Talk:Roman Shukhevych/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nachtigall

Shukhevych ideed commanded that batallion, but the cited source does not mention him as responsible for anything. Besides the other reference suggests they deny that charge. Unless there is a proof of him personally commiting any atrocities, please keep that information at the Nachtigall article. --Hillock65 23:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean "him personally commiting any atrocities"? Personally cutting someone's throat? The battalion under his command committed the massacre of Jews in Lviv. Since Shukhevych as a commander is responsible for his unit, this atrocity is highly relevant to his biography. Beit Or 17:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
How is it relevant? Just a few edits before you moved info on members of that units denying the charge to Nachtigal article as irrelevant here [1], now all of a sudden alleged atrocities of this unit are relevant to a story of Shukhevych? Is there any evidence of him being in command of that unit at that time? He was not sick, on leave, detained, imprisoned? Present evidence of that info forked (WP:CFORK) from another article before inserting it here again. Thank you. --Hillock65 18:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
If that was Shukhevych who denied his involvement in the massacre, that material would be relevant to his biography. Otherwise, it has nothing to do here. Beit Or 22:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Also, since you invoke (rather speciously) Wikipedia:Content forking, please read what is not a content fork: "Articles on distinct but related topics may well contain a significant amount of information in common with one another. This does not make either of the two articles a content fork.". Beit Or 22:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Beit Or, between when and when was Shukhevich commander of Nakhtigal? When did the pogrom took place? If the second date falls between the first two by all means add it to the article. Now, Hillock, if Beit does provide the refrences, and you believe that Shukhevich was sick/on leave/detained/imprisoned on the day of the pogrom and/or wether he was unaware of it taking place or any other valid reason that would clean his name, it is your responsibility to cite that event. --Kuban Cossack 19:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

He was the Ukrainian commander from the beginning; there are no references to him being relieved from command at any point. Beit Or 22:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
If you want a more specific reference, here is one: "There were two Ukrainian companies in the German army composed of the members and sympathizers of the OUN under the leadership of Stephen Bandera; one called the Nachtigall, under the command of Roman Shukhevych, entered Lviv with the German forces on June 30." (Volodymyr E. Kubijovyč Ukraine: A Concise Encyclopedia Vol. 1, p. 886. University of Toronto Press, 1963). Beit Or 11:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Article expansion

The article has been translated from the Ukrainian Wiki article (with all sources kept intact) Bandurist 13:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The material you have added is either unverifiable, or comes from unreliable sources, or is blatantly antisemitic. For example, you have cited extensively archival materials from Lviv archives; this is a violation of WP:V, which says: "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." Since archival materials are not published you cannot use them. Where you have provided the publishers, I cannot spot anyone "with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". Do you have proofs that the Ukrainian publishers Union indeed has such a reputation? And the passage "Jewish sources claim..." is simply disgusting. Beit Or 14:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I Understand that you are unhappy. The article does not share your POV. It is a translation of the article on the Ukrainian Wikipedia. Shukhevych is a contravercial person currently in Ukrainian because of the disinformation that has been spread about him. Recently he was post-humourously awarded the medal Hero of Ukraine by the Ukrainian president. This would not have happened without significant research into Shukhevych's background. The archived materials are accessible, and so are the books. If you would like I can even scan some of the pages for you, but you would do better by ordering them through your local library. Archival materials show exactly where the materials come from and they are accessible (at least to me). I do however find your behavior quite disappointing Bandurist 14:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I have asked you to comment on the reliability and verifiability of your sources. You have responded with personal attacks and violations of WP:AGF. You say, "The archived [sic] materials are accessible..." Please consult WP:V. You can only used published materials. Archival materials thus cannot be used unless they were previously published by a reliable, secondary source. Beit Or 14:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
They have been published in a secondary source - The Ukrainian Wikipedia is a secondary source and it has been published. I feel that Wikipedia is a reliable source. However, secondary sources are also available. Bandurist 14:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Alfred M. de Zayas in his book "The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, 1939-1945",(Published by University of Nebraska Press Picton Press, Rockport, Maine, 2000 edition) in Chapter 20 gives an analysis based on document of the tragic massacre in Lviv which contributes to the refutation of the Wiesenthal-Safer Calumny. In his analysis based on documents the 4,000 murdered people were Ukrainian and Polish intellectuals murdered by the NKVD. This was documented by German and by the Ukrainian Red Cross. For an in depth analysis of the Lviv massacres see [[2]] Bandurist 16:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Please do not switch the subject. Do you have anything to say regarding the reliability and verifiability of your sources? Regarding Zayas, your link is not working. Beit Or 20:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I think you meant this link[3]. Whatever the merits of the book and its author, this particular chapter is about the massacre of Ukrainian prisoners before the Soviet withdrawal from Lviv; it's not about the massacre of Jews and Poles after the German occupation. It's just on a different subject. Beit Or 20:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Read the whole article, not just the top three paragraphs. Bandurist 20:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
What article are you talking about? Beit Or 20:40, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The Lviv case gained renewed attention in the fall of 1959 when the Soviet press mounted a major disinformation campaign against a minister in the West German Adenauer cabinet, Theodor Oberländer, accusing him of participating in the SS murders there. On 5 September 1959 the Radianska Ukraina wrote: "Eighteen years ago the fascists committed a horrendous crime in Lviv in the night of 29 - 30 June 1941. The Hitlerites arrested on the basis of prepared lists hundreds of Communists, Communist youth, and non-party members and murdered them in brutal fashion in the courtyard of the Samarstinov Prison." These accusations were picked up by the Western press and eventually led to Oberläander's resignation. The investigation by the district attorney's office in Bonn, however, completely cleared him.

