Talk:Bergen-Belsen concentration camp/Archive 1

Archive 1

Channel 4 (UK commercial TV) program "The Relief Of Belsen", 9.00-11.05 pm Monday 15 October 2007

• This British TV program on Channel 4 [1] [2] was a filmed reconstruction of events there at liberation and after, using genuine old footage for scenes with prisoners in. It claimed that:
  • "Belsen had 2 camps: Camp 1 was the concentration camp, Camp 2 was used for other purposes. Camp 2 was adapted into a hospital, and that hospital is still open." The underlined text seems to contradict the article, which says that Bergen-Belsen DP camp was vacated in 1951. Did Channel 4 get it wrong? Or what? Was the hospital moved rather than closed down? Who is right? Anthony Appleyard 05:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the entire section about this. Do you know how many books over the last 60 years have been written about Belsen? Devoting so much detail to this programme trivialises Belsen. It was also in abysmal English. Jooler 20:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protect?

• semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Syrenab (talk) 16:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
• I semiprotected page Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Was there a gas chamber at Belsen?

I've removed this section, as it seems to be giving undue weight to a minority view, based on sources which are objectively very poor. One comes from a who-he website, and quotes (without citation) a remembered converstion of thirty years earlier, the other is to a Canadian local paper reporting the comments of someone who claimed to have survived six attempts at gassing. Neither of these are particularly credible, to put it mildly. Extraordinary claims require an extraordinary level of proof. Since the bulk of sources say B-B had no gas chamber, adding this section based on these weak sources is unjustified. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 22:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• I have restored the section, and then commented it out, pending discussion.

What is a "who-he website"?

This source seems to be as valid as many other reports of events that long ago. Among the very distressing job of clearing up after liberation, there were more things to do than making a detailed description of every installation and bit of equipment found. A smallish underground gas chamber may well have gone unnoticed, or thought in error at the time to be an ordinary cellar.

It seems possible to me that one among so many had a genetic mutation that made him immune to the gas used. Genetic oddities happen occasionally.

Anthony Appleyard 06:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

By a who-he website I mean one written by random persons, rather than one by a scholarly organisation such as USHMM or Yad Vashem.

The source is of very low reliability, because the claim of the soldier's son is reported from a book, but the book is not cited, so it is not verifiable by anyone. The excerpt also makes it clear that the son is remembering (after a gap of 20-30 years) what his father told him 30 years after the war. The likelyhood of misremembering on the part of the father or the son is reasonably high.

The attitude of the Allies during the invasion of Germany was that the perpetrators of crimes against peace and humanity were to be punished. It is unlikely that unknown facilities were destroyed immediately as they would constitute evidence.

The chance of a mutation which would allow respiration unaffected by carbon monoxide or hydrogen cyanide is negligible, and in any case, if someone wasn't gassed successfully they would almost certainly have been (a) shot or (b) sent for mediacl experimentation. Not gassed another *five* times and allowed to escape. Much more likely than this is that the victim's mental health had broken down and they believed that things had happened which had not.

To sum up, neither of these stories can be given much weight. The sources fail reliable sources and verifiability, and there is a prima facie implausibility about the gassing survivor account. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 09:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

In the 1945 trial for Belsen a doctor testified that thousands were gassed in one night. Why do the historians not believe the witnesses about German camps, but believe witnesses about Polish camps - no better testimony. All the German camps have progassing witnesses - who, what evidence moved the chambers out of Germany?159.105.80.141 17:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Cite your source - and there were no gas chambers at all in Belsen. We have the plans, we have the eye-witnesses and we have the film and photos and more eyewitnesses from its liberation. No gassings. That was done in the East. Darkmind1970 15:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

As for Germany, there were chambers of T-4 (operating also later) and possibly some "experimental" at the camps (also dissinfection chambers). --HanzoHattori 20:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Sources - this article - Simon Wisenthal - Martin Broszat - etc - other than the Nuremberg trials and a couple of eyewitnesses this story fell on its face years ago. Nizkor even lists it under " A tale of ..."159.105.80.141 19:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Precisely - its a case of a dubious source for Bergen-Belsen. There were no gas chambers in the place, and no historian has ever claimed that there were any. Just thousands of people being crammed into unsanitary huts in hideous conditions and being treated with total indifference and contempt by their guards as they died. You could smell the place a mile off. I shudder just thinking about it. Darkmind1970 08:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

The conditions were certainly hideous and insanitary, but do you have any source for your assertion that they were "treated with total indifference and contempt by their guards as they died"? It's perfectly possible of course, but isn't it equally possible that with 60,000 seriously ill and dying prisoners, and no sanitation, water, food or medicine (the civilian populations of Germany and Holland were starving too) the guards were simply overwhelmed and terrified of catching typhus themselves? There were many more prisoners than the site had been intended to house as a result of evacuation of Auschwitz and other eastern camps. These prisoners brought the typhus with them into Belsen. 78.147.100.109 05:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

There was a deliberate German policy of starvation in Holland, but while conditions were very hard in Germany there was no famine there - food was still coming down from places like Denmark. Belsen was far too smell for the numbers of people being jammed into it - but they were poured in anyway by the authorities. I would describe that as indifference and contempt. Darkmind1970 10:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll accept the point on famine in Germany. It was perhaps an overstatement. I don't have the knowledge. But the infrastructure was breaking down with the mass retreat from the east and Allied bombing of communications, and food was certainly scarce; I would think that feeding prisoners was low on the list of Nazi priorities at this point in the war (as feeding Indian civilians was for the British in the WW 2 Bengal famine). The massive overcrowding was not down to the guards, who cannot be blamed for mass of sick, starving and lice-infested prisoners pouring in from the eastern camps as they were evacuated. And what were the authorities supposed to do? Turn the prisoners loose in the countryside? The British didn't do this.

But this is getting OT as we are no longer discussing the article. 89.240.229.252 22:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, how´s this. My father was a member of the British 11th Armoured Division that liberated Belsen concentration camp. Once and for all, there were no gas chambers used for exterminating people at Belsen......and furthermore, many of the guards weren´t even German. They were Hungarian and other Eastern European nationalities. See the Trawniki concentration camp page. Now that´s interesting!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.57.7.25 (talk) 18:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Photo

Please view another photo at de:KZ Bergen-Belsen

[Entrance] herewith licensed under GFDL

thx ;-)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 10:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Needs To Be Placed On A Map

There should be a map of Germany showing where Bergen-Belsen was. I know some Germans don't like that, too bad, there should be a map posted anyway.

75.253.47.138 (talk) 04:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

Bergen-Belsen → Bergen-Belsen concentration camp is a very stupid thing: To follow pattern of other concentration camp article titles.

