Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:57, 21 September 2008

Germany Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Whitewashing

You've got to know that whenever you try to rewrite history and downplay these things, I'm going to be right in there expanding and clarifying.

"In 1920 due to return of Polish provinces to Poland, the Commission ceaased to function. Subsequently, most of German settlers returned to Germany."

Leaving out the role of the war ending, and making it sound like the surviving German land owners just got bored and drifted off is definately whitewashing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwood (talk • contribs) 05:26, 20 August 2004 (UTC)

Events after 1918

I am of the opinion that the article should not mention events that happened after 1918, that is after the Commission ceased to function. The article contains descriptions of events such as: 1. Nazi expulsions and other Nazi crimes, 2. post-WW2 expulsions of Germans, 3. restitution claims. These events are not direct results of the actions of the Commission. This is not an article about Polish-German relations throughout centuries. I am of the opinion that this information does not belong to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.111.156.226 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 15 November 2004 (UTC)

How to allege something in a subtle way: Category Anti-Polonism and what it implies

"Categories appear without annotations, so be careful of NPOV when creating or filling categories. Unless it is self-evident and uncontroversial that something belongs in a category, it should not be put into a category," says the Misplaced Pages guideline WP:CG.
Anti-Polonism is defined as "irrational fear or malicious hostility toward Poles". A wiki category implies that one thing is part of another, which means that the Settlement Commission had anti-polonistic aims.
I doubt that, for the simple reason that German nationalism is not necessarily anti-Polonism. If you support your team in a soccer match, are you anti-the other team? No, you simply want YOUR team to win. So I highly doubt that Bismarck, who you can judge as so Pro-German that when it comes to deciding whether Germany or Poland should have an advantage he'd prefer Germany, was anti-Polonistic and have therefore removed the category Anti-Polonism since it is at best controversial, at worst a misinterpretation, at any rate a case where the guideline above says it should be deleted.NightBeAsT 14:44, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Bismarcks speech was given to you in which he explains his actions are aimed against Poles.Of course you deleted it as soon as it was posted. --Molobo 17:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

And an answer to it you can find on Talk:Kulturkampf and on my talk page.NightBeAsT 17:37, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

21,866 German famiies settled, 154 thousands colonists altogether.

The precise numbers are 21.866 families, 154,000 settlers altogether. Andrzej Chwalba - Historia Polski 1795-1918 page 461--Molobo (talk) 20:29, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

More precise statement

The number of Germans increased, but the Comission failed to Germanise Polish territories as it was not enough.--Molobo (talk) 18:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

How / to what extend did the number of Germans increase (source?) Skäpperöd (talk) 20:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Source: Andrzej Chwalba - Historia Polski 1795-1918.--Molobo (talk) 20:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

How / to what extend did the number of Germans increase ? Skäpperöd (talk) 17:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It didn't exist beyond 1918

So history after that isn't connected to its activity, however I think some of its members were very active Nazis, coming from the racist Pan-German League.--Molobo (talk) 18:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

You deleted: The Settlement Commision failed to achieve its goals to increase German population and German property in Prussian Poland, neither short- nor long-term. In 1918, after the German Empire's defeat in World War I, the Commission ceased to function. By then, only the number of Poles as well as the amount of landed property owned by Poles had increased. Furthermore, after the constitution of a Polish state in 1918, the German population in these areas declined by another 70%, and the land owned by Germans by 45%.

There is no reason for deleting the sourced short overview about the Commission's main goals and how they were (not) achieved. Also, there is no reason for deleting a short sourced mention about how these issues developed after the Commission was resolved. Skäpperöd (talk) 20:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

That the Settlement commission failed to Germanise and take over Polish territories was not deleted by me. The reversal of Germanisation after Poland was freed from German Empire is seperate issue and needs to be described in detail. Blanke btw is just one side of the coin and his views have been described by reviewers as pro-German so basing it only on his statements doesn't constitute NPOV i believe. --Molobo (talk) 20:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you did not delete the above paragraph? Come on, this article page has a edit history. Please do not delete sourced information.

And again, it is common in articles about historical events to include a short mention of how the covered issue further evolved. If you are concerned about the sourced statistics, provide evidence that proves the source wrong.

