Talk:Stepan Bandera

Over-egged pudding in lead

The first sentence includes "Ukrainian far-right leader of the radical, militant wing..." We have RSs for that but (a) it is a lot of value-laden adjectives in the first sentence, and (b) are we certain that the preponderance of RSs use these terms as the main way he is described? I'd advocated a cleaner simpler first sentence - "Ukrainian nationalist leader of the radical wing of the OUN" - and then maybe unpack the other terms a little later in the lead. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:14, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

For comparison, Britannica lists him as "Stepan Bandera (Ukrainian political leader)"; Ukraine's internet encyclopedia says "Revolutionary, politician, and ideologue of the Ukrainian nationalist movement"; Wikidata has "Ukrainian nationalist leader"; wikipedia.fr has "leader politique ukrainien" (Ukrainian political leader); .de has "nationalistischer ukrainischer Politiker und Partisanenführer” (Ukrainian nationalist politician and partisan-leader); .es has “líder nacionalista ucraniano” (Ukrainian nationalist leader) BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:24, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

In my opinion we can leave the lede as it is. Sources often speak of him in these terms and his political faith is not in doubt, there is no point in going around it for WP:SPADE. Mhorg (talk) 12:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

BobFromBrockley, I read on de wikipedia: "Stepan Andrijovytsch Bandera ( Ukrainian Степан Андрійович Бандера , scientific transliteration Stepan Andrijovyč Bandera ; born January 1, 1909 in Staryj Uhryniw , Galicia , Austria-Hungary ; † October 15, 1959 in Munich ) was a Ukrainian nationalist politician and leader of the far-right , terrorist wing of the OUN , the OUN-B." [1] JimRenge (talk) 12:41, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

German version is wrong because entire OUN was a terrorist organisation, not just OUN-B Marcelus (talk) 21:06, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

For me, this points to the unhelpfulness of using lots of contentious adjectives in the first sentence, and benefit of switching to a neat, neutral opening that can be unfolded properly in following sentences. BobFromBrockley (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Why do you think lack of adjectives makes it more neutral? Marcelus (talk) 12:38, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

It's not about adjectives in general; it's about contentious adjectives, and loading lots of them into a first sentence which would read better if it was simple, encylopedic and informative instead of a cumbersome polemic. We have the rest of the lead to be more precise in unpacking his role. BobFromBrockley (talk) 00:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

The rest of the lead does not elaborate on ideology. How would you propose mentioning this later in the lead? Mellk (talk) 05:51, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I would (a) simplify the first sentence to something like "was a Ukrainian nationalist politician involved in the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists", (b) expand para 2 to mention he joined OUB in 1929 and briefly characterise it (e.g. "Involved in nationalist organizations from a young age, he joined the right-wing nationalist OUN in 1929"), (c) introduce OUN-B in para 3, (e.g. "Bandera was freed from prison in 1939 following the invasion of Poland, and moved to Kraków. In February 1940, the OUN split and he became the figurehead for its radical, militant wing, known as the OUN-B." Para 4 already includes the fact his legacy is contested with some seeing him as a fascist. This would be much more informative, and have a clear, readable, NPOV opening sentence. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I think the Britannica version is succinct and accurate enough. LeVivsky (ಠ_ಠ) 18:28, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure what the right way to introduce this article is, but I think you're right, we should be trying to introduce this article in a manner that is more encyclopedic. See the kind of advice given in WP:WTW or WP:IMPARTIAL for instance Tristario (talk) 14:14, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

My proposal: was a Ukrainian far-right leader of the OUN-B, radical, wing of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists Marcelus (talk) 15:01, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Pledging to work with Nazi Germany

He prepared the 1941 proclamation of the Ukrainian state, pledging to work with Nazi Germany after Germany invaded the Soviet Union on 22 June 1941. sentence from the lead. While true, I suggest only important enough facts are to be represented in article lead.