At about the same time an international commission was set up at The Hague in the Netherlands to carry out independent investigations. The members were four former anti-Hitler activists, Norwegian lawyer Hans Cappelen, former Danish foreign minister and president of the Danish parliament Ole Bjørn Kraft, Dutch socialist Karel van Staal, Belgian law professor Flor Peeters, and Swiss jurist and member of parliament Kurt Scoch. Following its interrogation of a number of Ukrainian witnesses between November 1959 and March 1960, the commission concluded: "After four months of inquiries and the evaluation of 232 statements by witnesses from all circles involved, it can be established that the accusations against the Battalion Nachtigall and against the then Lieutenant and currently Federal Minister Oberländer have no foundation in fact.http://www.alfreddezayas.com/Chapbooks/Lembergmassacre.shtml " Bandurist 21:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

This paragraph pertains to the accusation by the Soviets described one paragraph above: "The Lvov case gained renewed attention in the fall of 1959 when the Soviet press mounted a major disinformation campaign against a minister in the West German Adenauer cabinet, Theodor Oberländer, accusing him of participating in the SS murders there. On 5 September 1959 the Radianska Ukraina wrote: "Eighteen years ago the fascists committed a horrendous crime in Lvov in the night of 29 - 30 June 1941. The Hitlerites arrested on the basis of prepared lists hundreds of Communists, Communist youth, and non-party members and murdered them in brutal fashion in the courtyard of the Samarstinov Prison."" The commission cleared Nachtigall of the charge of murdering communists and others on 29 - 30 June. The accusation was, of course, a crude Soviet invention, since Nachtigall only entered Lviv on June 30; it couldn't possibly kill anyone in Lviv on June 29. The commission says nothing regarding the murders of Jews in the first days of July. Please do not attribute to the source what it doesn't say. Beit Or 21:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Beit Or, earlier you said "The material you have added is either unverifiable, or comes from unreliable sources, or is blatantly antisemitic." Does this mean you find all of the material to be unverifiable and unreliable? Is there a specific part of this new material that you object to having in the article? Or do you object to all of it? Ostap 00:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
The sources for the new material fall into two groups: Lviv archives and books in Ukrainian published by some murky presses. The first group obviously fails WP:V because only published primary or secondary sources may be used; archival materials are unusable until they are published by a reliable source. Ukrainian Wikipedia does not meet the requirements of reliable source. Regarding the second group of sources, I have repeatedly requested the editors who insist on using them as to why they believe these sources are reliable. The requests have so far been ignored. Beit Or 21:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Just a general comment. The expansion of the article to include the subject's biography, not just a political one, is a good idea and I very much welcome that. However, Wikipedia, English or non-English, cannot be used as a source of anything. We can of course use foreign language articles in writing our articles but we have to transfer the text from foreign language wikis along with the sources and cite the published sources, not the Wikipedias as references. So, any information that is unsourced can be challenged and if it is repeated from another Wikipedia, where it is also unsourced, does not add any verifiability to the info. The expansion brought in one verifiable source, that is Zayas. Note, however, that Alfred-Maurice de Zayas is not a mainstream scholar and his works are widely viewed to be controversial enough to require at least reverification to mainstream historians. --Irpen 00:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I did some research, and all I could find was Columbia University professor John Armstrong in his book Ukrainian nationalism (review [4]). On page 77, he writes about Ukrainian and Nachtigall participation in these events. He says in a footnote (and I quote) "Interview 24. Raul Hilberg, in his exhaustive study "The Destruction of the European Jews" (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961), p. 330, shows that Ukrainians were involved in violence against Jews in Galicia (see also p. 173 below). It is probable that some Ukrainians assisted the Germans in the massacres of Jews in L'vov soon after the outbreak of the war. Recently, Polish writers have described "eyewiteness accounts" of "Nachtigall" members' participation in these attrocities (Aleksander Drozdznski and Jan Zaborowski, Oberlander: A Study in German East Policies [Poznan: Wydawnictwo Zachodnie, 1960]). I have not, however, been able to find any evidence (other that alledged Polish witnesses) indicating involvement of "Nachtigall" members in anti-Semitic atrocities" Nachtigall is in quotes because it is a codename, as he identifies earlier on page 74. Nonetheless even though he (in 1963) could not find enough evidence he still does imply in his writing that they were involved and he makes it clear that even with the lack of evidence their involvment was very probable. Also, I think the 1990 Encyclopedia of the Holocaust clearly has found enough evidence that they were involved. It is hard to argue with that. It looks like scholarship is against de Zayas, and writing that their participation was "alleged" would seem unnecessary. Ostap 02:08, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I haven't referenced to a Wikipedia mirror. This is an incorrect assumption of my colleague. The materials were translated from the Ukrainian Wikipedia site (though slightly condensed) keeping all the original references which are given in the original and in translation.
Regarding de Zayas book. He is a historian. He is in the English-speaking mainstream and notwithstanding criticism from a few historians, his works Nemesis at Potsdam and The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau were well received in the academic community, and are used in colleges and universities, and remain in print thirty years after their initial publication, and are in the 14th and 7th revised and updated editions, respectively". But it is not that so much as the fact that he does give his sources which are one can also verify.Bandurist 02:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
You have copied text from answers.com, a Wikipedia mirror, into Nachtigall Battalion. The text from the Ukrainian Wikipedia relies either on unpublished primary sources, which are prohibited by WP:V or on secondary sources the reliability of which you have so far failed to support with any evidence. Reliability of Zayes (who is a lawyer, not a historian) aside, you have plainly misrepresented his text: he says Nachtigall was cleared of the ludicrous Soviet charge that the battalion had murdered communists in a Lviv prison, he does not say Nachtigall was acquitted of murdering Jews. Beit Or 21:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
1) Regarding Alfred-Maurice de Zayas If one reads the Wiki article one notices that he is listed as not just being a lawyer, but also a historian. Further it states that he has not only earned his juris doctor from Harvard Law School and a doctorate of philosophy in modern history from the Georg-August University of Göttingen.
That makes him a historian in my eyes. He has combined his knowlege of history and law to produce some outstanding works. He has been a visiting professor of international law and of world history at a number of institutions, including the Graduate Institute of International Studies (Geneva), the DePaul University College of Law (Chicago), the University of British Columbia (Vancouver), the Geneva School of Diplomacy and International Relations, the Schiller International University (Leysin), the Académie Internationale de Droit Constitutionnel (Tunis), the University of Trier, the Santa Clara Law School, the Center for Applied Studies in International Negotiations (CASIN, Genève), the Institut de Droits de l'Homme Strasbourg, the Felix Ermacora Institute in Vienna, the Raoul Wallenberg Institute in Lund (Sweden), and the Universidad de Alcalá de Henares (Madrid).
He has been member of doctoral commissions at the universities of Geneva, Amsterdam, and Alcalá de Henares. While at the U.N., he was the founder and editor of the series "Selected Decisions of the Human Rights Committee under the Optional Protocol." He is a regular participant in panels and round tables at the United Nations, where he represents the International Society for Human Rights.
He is an impressive figure in my eyes.