Voting

Please add  * Support  or  * Oppose  followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~"

• Oppose - it was a POW, not a concentration camp until 1942. --_Lysy^talk 21:14, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment : It is foremostly as a concentration camp that Bergen-Belsen is remembered. This does not preclude its role as a POW camp being included in the article. David Kernow 23:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support - for above reasons. LuiKhuntek 15:46, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support : in case it is not assumed that I, as originator of the proposal, am in favor. (Direction to Wikipedia policy, please?)  David Kernow 20:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support. And I would suggest the Bergen-Belsen to be a disamb article directing to Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, Bergen-Belsen DP camp and Bergen-Belsen POW camp. --_Lysy^talk 21:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Seconded David Kernow 03:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support. The name change is consistent with usage elsewhere ("Auschwitz concentration camp"). logologist|Talk 02:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

---

Thank you for making the move, Nightstallion. As per Lysy's suggestion above, I've now converted the Bergen-Belsen redirect page into a disambiguation page. David Kernow 14:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

---

This camp was in Germany - I believe the latest historical consensus is that no gassings occurred in Germany proper in spite of what witnesses may claim. There were several other witnesses who contradict the historical consensus besides the gas immune boy and the soldier. The article should not try to imply a history that no reputable historian will support. The link mentioning the two eyewitnesses to gassing is scrapbooks - appears to be an unreliable source - no historian from either camp verifies much/most of their information. Very emotionally intense but light on facts and truth.

Search the web with "Kramer,belsen,etc" - you will find several articles of some scholarly merit, far removed from this propaganda piece.159.105.80.63 13:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Concernig negotiations over the camp - no mention that DDT was used after liberation, not released for use during the war. The Allies had DDT throughout the war, dropping DDT for camp use ( the Russians neede it too ) would have stopped most deaths - of course the Germans could have fought longer and harder.159.105.80.141 13:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit request from VampaVampa, 20 December 2010: a typo to be corrected

{{edit semi-protected}} The line 2 of the paragraph 4, just above the contents chart, has a misspelt name "Auswitzch" instead of "Auschwitz", even though the link leads to the relevant article. VampaVampa (talk) 03:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Banksy?

This link to the Belsen diary on this site is inoperative - correct? delete? Also, I wonder if this artist actually rates a mention in the text of the article - seems like a very minor figure.20:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.187.193 (talk)

You are right, although some secondary web sources such as Little James and Brian Sewell's still work. I think it should therefore be de-linked. Un-topicality may deem it worthy of deletion altogether before long. Such are the dictates of fashion in modern art (patronage by Sewell notwithstanding)? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Is the artist, Banksy, worthy of mention? Indeed. From the book "italic text"Wall and Piece"italic text" by Banksy, the text of the Manifesto: [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mililypad (talk • contribs) 11:01, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 195.12.224.130, 13 May 2011

Plse change Bengal Famine Mixture from a rice based mixture to a flour based mixture. Also change paprika to onions. soure: Alan MacAuslan,'Darling Darling Meg'(oyb The Pentland Press, 1996) 195.12.224.130 (talk) 15:47, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Not done for now: Can you provide a page number for the reference, so it may be more easily verified? Thanks. —Tim Pierce (talk) 14:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The condition of Bergen-Belsen in 1985

I'm giving a talk to some 8th graders tomorrow about my visit to Bergen-Belsen in 1984. I thought to brush up on its history a little bit. There was one passage that bothered me:

"Bergen-Belsen fell into neglect after the burning of the buildings and the closure of the nearby displaced persons' camp. The area reverted to heath, with few traces of the camp remaining. Ronald Reagan's visit to West Germany in 1985 (see Bitburg) included a hastily arranged stop at Bergen-Belsen, which prompted the West Germans to put together a small documentation center."

I'm looking right now at the pictures I took there in 1984. They show a well-tended memorial park that reflect my memory of the place. And I remember the little museum there was very much in order. Also, the stonework there was aged. There were no signs of anything being "hastily arranged".

I'm confused by what seems, to me, to be erroneous history. I have no idea how to address it. I'm leaving this note in hopes that someone with the aptitude and the ambition will look into it.

Thank you very much. PBezukov (talk) 06:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

The thing that was hastily arranged was the visit itself, according to the wording of that passage. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 09:26, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Cannibalism?

It seems that this occurred towards the last months of the camp, and a cursory search turns up numerous accounts. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/15/newsid_3557000/3557341.stm, amongst the better online sources.) Could someone add this to the article? Maybe also worth mentioning in the Cannibalism article as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.94.131.47 (talk) 19:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion from bluetortilla, 11 March 2011: general guideline suggested

{{edit semi-protected}} I'd like to see an edit stressing that most of the gruesome footage depicting dead, emaciated bodies being bulldozed in liberated concentration camps were in fact allied bulldozers and that the victims had mostly succumbed from disease and starvation. In other words, these weren't extermination camps like Auschwitch, for which we do not, as far as I know, have filmed documentation of the same magnitude (we don't have any footage of the Holocaust activities at all as far as I know. There are photos of German military and Jews in Ghettos and camps, but none that I have seen of the extermination process). I also think it relevant that the British and American allies took care to film the camps, while the Soviets (apparently) did not. I think this is important on several levels. As a 6th grader in elementary school, we were easily able to demonize Nazis because of the horrid camp films but we were deceived as to the content of what we were seeing (we were led to believe that the corpses were those of gassed Jews, which to my knowledge they certainly were not- why is this unclear?). As a young person learning about the brutality of Nazi Germany and its implications for humanity and the world in general, I don't think justice was served to the millions whose lives were shattered and who were also murdered in cold blood alongside the Jews if in fact we do not accurately document them. The fight against anti-semitism is a noble one as is the fight against genocide and oppression everywhere. But it doesn't do that cause justice if it deceitful and I believe that the sources of film footage, the makeup of the victims, and the lack of footage if applicable should be clearly documented, and extending beyond that anything found in Nazi concentration camps should also be related in terms of their involvement or lack of involvement in the Jewish genocide, which was the main thrust of the Nazi holocaust.

To back this further, it is well known that Allied forces used bulldozers to bury the dead in places like Bergen Belsen - My own knowledge of this is that my Grandfather was one of the British soliders that completed this task at Bergen Belsen.

Koal4e (talk) 17:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Bulldozers were used because there were so many dead and decomposing bodies lying around the place that it became imperative for health reasons to bury them as soon as possible. In addition, the smell was so appalling that many British troops were unable to spend any time around the camp, such as for use as burying parties, simply because the smell made then retch (vomit). So bulldozers were used as a means of quickly burying the dead. The disgusting smell is why in pictures the bulldozer driver has a handkerchief fastened over his nose and mouth.

