Talk:Sajmište concentration camp

Direct quotes are too long

I just noticed that there are huge sections of direct quotes from a book in this article. Those quotes should be condensed, because Wikipedia isn't just supposed to copy and paste big chunks of text from other sources. The two very long quotes may even be a copyright violation, but I'm not certain.Spylab 11:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

This is hilarious - it remembers me to a Viennese Royal Opera director who once claimed that Mozart's Figaro had too many notes! Quotes to be condensed??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.249.9.127 (talk) 23:18, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

See WP:QUOTE for Wikipedia's guidelines on using quotes. (Also note that 4.249.9.127 (talk · contribs) is a suspected sock puppet of a permanently and repeatedly-banned individual).Spylab 23:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Quotes fixed.Mtsmallwood (talk) 16:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Note related to my August 30 2007 fix

This user Spylab does not read this article nor references given in this article even though he was warned about it several times. He requested reference for numbers of victims given in this article, even though the reference is given along with the quote (Dr Hinko Salz's testimony, Adolf Eichmann Trial, Tel Aviv 1961)

The second problem with his 'correction' is insertion of even though between these two sentences

As of 2006 Sajmište is still not a memorial center. On February 11, 1993, the European parliament adopted the Resolution on European and International Protection of Concentration Camps as Historical Monuments.

which turns both statements into a false claim. The document (Resolution on European and International Protection of Concentration Camps as Historical Monuments) is just a set of recommendations - not obligatory to anyone, nor it mentione Sajmiste at all. But Spylab's 'correction' suggest that there are some obligations not fullfilled by someone. --4.249.6.37 02:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

• Note that the above comment was posted by a sock puppet of an individual who has been permanently-banned from posting on Wikipedia due to personal attacks, disruptive edits and sock puppetry. Spylab 12:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Revisions January 19 2009

I paraphrased the quotes, broke up the text into smaller sections, added some links in the text, added some categories, added The Holocaust navbox, added categories, and did some other clean up, such as bringing material from the notes into the body of the article.Mtsmallwood (talk) 16:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Sept 6th 2007

I did not find it rational mentioning that Sajmiste was on the Belgrade outsikirts - not a singe reference found it rational. Moreover - it introduces ambiguity (occupied territory of Serbia vs. Independent State of Croatia)

Security Police is definitely not German Sichersheit Polizei - no need for this false linkage.

The Resolution on European and International Protection of Concentration Camps as Historical Monuments document has jurisdiction only over EU i.e. over her member states and it is not written to cover all concentration camps in Europe. So, this document is mentioned here out of the article context.

Linkages like As of 2006 are meaningless due to the fact that the text under such a link does not have any information related to this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.249.75.44 (talk) 01:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Un-referenced

I completely removed

On February 11, 1993, the European parliament adopted the Resolution on European and International Protection of Concentration Camps as Historical Monuments. However, it seems this does not pertain to

for seeing that reference as given leads nowhere. If someone can find online information about this resolution - it's ok with me to put the removed text back.

--Standshown (talk) 04:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

References

error: gas van

This Van is clearly a Magirus. Nothing is known about gas vans from "Magirus". It should be removed because gas vans are known from the companies Saurer, [[Diamond T], Opel and Renault. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas Maierhofer (talk • contribs) 07:34, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

see Link: deathcamps.org/gas_chambers/gas_chambers_vans --Holgerjan (talk) 14:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

NDH Territory

I wouldn't normally make an issue of it, but the mentioning of Independent State of Croatia in the lead section has a history in this article: there is an attempt at "whitewashing" or sidetracking the role of Serbian authorities concerning the camp. Yes, technically, it was located in NDH territory, but, terrible as they were, NDH puppet government had no role with this camp whatsoever. The camp was operated by Nazi, with assistance of Nedić's people, and it was meant exclusively for citizens of Serbia. Independent State of Croatia has nothing to do with it, and its mentioning in the lead, in my opinion, violates WP:UNDUE as an "attention diversion". No such user (talk) 11:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

again: gas van error

This Van is clearly a Magirus. Nothing is known about gas vans from "Magirus". It should be removed because gas vans are known from the companies Saurer, [[Diamond T], Opel and Renault.

