Talk:Memorials in Canada to Nazis and Nazi collaborators

Initial Page Move

Does anyone object to moving the page to "Monuments and memorials in Canada to Nazi collaborators"? I notice in the delete discussion there doesn't seem to be much objection to this name at least as an improvement over the current name. Further moves can possibly be done and proposed after this, but this can be a first step Tristario (talk) 04:26, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Please, let's discuss and reach consensus, rather than make any hasty moves. CT55555(talk) 04:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

And the name you suggest does't work, as the moments include monuments to the Waffen-SS, who are not Nazi collaborators, but Nazis. CT55555(talk) 04:53, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@CT55555 and @Tristario - This, sister page Monuments in the United States to Nazi collaborators talks about the Nazi Nachtigall Battalion and Schutzmannschaft Battalion 201 composed of volunteer Ukrainians. - GizzyCatBella🍁 05:37, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

List of Nazi-affiliated monuments in Canada ? GizzyCatBella🍁 05:46, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Nazi-affiliated monuments and memorials in Canada? (include memorials, move away from list)? I prefer status quo, but see various requests to change, so maybe a good compromise? CT55555(talk) 05:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I would support this over the current name at least. It's an improvement Tristario (talk) 05:52, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I’m okay withe the above. - GizzyCatBella🍁 05:52, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I support it over the current name. I would prefer to keep "list" though Tristario (talk) 05:53, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

List of Nazi-affiliated monuments and memorials in Canada then? CT55555(talk) 05:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine with this Tristario (talk) 06:00, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@CT55555 Drop the list maybe - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:06, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

But both work for me. Up to you. - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:06, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't have strong feelings about it being a list, it seems @GizzyCatBella prefers not list, @Tristario prefers list. I am neutral. I think this is good moment to pause, see what others say. There were lots of opinions at AfD ad I suspect a day or few will give others a chance to comment. CT55555(talk) 06:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

👍 - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:10, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I think it is an attack on the English language. People and organizations can be "affiliated". Monuments can't be. Look in a dictionary. Inanimate objects could be "associated" with something but they can't be "affiliated" with anything. As a separate issue, a mountain is neither a monument nor a memorial; decide what the page is actually about before choosing a name for it. Zero^talk 07:30, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

It seems to match some mainstream definitions https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/affiliated CT55555(talk) 12:26, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

That definition and its examples agree with what I said: "People and organizations can be 'affiliated'." Zero^talk 12:46, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

It's saying that monuments are to people or groups who are affiliated with the Nazis. People and groups can be affiliated with Nazis. That said, I'm open to any better suggestions you have. CT55555(talk) 13:57, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

However Nazi-associated doesn't work either as association can be negative as well as positive. I assume you don't want Holocaust memorials here. Zero^talk 07:34, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

We can put a definition in the article to avoid the unlikely scenario whereby someone genuinely is confused by this. CT55555(talk) 13:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@Zero0000 Can you propose a title? - GizzyCatBella🍁 19:37, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

• Suggestion: Memorials in Canada to Nazi collaborators. No need for the "list" in the article name since this page serves as the main page for the topic, discussing both the controversy and providing the related list. "Memorials" only, since "memorial" encompasses monuments. Lastly, the late recruits into the Waffen-SS (post 1943) were largely not committed National Socialists, but an expedience, since Nazi Germany was running out of manpower. So "collaborators" would be my preferred term in the article name. --K.e.coffman (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  The trouble with this is that the Waffen-SS are so clearly defined as Nazis, both in the general sense and in reliable sources that are used in this article. I think the political philosophy and motivations of members (late joiners or otherwise) isn't the key thing here. Nazis who are not really into aspects of Nazism are still Nazis, not Nazi collaborators. Dropping "list" and using "memorials" I am neutral on. To use an analogy, my slightly racist uncle is still "racist", not a "racist-collaborator". "Collaborator" does not mean "just a little bit". CT55555(talk) 18:19, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  late recruits into the Waffen-SS (post 1943) were largely not committed National Socialists

  *@K.e.coffman do you have a source for that? After the war the SS as a whole was held to be a criminal organisation by the post-war German government. During the Nuremberg Trials, the Waffen-SS was declared a criminal organisation for its major involvement in war crimes and for being an "integral part" of the SS. An exception was made for conscripts who were not given a choice in joining the ranks, and had not committed "such crimes". They were determined to be exempt. As far as I know, 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) formation was made up predominantly of military volunteers with a Ukrainian ethnic background from the area of Galicia. -

