a look at the pictures of the Judenrampe today, you cannot see the gate in the back. And on the drawing, there are niether cattle boxes nor railroad... The rails on Judenrampe goes from south to north, but the direction to the camp is to the west. So you never can see the like this.
And if you want to know where the gate is on the map just have a look on two ways from the camp which are visible - one leads to the railyard and the other over the bridge across the rails. So this is the place where the gate is. I guess you dont need to bother people from Yad Vashem, try to ask someone who lives in Oswiecim, they will told you. I am 100% sure, that this picture is from the camp :)
Other pictures of Judenrampe [2]
If you will go to the source of the picture, you can see that there is written: "Jews undergoing the selection process on the Birkenau arrival platform known as the "ramp" "

So the picture is from Birkeanu ramp with Hungarian Jews on it... Vrba has never worked there (he worked on Judenrampe)...and the reason is simple...he was not already in the camp when the ramp was finished in May 1944.

So the note under the picture is mixing two different ramps..:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.103.4.11 (talk) 17:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


Regarding other things
I dont know, why don´t you believe Vrba´s words in his memories???? And why a selection of Canada commando after half a year in Auschwitz??? And do you think he was in Auschwitz half a year without the number?
If you read Vrba-Wetzler report carrefully, you can find this part: "We were taken to a cellar and received tea and bread. Next day (June 30th 1942 - my note), however, our civilian clothes were taken away, our heads were shaved, and our numbers were tattooed on our forearms in the usual way." ---So this is the same as in his memoirs. And exactly according to practice in Auschwitz. Noone was a long time without number.
Other source: Danuta Czech: Kalendarz wydarzeń w KL Auschwitz: 30th June 1942: 400 Slovak Jews which were transported from KL Lublin gets numbers 43833-44232. ---- and in the note: On 15th August 1942 (after 6 weeks in the camp) were just 208 of this prisoners alive. That means that 192 people of this transport were already dead (48%). (thats my translation from Polish to Czech and then to English, so nothing special...:) )
So, if they would get their numbers after a half a year, they couldnt get 400 numbers...
And they went not trough selection, becouse they came from the other camp. Vrba went trough selection in KL Lublin-Majdanek...
So that are my point to that.... Make with the article what you want... :) Sorry for my mistakes in English..:)
Have a nice day. --89.103.4.11 (talk) 06:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
So...did anyone check what I had written... You have to persuade me if I am wrong...but I geuss I am not..:) --89.103.4.11 (talk) 19:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Are you saying that this is not a sketch of the ramp? SlimVirgin talk|edits 02:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, but sketch cannot be a proof :) Show me just one photo of Judenrampe,where you can see rails and in the background the gate... As I told you - the rails on Judenrampe goes from south to north, but the direction to the camp is to the west - so it is unpossible to see it like it is on the picture in the article... Or just have a look on the map...
The other thing is that on the sketch is niether train nor rails and definitely not in the direction to the gate....--89.103.4.11 (talk) 20:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Other mistake is this sentence: "Vrba's initial duties in Auschwitz involved digging up the bodies of over 100,000 Jews who had already been killed or died, so they could be incinerated."

They should do this work, but finally they (or at least Vrba) didn´t. There you can see part of Auschwitz Trial:

  • Vorsitzender Richter:

Herr Vrba, Sie waren im Auschwitz-Lager mit verschiedenen Tätigkeiten beschäftigt.

  • Zeuge Rudolf Vrba:

Jawohl.

  • Vorsitzender Richter:

Wollen Sie uns einmal sagen, was Sie dort für einzelne Tätigkeiten ausgeübt haben?

  • Zeuge Rudolf Vrba:

Die ersten sechs Wochen war ich tätig in einem Hauptwirtschaftslager der SS.

  • Vorsitzender Richter:

Ja.

  • Zeuge Rudolf Vrba:

Dann war ich eingereiht in eine Gruppe, die für IG Farben arbeitete, in den Buna-Werken.

  • Vorsitzender Richter:

Wie lange?

  • Zeuge Rudolf Vrba:

Dort war ich ungefähr vier Wochen.

  • Vorsitzender Richter:

Vier?

  • Zeuge Rudolf Vrba:

Ungefähr vier Wochen.

  • Vorsitzender Richter:

Ja.

  • Zeuge Rudolf Vrba:

Vielleicht sechs Wochen.

  • Vorsitzender Richter:

Ja.

  • Zeuge Rudolf Vrba:

Danach wurde ich in ein besonderes Kommando eingereiht, das den euphemistischen Titel Aufräumungskommando hatte und das sich damit befaßte, die Transporte von jüdischen Familien, die nach Auschwitz kamen - dort zu assistieren beim [Ausladen] von den Zügen.

So, as you can see, he worked for the first six weeks in Hauptwirtschaftslager der SS (stores of food and other things), then he worked in Buna and after that in Canada commando.

So he was never digging and burning dead bodies. He didnt mention it also in the Vrba-Wetzler report [3] --89.103.4.11 (talk) 08:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

According to what I read Vrba was transferred to Canada after a selektzia in which about half the "working" population was gassed, leaving only the most fit. He filled one of the "vacancies". I will try to get a copy of the English version of the book as well. pikipiki (talk) 10:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)