For example, Encyclopedia of History of Ukraine http://resource.history.org.ua/cgi-bin/eiu/history.exe?&I21DBN=ELIB&P21DBN=ELIB&S21STN=1&S21REF=10&S21FMT=elib_all&C21COM=S&S21CNR=20&S21P01=0&S21P02=0&S21P03=ID=&S21COLORTERMS=0&S21STR=0001124 gives the following short description:
BANDERA Stepan Andriyovych (pseudonyms: Stary, Baba, Biylikho; December 1, 1909 - October 15, 1959) was a theorist and prominent figure in the Ukrainian national liberation movement of the 1930s to the 1950s. He was the son of A. Bandera, born in the village of Staryi Ugriniv (now in the Kalush district of Ivano-Frankivsk region). He was a member of the Ukrainian Military Organization (1928), the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (since 1929), the regional executive of the OUN in western Ukrainian lands (from 1931), and the deputy regional leader of the OUN (from June 1932). From 1933, he served as the regional leader of the OUN in western Ukrainian lands. He was sentenced to death at the OUN Warsaw Trial in 1935-1936 and the OUN Lviv Trial in 1936, but the punishment was later commuted to life imprisonment. He was held in the "Saint Cross" prison in Warsaw (1933-1939). After his release, following the collapse of the Polish state at the beginning of World War II, he led an opposition faction within the Ukrainian nationalists, whose supporters advocated for radicalization of the forms and methods of struggle. At the II Great Assembly of the OUN in April 1941, he was elected head of the revolutionary leadership, which prepared the "mobile groups" of the OUN and initiated the proclamation of the restoration of Ukrainian statehood on June 30, 1941. He was arrested by the Nazis and imprisoned in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp on July 6, 1941. He was released in September 1944 and resumed his duties as the head of the OUN. Due to disagreements with the leadership of the regional leadership of the OUN in August 1952, he stepped down as the head of the OUN. From 1946 to 1953 and 1956 to 1959, he served as the head of the leadership of the OUN abroad. He lived in cities such as Innsbruck (Austria), Zeefeld, Munich. He was assassinated by KGB agent B. Stashynsky in Munich. The surname Bandera is a symbol of the Ukrainian national liberation movement of the 1930s to the 1950s.

Without going into the details on pledges contained in the Proclamation. Manyareasexpert (talk) 21:45, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Why is it not important? Mellk (talk) 05:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

A fact may be important, or it may be not. A source given here has not found that fact to be important enough to include it into its summary. Manyareasexpert (talk) 08:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't see why we wouldn't include this detail in the lede, it's covered in the body, and this detail has been well covered by other sources Tristario (talk) 08:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree it's important enough for the lead. I'm not 100% sure of the wording. We currently have two sources in the lead:

• Tadeusz Piotrowski's Poland's Holocaust, which is a controversial source, which on p.211 (not p.221 as the footnote now says) mentions a letter from Bandera himself but says nothing about pledging support for Hitler ("...argued the case for an independent Ukrainian state but said nothing about the OUN-B's intended course of action...")
• Sol Littman's Pure Soldiers Or Sinister Legion, a sensationalist journalistic work not a scholarly work, which mentions the pledge but doesn't attribute it to Bandera ("...issued by Stetsko on behalf of the Bandera faction of the OUN promised...").

The second of these only is cited in the body.

So we don't have a source saying Bandera pledged support. Tristario say it's "well covered by other sources" so maybe we could insert the sources which do say this.

Remember, this page is under "reliable-source consensus required" rules, so if Littman and/or Piotrowski are challenged we need to reach consensus before restoring. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

You may be right, actually. You're welcome to adjust the wording/sourcing. David Marples says something similar to what's in the lede, except he says it was Stetsko doing it on Bandera's behalf. [2] (p. 560-561) Tristario (talk) 01:50, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I added new source Motyka (2006). In the act of the restoration of the independence OUN pledged "close cooperation with the National Socialst Great Germany, which under the direction of Adolf Hitler are building the new European order". This part was removed from the official OUN documents. Marcelus (talk) 08:04, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Among other, the lead is unclear as of now because it suggests Bandera "pledged to work with Nazi Germany". What do the sources say? Was it Bandera? Was it OUN who pledged? A declaration? A declared Ukrainian state? Manyareasexpert (talk) 08:18, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

So if we are not clear on this, why the lead should say this?

