Talk:Polish League Against Defamation

bias

"The organization is fighting the anti-Polish propaganda, which, in part, tries to blame Poland for the crimes of World War II instead of Germany, and to make Poles murderers instead of victims." This oddly worded sentence makes it look as if some people are claiming that Poland is responsible for the Shoah. Nobody is blaming "Poland for the crimes of World War II instead of Germany" but some Poles were indeed "murderers instead of victims" (Jedwabne pogrom, Anti-Jewish violence in Poland, 1944–46, etc.). Also, the sentence seems to have been written by someone who has no real grasp of when and how to employ the English definite article ("the anti-Polish propaganda", "the crimes of World War II"). And "propaganda" is anyhow too strong a word, it's not NPOV as it adopts the position of the nationalists of the Polish Anti-Defamation League who perceive unfavorable elucidations (especially coming from or directed at non-Poles) as malicious attacks. They are the ones who propagate, namely a very one-sided, jubilant version of Polish history.—84.41.34.154 (talk) 06:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

So, what is your suggestion about the improvement of this phrase? (It means what are the sources say? As you know, the article text cannot be based on a wikipedian's opinion.) Staszek Lem (talk) 17:27, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

My Polish father, who is still alive, can very vividly remember names, dates, and locations during his time spent in World War 2.

My Polish father, who is still alive, can very vividly remember names, dates, and locations during his time spent in World War 2. During this time, Germany had taken by father away from school at the age of 16 and placed him into a forced work camp. They had mistaken my father for who would have been his older brother who was born an ill twin who had died at birth... my father was named after that twin. Due to my father's age, it was against the law for them to have taken him, but they took him because he was one of the schools brightest students. While my father was working, he became involved with a group of Poles, which he joined for protection. (I will not tell you the name of that group.) During the war, my father and his group worked hard protecting the Jews. Any group involvement that my father had during the war, he spent it protecting Jews. My father was captured, tortured and almost gassed in the chambers if it wasn't for the help he received from the Red Cross that saved him. My father belonged to many groups, and moved up quickly in ranks. My father holds metals that were given to him from The Polish President. My father was NOT the only one who risked his life to save the Jews. Where is this information hiding??? Where is the "Thank You" that men like my father deserve???? This is just a very small sampling of the honorable contributions that my father made during this time period, and I am sure this holds true for many others. You want to talk about the white washing of the truth??!! ArleneWojo101 (talk) 13:49, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

See WP:FORUM and WP:SOAPBOX, and cease this sort of utter tripe on the Talk Pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.169.18.4 (talk) 01:29, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Section about activities of the organization is copy-and-pasted from its homepage

It's obviously also POV, talking about the organization as "we", talking about "heroic" poles, and so on. Also it's missing references, and missing details (e.g. law suit filed against El Pais and Frankfurter Rundschau for what?). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tohuwaboho (talk • contribs) 20:43, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Title

@Nihil novi: I disagree on the title. First of all, the organization itself - [1] - calls itself "the Polish League Against Defamation" - so that's possibly the correct title, and should definitely be as an alternative title. As for the current title, the proper rendering should be Polish Anti-Defamation League - and not "Antidefamation". I'm holding off on any page moves pending agreement here (edit wars on titles - are messy, and unneeded, :-)). In terms of WP:COMMONNAME - google-news (and google) shows about a 50-50 split between the two forms - so whatever the title we should display the alternative as well.Icewhiz (talk) 13:02, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing up these points. I've added "Polish League Against Defamation" in the lead.

Nihil novi (talk) 22:06, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 6 June 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move the page to Polish League Against Defamation, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 12:00, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

---

Polish Antidefamation League → Polish Anti-Defamation League – There are merits for either "Polish Anti-Defamation League" or "Polish League Against Defamation" (about 50-50 split on google news), however the current form of "Antidefamation" is clearly incorrect (in terms of English syntax, and by search results). Icewhiz (talk) 06:12, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

• Move to Polish League Against Defamation. Given it's an equal split in the sources and that's what they call themselves in English on their website. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
• Support Polish League Against Defamation as the preferable form, per Necrothesp.    Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

• Keep the present title, "Polish Antidefamation League", which is more in accord with English-language structure than "Polish League Against Defamation".

"Polish Anti-Defamation League" might also be acceptable. But the English Wiktionary does not list "anti-defamation" at all, only :"antidefamation", which it defines as "Opposing the defamation of a particular group. Chiefly in direct or oblique reference to the [Jewish] Anti-Defamation League", formerly known as the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith.