His works:

  • Nemesis at Potsdam: the Expulsion of the Germans from the East.
  • A Terrible Revenge: The Ethnic Cleansing of the East European Germans
  • The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, 1939-1945.University of Nebraska Press, 1989
  • "Human Rights in the Administration of Criminal Justice" New York, 1994
  • "Ethnic Cleansing: Applicable Norms, Emerging Jurisprudence, Implementable Remedies" in John Carey (ed.) International Humanitarian Law: Origins, New York 2003

Make him an authority on matters dealing with this part of the world and this period of time.

2) Controversies : The wiki article states "While de Zayas' literary output and his international law and human rights publications are mainstream, his peace activism and his publications on Germany have rendered him somewhat controversial." Nothing here about controversy regarding his scholarship.The controversy was regarding the fact that he questioned the legality of the expulsion of 15 million Germans from their homelands after World War II.

His second book, The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau (University of Nebraska Press) investigated alleged Allied war crimes, including the murder of Ukrainians in Lviv by the NKVD 1941. De Zayas was the first researcher to see and evaluate the 226 volumes of extant records of the Wehrmacht-Untersuchungsstelle, which had been classified documents in the United States and had just been returned by the US National Archives to the German Bundesarchiv. The book was savagely attacked in the media of the Soviet Union and its satellites. - This could be expected. Nether-the-less it has been well received in the academic community, are used in colleges and universities, and remain in print thirty years after their initial publication, in the 14th and 7th revised and updated editions, respectively. Arnold Krammer in The Journal of Soviet Military Studies reviewed in - "The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, 1939-1495 is a fascinating book. It is well-organized and elegantly written ... a sobering new look at the Second World War and ourselves .. With the appearance of this new book ... our innocence comes to an official end."

3) With regard to sources I have a recently published book on Shukhevych. I also can get the Mirchuk book this weekend and put in all the references, page numbers etc, however you will have to give me a few days. Bandurist 01:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You keep ignoring the most critical problem here, namely that you are misrepresenting Zayas who never mentioned Nachtigall in relation to the massacres of Jews. For this reason, the question of Zayas reliability is moot. Beit Or 15:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I only briefly browsed the discussion here, but I for whoever said "I feel that Wikipedia is a reliable source", we must realise that Wikipedia is indeed not a reliable source, and it certainly is not a publisher of original thought. Likewise, a mirror of Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Cheers, TewfikTalk 19:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Re quotations

"Interview 24. Raul Hilberg, in his exhaustive study "The Destruction of the European Jews" (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961), p. 330, shows that Ukrainians were involved in violence against Jews in Galicia (see also p. 173 below). It is probable that some Ukrainians assisted the Germans in the massacres of Jews in L'vov soon after the outbreak of the war. Recently, Polish writers have described "eyewiteness accounts" of "Nachtigall" members' participation in these attrocities (Aleksander Drozdznski and Jan Zaborowski, Oberlander: A Study in German East Policies [Poznan: Wydawnictwo Zachodnie, 1960]).

The Polish book of 1960 is not a credible source. In the 1960 the Lviv case gained renewed attention in the fall of 1959 when the Soviet press mounted a major disinformation campaign against a minister in the West German Adenauer cabinet, Theodor Oberländer, accusing him of participating in the SS murders there. It started on 5 September 1959 when "Radianska Ukraina" wrote: "Eighteen years ago the fascists committed a horrendous crime in Lviv in the night of 29 - 30 June 1941. The Hitlerites arrested on the basis of prepared lists hundreds of Communists, Communist youth, and non-party members and murdered them in brutal fashion in the courtyard of the Samarstinov Prison." These accusations were picked up by the Western press and eventually led to Oberländer's resignation. The investigation by the district attorney's office in Bonn, however, completely cleared him. http://alfreddezayas.com/Chapbooks/Lembergmassacre.shtml

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bandurist (talk • contribs) 02:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Shukhevych

A lot of people that I know of, including myself have searched for this article, and not found any results, because we typed the name through an i instead of y. I think there should be some redirection, from Shukhevich to Shukhevych. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mona23653 (talk • contribs) 00:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

reverts

The article now has the Yosef Lapid quote, the yushchenko quote, the information about the Holocaust Encyclopedia, and the Zayas part and the part from Taddeusz Piotrowski's book. What is the issue and why all the reverts? Ostap 06:08, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Bandurist and IP, please use this page rather than revert, that can get you blocked. I tried to add in everything that was cited from both POVs. This section is getting very long, and probably belongs in the Nachtigall article anyway. Perhaps it should be broken into its own article? Ostap 00:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
It is topical. I would prefer to discuss things on the talk page, however ...IP is not even registered.... Bandurist (talk) 01:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Picture of Roman Shukhevych and Germans?

