Talk:Rutka Laskier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Judaism Portal Rutka Laskier is part of WikiProject Judaism, a project to improve all articles related to Judaism. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Judaism articles.
Project Judaism To-do: edit purge watch Here are some tasks you can do: Requests: Jewish and Biblical Units of Measurement or some such name, to include material of Ancient Hebrew units of measurement but also Talmudic units and use in Halacha (a la the Hebrew Wikipedia article he:מידות ומשקלות תורניים) Collaboration of the week { Cleanup: Jewish mythology - needs to be rewritten to be inline with our other mythology articles. Expand: Yom Ha'atzmaut - quite short for an article of such importance Wikiversity: School of Jewish Studies. Part of the new open content university, Wikiversity. Stubs: Category:Judaism stubs, Category:Tanakh stubs, Category:Synagogue stubs Update: Portal:Judaism is WikiProject Judaism's frequently updated portal. You can help make this the best portal on Wikipedia. Look at the talk page to see how you can help. Template loop detected: Template:WikiProject Judaism
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

A fact from Rutka Laskier appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 8 June 2007.

	Poland Portal Rutka Laskier is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Poland on Wikipedia. To participate simply edit the article or see our current projects and discussions. On the main project page we have some tools to help you out. Don't hesitate to ask questions!
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] News article link

The yahoo.com link will only remain valid for about a month or so... AnonMoos 00:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gdansk

Polish Wikipedia says that she was born in Gdansk. What is the source for this? Badagnani 17:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry I don't speak english. Ifo comes from the end of the book in separation “From Rutka to Ruta” (Polish edition of the diary of Rutka Laskier). Rutka, she born in the Gdańsk, after family put over to the parents city (Będzin). Mateusz Opasiński 21:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I do not think the Free City of Danzig was 'a German enclave' by any stretch. It was neither German, nor Polish. Otherwise it would not be referred to as 'Free'.128.146.238.235 17:57, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Our own article says it was 90% German. That sounds like a "German enclave," doesn't it? Badagnani 18:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by 'our own'? And what do you mean by 90%? In terms of ethnicity? If so, it does not matter. Legally, the City was neither a part of Poland, nor Germany. Look up the definition of 'enclave' and change the text accordingly. Otherwise, you are re-writing history.

"Our own article" means "the English-language Wikipedia's article" (about the Free City of Danzig). It says 90% of that city were German speakers. Badagnani 18:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I've just changed the wording to: "Laskier was born in the Free City of Danzig (now Gdańsk), then a predominantly German-speaking autonomous city-state in northern Poland." Is that okay? Badagnani 18:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

It is not OK, the Free City was not in northern Poland. It was not part of Poland at all. And I would drop the bit about what language people spoke there. It is irrelevant here.

BTW, the woman's name is 'Stanisława Sapińska' not 'Stanisławą Sapińską'. The latter is the causative case of the former (with the extra diacritics used in Polish only). It needs to be changed throughout the English text.

What does it mean "causative case"? Badagnani 18:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

'Causative' means by whom an action was performed. In English, say, the name Badagnani retains the same form irrespective of what role it plays in a sentence (by Badagnani, with Badagnani, about Badagnani, for Badagnani). It is not the case in Polish (Badagnani, Badagnaniego, Badagnaniemu, etc.). You must have copied the form 'Stanisławą Sapińską' from the Polish wiki. Her proper name is 'Stanisława Sapińska' and, because in English it remains the same in any santence, this form should be used throughout.

That's helpful. The Slavic languages have a different logic about this. The closest thing we have in English would be "Badagnani's" to show possession. Badagnani 19:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

At least people should know where it is. It wasn't part of Poland, but it was inside northern Poland. That just tells readers where it was, geographically. "North-central Europe" is maybe not specific enough. Badagnani 18:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Do people generally know where Gdansk is? If not, maybe 'the Free City of Danzig (now Gdansk, Poland)'

I'm from the U.S. and am very good at geography, but even I don't know what regions of Poland any of the major cities are (Krakow, Warsaw, Katowice, etc.). I think most North Americans don't know either. The reason I added "northern Poland" is because we already said that Bedzin is in southern Poland, so it can show that the family's move was not a close one, but a long one. Badagnani 19:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but Bedzin, unlike the Free City, WAS (an is) a part of Poland. If you want to show that a move was a long one why not 'the Free City of Danzig (now Gdansk, northern Poland)'. Linking the Free City to Poland would be, at least, confusing.

I made a change in the text; see what you think. Your expertise and input is greatly appreciated. Badagnani 19:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC) I think it's OK now.

One more thing... 'Młynarskiej Laskier-Kleinberg and Company'... 'Młynarskiej' is an adjective derived from the noun 'Młyn' (eng. a mill). It is not a person's name. So maybe, 'Laskier-Kleinberg Mill Company'?

Yes, but isn't Młynarskiej part of the name of the company, since it's capitalized? Badagnani 19:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC) No, it is not (who capitalized it anyway?). The corresponding entry in the Polish Wiki says 'firmy mlynarskiej' which is not a proper name (it simply means 'a mill company'). But I see where the problem is... the mill company was owned by Laskier, Kleinberg, and some other guys (hence 'and Company'). 'Lakier-Kleinberg and Co. Mill Company' looks and sounds awfull. Any idea how to change it? 'Lakier-Kleinberg and Co. Mill Consortium'? BTW the company OWNED the grist mill (among other things, I guess). So, the company and the mill were not one and the same thing.