BTW, Brigadier Glyn Hughes was instrumental in the care and rehabilitation of the victims, as he had been present with the 11th Armoured Division when the camp was liberated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 10:58, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Typo

"The area reverted to health" should read "The area reverted to heath" --Mccormickmeister (talk) 12:42, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for pointing it out. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 16:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Some improvements

I hope the info box deals with the request for a map, this could also be done with a map of Lower Saxony, but I guess for international users the German map is better. The list of nationalities of the victims is just a start, and not supposed to be exclusive. Feel free to add as appropriate. For time of operation I included the prisoner of war period, but not the DP period, as that has its own entry. Overall, the entry could be improved by giving it more structure (chronological or otherwise). Drow69 (talk) 16:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Cleaned up the intro in accordance with tag, I moved the quote to the liberation section, as it is extremely important to have eye witness accounts of these unimaginable horrors, but I think it is misplaced in the introduction

Added some info/clarifications on the operations and removed some minor contradictions in timing or nomenclatura (i.e. the various names of the camp sections)

IMO the part about the lawsuit does not belong where it is now. Maybe we could create a new section on "controversies" - where I would also very much prefer to see the part on the poisoned water supply... Drow69 (talk) 21:49, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I finally got around to adding some stuff to the aftermath section. I suggest we split it into two sub-sections ("legal prosecution" and "Memorial"). I put up the trial stuff today. If any more in line citations are needed pls let me know. The picture of the huts being torched might be more appropriate in the liberation section where the flame throwers are mentioned...

Maybe I will get a chance to add some detail to the memorial section over the next week or so. Drow69 (talk) 15:52, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

This is done. I kept all the other references - although the Turkish ones are looking really ugly in the ref list. But I am too lazy to reformat those... The quote from the NYT was flagged as unclear anyway, so I left that out, but kept the citation on the new exhibit. Maybe one sentence in the introduction should summarize the memorial stuff, such as mentioning the importance the site had in bringing a reluctant post-war Germany face to face with what had been happening right in the middle of the country. Drow69 (talk) 18:35, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Water supply

"As a final act of defiance, the retreating Germans cut the water supply to the camp, making it hard for the Allied troops to treat the ill prisoners." I would like a source for that. As far as I understand it, water supply had been irregular for quite some time before the liberation. Which was said to be one of the reasons for the typhus epidemic that raged through the camp. I think I've read somewhere that the German guards explained the shortage of water with something like "The pipes had been cut", which doesn't necessarily mean that the Germans themselves had cut the pipes. 83.248.183.68 (talk) 20:45, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I've added a source for that claim - anyone want to tell me to reference a specific page? --DuLithgow (talk) 11:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I just checked that out. A single secondary source. Could be anecdotal or even invented. (I could write a book with any crap in it. Doesn't make it a historical source.) It's valueless unless it can be linked to verifiable primary source. Shephard was a producer on World at War which assured us that the stories of atrocities in East Prussia were Nazi propaganda and "the Russians acted as liberators, not conquerors". So much for his reliability.

And even if it's true, the "final act of defiance" is POV. They may not have cut off the supply just to the camp; it may have been to the whole area. Cutting off utility supplies to areas controlled by the enemy is a normal and legitimate act of war. Channelwatcher (talk) 22:20, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

These were war crimes, and the prisoners in the camps were civilians. I've restored the non-apologetic non-whitewashed wording. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps the wording is poor, I'll let others decide that. It's not quite correct to call this a normal and legitimate act of war. They were in fact in a state of cease fire locally at the time. The Germans who ran the camp were afraid that typhus might spread outside the camp and knew they didn't have means to deal with that. They know the area would fall so they negotiated for it to be be transferred. The occupying troops even had to watch german (artillery?) troops walk away without being allowed, under the agreed terms, to confront them militarily. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 18:47, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Cut off water supply and poisoned water supply are two completely different things. There may also be pretty unsensational explanations for both. The pipe could have been broken, the watter rotten. And both are no surprise as Germany was permanently bombed and its economy collapsing. So it's fair to assume that insinuating some malicious intend is nothing more then propaganda. --41.151.210.142 (talk) 06:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I would completely remove this claim about poison in the water supply - or at the very least rephrase it in a more neutral way, e.g. by saying that "some claim" or s.th. like that. There is no mention of this at all in the extensive exhibition at Bergen-Belsen - and, believe me, this exhibit is anything but an attempt at a white-wash. Drow69 (talk) 15:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

THE POISONING OF THE WATER SUPPLY IS NOT A CLAIM!!! My mother was an "inmate" at Belsen and this is her FACTUAL TESTIMONY. To delete this information desecrates her memory and those thousands and thousands of others who can no longer speak of the horror one group of human beings inflicted on other human beings of which Belsen was only one representation. These harrowing realities can't be re-phrased so as to make them more palatable..."neutralized" so to say. The Belsen exhibit, like any exhibit of any kind, represents a "selection," often by committee, which in no way guarantees full representation of subject matter. Such an exhibit, of course, would be impossible to actualize. Therefore, towards the goal of broadening knowledge and intellectual enlightenment, it is even of more vital importance to restore the deleted information---which I am doing.Betempte (talk) 20:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I am not disputing the veracity of your verbal informant. This is just Wikipedia policy. It would be a much greater desecration of your mother's memory if another ip editor added other material, without any source, that was untrue, claiming that it was also "eyewitness testimony", and it was not promptly removed. Your mother's story should be written down and published. I am surprised that it has not been already. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

* I have a source for these claims in Shephard, Ben 'After Daybreak - The Liberation of Belsen, 1945' Pimlico 2006. See page 57 which has the following tekst "The German soldiers marched out in good order [...] having left behind a little surprise - they had sabotaged the water supply in the barracks". In other places there are references to dead bodies in the water tanks - but the texts I have do not make a specific connection between the two statements. As his source he refers to a 'Taylor Report' in some 'Barnett Papers' as part of the Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives. Feel free to include this reference in the text. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 21:16, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, DuLithgow. At least that is a start. But does Shephard explain what "sabotaged" means - does it mean cut supply or poison, or dead bodies, or what? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:21, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

• I remember reading about how the Hungarians finally cleaned the water tanks which had bodies in them. But Shephard does not explicitly claim a connection as far as I remember. It seems like a likely connection, but not one I remember him making. Sorry. But I found a bit closer link to the Barnett Collection. The collection is open access, so anyone living in London should be able to go and check the text. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 20:38, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

That looks a fascinating archive. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:45, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

• So does anyone object to me (re)introducing the sabotage of the water supply as factual? --duncan.lithgow (talk) 20:51, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