Das Foto zeigt keinen Gaswagen. Es handelt sich bei diesem Fahrzeug offensichtlich um einen Magirus-Deutz. Nach allen Veröffentlichungen wurden nur Wagen der vier Firmen Diamond, Renault, Sauer und Opel umgebaut.

--- Vergleiche dazu folgenden Link: 

http: //www.deathcamps.org/gas_chambers/gas_chambers_vans_de.html deathcamps

Der Fall des Vernichtungslagers Chelmno wurde durch die "Hauptkommission für die Untersuchung von Verbrechen der Deutschen in Polen" ab Mai 1945 untersucht (dies war der Name der Kommission zu Beginn ihrer Existenz). Die Kommission erhielt die Information, dass in der ehemaligen Ostrowski-Fabrik in der Stadt Kolo (ca. 12 km von Chelmno entfernt) ein Gaswagen steht, der laut Zeugenaussagen im Vernichtungslager Chelmno eingesetzt worden war. Der Wagen wurde gefunden, fotografiert und untersucht. Die damals aufgenommenen Fotos sind verwahrt im Archiv der Hauptkommission in Warschau (Signaturen: 47398, 47396, 47397, 47399, am besten ist Nr. 47398). Die Titel dieser Fotografien lauten auch heute noch: "ein Wagen zum Töten von Menschen durch Auspuffgase, in Chelmno". Eines dieser Fotos wurde abgebildet in Flemings Buch "Hitler and the Final Solution", mit der Information, dass es das Foto eines "Gaswagens" sei, der in Chelmno benutzt worden war. --87.142.146.158 (talk) 17:29, 19 November 2010 (UTC) (de.Wikipedia Benutzer:Holgerjan)

File:Chelmno Gas Van.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Chelmno Gas Van.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:51, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sajmište concentration camp/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 12:26, 21 June 2013 (UTC) I'll get to this one shortly. Regards.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	the tower caption needs adjusting (see below)
	7. Overall assessment.	On hold for seven days, a couple of comments to be addressed. Passed, all comments addressed.

Comments

• There are some broken links between the citations and references, eg Ramet 2005 (should be 2006 per the refs) and Vojnovic 2013 (needs a year field in the citation template) that need addressing against criteria 2a.
• There are a couple of duplicate links "Gruppenfuhrer" and the German language template.
• There are some issues with not referencing some ranges of figures available in one referenced source and using figures from another. For example, Ramet p. 131 says 40,000 killed, of which 7,000 were Jews, and points to Shelach for discussion about the estimates, but Mojzes (47,000) has been used without mentioning numbers from the other sources. Ranges should be inserted here to avoid the impression that one source is preferred over another.
• The camp was located in Staro Sajmište, not Novi Beograd, which wasn't built till after the war.
• The tower photo is actually the tower of the old fairground, is it not? I think the caption should reflect that.
• in the lead, "a gas van", not "the gas van" there were about 20 of those vans used by the Germans throughout Europe.
• Shelach 1989, p. 1168–1169. should be Shelach 1989, pp. 1168–1169.

All comments have been addressed. 23 editor (talk) 18:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• fn 20 doesn't point to its source
• After giving Turner's name in full at first mention, he becomes just "Turner" from then on
• putting this on hold to get those last couple of things done, then she's good to go. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I think I've fixed the Turner bit (if I understood correctly). Thanks for this 23 editor (talk) 23:50, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I've tweaked the Salem cite, I know it isn't 100%, but at least it points to the source now. Passed. Well done. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:04, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, 23 editor (talk) 00:41, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit Nov 2013

Hi

Initial operation

• "By October," - the previous section states that the camp was opened on 28 October, while this sentence claims that the killings were done before that. It also then talks about "more frequent killings occurring in mid-September, between 9 and 11 October, and on 11 November." Something seems off with the dates as described. After re-reading the previous paragraphs and sections, I still am not sure which is correct.