I own a couple of pictures [5] showing two prominent Ukrainians during some kind of official greeting of Germans taken somewhere in Western Ukraine in 1941. One of the Ukrainians looks like Roman Shukhevych. Can anyone confirm it's really him? And who is the older man next by him? Could it be Konstantyn Levytsky? Narking (talk) 21:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


Nachtigall video

Interesting video about Shukhevych and Nachtigall on U-tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q0NFUGhN0U Bandurist (talk) 04:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Pieracki

The assassination of the minister of internal affairs Bronisław Pieracki who was responsible for brutal pacifications... In what way was Pieracki responsible for pacifications? The decision was made by Piłsudski.[6]

A few days after the event, OUN made an official announcement taking responsibility for the murder. They declared Pieracki the main person responsible for organizing and executing the pacification, calling him the "hangman of the Ukrainian nation".[7]

...and the destruction of numerous Ukrainian cultural institutions......and on whose orders brutal torture was carried out publicly on the Ukrainian population -? I think it should be clarified. Is this about pacifications? --Hedviberit (talk) 17:55, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, article looks like propaganda brochure. Pacification in 1930 - that was response for anti Polish actions by OUN. There is no mention about that. I didnt find any informations about Chechowski's torture ect. Sources are not reliable.--Paweł5586 (talk) 12:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

A lot of "Original Research" going on here - Pawel5586 and Hedviberit are trying to reconcile a number of different sources instead of reflecting what the sources are saying. If sources present conflicting view (as would be expected) they both should be reported. Pawel5586 and Hedviberit you need to expand your research beyond just Polish research. Bobanni (talk) 13:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

All article has been written acrording to Ukrainian sources e.g. ^ Мірчук П. Нарис історії ОУН… — С. 337 — 348, 382 — 384. (Mirchuk P. Essays in the history of the OUN - p. 337- 348, 382-384. So it look like pov, specially facts about assassinations.--Paweł5586 (talk) 13:47, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

This is a very ironic complaint given some Polish authors' insistance on using sources published by Nortom.Faustian (talk) 14:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I have checked - Mirczuk was a OUN member, even after war he was active in Foregin Branch OUN till 1952. I think this is mean that he is not reliable source.--Paweł5586 (talk) 19:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
That makes equally as unreliable as a member of Polish self-defence forces. If we remove Mirchuk, we must remove Filar, and countless others for the same reason that we remove Mirchuk. We should not have double standards.Faustian (talk) 15:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
There are other reasons. Hungarian historian Gabor Lagzi calls him "OUN hagiographist" [8] p.9. Paul R. Magosci describes his writings as sympathetic to OUN [9], and classifies Mirchuk's and Shankowsky's "Chronicles of UPA warfare" in a category "Myths of UPA warfare" [10]. G. Motyka suggested that Mirchuk's work about UPA should be treated with criticism [11] p. 296. Grzegorz Hryciuk noted quasi-historicism of Mirchuk's publications (particularly "Stepan Bandera. Symwoł rewolucijnoji bezkrompromisowosty")[12] p. 314. A characteristic quote from Mirchuk: Tadeusz Hołówko "poisoned the Ukrainian society's life with the idea of conciliation". Btw, the justification for the killing of Hołówko (three years earlier) was similar - Prominent OUN activists blamed Hołówko, who at that time was working in the Ministry of Interior as the director of the Department for Minorities, for the pacification and the colonization of Eastern Galicia. Mirchuk's opinion seems to be more an opinion of OUN activist than historian. --Hedviberit (talk) 18:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't disagree. I'm just pointing out that similar criticism canbe made of Filar. See Wnuk's writing. And Filar is repsectable - the same people complaining about Mirchuk put info taken from Nortom books all over the place.Faustian (talk) 02:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
I think the case of Mirchuk is slightly different. Filar's works are regarded as being of scientific value (included into "traditional trend") while the scientific value of Mirchuk's publications is questioned by some historians. Filar's publications can be treated as at least secondary sources. They include informations about documents found in Polish, Russian and Ukrainian archives (just like Melnyk's works, I presume). Mirchuk was important OUN activist [13] and his writings seem to be heavily influenced by OUN's ideology. Both Nortom and Mirchuk can be seen as controversial. I would support changing Mirchuk's words to those of Gabor Lagzi, and this sentence: In 1930, he became one of the leaders of the social revolts that rocked all of western Ukraine to "He was one of the leaders during the wave of 2,200 attacks against Polish property in Galicia in 1930[1]. acts of protest against the anti-Ukrainian policies of the Polish administration - only the assassination of Pieracki fits this definition (of the acts of protests mentioned in the article).--Hedviberit (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
First point Filar's any controversial or unsourced statements. He is well-educated, respected and reliable historian. Against Mirczuk we have other sources, telling about his biased excuses--Paweł5586 (talk) 08:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
But Filar is respected by both - Polish and Ukrainians historians, he organized Polish-Ukrainian conferences and his books werent critized as biased. In this situation the case is clear, we have sources about Mirczuk overuse.--Paweł5586 (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Of course I didnt deny facts about assassinations, but excuse for killing Polish authorities is not acceptable.--Paweł5586 (talk) 19:51, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Orest Subtelny, Ukraine: a history, Toronto: University Press, 2000, p. 430

Proposal of change

I suggest this section:

In 1925, Roman joined the Ukrainian Military Organization UVO. In 1926, Shukhevych was ordered to assassinate the Lviv school superintendent Stanisław Sobiński who had enforced a strict anti-Ukrainian stance in the education system. The assassination was carried out by Bohdan Pidhainy on October 19, 1926.