Nihil novi (talk) 21:22, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

"Polish Antidefamation League" has 0 hits in google news (and as you might see - the betterknown ADL uses "Anti-Defamation", and google suggests "anti defamation" or "anti-defamation" if you type in antidefamation). "Polish Anti-Defamation League" has 22 google-news hits. "Polish League Against Defamation" has 49 true google news hits.Icewhiz (talk) 06:10, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

• Support Polish League Against Defamation (nominator - clarifying since I think this title is better) as more common and in use by organization. Polish Anti-Defamation League is preferable to current "Polish Antidefamation League" title.Icewhiz (talk) 06:12, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

---

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

use of non-RS

We describe organizations as they are described in WP:IRS. The organization itself is not a RS. This organization has been described as "the Polish Anti-Defamation League (PDL), a nationalist organization close to Poland’s government" in TIME - a RS. There are not mainstream contemporary RSes treating it as a " non-governmental (NGO) civil-rights organization" - a decidedly non-neutral and self-serving presentation.Icewhiz (talk) 06:43, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

You need something more than a couple editorials/magazine articles (that aren't even about the subject).Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:44, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

To the contrary - these are actual WP:RS that are on the subject, using their own voice. Using the organization itself - a non-reliable WP:SPS (and a dead link to boot) to source a description of it - is a gross violation of sourcing policy.Icewhiz (talk) 06:50, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Uh... what voice other than their own could they use? What does that even mean? Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:53, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

They could have attributed this to someone else. In this case - they reported this in their own voice - which means that since they are a WP:RS - that we should repeat this as well. Meanwhile, your description of the organization as a civil-rights org (since removed) is unsourced, as is the description of them as a NGO (which is quite doubtful) - per Time, Times of Israel, and for instance this buzzfeed piece which notes the close ties between this organization and the ruling party in Poland as well as the "Polish National Foundation, a quasi-public organization funded by state-owned corporations to promote Poland’s reputation abroad."Icewhiz (talk) 07:03, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, with attribution. Also, why are you complaining about stuff I removed that you also disagree with? Also also your own source calls them an NGO, so... pick one, either you like Buzzfeed as source and then we go with NGO, or you don't and we don't.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:19, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

No attribution needed - seeing that just about every English language news organization that provides a description (other than just saying the name of the organization) says it is "nationalist", "nationalist organization close to Poland’s government", "campaign group close to the ruling Polish party", "right-wing Polish group", or "independent organization considered close to Poland’s right-wing, nationalist government" - there is no need to attribute. As for NGO - many English sources do not call it an NGO. Several use the term "campaign group". Using NGO here would be misleading given the very close ties to the government - Buzzfeed uses NGO once, and only after describing the close ties to the Polish government - use of NGO out of this context would be misleading.Icewhiz (talk) 08:03, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

What am I "complaining about stuff I removed that you also disagree with?" - I only complained about the description of the organization in the lede in your edit (which is what I reverted) - I did not complain (AFAICT) about the other changes you made - though looking at them, I am opposed to "occupied Poland" (though this was present earlier - you wikified this) - we should not get into whether Eastern Poland or 1944 Poland (liberated? occupied?) was occupied (particularly since this protest, AFAICT, is not only about 39-41 but also about 43-46 - during which the Soviet annexation was widely recognized) - it is sufficient to say "Soviet war crimes against Poland" (using the link's language) - which is strong enough language and spot-on factual/NPOV (I don't think there is any NPOV source denying the existence of Soviet war crimes).Icewhiz (talk) 08:23, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Every country should have it

Every country in the world should have this kind of organisation and it’s not nationalism. It is in order to protect a good name of that country. Poland is not the only country which has established anti-defamation league.

Can this please be more clear... you're making them out to be crazy

To point out that they complained about how Polish honey was being referred to and ignore the valid anti-Polish sentiment that does exist in the other hundreds of works that they mentioned is blatantly to make all of their claims seem frivolous. It is also extremely vague to say that they sued Grabowski for defamation, when they sued him because he falsely claimed that Edward Malinowski was complicit in killing Jews, when he hid them and saved many who later spoke out in defence of him. 174.115.15.87 (talk) 23:24, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Sentence not clear

"In 2019 the league funded a lawsuit against Grabowski and Barbara Engelking, editors of the 2018 Dalej jest noc ("Night Without End"), accusing them of defamation.[23] The court ruled in their favor, but was later overruled in an appeal.[24]" "in their favour" sounds like in favour of Grabowski and Engelking, but it is the other way round. See here: https://oko.press/grabowski-engelking-wyrok-dalej-jest-noc. 77.65.99.81 (talk) 00:57, 24 December 2023 (UTC)