As long as you use that p.57 source, no objection. In fact it might be advisable to use a direct quote. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Done --duncan.lithgow (talk) 23:29, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

If someone enters information as “witness testimony,” (or any category of information for that matter) and this information is in dispute as factual, it then should be countered by supplying documented reference(s) to the contrary. Otherwise, Wiki could become a conglomeration of selective, subjective editing; a form of censorship which would contradict any mission of providing comprehensive encyclopedic knowledge. Betempte (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Any claim is just a claim, unless and until it is supported by a reliable source (and even then it might well still be just a claim). That's just the way this place works. It doesn't even have to be true, just supported. Wikipedia doesn't (and can't) work by assuming that "every claim is true until disproven." If you can't deal with this, you might try and change the policy. Or else find an encyclopedia that works in a different way. Your poor mother's claim sounds wholly plausible. But, alas, that's not enough. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:10, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully my supplied reference will end this discussion. I agree completely with User:Martinevans123 regarding personal testimony and original research. --duncan.lithgow (talk) 20:08, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

I think you may have started the discussion. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Signed it now, sorry I forgot for some reason. Remember to sign ... --duncan.lithgow (talk) 20:08, 24 May 2012 (UTC) ... signed

Let me just point out that these eyewitnesses were traumatized, in fear of their lives, cold, malnourished, sick and without adequate water supply. In this situation it is quite understandable that they would blame every observed phenomenon on those ultimately responsible for their suffering. I talked to the people at the memorial. They said that one claim they have heard from survivors was that poisoning by the guards stopped the women in the camp from having their period. In fact, it was a natural reaction of the body to an extreme lack of food, increasing the chance of survival by not depleting the body's resources further through bleeding. So my argument was not in favour of a "neutral" view of the act, but to be careful about endorsing the fact that it actually happened.

On another note - yes, the exhibit by necessity offers only a limited amount of information. However, that also applies to a resource like Wikipedia. Indeed, the amount of material on view at the memorial and in its publications is vastly larger than anything that could conceivably be included in an encyclopedia, even an online one. So the choice of what to leave out and what to include is even more crucial for Wikipedia. And I would argue that the focus should be on the well-established facts - but I can certainly live with the way the section is phrased now. Drow69 (talk) 15:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Glad to hear it! --duncan.lithgow (talk) 22:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, facts are a good idea here. Eyewitness testimony, another variety of the truth, will always have a vital and supremely important place. But it's probably not here, encased in anything as crass and pedestrian as an online encyclopedia. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I found another source on the water supply issue. It seems that this did not pertain to the concentration camp itself but rather to the Wehrmacht barracks to which the British began moving the prisoners immediatedly after liberation. See the DP camp article for details. Nicola Schlichting wrote, referring to the emergency hospital created in the Wehrmacht barracks(sorry, German): "Nachdem die Vorbereitungen abgeschlossen waren, wurden schließlich am 21. April die ersten 350 Kranken aus dem KZ verlegt; zuvor hatten die abziehenden Wehrmachtssoldaten in der Nacht vom 19. zum 20. April »zum Abschied« noch die Wasserzufuhr durchtrennt." Rough translation: "After the preparations were complete, the first 350 sick were moved from the concentration camp on April 21; before that the withdrawing Wehrmacht soldiers had severed the water supply in the night from April 19 to 20." Drow69 (talk) 15:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Canadians?

Are we really sure that there were any Canadians there when the Camp was liberated? The British forces were part of 21st Army Group which included both British and Canadian units. But as can be seen here http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=80455.0 there is some debate on the issue. Anyone has a reliable source on this? Otherwise we may have to change the wording about who did the job. Drow69 (talk) 21:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

russian vs soviet

The term russian in the opening paragraph is self evidently incorrect. The correct term is "soviet," just as the correct equivalent term would be british, not "english" prisoners of war. For an article where experts discuss relative minutae, this is a gross oversight, and yes, it does matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.245.96 (talk) 13:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I changed that. My only concern would be that "Soviet" also means "Council" and that it looks weird to have the nationalities of the other victims listed as e.g. "Polish" but to use "Soviet" for those from the USSR...Still, I guess it makes more sense than listing all the individual nationalities that comprised the USSR. Drow69 (talk) 19:43, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Citation needed in the lead

It seems there actually is nothing on this particular point in the article itself. I'll see if I can cobble something together in the section on liberation. It should summarize the work of the British film and photography guys in April-June 1945 and the effect their output had on the international perception of Nazi crimes as per http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/liberation.html. Drow69 (talk) 12:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Done.Drow69 (talk) 20:21, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2014

According to the map, this camp lies near the center of a line running between the Polish and Dutch borders. Please change Bergen-Belsen (or Belsen) was a Nazi concentration camp in what is today Lower Saxony in northwestern Germany to ...Saxony in northern Germany..., since it's really about as close to being northeastern as it is to northwestern. 149.160.175.36 (talk) 15:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Done. LittleMountain5 20:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Without delving into the history of the page...my guess is that "northwestern" originally referred not to Belsen itself but to Lower Saxony, which as a state is in fact in the north west of Germany.Drow69 (talk) 14:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 April 2014

I would like to add under the section "Personal Accounts" this entry;

Fania Fenelon, in her memoir Playing for Time describes her experiences in Bergen-Belsen including her transfer from Birkenau by train transport; primitive conditions on arrival; the building of the camp; typhus; work details; crematoria; the SS and Josef Kramer and liberation by the British.

Citation: Playing for Time; Fenelon, Fania, English translation, copyright 1977, by Michael Joseph Ltd. and Atheneum Publishers

Barry Tigay (talk) 21:15, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, I am not sure we should grow the "personal accounts" section. The Auschwitz page - which is rated a good article - does not have one at all. How about adding her to the "See Also" section? (there is a WP page on her) Any other thoughts on this issue?Drow69 (talk) 15:08, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 13:49, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Origin of the "Belsen" part of the name

Shouldn't the article explain where the name "Belsen" comes from? I had to hunt around elsewhere to discover that is a village outside Bergen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.150.26.234 (talk) 16:29, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Good point. I included a WP link to the village.Drow69 (talk) 15:14, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Bergen-Belsen concentration camp not death camp

Bergen-Belsen was a concentration camp not a death camp. Inmates were not systematically killed. Some thousands died, possibly as estimated 50,000 or more. But this was from disease starvation etc. not deliberate killing. Most died due to the breakdown of the supply network, due to the bombing and invasion of Germany. Therefore the summary note that 50,000 were "killed" there is wrong. It should say died.125.237.105.102 (talk) 04:32, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, the parameter "killed" comes with the infobox "concentration camps". It does not distinguish between extermination/death camps and others. So to deal with this, either the infobox template needs to be changed (which would affect all the pages on which it is used) or that specific line could be left empty here. The number of deaths is already in the lead and in the text.