I checked Liebe's Life of Bandera, who has been criticized for being too critical regarding Bandera, and the only thing regarding the "cooperation" he says in the conclusion is
In the proclamation, Stets’ko stressed that the OUN-B wanted to closely cooperate with the “National Socialist Great Germany, which, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, is creating a new order in Europe and the world.”
So it was Stets’ko, actually. Manyareasexpert (talk) 08:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Is Encyclopedia of Ukraine considered a reliable secondary source by editors of this article? Jgmac1106 (talk) 17:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

This is not a reliable source. Articles on the OUN-UPA are written in a very one-sided manner, whitewashing the organisation, and tend to be quite old and out of date with modern knowledge. Marcelus (talk) 18:03, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Member of USLC post-war

He was a member of Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council, in Munich. 62.169.197.95 (talk) 10:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a source for this? Mhorg (talk) 14:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Here https://www.radiosvoboda.org/amp/30053945.html 62.169.197.95 (talk) 09:43, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you put here the parts of the text supported by the source that you would like to add? Mhorg (talk) 12:35, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

"Судячи з документів, які я бачив, перше, що слід виокремити, це особисті амбіції. Тому що той же розкол, який відбувся в ОУН на мельниківців і бандерівців – це переважно було зумовлено особистими амбіціями і тим, що люди різного віку перебували в одних лавах. Мельниківці були переважно старшого віку, а бандерівці – молодші, прихильники радикальної боротьби." 2A02:8108:1640:5282:45:66D2:6897:2EDF (talk) 21:06, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Current "photograph"

The current image of Bandera used in the infobox is so intensely retouched that I do not think it ought to be used, it doesn't even look much like Bandera, at best one could call it an "idealized portrait". I would suggest this image would be more appropriate for use. I know the resolution is not spectacular, but at least it isn't so creepily airbrushed. There are some better images of Bandera online, but I am not sure whether they would meet the criteria for "fair use"[3][4]. Llados (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

I agree with you that we should put a realistic photo. In my opinion this one is fine.[5] Mhorg (talk) 13:57, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that one would be my preference as well :) Llados (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

The photo seems to be in the public domain; like the current picture, it was almost certainly taken on the territory of the Second Polish Republic, so I have uploaded it. [6] Llados (talk) 15:12, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

His Views

I am trying to add a topic sentence to the view section. Look aty the three scholars cites

The section begins with Rossolinski-Liebe, H whose biography is pretty much considered a hit piece, Himka, PA Rudling, whose work has been rejected and his academic integrity called into question.

I want a framing sentence on views that explore the scholarship on "views" from a less bias standpoint.

Further my link to Russian Disinformation page. The efforts of Russia to utilize the Bandera Narrative since 1944 are more than well documented. Jgmac1106 (talk) 18:14, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Rossoliński-Liebe, Himka and Rudling are widely considered to be reliable. The accusations against Bandera are not the result of Russian disinformation, but of his actions as an active fascist activist and Nazi collaborator whose organisation committed crimes on a massive scale. Marcelus (talk) 18:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Rossoliński-Liebe
There is notable academic critique of Liebe's book. See for example Talk:Slava Ukraini#Rossolinski-Liebe, Stepan Bandera. Manyareasexpert (talk) 18:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

The critic is about putting to much emphasis on negative aspects of Bandera and OUN's activities, nobody claimed that Rossoliński's book is unreliable or spreading false version of history. Marcelus (talk) 18:52, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

No but the critique and other views are worth to be included. Manyareasexpert (talk) 18:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm talking with user who claimes that Rossoliński is a author of "hit piece" and that Himka and Rudling "has been rejected", it doesn't leave much room fo nuance. Marcelus (talk) 18:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I am saying I see a pattern that violates WP:IMPARTIAL

If Bandera's views are defined by Rossoliński, Rudling,and Marples that is not impartial.

I could even find better Snyder quotes so it does not look like he is saying Bandera was a fascist and that't the only goal. Jgmac1106 (talk) 19:03, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

The View section isn't about hsi views. It is about scholars. Why do people need to know PA Rudling is a Swedish American?

Wouldn't a more relevant detail be that is speaking tour in Canada was canceled because his scholarship was called into question? and then Defending History wrote their defense of Rudling?

It is hard to say WP:IMPARTIAL when the "views" section follows Rossolinski, Rudling, and Marples (who of the three presents a more balanced approach.