In February 1929, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists was founded in Vienna. Shukhevych under the name "Dzvin" (Bell) became a representative of the Ukrainian Executive.

In 1930, he became one of the leaders of the social revolts that rocked all of western Ukraine. The Polish administration retaliated with a process of "pacification" which had the opposite effect and intensified anti-Polish sentiment and increase in interest in Ukrainian nationalism.

Shukhevych continued to plan and also participate in acts of protest against the anti-Ukrainian policies of the Polish administration. These included: 

   * The co-ordination of a series of expropriations from Polish government offices in order to fund continued insurrection in the struggle for Ukrainian national determination.
   * The assassination on March 22 1932 of the Police commissioner Czechowski for the torture of Ukrainian political prisoners during their interrogations.
   * The assassination of the Soviet consul in Lviv as a protest for the Holodomor in Central Ukraine which was done by Mykola Lemyk who assassinated the Special emissary of the NKVD Alexiy Mayov.
   * The assassination of the minister of internal affairs Bronisław Pieracki who was responsible for brutal pacifications and the destruction of numerous Ukrainian cultural institutions and on whose orders brutal torture was carried out publicly on the Ukrainian population. The assassination was carried out July 15, 1934 in Warsaw by Hryts Matseiko.

replaced by NPOV text without propaganda, just facts. --- In 1925, Roman joined the Ukrainian Military Organization UVO. In 1926, Shukhevych was ordered to assassinate the Lviv school superintendent Stanisław Sobiński. The assassination was carried out by Bohdan Pidhainy on October 19, 1926.

In February 1929, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists was founded in Vienna. Shukhevych under the name "Dzvin" (Bell) became a representative of the Ukrainian Executive.

In 1930, he became one of the leaders of the social revolts that rocked all of western Ukraine. Shukhevych continued to plan and also participate in acts of terror against policies of the Polish administration and Polish authorities. These included: 

   * The co-ordination of a series of expropriations from Polish government offices in order to fund continued insurrection in the struggle for Ukrainian national determination.
   * The assassination on March 22 1932 of the Police commissioner Czechowski
   * The assassination of the Soviet consul in Lviv as a protest for the Holodomor in Central Ukraine which was done by Mykola Lemyk who assassinated the Special emissary of the NKVD Alexiy Mayov.
   * The assassination of the minister of internal affairs Bronisław Pieracki. The assassination was carried out July 15, 1934 in Warsaw by Hryts Matseiko.

or we can add facts provided by Hedviberit about justification--Paweł5586 (talk) 18:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

there wasnt any concentration camp in Poland

List of Nazi-German concentration camps shows 11 camps in Poland. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 14:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

yes but during war, befere II war wasnt any.--Paweł5586 (talk) 09:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course concetration camps were constructed in Poland but Poles had nothing to do with them. Proper name is - Nazi Germany's concentration camps and extermination camps (operational during World War II). Saying "Polish concentration camp" is the same as denied Holocaust. --Paweł5586 (talk) 10:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Pawel - You have jumped to conclusions. We are not talking about the Nazi concentration camp that were in Poland during the war. This is the Bereza Kartuzka concentration camp that the Poles constructed before the war for Polish political prisoners that Goebells visited and was so impressed that he used as a model for the Nazi concentration camps. --Bandurist (talk) 14:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable source to back up your claims. As far as I know the first Nazi German concentration camp was Dachau concentration camp opened in March 1933 (Bereza was opened in 1934)--Hedviberit (talk) 09:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Plenty of books describe it as a concentration camp, if anyone wants references. The googlebooks result is here.Faustian (talk) 15:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Read it: The Polish government called the prison "Miejsce Odosobnienia w Berezie Kartuskiej" ("Place of Isolation at Bereza Kartuska"). From the facility's inception, the Sanation regime's opponents openly criticized the legal basis for its establishment and operation, calling it a "concentration camp." This term was later popularized by communist propaganda, which cited the prison as evidence that Poland's prewar government had been a "fascist" regime (despite the fact that Piłsudski had regarded fascism as a menace and that some of his government's most immoderate attacks had been directed against home-grown fascism--Paweł5586 (talk) 06:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Not all of those many sources I linked to base what they say on communist propaganda.Faustian (talk) 16:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Кальба М. Дружини Українських Націоналістів. – Детройт, 1992. – С. 45 – 53, 75 – 80. (Kalba M. Teams of Ukrainian Nationalists - Detroit, 1992

Non WP:RS and self published source - see at I.Patrilyak Viis’kova diial’nist’ OUN(b) u 1940-1942 rokakh (Kyiv: National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 2004- І.К. Патриляк. Військова діяльність ОУН(Б) у 1940—1942 роках. — Університет імені Шевченко \Ін-т історії України НАН України Київ, 2004)

Teeny booklet published by former platoon commander of Nachtigal which main propose was to exonerate own formation from the mass murder of the civil population at Lwow in summer

ThanksJo0doe (talk) 06:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Roman Shukhevych

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Roman Shukhevych's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "ReferenceA":

  • From Red Army: See Г. Ф. Кривошеев, Россия и СССР в войнах XX века: потери вооруженных сил. Статистическое исследование (G. F. Krivosheev, Russia and the USSR in the wars of the 20th century: losses of the Armed Forces. A Statistical Study, in Russian)
  • From Massacres of Poles in Volhynia: Lidia Głowacka, Andrzej Czesław Żak, Military Settlers in Volhynia in the years 1921-1939
  • From Stepan Bandera: ОУН в 1941 році: документи: В 2-х ч Ін-т історії України НАН України К. 2006 ISBN 966-02-2535-0

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 08:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Please find a source(s)

  • For edit [14] - source(s) which indicate a German historian Frank Golczewski - professor from the University of Hamburg as a German-Polish.
He was born in Poland, look it up yourself, it's on wikipedia.--Львівське (talk) 07:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
please indicate a secondary scholar source. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 08:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
page 5 has a brief bio--Львівське (talk) 21:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, however leaflets are not listed at WP:RS listJo0doe (talk) 07:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
  • for edit [15] - source(s) which indicate a facts given in National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine publication - I.Patrilyak Viis’kova diial’nist’ OUN(b) u 1940-1942 rokakh (Kyiv: 2004- І.К. Патриляк. Військова діяльність ОУН(Б) у 1940—1942 роках. — Університет імені Шевченко \Ін-т історії України НАН України Київ, 2004) as claims
I don't understand your point? Are you saying it's not a claim?--Львівське (talk) 07:41, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine publication gives it as "впевнено можно стверджувати що солдати з нахтигалю вчинили розстріли єврейського населення сіл в околиці Винниці. (I hope you can read Ukrainian. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 08:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

ThanksJo0doe (talk ) 07:22, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Translation [16] seems to be incorrect - there 2 villages were all Jews were shot and one at which unit was marched and also all Jews were shot. Also source gives slaughter . ThanksJo0doe (talk) 08:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Just because a source says slaughter doesn't mean wikipedia needs to plagiarize every word verbatim--Львівське (talk) 21:30, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
This edit is a misinterpretation of the source. Please, be accurate in future, because this is highly inappropriate and prohibited by the WP policy.ThanksJo0doe (talk) 07:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
This comment about inappropriate behavior coming from someone who's been banned multiple times?--Львівське (talk) 14:59, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Selective use of sources

Jo0doe (talk cites this article to support the claim that "Polish-German historian professor Frank Golczewski from the University of Hamburg [33] describes the activities of Schutzmannschaft Battalion 201 at Belarus as “fighting partisans and killing Jews" (see here). Yet the same source used by Jo0doe also states "More research is needed in order to establish the exact role and whereabouts of the 201st division and their activities" and describes other, pro-Shukhevych sources stating that they did not engage in such crimes. This information is left out when Jo0doe cites from the Rudling article. While Rudling documents very unsavory aspects of Shukhevich (responsibility for Polish massacres, OUN's fascist ideology, etc.) he takes a nuetral approach that is not reflected in Jo0doe's citation. Rudling's article also cites and links to an article by historian Himka here which states "In 1942 Shukhevych and most of the soldiers of the former Nachtigall served in Schutzmannschaft Battalion 201 in Belarus. No one has specifically studied the activities of Schuma 201 in relation to the destruction of the Jewish population. But we do know that the Germans routinely used the Schuma battalions in Belarus both to fight partisans and to murder Jews. This is a topic that calls for investigation."

Unfortunately cherry-picking some pieces of information and leaving out others is a pattern that Jo0doe has engaged in in the past. So pervasive is this approach in edits involving Ukrainian nationalists, that I suggest that perhaps unless a source used by Jo0doe can be verified (either available on-line or an English-language text that can be found) Jo0doe's edits ought not be included, given the high risk of their misuse. We don't know what he leaves out when he cites things, but we do know that he picks out those bits of information that support his POV and ignores other information.Faustian (talk) 13:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Obvoisly Myth Making sources ( see: The Shukhevych Cult in Ukraine: Myth Making with Complications Per A. Rudling, University of Alberta ) can be used in articles about themselves. Are you find source(s) for Polish-German? Or can provide wider citation from Die Kollaboration in der Ukraine,” in Christoph Dieckmann, Babette Quinkert, Tatjana Tönsmeyer (eds.), Kooperation und Verbrechen. Formen der “Kollaboration“ im östlichen Europa 1939-1945 (Göttingen: Wallenstein, 2003 p.176 to prove your text above?Jo0doe (talk) 16:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I found a source for Polish-German, I don't know why you argued such a mundane fact, though. Can you prove the Rudling article?--Львівське (talk) 01:28, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Rudling did not describe all of those facts as incorrect or fabrications, instead implying that in tandem with Leaving out critical information they present a falsely heroic picture of the man. He did not label that information as false or as factual errors, as he did some of the Russian claims (see the quote, next). Rudling, on the other hand, did write in the section about Russian mythmaking about Shukhevich: "The controversy surrounding Shukhevych’s memory has been further complicated by the role played by Putin’s increasingly assertive Russia has played a negative role by making history a part of his campaign against Ukraine. For instance, in May, 2009, Russian president Dmitry Medvedev formed a commission to “protect Russian history” against “falsifications,” specifically singling out Ukrainian, Baltic and Georgian authorities as guilty of such falsifications.[82] Combining a confrontational and polarizing rhetoric with sloppy treatment of historical facts, Russia has, in fact, facilitated Yushchenko’s myth making by validating nationalist claims of presenting a ”true” national history writing, as opposed to the neo-Soviet narrative of the Kremlin. For instance, Russia responded to Yushchenko’s recognition of Shukhevych, by alleging that the latter had been an “SS captain,” “a Nazi,” that members of the Ukrainian nationalist movement “were a part of the Nazi movement,” and that “the majority of the people who murdered Jews in Babyn Yar, were Ukrainian Nazis.”[83] This rhetoric, in combination with an aggressive foreign policy vis-à-vis Ukraine has had the opposite effect. Instead of undermining the new myths, it has enabled Shukhevych’s admirers to point out inconsistencies and factual errors in the Russian rhetoric, shifting the focus from their own selective, political use of history to the historical manipulations of the Kremlin." Interesting that you left out the mythological nature of those claims about Shukhevich when you cited Rudling. Rudling's article was nuetral and objective, but you used it selectively to push your POV.Faustian (talk) 03:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
I think jo0doe has proven again he can't be trusted...what say you?--Львівське (talk) 05:04, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Please indicate the placein text which drawing a conclusion about He did not label that information as false or as factual errors,