  GizzyCatBella🍁 19:08, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

  I see that I've ignored to mention Roman Shukhevych, whose memorial is also included in the article and about whom CT55555 wrote at the AfD: One of these is a monument to Roman Shukhevych, his collaboration with Nazis is well document on his page. I feel that we should use the lower denominator ("collaborator"), not the higher one ("Nazi"). --K.e.coffman (talk) 20:42, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  I support Memorials in Canada to Nazi collaborators as an improvement. I still think Pétain must go and Mihailovic is questionable. Srnec (talk) 21:07, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  I'm also fine with this name. I would also accept "Memorials in Canada to Nazi collaborators and Nazis" as a suboptimal improvement, and the scope of this page could also include more definite nazis (should any such memorials be identified). I think it can be argued for various reasons that all the entries on this page are questionable in some way or another, but it is true that these are or were all memorials (in the broader sense of the word, something that commemorates, per merriam-webster) to people that collaborated with the Nazis Tristario (talk) 22:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  Through the lens of trying to find consensus where we differ, Memorials in Canada to Nazi collaborators and Nazis seems like the best solution so far. @Beyond My Ken had good contributions in earlier discussion, so adding a ping here. CT55555(talk) 22:50, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

  @CT55555 Memorials to Nazis and Nazi collaborators in Canada - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:53, 1 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

  I'm agreeable CT55555(talk) 00:09, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  The issue with that is it might make it sound like the collaboration was done in Canada. And this page is also mainly about Nazi collaborators, so I'd prefer that to go first. But it's still an improvement over the current title and I could accept it Tristario (talk) 00:40, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  Can we use commas in titles?

  Memorials, to Nazis and Nazi collaborators, in Canada = the memorials are in Canada

  Memorials to Nazis and Nazi collaborators in Canada = possibly confusing

  That said, how bad is the risk when the contents of the article would clearly clarify?

  I don't care which goes first, but above seems more natural. CT55555(talk) 00:47, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  "Nazis and Nazi collaborators" implies two types. There aren't. There are no Nazi party members on this page. Srnec (talk) 02:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  The 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) were Waffen-SS who are the combat branch of the Nazi Party. Check out Waffen-SS CT55555(talk) 02:20, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  From Waffen-SS: ...and after the Operation Barbarossa invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, Nazi propaganda claimed that the war was a "European crusade against Bolshevism"and subsequently units consisting largely or solely of foreign volunteers and conscripts were also raised. and from 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician): "Although the Waffen-SS as a whole was declared to be a criminal organization at the Nuremberg Trials, the Galizien Division has not specifically been found guilty of any war crimes by any war tribunal or commission. However, numerous accusations of impropriety have been leveled at the division, and at particular members of the division, from a variety of sources. It is difficult to determine the extent of war criminality among members of the division." I think you're trying to oversimplify this aspect. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{(work / talk)} 04:52, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  I didn't write that they were criminals. I wrote that they were Nazis. CT55555(talk) 04:54, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  Which is an oversimplification. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{(work / talk)} 05:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  Articles need reasonably simple titles. Titles need to be accurate. If the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) are not Nazis, then a whole bunch of reliable sources must be wrong and you could make this much easier by linking to a reliable source that states they are not Nazis. Right now it seems like there are arguments that they are less criminal Nazis than other Nazis, or partly accidental Nazis, or Nazis who didn't share the political philosophies of the majority of Nazis. That said, while the article to them seems badly sourced it does include references to massacres, killing of Polish people and Jewish people so that seems like the hallmarks of Nazism to me. CT55555(talk) 05:16, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  Reliable source that quotes historian that contests the nazi label. Scholarly source which does not treat them as nazis but treats it as collaboration Tristario (talk) 08:16, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  Ottawa Citizen daily - Graffiti on monument commemorating Nazi SS division being investigated as a hate crime by police. - GizzyCatBella🍁 08:48, 2 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

  @GhostOfDanGurney The information that is white-washing 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) (not specifically been found guilty of any war crimes) is incorrect see Chodaczków Wielki massacre, Huta Pieniacka massacre or Pidkamin massacre for example - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:29, 2 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

  As we read in the article: "The Division SS "Galizien" was commanded by German, Austrian and Ukrainian officers", and several ethnic massacres are reported. I think classifying them as 'Nazis' or 'Nazi collaborators' is sufficient. In this case, it is correct to report them in this article. Mhorg (talk) 13:01, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Split suggestion

• Oppose, due to lack of justification to split. If it's not broken, no need to fix it.

