WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland#Article sourcing expectations (9 May 2021): The Arbitration Committee advises that administrators may impose "reliable-source consensus required" as a discretionary sanction on all articles on the topic of Polish history during World War II (1933-45), including the Holocaust in Poland. On articles where "reliable-source consensus required" is in effect, when a source that is not a high quality source (an article in a peer-reviewed scholarly journals, an academically focused book by a reputable publisher, and/or an article published by a reputable institution) is added and subsequently challenged by reversion, no editor may reinstate the source without first obtaining consensus on the talk page of the article in question or consensus about the reliability of the source in a discussion at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard.

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance). Military history: Biography / Russian & Soviet / World War II Start‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military biography task force Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force World War II task force Ukraine Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine 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.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Scouting Low‑importance Stepan Bandera is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scouting and Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations, WAGGGS and WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ScoutingWikipedia:WikiProject ScoutingTemplate:WikiProject ScoutingScouting articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 15, 2020.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Noam Cohen (31 May 2022). "Wikipedia acts as a check on Putin's false view of history". The Washington Post. Since the Russian invasion, the English Wikipedia articles about the historical figures and topics Putin invoked have been racking up pop-star numbers. The article about Stepan Bandera, a far-right leader of Ukrainian nationalists before and during World War II — whom Putin sees as an evil force guiding Ukraine even today — has been viewed a million times since the invasion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stepan_Bandera&diff=next&oldid=1174778122

Personally, I don't think Stephen Dorril is a good source to use. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:47, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dorril doesn't appear to be a very good source. I think we probably should remove him. And how the information we're attributing to him fits in with the other content we have on the page isn't that clear Tristario (talk) 05:59, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In absence of any arguments to the contrary, I'll act on this. (Note, this article is covered by the sanctions relating to sourcing for articles on the Holocaust in Poland, so removed material needs to be brought back here before reinstating.) BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps something can be written about it. Oliver Boyd-Barrett, Stephen Marmura: "MI6 worked closely with Bandera and the postwar OUN to play their part in the subversion of Soviet rule"[1] Mhorg (talk) 11:51, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That chapter was written by Gerald Sussman, and that part seems to be some historical background to the main focus of the chapter, which relates to "Russiagate". It doesn't seem like Sussman has expertise on this area of history. Does more mainstream scholarship of Bandera mention this? Tristario (talk) 23:18, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is discussion of MI6 in Rossolinski-Liebe's book, so this can be included, although I'd prefer a better source than that Russiagate book. The article does already mention cooperation with British intelligence Tristario (talk) 23:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a book edited by and contributed to a bunch of conspiracy theorists with no expertise on Ukrainian/Polish history or any other relevant topic. The particular chapter is by a specialist in SE Asian urban studies. Hard no. BobFromBrockley (talk) 07:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey mhorg You removed my sentence framing the views section since I said Bandera's primary view was towards Ukrainian statehood.

In your reversion note you said the view subsection if just for views on fascism.

If that is true why not rename the section or add a topic sentence rather than a summary from a historian?

What is wrong with including views towards Ukrainian independence in the Views section? Jgmac1106 (talk) 14:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you look closely, I did not remove it, I just moved it to the bottom of the section, as most academics focus on its affiliation with fascism. Mhorg (talk) 18:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It seems to me obvious that his most central views should come first in the section not last. Jgmac’s text could be phrased a little more clearly and concisely but does belong at the top of the section. BobFromBrockley (talk) 07:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]