Talk:Taras Bulba-Borovets

The biography of Taras Borovets is untrue and incomplete. He was a cruel murderer of Polish peasants, also their wives and children and old people in the Volhynia/Wołyń region. This biography was written by some Ukrainian nationalist, contradicting the facts and truth about the real life and deeds of the bandit called Taras Bulba Borovets/ Borowiec in Polish — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.142.3.108 (talk) 12:56, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

"Freed by Nazis"

"He was freed in 1944."

What's the deal with someone being "freed" by Nazis after being arrested? This looks odd. We get this info (no doubt sourced) not just for this person but for other members of Ukrainian nationalist movements "imprisoned by Gestapo." See Patriarch Mstyslav for another prominent example.

Is it just me who thinks that it is not very normal for someone to be captured by Gestapo, incarcerated, and then "freed"? I've never heard of this being done with Soviet prisoners. Some elaboration of this mystery is in order. --Irpen 17:58, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't say that he was freed by the Nazis. However it does not say who freed him. Bandurist 23:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, this is worthy of being clarified then. --Irpen 00:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, I figured it out. Dzyobak's paper had it. --Irpen 02:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you figured out Patriarch Mstyslav? Ostap 03:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

No, but I have not spent any time on that. But we had to clarify this long time ago. Nazis were not exactly known for just "freeing" their captives, were they? --Irpen 03:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

No, it is strange. Ostap 03:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Citation needed date=August 2008

@Geohem and Lute88: what's the problem? Citation needed from 2008. You must specify the sources. My text was corrected according to the main article about The Polissian Sich--Nicoljaus (talk) 20:27, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Text removed, but you made an additional non consensus changes. So it was reverted. --Geohem (talk) 11:55, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

You've returned the text without sources. I corrected this. New text - consensus one, according to the main article Ukrainian People's Revolutionary Army. Formulate more specific claims, please.--Nicoljaus (talk) 12:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Aid to jewish families

Nicoljaus, would you please stop deleting sentences that describe Bulba's aid to Jewish families which use cited material? I'm not sure if they teach you how to read American English at Olgino, but please try to read the sources instead of merely deleting them. The rescue efforts on the protecting memory website describes the aid he gave to them. 71.121.248.91 (talk) 09:21, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

It's amazing. May be my auful actions should be discussed with admins?--Nicoljaus (talk) 21:44, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely you can. Apparently they don't teach you how to spell at Olgino either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.121.248.91 (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Learn how to read the sources Nicoljaus. The Protecting Memory article states that Bulba saved the Jewish family from the Soviets, not the other way around. 71.121.248.91 (talk) 08:55, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

No, it doesn't say that. And read WP:PA, please.--Nicoljaus (talk) 08:53, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Rescue Efforts taken from [1]

Assistance to Jews from the local Christian population was rare. The peasant Mikhail Khaboviets hid more than ten Jews on his land and helped guide

Jews to safe partisan groups in the woods.

In other instances, Jews managed to establish contact with partisans in the region. Some were allowed to join Soviet partisans under the command of Vasily “Komarov” Korzh. One family was discovered by Ukrainian partisans affiliated with Taras Bulba-Borovets and provided refuge in exchange for work. They fled this unit when an officer revealed that they would be killed if Soviet partisan forces advanced on the Bulba unit’s position.

Only a few dozen Jews from Ratne survived the war. 71.121.248.91 (talk) 08:55, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it does say that.71.121.248.91 (talk) 09:08, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

I still don't see how Borovets personally "saved the Jewish family from the Soviets", as you claimed: [2]. Soviet partisans have no problems with Jews, because they were commonly internationalists. Try to find help with your version of this case.--Nicoljaus (talk) 11:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

I can't understand your grammatically incorrect sentence, please work on your grammar skills. I do have help with my version of the case, they are called sources. Bulese (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

What you fail to see is unimportant, but what the sources say is. Stop deleting sourced sentances. 71.121.248.91 (talk) 21:06, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Also please stop deleting viable sources and providing links to sources that do not exist.Bulese (talk) 14:03, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

That's what the Jews themselves write, who saved them and who killed them:

When the Germans conquered the area, they worked very closely with Ukrainian nationalists. Short of manpower, the Germans were very happy to recruit Ukrainians as police, para-military forces, and local government officials. These Ukrainians, in turn, used their new authority to harass and murder Jews and, after the Jews were gone, Poles. Eventually, a situation existed where the Germans controlled the large towns, but armed Ukrainian partisans controlled the countryside. The large Ukrainian partisan formations would kill any Jews they found, along with Poles and Czechs.