In your above statement, you agree Germanisation attempts had failed, so what reversion of Germanisation are you talking about? Skäpperöd (talk) 07:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Full Germanisation was not achieved, but there is no doubt that Germanisation was attempted and conducted in parts of Polish territories--Molobo (talk) 17:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Laws to expell further 2,000 milion Poles and Jews to make room for Settlers were created in First World War

"In 1912 the first and only four Polish large estates with 1656 hectares were expropriated ."

Laws aimed at expelling circa 2,000 milion Poles and Jews to make room for German colonists were prepared during First World War.--Molobo (talk) 18:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, of course... since the population of Poland was obviously something like 2,000,000,000 at this time... *rolleyes* - WikiReaderer (talk) 01:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I will clarify Nazi propaganda literature

I will clarify that the claims that German settlers were native to lands they were to Germanise were used by authors listed as pro-Nazi and whose works are named as Nazi propaganda literature. We shouldn't consider authors praising Nazi movement and making racist claims about Poles are reliable sources of information regarding Polish-German history. --Molobo (talk) 12:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Discussion was not about whether or not some of the settlers were natives of Posen/West Prussia, but about Baron Galéra being a Nazi. Thread is here

Skäpperöd (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Discussion was whetever a Nazi publication is a reliable source. The main opinion is that it should be only presented as portayal of Nazi views--Molobo (talk) 17:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Clarified Nazi propaganda and made clains precise

Clarified Nazi propaganda. Blanke doesn't say "only the number of Poles increased" but that there were more Poles then in beginning. He makes no mention if the overall number of Germans increased in that period or not, as wrongly inserted sentence could imply. --Molobo (talk) 21:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

It seems I missed a piece by the nazi author.--Molobo (talk) 19:14, 7 August 2008 (UTC) And another one. Will have to search Wiki if there is any other place where he is used. --Molobo (talk) 22:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Interesting source

Ethno-nationality, Property Rights in Land and Territorial Sovereignty in Prussian Poland, 1886-1918: Buying the land from under the Poles' feet? by Scott M. Eddie University of Toront

Will expand the article using this. --Molobo (talk) 19:24, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Is there a point to this sentence?

"Publications in Nazi Germany made claims that many colonists were German natives from the region. "
If so, finish it. If not, delete it. What is the relevence to *this* article? Bwood (talk) 14:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

No. Rm Skäpperöd (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Disagree. Nazi propaganda brought by Skapperod is notable. I will restore information that it presented colonists as natives.--Molobo (talk) 21:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Geiss quote

Why is half the section entitled "Political Background" filled with this quote during the last gasp of the Commission's existance? "Background" implies situations/events/etc that lead up to something. A discussion of the concept of Lebensraum would be more appropriate here, I think.

"German historian Profesor Imannuel Geiss in his scholary work on German designs for Poland during World War I, Der polnische Grenzstreifen 1914-1918. Ein Beitrag zur deutschen Kriegszielpolitik im Ersten Weltkrieg, writes that legislation was drafted by German leaders in preparation for a larger colonization effort, wherein some two million Poles and Jews would be removed to make room for German colonists in annexed territories of Congress Poland, while Poles within the German Empire's Polish provinces, obtained in the Partitions of Poland, would be "encouraged" to move out if they did not accept Germanization."

Bwood (talk) 14:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Rm per WP:UNDUE- does not belong here at all. Skäpperöd (talk) 16:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear Piotrus, before you restore this again, keep in mind that these plans were

• never executed
• based on the same ideologic background that led to the SC establishment, but else not related to the commission
• made in the last years of the war when the commission became obsolete anyway

The quoted plans are to be understood as telling the Germans "the harder your losses" (that's what they experienced) "the higher your future gains" - and therefore is in part propaganda to motivate a people getting tired of the war. The "real" part of the plans was the need to refill the treasure of the state emptied by the war costs. For that, it was presented as one option to annex territory in the east. For this article, the information is at least strongly overweight if not irrelevant at all. Skäpperöd (talk) 07:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Generalplan Ost was never executed but we have a whole article about it. That the plan existed and was connected to Settlement Comission is noted and notable enough to be mentioned. As to the rest of your claims-they are unsourced.--Molobo (talk) 19:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

That the plan was connected to Settlement Comission is noted Noted by whom? Until now a more than very distant relation has not been backed by anything. Skäpperöd (talk) 19:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Except for Professor Geiss. --Molobo (talk) 19:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