CT55555(talk) 02:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@CT55555 The editor who placed the template needs to explain here first. - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:33, 22 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:08, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. There was an equally confusing lack of justification for a similar edit here Roman Shukhevych statue CT55555(talk) 06:34, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

POV

Whether out of utter carelessness or what, this article still reads like a hit piece.

It implies members of Division Galicia were Nazis, while they were not eligible for Nazi party membership because of their background. It implies that its members were declared guilty of crimes at the Nuremberg trials, when that is false. In fact no evidence of war crimes by the division was presented at Nuremberg, nor discovered by the Canadian government, the Deschênes Commission, nor the Canadian Jewish Congress (according to the article 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician)).

“Waffen-SS” is peppered throughout, implying that Roman Shukhevych and the UPA were members of the Waffen-SS and found guilty at Nuremberg.

What exactly is the section “Memorial at St. Volodymyr Ukrainian Cemetery, Oakville” about? Is it a monument to the UPA or to the Galicia Division? Why are there two monuments pictured and which is the subject?

I’ve topped the article with a POV tag until it someone cleans up problems such as these, with supporting references. —Michael Z. 22:16, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mzajac Why don’t you clean up problems? GizzyCatBella🍁 01:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella WP:VOLUNTEER.  —Michael Z. 03:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mzajac: Collaboration here should be much easier/more productive now; GCB was blocked as a sock by ArbCom the other day. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:08, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

It's important to describe this issue following the rules of WP:NPOV. I have yet to read the book by Sol Litman on the issue, however, he contends that the 1st Galician did commit atrocities. And the Deschênes Commission is certainly controversial, meaning other points of view should be presented. Following WP:NPOVTITLE, as members of the SS, they are Nazi collaborators and were considered criminals at Nuremberg. Even if not a neutral name, following WP:NPOVNAME, their collaboration with the Nazi regime as members of the SS (as opposed to Wehrmacht) makes it appropriate to call the unit Nazi collaborators. I firmly believe the article follows these standards and should not be changed. Toomuchcuriosity (talk) 19:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

References

Draža Mihailović monument

The fact that Draža Mihailović is listed here doesn't sit well with me and it seems to be based on an opinion piece by one Lev Golinkin. Mihailović was legally rehabilitated in 2015 and has widely been celebrated as an anti-fascist and anti-Nazi. – PidgeCopetti (talk) 13:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm no expert, but the article about him includes other citations that seem to support this. For example: https://web.archive.org/web/20120303145017/http://www.bosnia.org.uk/bosrep/report_format.cfm?articleid=3026&reportid=169

Is it accurate to say that at some point, he was a Nazi collaborator? CT55555(talk) 14:36, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

While some Chetniks did collaborate with the Germans, Draža Mihailović did not. PidgeCopetti (talk) 01:46, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

"widely been celebrated as an anti-fascist and anti-Nazi" seems like a bit of a stretch. This needs to be handled in an RfC; no doubt you've seen the edit warring. Drmies (talk) 21:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

It's worth noting that the Simon Wiesenthal center has never condemned Mihailovic (the way they have Shukhevych or Bandera) and B'nai Brith Canada has never called for the removal of his statue, like they did with the Ukrainian monuments. For this reason alone we should consider removing this section. Does anybody object? 206.188.81.118 (talk) 18:11, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I'd support removal. (Also highlights issue with relying too much on Golenkin as a source.) BobFromBrockley (talk) 17:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I object. Sources are very clear that Mihajlović was Nazi collaborator. The corresponding article (Draža Mihailović) discusses hi collaboration at length. The fact that some people celebrate him as "anti-nazi" does not mean anything. People celebrate lot of different things. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Citation needed

"These monuments are controversial, with leaders of the Canadian Ukrainian community rejecting the links to the Nazi regime."

Is there a citation for the same, or any survey with what share Ukrainian-Canadians reject their links to the Nazi regime and its collaborators? Ukrainian-Canadian leaders such as Chrystia Freeland have not dissociated these monuments from the community in any way. 24.239.134.31 (talk) 09:37, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

per WP:LEDE that wasn't really supported by the body of the article, so I removed that part. Thanks for pointing that out Tristario (talk) 22:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC)