Talk:Nisko Plan

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jewish history Low‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The Bits About Browning[edit]

The stuff at the end of this article seems a little too close to weighing in on the whole "Functionalism versus Intentionalism" debate and - correct me if I'm wrong - but isn't that something with which Wikipedia shouldn't choose sides? It literally just says "Most historians....MAINSTREAM historians" and that seems a little ridiculous, considering it's such a huge schism within the serious historiography of the holocaust, a schism in which both schools of thought conceded to the other just to get some sort of consensus. Basically saying "yeah, both sides have their merits and their evidence." That hardly seems like MOST HISTORIANS disagree with Browning. (Additionally, the source the suspect statement cites is none other than Browning themself, maybe Browning's just the most humble person around, or maybe those were just ham-fisted in because whomever wrote those jabs wanted to choose sides and did so around the already-extant sources). As you can tell, I have picked a side - the side that doesn't think wikipedia should pick a side in an on-going scholarly debate which doesn't seem to be meeting its conclusion anytime soon. 2601:87:4400:AF2:B17D:88BD:BBE9:6B58 (talk) 00:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

also known as Nisko - Nisko or not?Xx236 (talk) 13:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Browning is not a revisionist historian and the Holocaust was not agreed on at the Wannsee conference. I suspect that more is wrong with the article, but I'm not an expert on the subject. 83.77.26.190 (talk) 22:43, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree absolutely on both the above points and have removed the word revisionist, which was highly misleading in the context. Browning's claim that the SS experimented with various possible solutions is not revisionist. Norvo (talk) 13:49, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another Error[edit]

the intentionalist/functionalist historiography debate which historian Christopher Browning has tried to initiate

The debate on intentionalism/functionalism (and these terms) goes back to 1980 or earlier. It was not 'initiated' by Christopher Browning. Norvo (talk) 01:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's someone who's been editing this article that's dancing around the ole' F vs I debate but that's obviously biased in their portrayal. Now it says "MOST HISTORIANS" disagree with Browning and whenever I see a "MOST HISTORIANS/MAINSTREAM HISTORIANS" statement my eyes roll so fast it gives my brain whiplash. You might be able to get away with that when countering Climate Change deniers but not this particular debate which is still very much alive and contentious. (If it weren't, I wouldn't be complaining about the obvious bias right now.) 2601:87:4400:AF2:B17D:88BD:BBE9:6B58 (talk) 00:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

geographically unclear[edit]

(mostly)because the last paragraph of the first piece in the article is unsourced it is giving a few wrong impressions , at first because the suggestion is lublin and nisko are neigbouring towns, for that reason it is not obvious if the german wiki is unclear about the prepared use of the facility, or if this article refers to a, the and many burggraben projects, possibly only in the area of lublin, perhaps it is confusing the burggraben project with the nisko plan?62.195.7.176 (talk) 08:48, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article name[edit]

Per Wikipedia:Article titles, the town of Nisko – although named in the SS planning stage of the so-called Nisko-Aktion for the creation of Judenreservaten or Judenreservat in occupied Poland – was (and still is) insignificant in terms of size in comparison to the provincial capital of Lublin in Poland, former location of the Lublin Ghetto and the massive Majdanek concentration camp system of subcamps. This article is not about the plan per se, but about its successful implementation in the form of the Lublin Reservation (Browning) a.k.a. German: Lublin-Reservat (Gutman, Jäckel, Longerich, Schoeps) which best identifies the actual subject of this article.

"Nisko Plan" search in Google Books: 296 results.
"Lublin Plan" search in Google Books 367 results.
"Lublin Reservation" search in Google Books 1,110 results.

Renamed accordingly. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 15:28, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lublin Reservation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160208215116/http://www.sztetl.org.pl/en/selectcity/ to http://www.sztetl.org.pl/en/selectcity/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:52, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Split article?[edit]

The article seems like it's about two different topics: 1) the Nisko Plan 2) the Holocaust in the Lublin District in general, after the Nisko Plan was abandoned. How do editors feel about a split? b uidhe 02:22, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no objections I may start working on this soon. Will draft at Draft:Nisko Plan and Draft:The Holocaust in the Lublin District. b uidhe 18:13, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Krychów forced labour camp 1940 (Krowie Bagno).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:24, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]