Talk:Vinnytsia massacre
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
A fact from Vinnytsia massacre appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 25 November 2007. |
 |
[edit] Title
Most Ukrainian sources refer to this as трагедiя (tragedy), rather than "різня" or "бійня" or "розправа" or "побоїще" (which all can be translated as massacre). I don't think we should use the strong term for the title unless the usage is overwhelmingly supported by references.
How about Vinnytsya mass execution? --Irpen (talk) 09:28, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- Well, most English and notably German sources refer to it as massacre.[1] The encyclopedia of Ukraine in English lists it as such [2]. As well, the Katyn massacre is also rendered differently in Polish as (Katyń crime) and yet rendered as massacre in English. Both crimes happened and were investigated under similar circumstances and feature in many sources together, why should this one be termed differently? --Hillock65 (talk) 11:16, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- As I said, I do not feel particularly strongly about this issue and facts seem to be undisputed anyway. It's just that "mass execution" is a more precise term of what actually happened. In no way such more precise less colloquial title would whitewash the crime of the regime. And if some other articles have not so good titles, it's no reason to add one more. The main idea about being precise in titles is that the terms in titles (as well as in categories) cannot be annotated. I agree that the term is applicable to what actually happened but mass execution is just more correct and relays the contexts more precisely. Massacre can be a pogrom, an annihilation of civilians in the war, etc. Mass execution is a specific definition of what actually happened. --Irpen (talk) 11:18, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think the issue here is what do we decide as massacre or as mass execution. Massacres tend to be spontaneous, chaotic and unplanned, most of the killing is conducted in a either a savage form, or shooting from the hip style, not caring who catches the bullets. Mass Executions on the other hand would be a carefully coordinated, carefully selected victims, they would known, all would know that they are being executed. The shooting itself would be carefully staged and conducted professionally. The bottom line is that massacre involves murder, even slaughter. Exectution involves killing. The article states: that almost all of them were executed by shots in the back of the head, so it was not a vile attack of rage and savagery, they were marched out shot, and buried. That in definition is an execution. It goes irrespective weather the victim was innocent or not. --Kuban Cossack 12:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I beg to differ. The manner in which people are murdered do not make one a massacre. Slaughter of almost 10,000 people from hip or not is a vile attack of rage and savagery. It is the public perception of it that makes it a massacre. This massacre and the one in Katyn are often viewed in conjunction, especially since the manner of execution and of investigation and discovery was the same. Even the Germans used it together in their propaganda. The difference might be in what respective Polish and Ukrainian peoples think of it. While the Katyn massacre was one of the worst in recent Polish history, what happened in Vinnytsia is dwarfed by what happened in 32/33, in Bykivnia and other places. While it is vile and gruesome, I am sorry to say, it is not the worst by Ukrainian standards. So, reference to literature might help. Normal definitions do not work all the time. --Hillock65 (talk) 14:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the title: 9,442 people executed and buried in 91 mass graves sounds like a massacre to me. Not quite on the same scale (or as well-known) as, say, the Katyn massacre, but up there in the annals of mass murder. More importantly for our purposes, this is what reliable sources call it. Let me adduce one more example, from Amir Weiner's book mentioned above (I put in the full reference in the article):
At the height of the Terror in 1937-38, Vinnytsia was the site of mass executions by the People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD), with more than nine thousand people shot and dumped into mass graves on the outskirts of the town. The massacre destabilized the local scene. The exhumation of mass graves by the Germans made the assessment of the Soviet past, the Nazi present, and a possible Soviet future an unavoidable dilemma. The massacre also reshuffled the local party organization, bringing to the fore a new generation of local leaders who would endure the ordeal of war shortly thereafter.
Sounds like a pretty clear-cut case to me. Turgidson (talk) 04:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hillock and Turgidson, you should understand the key issue behind the grievances of Irpen etc. In their hyper-POV-vision, only Ukrainian nationalists, Nazis and other evil forces of the West may commit "massacres" and "genocides". Instead, Russian and Soviet actions, as well as actions of Moscow's foreign sockpuppets, qualify only as limited and unimportant "tragedies", "mistakes" etc., as a rule. For Irpen and Co., it is a question of will, not of truth or neutrality :) Ukrained (talk) 15:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I never said anything of that sport. It is sad to see Ukrained resorting to same old learning nothing from his block. --Irpen (talk) 17:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Instead of arguing about which is the best title it would be better to expand the text in the article. As a neutral non-Ukrainian I can understand both arguments. Massacre to me sounds like something that happened during a short period of time, like at the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia. In Vinnytsia people were executed during several years. But on the other hand it's true that it's known as the Vinnytsia massacre in for example Encyclopedia of Ukraine. So I guess we can keep the title and go on expanding the article instead of the talk page. Narking (talk) 22:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Numbers
This paragraph: "468 bodies were identified by people of Vinnytsia and the surroundings, the other 202 were identified on the basis of documents and evidence found in the graves. Most were identified as Ukrainians, but there were also 28 ethnic Poles.[5]"
Doesn't correspond the 5-9 thousand mentioned earlier in the article. What is it supposed to mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.86.153 (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
- It means that less than 10% of victims were identified. The majority remain unknown. --Hillock65 (talk) 17:53, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Removed POV"
- Nazi occupation of the 10 out of 11 mentioned countries is not POV, it is a *fact*. Considerable pro-German sentiment in 1940s Sweden is also well-documented. What's the problem? 81.211.60.42 (talk) 08:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- 10 German sattelites are already mentioned in the article. As far as Sweden's pro-German sentiment in that particular case, that is a point of view and needs to be supported by references from respectable sources. In general, speculations as to whether those scientists did their jobs well is very hard to prove irrespective whether they come from neutral Sweden or from 10 of Germany's sattelites. We can only mention where the scientists came from, to state whether they distorted their findings we need to support that with references to documents. I think the readers can make their own conclusions as to how the scientists from Germany's sattelite states and nominally neutral Sweden did their job. Sincerely. --Hillock65 (talk) 13:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