Many of the Jewish partisan units were eventually absorbed into the Soviet partisan formations. While anti-Semitism was not unknown among the Soviet partisans, the senior Soviet officers enforced a strict discipline that usually protected the Jews from serious abuse.

https://www.jewishgen.org/ukraine/PTM_Article.asp?id=38

I guess we have finished this case. --Nicoljaus (talk) 17:21, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Your source makes no mention of Taras Bulba Borovets and his relations with Jews, while mine does and explicitly states how partisans affiliated with him sheltered Jews and gave them (not forced them to) work. You're right, the issue is settled.Bulese (talk) 20:54, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Interesting how your source makes no mention of Borovets, or any particular people at all. Inaccurate edits on the page that does not pertain to Borovets in particular will be undone.Bulese (talk) 20:57, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

There was a situation described as "every group against every other." (There were a few "righteous Gentiles," though, who helped save individuals and small groups of Jews from the carnage, and Spector describes these people as well.) This excerpt from your source is referring to people like Borovets and his partisans. Thank you for admitting your errors. Bulese (talk) 21:00, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

This excerpt from your source is referring to people like Borovets and his partisans. - this is a direct lie and you know this. How Borovets and his people treated Jews are well known:

Supporters of Ukrainian rebel Taras Bulba-Borovets, the Polissian Sich, carried out anti-Jewish actions along the Ukrainian–Belorussian border in the Pripjet marshlands. According to Karel Berkhoff’s research, one 15-year-old-member of the Sich recalled: ‘we did everything they asked. I went everywhere, rode everywhere, fought and shot Jews who had treated me badly’. The Sich had its own newspaper, in which it announced at the end of 1941, ‘now the parasitical Jewish nation had been destroyed’. Researcher Jared McBride also documented Sich pogroms north of Zhytomyr at Olevs’k. In that case, the robbing, torture and killing of Jews was done with no German involvement.

— Pogroms, mob violence and genocide in western Ukraine, summer 1941: varied histories, explanations and comparisons

And now you scoff at the memory of the victims, say that the murderers are saviors, and accuse the Soviet partisans of Volhynia, many of whom were Jews fleeng the Ghettos, that they were killing themselves, and only heroic heroes of heroic UPA saved Jews.--Nicoljaus (talk) 10:02, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Your grammatical skills are almost as bad as your ability to read.Bulese (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

What you just said does not appear on any of the text in the link you provided. It will be undone.Bulese (talk) 16:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

• I have removed this part about partisans "affiliated" with Borovets. This article is about Taras Bulba-Borovets, not about any case related to the partisans Geohem (talk) 11:10, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Nicoljaus

Nicoljaus, please stop to remove the information from the article, that is based on reliable sources. Geohem (talk) 13:11, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh, yes! the schoolgirls are best sources for the heroic deeds of heroic heroes.--Nicoljaus (talk) 13:19, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Журналіст-дослідник Іван Ольховський - A journalist, and that says it all--Nicoljaus (talk) 13:38, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Nicoljaus please stop

Nicoljaus, please stop deleting sourced sentences. It is juvenile and incorrect. 71.121.248.91 (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Use sources on the subject of the article, not accidental mentions.--Nicoljaus (talk) 18:38, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

What exactly is that supposed to mean? My source directly deals with the subject matter of the Borovets page. It contradicts your claim that the Sich did not execute combat operations against the biggest friends of Stalin the Nazis. 71.121.248.91 (talk) 19:30, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Use normal works on the subject of the article, stop cutting out random phrases. In the paragraph everything is told in detail.--Nicoljaus (talk) 20:04, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Edit war Nicoljaus is starting

Would the editor Nicoljaus please stop edit warring against numerous people who oppose his fascist one sided Russian opinion? Thank you. 96.244.219.229 (talk) 20:14, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

New reincarnation of blocked users Bulese (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 71.121.248.91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).--Nicoljaus (talk) 06:33, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

The information has a citation. Wikipedia is based on information from reliable sources, with citations to those sources. It is dishonest and misleading to put in completely different text next to the citation.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:54, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I believe this behavior is disruptive and vandal.--Nicoljaus (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

The sources do not support what Nicoljaus is saying. They will be undone. 131.118.245.252 (talk) 19:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

One of the changes the IP editor made was to alter, this:

Borovets and his people helped the peasants, preventing the Germans from exploiting the country, but they did not executed combat operations. Borovets himself claimed that "he had spilled no German blood".

to this

Borovets and his people helped the peasants, preventing the Germans from exploiting the country, and executed combat operations against the Nazis and their former allies, the Soviets.

I checked page 103 of the source, and it says the following:

But Borovets asserted that he remained friendly to the Wehrmacht and "had spilled no German blood."