You did not back yet that Geiss connected the plan to the Settlement Commission. Skäpperöd (talk) 20:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh its on several pages. Page 32, 71...--Molobo (talk) 20:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Besides you ignore the fact of deleting information why the attempt started and what was its motivation as well as background, presenting only misleading information about about Prussian court temporary stop of expulsion law.--Molobo (talk) 21:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

German Empire's sources

Sources from German Empire claiming that colonists were natives must be portayed in neutral way as there is question about their neutrality.--Molobo (talk) 19:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Please do accept that a substantial German population dwelled in the Polish lands since the Middle Ages. You are the only one who disputes that. Skäpperöd (talk) 19:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

That some Germans existed in Polish state nobody disputes. However this is about colonists brought to take over Polish territories. You adress the wrong subject.--Molobo (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Since you agree on the presence of Germans native to these territories, what is your problem to accept that some of them aquired land from the SC under favourable conditions? Skäpperöd (talk) 21:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

1. They were immigrants and colonists, not "natives". The question is about German colonists sent to Germanise Polish territories. Not about if earlier there was some other influx of Germans into Poland. Third German Empire which was an essentialy racist apartheid state for Poles isn't objective source of information about its treatment of Polish population.--Molobo (talk) 21:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

They were immigrants and colonists, not "natives". You are wrong about that. Please keep in mind that there was a substantial German population there since the Middle Ages, some were assimilated ("Polonized" if you like), others were not. You can't call those people immigrants or colonists.Skäpperöd (talk) 20:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The question is about German colonists sent to Germanise Polish territories. Not about if earlier there was some other influx of Germans into Poland. That is what you keep to confuse. They were not sent. The SC bought land (from both Poles and Germans, see article) and offered these lands at good conditions to Germans only, regardless of where these Germans came from. It is not very surprising that, besides Germans from distant areas, also locals took their chance. Skäpperöd (talk) 20:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Third German Empire which was an essentialy racist apartheid state for Poles isn't objective source of information about its treatment of Polish population. No "Third German Empire" is used as a source here. Skäpperöd (talk) 20:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Whitewashing

Sadly all throughout information about political background is being deleted.--Molobo (talk) 19:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

You one-sided added parts of the historical background (which is POV) in a section covering a different issue. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I added direct information from scholary work about the subject. One sided ? Care to write who claims German Empire's policy was not anti-Polish and didn't discriminate Poles ? Please remember to not use Nazi authors, as Baron Galera who you brought up earlier can't be used as credible source due to his admiration of Nazi party, racist comments and devotion to Hitler.--Molobo (talk) 21:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, let us look into the information disliked by user Skapperod.

• After Partitions of Poland and Congress of Vienna, Prussia acquired Polish majority provinces - impossible to argue with, a well-established fact,
• The "Polish question" has become one of the most important issues in German Empire - a referenced information, especially the government of Prussia was very concerned about its Polish minority. Please note that Poles were by far the biggest minority of the whole empire,
• Poles experienced religious, political and economic discrimination - a well-established fact, backed by numerous references. Tymek (talk) 02:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

@Molobo:yawn.

@Tymek: I do not "dislike" the information. The section the information was inserted to deals with the political background, not the historical one. It depicts administrative measures taken concerning the SC, please have a look. Maybe one should rename the section in "Political measures concerning the SC"? A coverage of the historical background (as a kind of introduction) should not imply that Germany was exceptionally nationalistic back than (I do not question she was). Also, "the Polish question" is phrased in analogy to "the Jewish question" and don't tell me this association was not made by purpose. Skäpperöd (talk) 21:06, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Molobo:yawn.

Thanks, I guess then that you have no arguments regarding my comment and agree with what I said.

"Also, "the Polish question" is phrased in analogy to "the Jewish question" and don't tell me this association was not made by purpose." Too bad for your argument that this was not made by me but the scholar I am using. And in fact occurs quite common as Bismarck used the phrase in his speeches:

Bismarck and the "Polish Question." Speech to the Lower House of the Prussian Parliament, January 28, 1886.

• Bismarck and the Prussian Polish Policies of 1886

Bismarck stressed, in a letter to the German ambassador to the Vatican, that "the Polish question is solely one of nationaility"

• BISMARCK AND THE POLISH QUESTION

Canadian Journal of History: Discusses the political views of former German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck on Prussia's Polish minority problem in 1894

• CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Kulturkampf

"He laid great stress on this fact; as is well known, the Polish question"

• Bismarck and the Polish Question.