However, not all of the people who died at Belsen were victims of starvation and/or disease in the final days of the war. Inmates were worked to death, given inadequate shelter, food and medical care even before the supply situation became critical. Some were killed by guards as punishment for minor infractions. There might be a sophistical case to differentiate ethically between shooting someone in the back of the head or forcing them to do hard work in sub-zero temperatures with no protective clothing until they die from exposure. But the results are the same.

I'll look at my sources to see if some content can be added on camp life to emphasize this point. Moreover, it is a myth that the mass deaths in the camps in early 1945 were inevitable and caused by a breakdown of supply lines. Simply compare death rates at Belsen with those in the surrounding towns. Someone obviously made a choice not to "waste" any resources on the inmates.Drow69 (talk) 15:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Liberation

--Archimedia (talk) 11:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC)Liberation. I would like to make comment on the liberation section of this article. I am the nephew of Major Len Willmot. I had many discussions with Len about the liberation of the camp before he died. Len told me the following: Len was SAS, SOE. He was operating behind enemy lines throughout the 2nd World War, primarily as a radio operator with Sterling and later in setting up the French, Dutch and Greek resistance movements, for which he was awarded the highest of medals from each of those countries. He was instructed by Whitehall to go to Bergen-Belsen and meet up with the British and Canadian troops who were to liberate the camp and take Kramer into custody. His instructions were to enter the camp and go through all the documents to see if there were any SAS, SOE personnel in the camp or on the books as having been in the camp. He arrived on the evening of the 10th April 1945 and waited in the forest to meet up with the British and Canadians. On the 11th April he received advice that the forces were held up by unyielding resistance of mostly die hard Hitler Youth. Later that day he observed trucks leaving the camp loaded with inmates. He followed the trucks to a clearing in the woods where they were being off loaded and shot en-mass. He had been made aware that Kramer wanted to surrender to the British as there was a risk that the Russians would get there first and kill them all. On the afternoon of the 11th April he returned to the main gate in his British army uniform and demanded that the guard contact Kramer and surrender to him. This was done and each guard on each of the gates surrendered to Len and accompanied him to the commandants office where Kramer officially surrendered and handed Len his pistol. Len met Irma Grese at that time. Grese was later known as 'Irma of the lampshades' because she apparently made lampshades from the skins of Jewish prisoners. I asked Len about this and he said he had seen the lampshades but had no idea from what they were made at the time. Len spent the next three days in control of the camp. He stopped the trucks leaving, stopped the mass shootings, examined the books and had an escorted tour of the camp, after which he demanded that the guards commence cleaning up the excrement that covered everything. His description was a story in it's own right and was graphic and sad. He did comment that many of the prisoners were so emaciated that they had to be shot after the British and Canadians arrived three days later as they were too far gone to be saved. Len found no SAS or SOE operators on the books and radioed back to England with his findings. I do not know anything about the arrival of Lieutenant John Randall and his driver but I do know that Len was alone when he arrived at the camp and did so under orders from Whitehall. He was the first one to enter the camp and ordered the surrender of all officers and guards and all their weapons. If Randall arrived by accident so be it but he had nothing to do with the surrender as Len had been in the camp from the 11th April until the arrival of the Allies on the 15th April.----

Well, the source given for the Randall story is the Daily Telegraph. Not sure how reliable that is. The catalogue to the Belsen exhibit published by the Stiftung Niedersächsischer Gedenkstätten does not mention him. It says that after negotiations at the British and then German regional headquarters (at Schwarmstedt and Wolterdingen) on 12/13 April (initiated by the Germans after Himmler ok'ed it on 11 April):

• on 13 April at 1 am, the British and Germans signed a deal at the Wehrmacht barracks north of Belsen. Most SS guards then left, leaving only Kramer and a small number of guards
• on 14 April the British were supposed to arrive, but were prevented from doing so by fighting near Winsen and Walle
• on 15 April "in the morning the vanguard of the 29th Armoured Brigade, pursuing German troops, reaches Belsen. After a brief stop, they continue on.(...) In the afternoon, between 3 and 3:30 pm a unit of the 63rd Anti-tank Regiment led by Lt-Colonel Taylor and Captain Sington arrives and takes over the camp. Shortly thereafter, the first doctor, Glyn Hughes arrives."

By 11 April there was not yet any deal between the British and the German side. Nothing is mentioned anywhere about mass shootings at this stage. However, on 11 April: "around 2,000 inmates are ordered by the SS to remove the dead lying around the camp. They dig pits to do so." (pages 257 and 258) Drow69 (talk) 11:56, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

"A 'Jock' doctor"

Thank you, Anthony, for your speedy explanation. I had forgotten to do so on the spot, then I was on may way to fix it. In the quotation of Michael Bentine, there was a direct link from 'Jock' to Scotland. I've substituted «a ‘Jock’ (i.e. Scottish) doctor» for «a ‘Jock’ doctor». I'm afraid many people don't know this local term. I didn't.--Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 19:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

In the UK forces all Scotsmen are (or were) liable to be called 'Jock' by non-Scots. The equivalent for Welshmen is 'Taff' (or 'Taffy') and for Irishmen 'Paddy'. The terms are affectionate and in no way perceived as derogatory by either party. The terms may be used by any of one, of any other, e.g., a Scotsman may call a Welshman 'Taff' and vice versa. There doesn't seem to be an equivalent for an Englishman, possibly because they have historically been in the majority in most services. Ian Dunster (talk) 12:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

'Jock', 'Taffy' and 'Paddy' are very offensive terms these days..and I suspect many of those on the receiving end weren't too happy being called them 50-60 years ago, if we're honest. I'm sure West Indian servicemen were called similar names but there was hardly a culture in the 40s of minority groups expressing their displeasure at this sort of thing. To say these terms are 'affectionate and in no way percieved as derogatory by either party' is far from the truth. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 13:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe that most people regard the terms as derogatory.Royalcourtier (talk) 06:33, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Vauxhall-

"Taff", "Paddy" and especially "Jock" are very much in evidence in HM Forces today, and are not regarded as being offensive in any way. As a "Jock" and member of the RNR, I (and those I serve with) personally don't find it an assault on my wellbeing or ego in any way - in fact, the line infantry take it as a compliment. The terms as described are no more offensive, and are on exactly the same level, as regimental nicknames. Or, in another way, it is like any Briton referring to "Geordies" or "Scousers". There is no such thing as an ethnic Scotsman, Irishman or, indeed, Englishman in the same way that there is an ethnic "Indian" from the sub-continent. I hope this first-hand information will correct you. Refer yourself to the Army Rumour Service forum for further clarification if you need it.