I've found at Conclusion section  : А selective and quasi-mythical representation of the past not only makes the nationalists’ appeals .., less effective, it also raises the question of double standards and the whether they are more interested in politics than an understanding of the past.

  • Older pro-OUN/pro-UPA accounts tend to overlook or ignore the period between August 1941 and January 1943 entirely.
  • By and large, the pro-Shukhevych narratives uncritically accept the Schutzmänner’s versions of history, neither of which mention any war crimes or abuses committed against the local population.
  • The editors [pro-OUN/pro-UPA accounts ]are fairly open about the hagiographic nature of their work.

Obvoiusly - I've use a National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine publications, prominent western scholars most recent sources - could you suggest a source which claim that the facts given in above WP:RS represent an wiki-editor POV? Thanks P.S. please be stright on topic and avoid irrelevant long texts ThanksJo0doe (talk) 07:56, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Please find the text int he source where the comments of Viatrovych or other UPA apologists are incorrect - as he labels some of the Russian claims. It is clear that Rudling describes the pro-UPA apologists as omitting facts to create a distorted picture. He doesn't state that the facts they do show are wrong - if they were wrong he would say so. Basicaly he acuses the pro-UPA apologists of doing what you do, Jo0doe, cherry-picking facts to support their POV and ignoring others in order to push their agenda rather than describe what actually happened.Faustian (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Appologies for my English - but did you suggest that the quasi-mythical representation of the past and hagiographic nature of their work translated as "facts" and "reliable information"? Did you suggest that the writes Schutzmann Myroslav Kal’ba in 2005 need to be understood as scholar Myroslav Kal’ba? As [17] article suggest earlier? Could you also specify what actually was ommited by from section Roman Shukhevych: Background-? ThanksJo0doe (talk) 13:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Namely which facts from Roman Shukhevych: Background were leaving out - you repatedly repeat it but does not give any citation from ..backgound section which presumably was ommited& ThanksJo0doe (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Schutzmannschaft Rank

http://books.google.com/books?id=tdzTU1Uj3zcC&pg=PA68&lpg=PA68&dq=Schutzmannschaft+ranks&source=bl&ots=b1F9nXK1md&sig=X3P3lvBh-5Qs-NLP0QSxtsw_SYc&hl=uk&ei=LdeYTO39OcOB8gaKhZC3AQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Schutzmannschaft%20ranks&f=false . Regular police rank system, NOT that of waffenSS.--Galassi (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Can't find rank system at link provided. Try Sicherheitsdienst rank - 201 battalion was under command of the SS and Sicherheitspolizei Baranovichi Sipo/SD. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 16:36, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
It's mean they (battalion personnel) were a part of SS and Sicherheitspolizei - see here [18] Jo0doe (talk) 16:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
"Under command" does not mean "part of" in English.--Galassi (talk) 16:41, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I appologies for my English - units of SS and Sicherheitspolizei Baranovichi Sipo/SD is part of SS and Sicherheitspolizei system of the Sicherheitsdienst - not Waffen- SS. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
And where does it say that Schutzmannschaft was a part of SS?--Galassi (talk) 17:54, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Sicherheitspolizei was a part of Sicherheitsdienst. The book Дружини українських націоналістів у 1941 — 1942 роках. — Без місця видання, 1953. given a lot of details about Shukhevych and Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski friendly meetings - as with supreme commander of unit.Jo0doe (talk) 18:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
  • at p.118 of mentioned above book

Командир фон Бах , коли побачив що «арієць» Шухевич приїхав до нього без старшинських відзнак наказав негайно нашити всім старшинам німецькі відзнаки

(hope you can read Ukrainian and know which type of insignia wear Erich).ThanksJo0doe (talk) 18:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Insignia is not a rank in English. You have to have a more specific source.--Galassi (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Sicherheitsdienst insignia used to a indicate a rank of serviceman. Source provided - see - Ph.D Per Anders Rudling from University of Alberta article details given stright after comma. If you wold like to use Wehrmacht rank instead - please find a scholar source for it first. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 19:54, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Tadaam: http://www.vsevolod.com/Files/Partizany&Karateli.pdf --Galassi (talk) 02:20, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Can't find any scholar value details for nice illustrated text, (nice claim also -"UPA appeared at 1944":) ) but no info about Shukhevitch rank. Hope you'll find itJo0doe (talk) 07:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Really? It has a nice list of Schuma ranks. We woudn't expect you to like it, of course.--Galassi (talk) 09:29, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
You know - WP:RS "not liked" non scholar sources. Any suggestion for scholar source which gives non Sicherheitsdienst ranks for Sicherheitspolizei personnel? ThanksJo0doe (talk) 12:01, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Massacre of Poles Section

We must be careful not to edit this in a way that falsely makes it look like most Ukrainians accepted Polish rule as legitimate after 1923. Their largest party viewed independence as the ultimate goal, the second largest party boycotted elections, of course the OUN (less popular than thedse two) were engaged in anti-Polish terrorism, etc. Reluctant acceptance is not the same as viewing the rule as legitimate or desired. Almost all Ukrainians werre opposed to Polish rule; most wanted a peaceful opposition (UNDO approach) and a small minority supported terror (OUN). But don't create a false impression that Polish rule was considered legitimate by most Ukrainians in these territories.Faustian (talk) 15:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Also consider the treatment of the Ukrainian population and the UN response that followed. Sentiment was very separatist, just not necessarily 'civil war' yet.--Львівське (говорити) 19:14, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I changed the name of the section back to Massacre, not Civil War as the later is most certainly a POV way of putting it. Aside from that, since this is an article about Shukhevych, not the massacres themselves, what the section should discuss is his association/role in these.