It must have been my mistake. I'll try to fix it. Badagnani 20:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

"Sapińska offered to hide the diary in her house's basement, under the double flooring in a staircase, so that people would be able to know what had happened to the Jewish people of Będzin"

I know exactly what you meant to convey, but in the present form it looks odd - if you hide something, how does it make other people know/learn about it? Besides, is 'house's basement' or 'the basement of her house' better?

The wording was awkward, you're right. See what you think now. Oh, if you could sign your posts by adding four tildes ~~~~after your posts, that will help other editors to know who you are. Thanks, Badagnani 20:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

It looks much better now. I always forget those four tildes... One more thing... In the sentence "In 1943, while writing the diary, Laskier shared it with Stanisława Sapińska (b. ca. 1918), whom she had befriended after Laskier's family moved into a home owned by Sapińska's family, which had been confiscated by the Nazis so that it could be included in the ghetto."

Maybe it would be better to change 'a home owned by Sapinska's family' into 'the Sapinska family home'. The way it is now, it seems to suggest it was the family (not the home) that had been confiscated by the Nazis (sic!)128.146.238.235 22:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the wording is not great, and maybe confusing. Also, some articles say it was a home and some say that it was an apartment. And it isn't clear why one of the articles say that it was later incorporated into the ghetto, when the Laskier family apparently moved out of the house into the ghetto. Badagnani 22:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The Polish word 'dom' (eng. home) has a dual meaning (as does its English counterpart). So a cardboard box under a bridge can be 'a home' in a spiritual sense. Anyway, there was nobody in any ghetto throughout Poland who lived in 'a home' (in terms of size). If anything, many families would be squeezed into one apartment (or a home). The way a ghetto was created was to take a part of the city, empty it of ethnic Poles, and move in all the Jewish folks from the surrounding area. If the Laskiers had lived outside the designated area, they would be forcibly moved in. If Sapinska lived inside the designated area (it was the case, obviously) she would be moved out. So the two families (the Laskiers and the Sapinskas) did not live together. In other words, 'a home owned by the Sapinska family' is factually incorrect. It ceased to be theirs after it was designated to be part of the ghetto. It seems to me, however, that the ghetto was not sealed as the two girls were able to interact with each other.128.146.238.235 22:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

What you say seems to make a lot of sense. Maybe you could get and read the book in Polish to make sure? It also seems, from her current age of 89, that Sapinska was not Rutka's age but was about 25 years old, in 1943. Badagnani 22:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I also live in Ohio, so I do not have this book in Polish handy. Do you know of any Polish bookstores in the Columbus are, lol. I actually wanted to read it because the excerpts I read in English seemed way too mature for a young teen (I blame the translation though). And I was also suprised she wrote it in Polish (and not Yiddish).128.146.238.235 23:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Not « in Polish » ! In « good Polish » ! : « Widać to po pamiętniku Rutki, która pisała go piękną polszczyzną. »… (cf. <http://katowice.naszemiasto.pl/pamietnik_rutki/specjalna_artykul/534152.html>.) Budelberger (talk) 00:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC).

It's not clear that the Sapinskas didn't own more than one home or apartment property, so I'm not sure if it was "the" home of the Sapinskas or just one of several that they owned. Badagnani 22:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Be realistic, the Sapinskas could not be property magnates. It was wartime in occupied Poland. The Sapinskas were kicked out from their family home after it had been designated to part of the ghetto. The Laskiers were moved in. The Sapinskas had to find themselves some other place to live (outsied ghetto proper). Do not apply the common sense of today to what was going on in occupied Poland 65 years ago.128.146.238.235 22:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

This is a bit of a pendantic comment, but when one refers to the family of Ms. Sapinska, in Polish it would be the "Sapinski's", as in Polish last names with the 'ski' ending are gender sensitive: thus: Mr. Sapniski, Ms. Sapinska, the Sapinski's. --Patpecz 04:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

• OK, good point, but it doesn't say "the Sapinska family" but "Sapinska's family," so it seems correct in the wording. Badagnani 04:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not; I'm just going by the wording in the English-language newspaper reports. Probably U.S. journalists don't know as much as you do about this, and they were getting the info second hand from the people at Yad Vashem. But you're most likely right. Is this what you get from the Polish-language sources on this? Or have you already read the book in Polish? Badagnani 23:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The Polish sources do not need to explain the backgroud as it is common knowledge in Poland. So in a sense, you are right. The Sapinskas owned two properties (although not at the same time). When they moved out of their family home (to make room for the Laskiers), they found shelter somewhere else. And no, I have not read the book in Polish (but, as I said before, the English translation seems a bit too mature)128.146.238.235 23:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, if you'd like to fix it you should go ahead. If you could add the process the ghettos were created (as you explained to me) that would be very, very good because I don't think most people understand that. I think most people think the Jewish ghetto areas were always there, since the Middle Ages. Badagnani 23:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discrepancies

It seems the first English-language articles about this subject got several things wrong. This is one of them. A few footnotes are in order, to clarify these mistakes. Badagnani 03:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

If you think this edit is wrong, then remove it as it is unsourced. Unsourced things that could be wrong in a biography should be aggressively removed. Royalbroil 04:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm saying the opposite: that the English-language sources on which we based the first version of the article got things slightly wrong, and our olish contributor has fixed it by sourcing from the Polish diary publication. That's one of the beauties of Wikipedia, that we continually improve. Badagnani 13:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)