I think it is best to not highlight the authors in text and let secondary sources and quotes back up claims. Take personality out of it. Jgmac1106 (talk) 19:00, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I would take

According to Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe "Bandera's worldview was shaped by numerous far-right values and concepts including ultranationalism, fascism, racism, and antisemitism; by fascination with violence; by the belief that only war could establish a Ukrainian state; and by hostility to democracy, communism, and socialism. Like other young Ukrainian nationalists, he combined extremism with religion and used religion to sacralize politics and violence."

and make it

According to some scholars Stepan Banderas views on Ukrainian Nationalism were driven by numerous far-right values and concepts including fascism, racism, and antisemitism reflected in a fascination with violence.155 These historians argue Bandera felt b only war could establish a Ukrainian state through hostility to democracy, communism, and socialism. Like other young Ukrainian nationalists, he combined extremism with religion."

do that so none of the paragraphs start with an author Jgmac1106 (talk) 19:07, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

What do you think Manyareasexpert? How about you marcelus? I see you edit Ivan Katchanovski page so you must be familiar with these scholars.

I will wait for other editors as well, before making change. But I want to focus on Bandera's views as established in secondary sources. Not provide mini-bios of scholars Jgmac1106 (talk) 19:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

We should keep "According to Rossoliński-Liebe" if it's him saying that, other than that, it's been taken from "Conclusion" section of his book so it's pretty valuable. If other researches have commented on Liebe's conclusions, we should mention those as well. Manyareasexpert (talk) 19:38, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I think that Jgmac1106's latest modifications have made the article worse. I tried to fix them but some parts don't look right to me. For example, this is the "Views" section. As far as I know and read, Rossoliński-Liebe, and Rudling are the Western academics who have dealt most with Bandera. Mhorg (talk) 20:23, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I haven't thoroughly gone through all of the recent edits, but care should be taken to avoid original research, and that the content is actually supported by the sources cited. Some of the recent edits also aren't very well written in terms of the clarity and the english Tristario (talk) 23:35, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I notice there have been quite a few reverts, I hope everyone is complying with WP:3RR or any other restrictions Tristario (talk) 23:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Controversy Sentence in Lede

I changed the controversy sentence to:

Bandera remains a highly controversial figure in Ukraine. Many Ukrainians hail him as a role model hero or as a martyred liberation fighter, while other Ukrainians, particularly in the south and east, condemn him as a fascist Nazi collaborator and reflect Soviet Narratives of utilizing a false narrative of denazification of enemies in the Republics of the Soviet Union. Critics claim OUN-B, and thus Bandera, hold responsible for massacres of Polish and Jewish civilians during World War II.. The narrative of denazification was used by Vladimir Putin to justify Russia's War in Ukraine.

I did not call it disinformation and it is a historical fact that Russia has spent decades and millions of dollars trying to define Stepan Bandera as a Nazi responsible for Lviv Massacre (while he was in a concentration camp) Jgmac1106 (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

reflect Soviet Narratives of utilizing a false narrative of denazification of enemies in the Republics of the Soviet Union; this a nonsensical sentence, you cannot say arbitrary that it is a "false narrative". It's hard to say what this sentence even means.

The narrative of denazification was used by Vladimir Putin to justify Russia's War in Ukraine; how is that relevant to the Bandera's biography? Why you put that in the lede?

{tq|Stepan Bandera as a Nazi responsible for Lviv Massacre (while he was in a concentration camp)}}; Bandera wasn't even arrested when the pogrom started (June 30). OUN militia took active part in the pogrom. Also OUN committed a lot more crimes against Jewish people both before and after Bandera's arrestation.

Your personal view seems to be based on false premises, I don't think you know enough about this matters to be able to edit this article. Marcelus (talk) 18:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

how is that relevant to the Bandera's biography?
"Nazi banderites" is how Russia justifies its invasion. See discussion Talk:Stepan Bandera#Pledging to work with Nazi Germany , why is "pledging to work with Nazi Germany" is still in the lead? Manyareasexpert (talk) 18:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

This sentence doesn't say anything about "Nazi banderites". If we want to include that in the lede we should make at least somehow linked to the Bandera's biography. For example: The cult of Bandera and the OUN-UPA in contemporary Ukraine was given by Russian propaganda as a pretext for the 'denazification of Ukraine' and invasion in 2022. Marcelus (talk) 19:13, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

The cult of Bandera and the OUN-UPA in contemporary Ukraine
I thought we are about to maintain some level in our discussion. Manyareasexpert (talk) 19:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean? Marcelus (talk) 19:25, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I would be okay with removing the controversy section from the lede then. But if we are going to say Bandera is a controversial figure we need to acknowledge 80 years of active measures to make him a controversial figure.