As far as I know Shukhevych did NOT order the massacres to commence. These were initiated by Dmytro Klyachkivsky and Ivan Lytwynchuk. If there was an order from OUN-B leadership or Shukhevych to that effect, it did not survive, and from testimonies of former UPA members there is no indication that such an order ever existed (and they can be pretty frank about other aspects of the massacres). Although Shukhevych probably did make general proclamations about exterminating the Poles.

However, Shukhevych DID approve of the massacres once they were under way. First, probably solely for political reasons (he needed Klyachkivsky's support to take over the leadership of OUN-B from Lebed), but apparently after summer of 1943 when he traveled to Volhynia because he came to believe the massacres were an effective strategy. This led him to support implementing the same "strategy" (mass killing) in Galicia. However, in Galicia, OUN-B/UPA ran into the problem that there was much more vocal opposition to such action from local Ukrainians, and also the Polish Underground was better organized (or to contrast it starkly with Volhynia - it simply existed). The timing goes roughly like this:

Early 1943 - Dubovy (Lytwynchuk) and Klym Savur (Klyachkivksy) begin the massacres of Poles in Volhynia.

Only slightly later (February) at a OUN-B conference Shukhevych and supporters de facto oust Lebed from power. Apparantly Klyachkivsky's support for Shukhevych was crucial here. Lebed remained the nominal head of the organization, even though Shukhevych and his supporters now held real power. However, at this point the major axis of dispute was not the massacre of Poles but whether OUN should pursue a primarily anti-German (Lebed, Stepaniak) strategy or a primarily anti-Soviet (Shukhevych) one.

Early summer 1943 - the massacres in Volhynia reach an apogee. Another OUN conference is held and Lebed's ouster is made official. Again, Klyachkivsky's support for Shukhevych plays an important role. Here, the massacres DID play an important role in this internal disagreement. Lebed and Stepaniak opposed the massacres, although mostly for tactical reasons (they didn't necessarily have any moral objections, just thought they were the wrong strategy which would eventually backfire). Shukhevych gave full support to Klyachkivsky's killings. Shukhevych and his side wins the dispute. Lebed is relegated to a position of something like Minister of Foreign Affairs (he then negotiated an agreement with the Germans).

August 1943 Shukhevych visited Volhynia and the areas controlled by Klyachkivsky. This apparently convinced him that the massacres were an effective way of pursuing "the struggle". This leads to several changes. First, OUN-B and UPA are reorganized. UPA is made the official armed wing of the organization and Klyachkivsky is made its commander-in-Volhynia. It's agreed that the same tactic (mass murders) be used in Galicia. OUN-B also drops a lot of the pro-Nazi imagery and symbolism and reverses itself on the question of democracy (now they support it, albeit in a limited way, for Ukrainians only).

Late 1943 early 1944 - the massacres spread to Galicia. Here however the situation is different. Polish resistance is much better organized (it was pretty much non-existent in Volhynia when the massacres started). And local Ukrainian population (in a tragic twist, the very people who are later targeted by Operation Vistula) tend to oppose the massacres, warn and protect their Polish neighbors and refuse material support to UPA (this occured on a much smaller scale previously in Volhynia, but there Klyachkivsky punished by death any local Ukrainians who helped Poles - in the different environment of Galicia where UPA really needed local support, that was not an option). So in early 44 it's agreed to change tactics - now Poles we'll be given a warning before an attack and a chance to leave (this practice was uneven but it did happen), only fighting-age men would be killed, while children, women and elderly spared (again, UPA did make an attempt to stick to that in Galicia, though atrocities and massacres "in the heat of the moment" still happened).

I'm writing this off the top of my head so there might be some mistakes in the narrative and timeline. But I'm pretty sure it's roughly correct. I do have the sources at home and can provide them later.Volunteer Marek 16:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for this info! It certainly belongs in the article.Faustian (talk) 03:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Marek - if you can provide the referene and page numbers for this info I'll put it into the article eventually, if you are too busy to do so.Faustian (talk) 14:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
There's a little bit of this in Snyder (Deconstruction of Nations) and a whole bunch in Motyka (From Volhynian slaughter to Opperation Vistula). I'll try to add it in with proper refs later today, after work.Volunteer Marek 15:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Lebed

It seems a little strange that Mykola Lebed, the OUN leader that Shukhevych "took over from" (i.e. ousted, though in a bloodless coup) is not even mentioned in this article.Volunteer Marek 16:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Massacre of Poles section

How is massacre of Poles section related to the article? The is only a hypothetical mentioning of Shukhevych. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 11:57, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Roman Shukhevych. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:25, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Roman Shukhevych. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:13, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Politician?

Actually Roman Shukhevych was a terrorist, Nazi collaborator and anti-Semite.--109.92.169.11 (talk) 07:41, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Roman_Shukhevych/Archive_1&oldid=1153979133"