Thanks - I do get a bit pissed-off with so-called 'experts' trying to re-write history. It's surprising that someone such as the previous poster who regarded the nicknames as derogatory has the cheek to comment on something about which they obviously know nothing. There's a whole lot of 'political correctness' around nowadays, and the adherents to such a principle delight in seeing offence in everything. It's funny that the RAF, probably the most multi-racial organisation on earth at that time, should be the subject of criticism from someone who, if his signature is to be believed, wasn't even born then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.49.1 (talk) 19:11, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

The 'Jock' doctor Bentine was referring-to was a member of the 15th Scottish Regiment aka 'The Jocks'. It was they who occupied the area around Celle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 17:13, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

liberation

I have met survivor and bought a book that she had wrote about experiences during time in bergen Belsen and other camps, and in regards to Belsen after liberation (15th April 1945), The SS were made to look after prisoners, white armbands with red cross on them, forced to bury the dead, look after them on the trains back home(many could not control bowels)keeping clean and comfortable, this lady also believed they were treated with D.D.T by British and in the final weeks conditions declined further , bread rations less than a slice a day and then none, only food a cup of soup and then the water stopped, she believed they were determined to kill them by natural means so as not be charged with murder, and that the British quickly restored water and even after British entered camp, there was still Hungarian and German SS, prowling around armed killing prisoners .... book is called Auschwitz to Australia by Olga Horak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.65.92 (talk) 02:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

treated with D.D.T by British

Many of the inmates were infested with lice and DDT was the only effective way of killing them (the lice). Most of the inmates' clothes had to be later burned for the same reason.

BTW, that Michael Bentine quote with a 'Citation needed' tag was from Bentine's The Long Banana Skin - New English Library - 1976 - ISBN 0-450-02882-8. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.75.103 (talk) 15:36, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Do you know the page number? Jayjg ^(talk) 19:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes - it's page number 143-144 in the NEL paperback edition I quoted the passage from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.79.13 (talk) 20:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

• Reviews of Auschwitz to Australia by Olga Horak (ISBN:097510926X) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

The following quote from the article includes an eight word snippet-quote from Ben Sheppherd's book "After some difficulty, such as the fact that departing German soldiers "had sabotaged the water supply in the barracks"", this is horrifically out of context. Sheppherd writes on page 15: "By early March 1945, Belsen was subsiding into chaos. The food supply began to fail completely; Allied bombing nearby disrupted the water supply." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.121.102 (talk) 16:22, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, but see my quote from a German source under the heading "water supply" stating explicitly that the departing Wehrmacht soldiers severed the water supply to their barracks.Drow69 (talk) 17:04, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Canadians were definitely there. I have scanned some pages of the April 1997 issue of the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion newsletter, carrying a eulogy to Sgt Mike Lattion, the photographer who was at Belsen on 15 April 1945. In addition my father told me as a child that he was in the jeep with the CO of 1 Can Para Bn when LCol Eadie entered the camp (I realise this is not a valid reference, but the portion on Lattion is I believe is referenceable). The pages are now in a pdf, but I can't find a way to send this pdf to someone for use as a reference. I would be happy if someone could send me directions as to how to email this document: pat at hyperion.co.nz. Thank you. 202.27.236.240 (talk) 01:04, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

The common factor seems to be that the Germany Army ran the camp as well as it could, and that there no, or very few war crimes committed there. The vast majority of deaths occurred due to disease and starvation after the mass expansion of inmate numbers from late 1944. And that was caused by prisoners fleeing camps in the east away from "liberating" Soviet forces, and the allies destroying German transport and supply networks. The Allies were largely responsible for the deaths, not the Germans. Germany guards were persecuted as scapegoats after the war. Their trials and executions were the only war crimes in Belsen-Bergen.Royalcourtier (talk) 06:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

How to pronounce "Belsen"?

• I am English. Every time I have heard the name Belsen, it was pronounced "Belssen". But this page's Russian equivalent transcribes it as Бельзен (= Bel'zen). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Hi Anthony, I am English although speak and write in the Cyrillic alphabet also. The Russian translation you have as Бельзен is actually translated as (= Beleazen) ь sounds like ea in the word EArings. Hope this helps in some way. (talk) 16:31, 30 April 2008
    • There may have been confusion here with the reconstructed ancient Common Slavonic pronunciation of the Cyrillic letter ѣ. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:33, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
• The Russian letter ь (soft sign) is silent: it merely softens the previous consonant. It is pronounced only in modern Mongolian, and in the reconstructed ancient pronunciation of Common Slavonic which St.Cyril invented his alphabet for. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Anthony,

a) I share your experience, the word “Belsen” is usually pronounced /’belsən/ (“unvoiced s” [4]), as if it were an English word. But German-speaking natives utter it /’belzən/ (“voiced s”) as they naturally do with all syllables beginning with an “s” followed by a vocal, regardless the position of the syllable in the word (cf. “stimmhaftes deutsch s” [5]).

b) The Russian transcription, Бельзен, keeps the “voiced s” and palatalizes [6] the preceding “l”, so I would pronounce it /’bɛlʲzɪn/ (cf. Бельгия /’bɛlʲgijə/ “Belgium”). Nevertheless, I’m no expert in Slavistics.

Kind regards, --Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 20:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Date of Anne Frank's death

The article states that Anne Frank and her sister died at the camp in March 1945. According to an article in today's Guardian newspaper, new research indicates it was actually in February:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/31/anne-frank-died-february-1945-one-month-earlier

I don't feel confident to edit a wiki article, but as this article appears to be being actively maintained, I'll leave it for someone else to do (and perhaps chase down other sources - one of the things I don't fully understand is when primary and secondary sources are preferred).118.209.26.9 (talk) 04:00, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I think we should use here whatever the Anne Frank WP article says on this issue. Current consensus over there seems to be to stick with March for now.Drow69 (talk) 10:08, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2015

An account by one of the medical students, Dr Alexander Paton, who worked at Bergen Belsen, can be found at http://www.bergenbelsen.co.uk/pages/Database/ReliefStaffAccount.asp?HeroesID=44&=44 This had been previously published in the British Medical Journal Volume 283 19 - 26 December 1981. AJHamber (talk) 10:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 13:39, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 June 2015

In the section named 'Liberation' please change the wording that refers to prisoners being 'hysterical' which is not a precise term and can be understood to be derogatory. It was formerly used in psychiatric discourse but it has been corrected as being an inappropriate term and is not used anymore. Please therefore change "– SS Doctors had previously used injections to murder prisoners so some became hysterical at the sight of the intraveneous feeding equipment." to "– SS Doctors had previously used injections to murder prisoners. When the somatic stress caused to prisoners by the sight of the intraveneous feeding equipment and their fear of immanent death became apparent, the procedure was discontinued."