Checks:

• Check for basic copyvio using Duplication Detector against 3 main refs - cannot complete as I do not have the books used.
• Citation bot - broken?
• dmy check script - not run
• Dashes script - run
• Enabled feedback tool - left for regular editors to choose implementation

I have given it one pass through, and will give it another later tonight, as well as running the other checks (my dashes script needs fixing for some reason). Chaosdruid (talk) 22:48, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I also have a problem with the refs and notes sections. They are all refs, including the notes section. A notes section is for [NB-1] etc, and I would rename them:

• Notes -> sub of References, renamed to Citations
• Books renamed as Bibliography
• Websites separated from the current "Notes" section and put into references on their own, as it currently seems impossible to see where they were used as inline citations from the Websites section of References. Chaosdruid (talk) 23:41, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Drljević

I haven't been able to find a single source other than Kurapovna which states that Drljević "administered" the camp. Nor does Kurapovna provide a source to back up this assertion. Probably best to remove it. 23 editor (talk) 18:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Errors

in late 1943, the new German ambassador to Serbia proposed that the camp be moved deeper into NDH territory

Serbia was under military occupation as Gebiet des Militärbefehlshabers in Serbien. It was not recognized by Germany as an independent nation - so the Germany didn't have any diplomatic relationships with the puppet government in Serbia. I would like to check that at Christopher Browning's book before correcting it.

Serbs send there jews, and this concentration camp was conducted by Serbs (Nedić). Beograd is a capital city of Serbia, but then it was just formally NDH.

This poorly written statement is simply not true. Belgrade was not part of the Independent State of Croatia during the WW2. The German military authorities in Serbia sent Jews to this extermination camp. Please check other articles, such as The Holocaust in Serbia, Territory of the Military Commander in Serbia, Government of National Salvation, and Staro Sajmište. I will correct this. --N Jordan (talk) 16:50, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Half the city was incorporated into the NDH (pretty much everything west of the Sava), so your statement is partially incorrect as well. It's true that a number of Jews were sent to the camp by collaborationist forces in Serbia but most had been arrested and deported by the Germans and Ustashe. The camp was run by the Germans and briefly by the NDH (though the vast majority of those who perished were killed by the Germans, not the Ustashe). In case, thanks for reverting the IP. 23 editor (talk) 22:28, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure if we can even talk about the city of Belgrade west of Sava, before the WW2. Other than the site of new city fair (built in 1938), there were only two settlements there. Both of them were not urbanized. The village of Bežanija was not part of the city at that time.

Before the WW2, there was an administrative district called Uprava grada Beograda (eng. Belgrade City Administration) but that was a district - not the city of Belgrade itself. It included cities of Zemun and Pančevo.

Maybe we could talk about the outskirts of Belgrade incorporated into the Independent State of Croatia (NDH), but definitely not about the half of the city.

Regarding the role of Serbian puppet government and local collaborationist forces, it is true that they helped round up Jews in Serbia. But they didn't send anybody to the camp, as they were even not permitted to enter the territory of the NDH.

I'm ok with your edit but sooner or later somebody will want to emphasize that the NDH had nothing to do with the Judenlager Semlin (which is true). At that time, they will say that was operated by the Serbian puppet government (which is not true).--N Jordan (talk) 07:15, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

I think we're more or less in full agreement. However, it is factually inaccurate to suggest it was not in the NDH as a number of sources point out and as can be seen on any wartime map. 23 editor (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