If you think Stepan Bandera is defined by the controversy then both sides need better representation in citations.

Further stop putting "together" back. Bandera was in Sachsenhausen concentration camp at the time of the Lviv Massacre "together" is just not true Jgmac1106 (talk) 19:25, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Bandera wasn't in Sachsenhausen before winter 1942, possibly later. Marcelus (talk) 19:28, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

So the articles cited about Ukrainians in the South and East explicitly state that Bandera was at and directed his followers during the Lviv Massacre?

I have never seen that so please share. I would hate to be wrong

Also I read both those sources where are the statistics about "some Ukrainians" in the East and the South? I do not find those claims in the sources cited. Jgmac1106 (talk) 19:33, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

This article itself (though citation needed) said Bandera was not there.

The word "together" does not belong unless you can prove it with multiple secondary sources

I do not need to prove Bandera wasn't involved. Editors who want to make the claim need to prove he was. Jgmac1106 (talk) 19:35, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Do you understand that Lviv pogroms wasn't the only OUN crimes against Jewish people? Marcelus (talk) 19:38, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I think this is not lede, assuming it has to be written somewhere. Mhorg (talk) 20:25, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Mhorg the article contradicts the lede.

In late 1942, when Bandera was in a German concentration camp, his organization, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, was involved in a massacre of Poles in Volhynia and, in early 1944,

However, Portnov notes that "Bandera did not participate personally in the underground war conducted by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), which included the organized ethnic cleansing of the Polish population of Volhynia in north-western Ukraine and killings of the Jews, but he also never condemned them."

That was my original issue. Why is controversy mentioned in the lede if there is no contrvoersy section below

It is almost like people want to force Bandera's involvement into the definition and they are not editing with good intent.

I am trying to remove the word "together."

(Though I think the entire paragraph needs to be a section of the article rather than in the lede orphaned from any evidence) Jgmac1106 (talk) 22:27, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

And Marceuls Bandera was arrested in Krakow on July 5, 1941 Stetsko in Lviv on July 12.

Petliura Days was not until the end of July and was a reaction to Petliura assassination. Jgmac1106 (talk) 23:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Petlura was killed in 1926, first pogrom in Lviv was on July 30, 1941 Marcelus (talk) 16:44, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

It might be better to just say "whose followers were responsible for massacres". That's more clear. Tristario (talk) 23:42, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree, "whose followers" avoids ambiguity. Jabbi (talk) 00:06, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't think you know enough about this matters to be able to edit this article.

I apologize for calling Rossolinski-Liebe biography a basic hit piece. I just think relying on these three authors can lead to WP:UNDUE influence and stated this conclusion too emphatically

The majority of claims up to WWII period are based on

Rossolinski-Liebe

Rudling

Himka

This can lead to a bias point of view and violate neutrality policies.

Kiebuzinski, Motyl, and Snyder have all criticized Himka's scholarship (see Lviv_pogroms_(1941)). Rudling's work was rejected on a speaking tour in Canada, and he was defended by many people cited on this page. As others noted many have called parts of Rossolinski-Liebe scholarship questionable.

I am not suggesting they be deleted but I think we have to watch for WP:UNDUE.

It can be small things. Why the Plast Uniform? Is that to show Bandera as a child or is that because Plast is Rudling's basic theory to prove a Bandera Cult existed in Canada amongst the Diaspora community?

For example I deleted the claim using Himka saying the Concentration Camp was "comfortable." While Himka does write that there was nothing comfortable for political dissidents at Sachsenhausen concentration camp. Jgmac1106 (talk) 01:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Is that to show Bandera as a child or is that because Plast is Rudling's basic theory to prove a Bandera Cult existed in Canada amongst the Diaspora community?, you need to explain more clearly your line of thinking. What's the connection between Plast in Poland, in 1920s and Canada? Marcelus (talk) 16:46, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Marcelus, when you make edits, it would be helpful if you describe what you're doing in the edit summaries, or possibly on the talk page. It can be difficult to keep track of your edits. Tristario (talk) 01:12, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

For instance, this edit is confusing, since you don't have a description, and you're mostly adjusting citations, but you also make a number of changes to the article too. It would be easy for someone to miss the changes you made to the article besides the citations. Tristario (talk) 01:15, 3 September 2023 (UTC)