Hobbituary (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

It seems that is an indirect quote from a 1997 book, i.e. not from the distant, unenlightened past. How many readers would know what "somatic stress" means? Drow69 (talk) 09:21, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Do you mean Panic disorder, leading to Somatic symptom disorder? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

As this request is controversial, I've closed it without prejudice against making some sort of change. I'm sure someone at the Medicine or Psychology Wikiprojects could provide advice about appropriate wording. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 13:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

"Panic disorder, leading to Somatic symptom disorder" - ah, you mean hysterical. One word rather than six. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.220.131 (talk) 00:23, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Request for editing /proof reading request.

The main caption at the memorial stone near the ramps where the victims were unloaded from goods trains is fine. But someone has tried to give an exact translation. I only have basic German, but I think it could be better.

The translation of the text '... die Opfer... die von dieser Eisenbahnrampe in das KZ BB gefuerhte wurden...' is given as '....which were guided by this rail ramp...'.

The second 'die' refers back to 'die Opfer'; the relative pronoun 'who' would be better in English. Next, 'were led' is probably better than the inappropriately gentle 'guided', for 'gefuerhte wurden'. Also, the translation, read in isolation, almost suggests that they were guided by a ramp of rails. That's nonsense. The 'Eisenbahn' is the railway. The ramp is a loading ramp, not a ramp in the railway. But such detail is not necessary. I think a better translation would be '... who were led from this railway platform...'

Please verify with a competent translator.

Sorry, I am not familiar with the protocol for doing this. I offer it in good faith.

WR — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.168.28 (talk) 09:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Actually, this is not on the page itself. It is on the picture's file page at Wikimedia. It should be open to edits from anyone. But you are correct. "Who were led from this railway platform (or ramp)" is better.Drow69 (talk) 15:33, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Commandant/no reliable source

Regarding the list of "commandants" on http://www.worldwar02.com/category/holocaust/camps/bergen-belsen-camp: There was only one "commandant" of the camp at any given time and that was clearly Kramer after Dec. 1944, according to multiple reliable sources. The one source quoted here is a blog run by a guy with an interest in WW2 and no indication is given of where he got that info from (WP:SPS). Egersdörfer (or Egersdorf as he was called by the British) clearly was a junior SS man - this can be gleaned from the trial transcript (http://realholocausthistory.org/OtherTrials/BelsenTrial/T319.htm). Grese was warden of the women's section, not overall commandant. In fact, Balz seems to have been Deputy-Commandant according to this website http://www.bergenbelsen.co.uk/pages/Staff/Staff.asp?CampStaffID=244, but I'd call this an unreliable private source, too. These two websites are the only Google results on Balz I could come up with. So until someone can provide more reliable info on Balz, I am taking this out. Drow69 (talk) 14:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Drow69 (talk • contribs) 14:10, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Both Kramer and Grese were interviewed by Eric Brown (he spoke fluent German) shortly after the camp liberation and his opinion of them is on his article page.

Some film of the liberation of the camp here: [7] but be warned, you may find some scenes distressing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.208.91 (talk) 18:21, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok. However, that does not throw any new light on the position of Balz. Moreover, linking to the video on the article page might cause a copyright problem...not sure what the copyright status of that video is.Drow69 (talk) 13:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Richard Dimbleby's original news report sound recording from Belsen here: [8] and some unissued Pathe News film here: [9] the officer with the moustache at 3:21 is Brigadier Glyn Hughes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.220.15 (talk) 16:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

BTW, when the mass graves were ready to be filled-in a proper burial service - read by a Rabbi for the Jewish dead, and by a Church of England padre for the Christian ones - was held. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.11.216 (talk) 17:36, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Change Summary at Top of Page

I want to edit the following portion:

"From 1941 to 1945, almost 20,000 Soviet prisoners of war and a further 50,000 inmates died there,[3] with up to 35,000 of them dying of typhus in the first few months of 1945, shortly before and after the liberation.[4]"

To this:

"Overcrowding and poor sanitary conditions caused outbreaks of typhus, tuberculosis, typhoid fever, and dysentery, leading to the deaths of tens of thousands of people in the first few months of 1945"

In order to better reflect what the reference material actually says as it does not say that 35 thousand died of only typhus in the first few months of 1945.

This is the reference material in full:

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005224

Nowhere in the article does it state that 35 thousand people died of typhus alone in the first few months of 1945.

That claim is being made by holocaust deniers in the conspiracy theory article "THE HOLOCAUST AND THE FOUR MILLION VARIANT" using wikipedia as a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.169.240.228 (talk) 23:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

This is why I think refs in the lede are a bad idea...if you read further down, the source that has the 35,000 number is actually the exhibition catalogue. In the table next to it, if you add up the months January to April you end up with a number in excess of 35,000. There is even an inline cit in the table. As to exact cause of death, it is a mug's game to guess whether x people died of malnutrition and lack of water and y died of a specific disease. Typhus definitely was an important cause of deaths. So it might make sense to rephrase the lede somewhat so that it states "died of malnutrition and diseases, including typhus". However, the absolute numbers should stay as they are estimates based on RS.Drow69 (talk) 14:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081014103052/http://www.sharenow.com:80/relations/folders/1582/ to http://www.sharenow.com/relations/folders/1582/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:15, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

"When British and Canadian troops finally entered..."

No Canadians troops entered Belsen. The confusion, I guess, is due to the fact that it was the 21st Army Group (Gen Montgomery) that took over Belsen. The 21st Army Group consisted of the 2nd British Army and the 1st Canadian Army. The troops detailed to take over Belsen were the 63rd A-Tank Regt of the 11th Armoured Division of the VIII Corps of the 2nd British Army of the 21st Army Group.