• Bismarck’s Speech to the Prussian House of Deputies on the Polish Question

Europe in 1848: Revolution and Reform by Dieter Dowe, Heinz-Gerhard Haupt

Has a whole chapter on page 174 titled Polish Question in Europe, defining it The long life of "Polish question" in the nineteenth century is a result of both the fact that each of the three partitioning powers of Poland had their Polish question, making the areas of the partition internally destabilizing factors fof 120 years, and especially to pan-European dimension. "The latter arose from the consequences(which lasted for the entire century) of Poland's "general, definitive and irrevocable dismemberment" for the European balance of of power and from cross-border attempts by Poles to reverse this partitioning and to restore Poland as an independent state"

"The explosivness of the Polish question for Europe was a consequence of the fact that maintaining the partition and preventing the re-emergance of a Polish nation-state were fundamental conditions for preserving the European balance of power and the system of states founded in 1815."

All the above are from scholary sources. The term Polish question is quite common term and not invented by me. In fact google books will give you circa 2000 hits for it. Which makes me think an article is in order btw.--Molobo (talk) 22:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC) A coverage of the historical background (as a kind of introduction) should not imply that Germany was exceptionally nationalistic You misunderstand the goal of Misplaced Pages, it is not to shape a picture of Germany you would like to see but to document facts. We are not here to shape views or to present our opinions. That the Poles were discriminated is undisputed and you haven't presented a single argument for your deletion of information about persecution of Poles. As to your claim about how Germany wasn't exceptionally nationalistic-this is not relevant to the article and your OR. If you have scholars claiming so-put their opinion in proper articles. On my part I read a great deal on Germany and will no doubt also contribute to its articles based on scholary sources.--Molobo (talk) 22:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Unexplained blanking regarding discrimination of Poles

Please explain blanking of the page regarding information about discrimination of Poles in German Empire

The information is essential to make the reader understand what were the reasons for this situation.--Molobo (talk) 22:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Records of the Commission

Are the records of the commission are open to the public? The reason I ask is that my fathers paternal grandparents came to the US in October 1886 from Sztum County. I have always wondered if the commission purchased their land.--Woogie10w (talk) 02:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The records are partly lost, partly in Berlin, Posen or Bromberg. Look here for mor detail (in German): http://www.gsta.spk-berlin.de/schlagwort_posen_664.html Skäpperöd (talk) 08:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Major expansion

Major expansion:

• Added more on funds
• Added more on resistance of Poles
• Added more on motivation behind the action
• Added on actvity of SC leaders during First World War
• Added various other details.
• Added map.

--Molobo (talk) 21:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Article name

The name of the article has been moved without prior discussion or request to move. The current name doesn't seem to be encounterd in English sources besides Misplaced Pages. The Settlement Commission seems to be the most common name encountered. If somebody wants to change the name please use the discussion page and request for move. Regards,--Molobo (talk) 14:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

Settlement Commission → Royal Prussian Settlement Commission in the provinces of West Prussia and Posen — Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (government departments and ministers), use of unambiguous title, correct English translation of the German term — Skäpperöd (talk) 08:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Misplaced Pages's naming conventions.

• Strong Oppose The name doesn't appear outside of Misplaced Pages(original research), a more acceptable name would be Prussian Settlement Commission or Settlement Commission(Prussian Partition of Poland). The proposed name uses German not English name of Poznań so it is not correct translation, also it is too long.--Molobo (talk) 09:46, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

• Prussian Settlement Commission. The name "Royal Prussian Settlement Commission in the provinces of West Prussia and Posen" is much too long, unnecessarily specific and has no results on the web. "Settlement Commission" on the other hand is much too general, creates more questions than it answers and there are many "Settlement Commission"s - check the web. So I'd go for "Prussian Settlement Commission", which is frequent, short, clear and specific. Sciurinæ (talk) 10:22, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The article must be moved back to Royal Prussian Settlement Commission in the provinces of West Prussia and Posen for the following reasons:

(1) Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (government departments and ministers) says: 1) All Misplaced Pages articles on public agencies/offices/departments etc. and political officials must effectively communicate the name of the jurisdiction involved within the article title. So we would have to include Prussia by adding S.... C.... (Prussia), if there was not: 3) Pre-disambiguation shall not be carried out in the event of the jurisdiction name being a natural part of the subject's name (c.f. Royal Australian Navy, ), so we need to title the article with (the English translation of) the commissions natural name.