It was in the NDH, but it was organized or operated by the German military administration in Serbia. The civil and military authorities of the NDH had nothing to do with this camp.--N Jordan (talk) 04:11, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I reshuffled the lead sentences to stress its geographical location – after all, this was a camp chiefly for Serbian inmates – and moved the NDH to second sentence as objectively less important. As N Jordan points out, from reading of the lead (and seeing just the intro in e.g. Google search or navigation popups) the reader gets a misleading impression that it was operated by the NDH. No such user (talk) 11:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Please check my latest revision. I tried to connect location to Zemun and Belgrade. At the same time to emphasize it was operated by Nazi forces in occupied Serbia. IMO we need this at the very beginning of article in order to avoid confusion. --N Jordan (talk) 06:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm OK with it, and 23 editor tweaked it further, so I think it closes the issue. For the time being, at least. No such user (talk) 15:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sajmište concentration camp. 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/20131203030415/http://www.b92.net/tv/press.php?nav_category=924&nav_id=340856 to http://www.b92.net/tv/press.php?nav_category=924&nav_id=340856

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 10:31, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Forgeries

• The country was dismembered following the invasion, with Serbia being reduced to its pre-1912 borders and placed under a government of German military occupation.[4] - false statement. Banat was not a part of pre-1912 Serbia but was a part of the government of German military occupation., Tomislav Vukovic alias Philip Cohen Serbia ... is an academically discredited book.

• Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• The NDH combined almost all of modern-day Croatia, all of modern-day Bosnia and Herzegovina and parts of modern-day Serbia into an "Italian-German quasi-protectorate."[8] - this statement is not verified by Tomasevic's book, page 272

• Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:09, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Belgrade was divided between German-occupied Serbia and the NDH. Zemun, the area where the Sajmište fairgrounds were located, was ceded to the NDH.[11] -false statement. Zemun was a separate town, not a part of Belgrade. Crowe, David M. (2000). "The Roma Holocaust". nowhere on the page 196 says "Belgrade was divided between German-occupied Serbia and the NDH ..." --Bocin kolega (talk) 17:45, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• By the way. Referring to perceived discrepancies in an article as "forgeries" breaks a basic rule of WP, assume good faith. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:21, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

These are not discrepancies and the assumption fo good faith is not applicable here.--Bocin kolega (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

The assumption of good faith applies across WP. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

• Starvation was widespread, and Jewish inmates appealed unsuccessfully to Serbian authorities for more food to be provided to the camp.[25] - again Tomislav Vukovic alias Philip Cohen is accusing the Serbs. In the occupied Serbia the supreme power was in the German hands and the camp was on the NDH territory. --Bocin kolega (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

First three remarks are not forgeries.

1) First one could have been amended: The country was dismembered following the invasion, with Serbia mostly being reduced to its pre-1912 borders and placed under a government of German military occupation, with the addition of the (Serbian) Banat. However, quisling government administered this region only on paper, as the Banat was placed under direct German control. Basically, Nedić's government indeed controlled only the pre-1912 territory, more or less. True, the statement is not fully correct, and even historians neglect a fact that on paper Banat was part of Serbia, but it is neither that important for this article, nor is a forgery. It may be sloppy, though.

2) The territory of NDH was indeed divided in German and Italian "interest spheres". The border of two zones went from the German-Italian border of the annexed parts of Slovenia, to the border of the Italian protectorate of Montenegro and Nedić's Serbia. The line went in the south-east direction, passing south of Zagreb, Sisak, Banja Luka and Sarajevo, leaving north in the German and south in the Italian zone. Better sources could have been asked for, which would be fine, but not to label it a forgery.

3) Here, the original information was fully correct. From 1929 Zemun made one administrative unit with Belgrade (and Pančevo), but remained a separate city. After the first road bridge was opened between Belgrade and Zemun in 1934, and the public transportation (trams) connected them, Zemun lost its separate city status that year and became part of Belgrade, as a settlement. The two towns were not connected by the urban tissue, but they were administratively and statistically one settlement. PajaBG (talk) 15:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Well, to some point, you are right. Better term shall be garbage. --Bocin kolega (talk) 10:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

What exactly is your problem? Are you here to build the encyclopedia? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:58, 12 April 2019 (UTC)