At the time, the 1st Canadian Army were nowhere near Belsen. Johnalexwood (talk) 17:00, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

I raised this issue here before - see above under "Canadians". Should we drop the reference to the Canadians, then? Drow69 (talk) 15:23, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect. Hundreds of Canadians were involved at Bergen-Belsen. A quick online search can tell you that much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:52A0:12D:BD82:E70A:A8E:8310 (talk) 15:34, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

IIRC, there was a 2nd TAF wing based at nearby Celle with some RCAF units and the comedian Michael Bentine was the Intelligence Officer to one of these attached RCAF squadrons, so it is possible these Canadians entered Belsen along with the British Army, or soon after. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.18.228 (talk) 17:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130329050106/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/prosecution-of-perpetrators/belsen-trial.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/prosecution-of-perpetrators/belsen-trial.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sharenow.com/relations/folders/1582/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:48, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130421052736/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/exchange-camp.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/exchange-camp.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130329003451/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/belsen-military-camp.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/belsen-military-camp.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016093251/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/POW_Camps.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/POW_Camps.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130421052948/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/mens-and-womens-camps.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/mens-and-womens-camps.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130421052240/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/reception-and-dying-camp.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/reception-and-dying-camp.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426051948/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/liberation.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/concentration-camp/liberation.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130421052828/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/prosecution-of-perpetrators.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/prosecution-of-perpetrators.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016091715/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/prosecution-of-perpetrators/german-proceedings.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/prosecution-of-perpetrators/german-proceedings.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150619012035/http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/place-of-remembrance/redesign.html to http://bergen-belsen.stiftung-ng.de/en/history/place-of-remembrance/redesign.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060515220855/http://www.bergenbelsen.de/en/chronik/ to http://www.bergenbelsen.de/en/chronik/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131024122942/http://realholocausthistory.org/OtherTrials/OtherTrials.htm to http://realholocausthistory.org/OtherTrials/OtherTrials.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Once again, the Stiftung changed their website...so all the old links are obsolete. :-( I checked the archived ones, they look ok. However, unfortunately the transcript of the trial did not make it...only the title page seems to be archived.Drow69 (talk) 12:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2018

{{edit semoooooooooooooooooo' 9--= jk'u

> }} 207.162.97.49 (talk) 14:45, 20 February 2018 (UTC)y0y9 yy980[

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2018: Nursing

At end of section Liberation, please append, with properly-formatted references of which I am incapable due to ignorance and lack of time, the following text.

Nursing staff in July 1945 consisted of[10] 134 German nurses, 10 Latvian nurses, and 13 United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) nurses of nationalities including Dutch, Belgian, French, English, Scottish, Canadian, and Australian, headed by recent Royal Red Cross recipient, Matron Muriel Doherty[11], an Australian. Two Australian women doctors assisted the team.

In addition to those rescued at the camp, further displaced persons were arriving by this time, from elsewhere.

"The hospital is run on the lines of any big general hospital," said Miss Doherty, "but it is very far from being a normal hospital.

"Most matrons would be horrified at the state of the wards.

"There are clothes all over the place. We are trying to do something about that by making bags for them out of the blackout curtains, but the patients all have their few personal possessions within easy reach.

"You see, these people are definitely not normal patients. For so long they have been living under strict discipline as slave laborers and worse.

"We simply must allow them as much individuality as possible, and do our best to reassure them.

"We still find them hoarding food, but there is not so much of that now. They love flowers and decorations, and the tops of the lockers are strewn with mats and embroidery wherever possible.

"The gipsies particularly love to spread flowers and leaves round their beds."

Nothing in the hospital is compulsory. The patients are not even forced to attend clinics, where both hospital patients and the inmates of the camp are cared for. For a long time mothers were afraid to leave their children at the hospital for treatment, but now they are bringing the children in quite happily themselves. Talking of the children, one casual sentence sharply emphasised the problem of the lost children.

"Peter is a lovely baby. Someone said they thought he was a Russian, but, of course, we can't really tell."

Miss Doherty is very pleased with the condition of the patients, and proud of the fact that they have managed to avoid any big epidemics. ~ ~ 06:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: per: WP:NOTQUOTE  Spintendo  08:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not sure what that means. Did you read what you linked? It says 'wikipedia is not a directory'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.18.13.17 (talk) 12:56, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2018: Personal accounts

Please add the following within the Personal accounts section.

Letters by Muriel Knox Doherty, August-October 1945 (Royal Red Cross recipient, matron of nursing at Belsen after liberation), documents held by Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.18.13.17 (talk) 14:24, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2018: Personal accounts

Please add a reference to Hetty Verholme, who was in the children's house with her two brothers. She has written a book called *The Children's House of Belsen*. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.244.90 (talk) 09:41, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2019

The first two to reach the camp were a British special air service officer lieutenant John Randall, and his jeep driver officer Roy Wildish, who were Louglitt (talk) 18:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 19:59, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

IIRC, the two were members of the Phantom unit and whilst being the first to reach the camp they didn't liberate or occupy it. The actor David Niven was a member. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.241.96 (talk) 09:25, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2019

Add the picture (File:The Liberation of Bergen-belsen Concentration Camp, April 1945 BU4026.jpg) to the Liberation section with the description "Women inmates gaze at the naked body of a child who has died of starvation.". 2406:3003:2004:6A0:A839:D085:2889:BF46 (talk) 08:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done The liberation section looks pretty full of images so I added it to another section. Alduin2000 (talk) 01:41, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Crematorium

There is an indoor picture of the camp crematorium, but I see nothing in the text that demonstrates the extent and duration of its use, considering that Belsen was better known for its mass graves than Auschwitz and others .Cloptonson (talk) 11:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

first liberation?

The article claims that it was the first camp to be liberated by the allies, but it was liberated in April 1945, and Auschwitz was liberated in January. PatGallacher (talk) 22:20, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

'Western allies' may be more precise, but I thought Natzweiler in France was liberated earlier? Cloptonson (talk) 11:02, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Buchenwald concentration camp is 11th. Mark c lester (talk) 12:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

The situation of camp prisoners on Allied liberation not adequately presented.

This entry is under protected status disallowing editing. I have pertinent information on Bergen Belsen concentration camp not included here. I request the ability to provide it. Trooskafka (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Trooskafka, you can add any details here and it can be looked over then added to the article. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 20:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Evacuation of exchange prisoners

Mother and daughter liberated from Bergen-Belsen train - 1945-04 - Clarence L. Benjamin

This Facebook post promotes a book:

• Rozell, Matthew A. (2016). A train near Magdeburg : a teacher's journey into the Holocaust. ISBN 978-0996480024.

about a train evacuating exchange prisoners to a camp further east, but which was liberated by the US Army. I have uploaded a related image (above). Does anyone have the book, so we can cite it and add something about the evacuation to this article? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:09, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

spelling of author name in the citations

https://www.worldcat.org/title/belsen-in-history-and-memory/oclc/37725861 The author attributed to Belsen in History and Memory in the citations on this article spells her name Reilly, not Riley. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:40b:8780:24d0:5c47:7639:e8b2:dd0c (talk • contribs) 02:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Appears resolved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

rename map

The subtitle oft the mal implies that this is the german map. That is not true as this is the map of germany some time ago. I would ask for the subtitle to be changed to include "former Germany" or something like that. 2001:7C7:20DA:1:9943:70A3:2368:543D (talk) 22:59, 30 December 2021 (UTC)