It is clear that the source does support the text, and that the IP editor's claim otherwise is untrue.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:23, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

When a user makes an edit and their view point opposes that of Nicoljaus, he deletes the edit along with its referenced material. He needs to stop. 96.244.219.229 (talk) 18:41, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Bad sources and Dead Links

The user Nicoljaus is using sources that cannot be accessed and dead links when citing sources. I would like to avoid an edit war, so could this user please respond to this section so a resolution can be found? Thank you very much. Themanhascome (talk) 20:24, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

It is not true. Links are given to paper books (which, however, are easy to download).--Nicoljaus (talk) 20:26, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

The Dvorak book cannot be accessed from the link you provided on the Borovets page. Themanhascome (talk) 20:28, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

It's another untrue. The link to Library of Congress Classification is given. You can fixed the web-link, but not delete the well-sourced information.--Nicoljaus (talk) 20:37, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Why don't you give a direct link to the page you reference? When using the ISBN search page on Wikipedia I can't find an online link to the book itself. Themanhascome (talk) 20:49, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Contents of the book itself, I meant to say. Themanhascome (talk) 20:51, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

It's your problem, not mine.--Nicoljaus (talk) 20:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

No, it is your duty (not problem) to provide links to verified sources to ensure accuracy on the page. Themanhascome (talk) 21:01, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

If you cannot find the book cited correctly - it's your problem, not mine.--Nicoljaus (talk) 21:14, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

The book is not cited correctly, as the page numbers you have listed cannot be accessed. Themanhascome (talk) 21:17, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

I think, you should try to accsess again, or ask for help. But you shouldn't delete the well-sourced information and not continue the edit warring.--Nicoljaus (talk) 21:30, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

The information is not sourced. You do not provide a direct link to the pages of your supposed source, the Dvorak book. The link you provided in the sources section was to a different source from Dvorak. Also, it is not in English. Contrary to your personal attacks against me, I am not a "Ukrainian Ultra Nationalist". I'm not even fluent in Ukrainian. Themanhascome (talk) 21:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Published sources don't have to be accessible through the internet, very few books are. You can see Wikipedia:Published, if the book is accessible through public libraries, then it is considered accessible. – Þjarkur (talk) 23:05, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. On the Book Sources page, I cannot find an available copy. I could not find an available copy on the Library of Congress page either. As someone who is new to Wikipedia, I was also wondering how we would know that the source does indeed state what Nicoljaus claims it does since it cannot be accessed online. Would I need to obtain a copy of the book and read it myself in order to disprove what another user may claim it says if that user is not being truthful? In terms of the source in question not being available in English, is that acceptable? Also, I see that another thing that the user Nicoljaus and myself have differing views on is the use of quotation marks on the headings of sections such as "First UPA" and Organization of the "Polissian Sich". Would getting rid of those quotation marks be the wise thing to do? Thanks. Themanhascome (talk) 00:22, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Verifiability is of course more difficult when it comes to obscure books, but we often have to cite books. The book by Armstrong can be found in 700 libraries in the world according to WorldCat and is available at my local University library. I could send you a scan of the relevant chapters next week if you wish (just email me). You can also add a {{Verify source}} in the text, requesting that other editors verify the text. It can also be good to request a direct quote for the reference, so that other users can see how the original text worded things (the request can be made on the article's talk page, or sometimes with {{Request quotation}}).

See: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources. Non-English sources are allowed, but when it comes to disputes other users often request a quote to the relevant section and a translation. Here one can also use {{Verify source}}.

I find the quotation marks in the section headings to be a bit strange, either removing the quotation marks or italicizing the word would probably be fine.

– Þjarkur (talk) 01:12, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

The PDF of the 1980 version of the Armstrong book seems to be available on Scribd – Þjarkur (talk) 01:50, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much. The book I was referring to, however, was the book from 2002. At the sources section at the bottom of the article page the author's name is in Cyrillic, and I don't know exactly how to pronounce it. Much thanks for the Armstrong link though. Themanhascome (talk) 01:54, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Nicoljaus' edit warring

Nicoljaus, what is the problem? The Risch book clearly states on pg. 35 that Borovets and his men were not involved in actions against Poles. I am working on making a link to an online version of the book, so until then, do not delete sourced sentences. Themanhascome (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

In this book, the actions of the Borovets' "First UPA" are merely compared with the actions of banderits. However, the author does not consider the actual relationship of the people of Borovets with the Poles.--Nicoljaus (talk) 14:48, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Would you happen to have an online link to the book? I'm having trouble finding one, as I only have the hardcopy edition. The copy I have states otherwise. Themanhascome (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2019 (UTC)