Talk:Judeopolonia

Notable?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was no consensus D O N D E groovily Talk to me 02:41, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

---

Is this concept really notable? Perhaps it should be merged to żydokomuna...? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

It could be merged to "Zydokomuna" (separate short section ?)--Jacurek (talk) 22:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Or into one of the first paragraphs, as it is a concept that predates and likely facilitated the development of żydokomuna... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:10, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Ya, I think so..--Jacurek (talk) 18:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

• These are different, although converging notions. Wikipedia is not paper, there is no pressing need to put everything in one basket. Timurite (talk) 16:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
• P.S. While English article is small, the Polish wikipedia article is significantly larger, and a brief google search shows more material, hence the concept is not as marginal as may seem. Timurite (talk) 16:52, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
• Although similar and with common background those are to different theories. --Arts2 (talk) 13:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Arts2; while the notions have a certain superficial similarity in theme, they remain entirely separate ideas, and the two articles should thus not be merged. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 15:42, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Judeopolonia

Should we mention that this has roots in anti-Semitism/Judeophobia? Also, I want to add a link to History of Jews in Poland. Shikku27316 (talk) 02:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Judeopolonia. 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/20090524054231/http://naszawitryna.pl/ksiazki_47.html to http://www.naszawitryna.pl/ksiazki_47.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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 20:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Myth?

I have strong doubts if we can qualify Judeopolnia as myth if the proposal of Zionist politician led to creation of German puppet state ruled by Germans and Jews. Cautious (talk) 10:57, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

"Judeopolonia" is a myth of 19th century origin. League of East European States was a real proposal, that was given this mythical name in a 2001 book.--Pharos (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Please prove somehow that the myth had at least some reception. Based on the fact that I actually read the book, I would say it must have been close to zero. ^^^^

I read it too. This article is not about the book, but about the conspiracy theory. If your contention is that the term was only used after the time of Bodenheimer, then the sources cited in the article plainly show you are wrong, and that is was used in the late 19th / early 20th centuries by other authors.--Pharos (talk) 19:07, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits

I've reverted this, since we generally describe conspiracy sources, described as such by academic sources, as conspiracy theories and not as an "idea positing future Jewish domination of Poland" (continuing with a description of the basis of this "idea"). Icewhiz (talk) 13:40, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz,

Shadows the the protocols, this [[1]] says it ws not in fact published till 1911.Slatersteven (talk) 15:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Sassy?

I don't think "sassy" is likely to be the correct translation in the phrase "informers and spies for the tsar, tightfisted hyenas and arrogant sassy people who oppress the Polish people". If there are any Polish-speakers passing through who can do better, it might be worth changing it. Boynamedsue (talk) 13:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, this translation is quote from the book (where it was translated). We don't edit quotes. I doubt anybody willing to read and translate Szcześniak . One of the meaning "sassy" is "impudent, disrespectful". I don't think anybody reading this piece with think "bold" or "cheeky" :-) Lembit Staan (talk) 20:07, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

"impudent" or "disrespectful" would be perfect! "sassy" seems too informal a word for the context. Apart from the register, it is generally used positively when referring to a personal characteristic (e.g. "She's a sassy, streetwise lawyer.") the negative use is normally restricted to specific contexts (e.g. "Don't get sassy with me!"). If the original is badly translated, you are right, there is not much we can do. Boynamedsue (talk) 07:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

OK, yesterday I was lazy. Today I looked into the source and I see that in fact the source does not cite/translate Szcześniak: the quote is of the ref cited, therefore I simply replaced the quote with rephrasing, with attribution. Lembit Staan (talk) 18:08, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Cool, leaving it out solves the problem nicely, without losing anything from the message (which, of course, is probably a shame, given the nature of the message). I've put the hyena bit in quotes, as it's not an actual thing he's accusing them of, just simple racist rhetoric. Boynamedsue (talk) 21:56, 5 February 2021 (UTC)