(2) The use of "Settlement Commission" only is disambiguous, numerous other settlement commissions can be found at google search for "settlement commission", google books search for "settlement commission" and google scholar search for "settlement commission". Settlement Commission should be made a dab page. Skäpperöd (talk) 18:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

(3) "Royal Prussian Settlement Commission in the provinces of West Prussia and Posen" is the correct translation of the full German name "Königlich Preußische Ansiedlungskommission in den Provinzen Westpreußen und Posen". The translation of the provinces' names Westpreußen and Posen should be West Prussia and Posen - not Poznan (which is the Polish name of the city the province was named after), as the respective Prussian province was/is known as Province of Posen. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your responce. However it doesn't seem to support the claim to your name which is not effective and actualy counterproductive to Wiki rules. The name you chose doesn't appear outside Misplaced Pages so it wouldn't be effective. If there will be more Settlement Commission articles we will create a dab page. For now that is not a problem. Furthermore your title is way too long and would have to include double naming for germanised names of Polish Poznań. A Settlement Commission(Prussian partition of Poland) is a better title. But for now that is not a problem since the Settlement Commission is the best known title for that organisation and no other articles of similar names exist. Also if they would be created it would be easier to give those less known commissions their own specific names rather then change this one. Also your title is not found outside of Wiki-it is clear therefore that it would be Original Research. After all the English name of Poznań is Poznan and not Posen, therefore the translation would be different. Regards--Molobo (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the shortened term "Settlement Commission" is widely used, however only in contexts that make it clear which commission is being talked about, that is the shortened term is only in use in works on late 19th/early 20th Prussia and the respective provinces are always mentioned. Here, we have a different case. Another settlement commission that has a wiki article is eg the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, others might be on wiki already or will come up. Skäpperöd (talk) 09:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

As you yourself noted there are no other articles besides the two. Foreign Claims Settlement Commission is already in existance and has its own specific name, the name you propose is way too long for Wiki, doesn't appear outside of Misplaced Pages and uses German not English name of Poznań. More acceptable alternatives are Prussian Settlement Commission or Settlement Commission(Prussian Partition of Poland).--Molobo (talk) 09:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Besides the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, other settlement commissions are also mentioned in en wiki without (yet) having an own article: Bill Dodd (Tidelands settlement commission) Henry Morgenthau, Sr. (Greek Refugee Settlement Commission) Wollert, Victoria (Soldier Settlement Commission) Skäpperöd (talk) 10:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you-as you can see all of those have short and elegant names. So how about Prussian Settlement Commission,Settlement Commission in Prussian Partition of Poland, Settlement Commission(Prussian Partition of Poland) ?--Molobo (talk) 10:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I see you agree on the need of a title change because of the disambiguity of the current title. You simply oppose the use of the English translation of the commission's German name. Yet, as I outlined in reasons (1) and (3) for the move request, we do not have another option without interfering with Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (government departments and ministers). Your descriptive proposals could be used for redirect pages. If however your concerns are all about the mentioning of the word "Posen" or the non-mentioning of the words "Poznan" and "Poland", please say so and have this discussion in a separate section. Skäpperöd (talk) 11:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

No, you didn't understand. Settlement Commission is quite ok with me. As to German, indeed this is English wikipedia we don't use German language here.--Molobo (talk) 11:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, now I see I understood very well. You don't want "Posen" in this articles title, since this is the only term in the English translation of the German term that resembles the German word. If you want to discuss whether or not the English term for the respective province is Province of Posen or not, do that at Talk:Province of Posen and do not have this discussion as a substitute. Skäpperöd (talk) 13:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry to say you still don't understand. Also the English name of Poznań is Poznan from what I know, and in German Poznań is germanised to Posen. However I guess we already established that your title is nowhere to be found outside Misplaced Pages and thus Original Research --Molobo (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

• Start-Class Germany articles
• Low-importance Germany articles
• WikiProject Germany articles
• Start-Class Poland articles
• Low-importance Poland articles
• WikiProject Poland articles