Holocaust in Poland
Rescue of Jews by Poles during the Holocaust
Wording shifted clearly. Language openings contradict each other on something important.
Something to inspect — not a judgment of bias or bad faith.
Overview
Use this briefing to choose what to inspect. The tabs contain the underlying comparisons.
Open the live English Wikipedia article ↗L1 ran on this article and exact checking did not confirm a durable rewrite. This does not mean the article never changed.
Different websites cited: 23 → 61. We do not rate those sites. See Citations.
2 configured questions checked in more than one language. See Facts.
Compared around the rewrite window. See Framing.
Did editors fight over it?
The page was not dominated by back-and-forth undoing. A quiet rewrite can still matter — it just means few people fought it on the page. About 1,366 recorded revisions in the measure.
Who wrote today’s text?
Half of the wording still on the page is about 12.9 years old or newer. 3.6% was written in the last 3 years. The ten most active accounts wrote 81.8% of what is there now (a fairly small group of accounts wrote much of the current text; 162 different accounts overall). Snapshot data on this page runs through 2026-07-01.This is background only — a small group of writers is common on specialist pages.
Available evidence: Rewrite (no candidate found), Vocabulary, Citations, Framing, Facts, Versions.
No candidate rewrite window was confirmed
The exact L1 check ran, but no candidate showed the required durable-spine drop. This is a completed negative result for that detector, not a claim that the article never changed.
Persistence-weighted changeThe share of wording lost, weighted so text that survived more snapshots counts more. by interval
Each row reports established wording lost, standing wording gained, and paired change as a replacement lead. The bar shows loss for continuity with earlier reports. Below-floor anomalies remain descriptive evidence but cannot receive exact confirmation. A coverage gap is shown descriptively but excluded from detector decisions. Candidate-window labels report the exact revision-level decision for the broader window containing that interval.
How the detector reached this state
- 1 · Coarse scanA snapshot comparison that finds candidate windows for closer inspection.No candidate signalNo measured interval crossed the detector's candidate threshold.
- 2 · Interval scoring35 intervals scoredThe bars below show persistence-weighted wording loss for each interval.
- 3 · Exact checkA revision-level test of whether a candidate window's durable spine collapsed.Not neededNo coarse candidate was sent to revision-level checking.
- 2009-07-01Loss 17.9%3,454 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2010-01-01Loss 2.9%1,096 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2010-07-01Loss 0.4%250 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2011-01-01Loss 0.2%128 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2011-07-01Loss 2.8%2,912 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2012-01-01Loss 3.4%4,132 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2012-07-01Loss 0.6%795 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2013-01-01Loss 0.3%559 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2013-07-01Loss 0.2%390 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2014-01-01Loss 1.5%3,267 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2014-07-01Loss 0.9%2,180 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2015-01-01Loss 0.7%1,820 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2015-07-01Loss 0.0%96 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2016-01-01Loss 0.4%1,153 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2016-07-01Loss 1.6%5,763 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2017-01-01Loss 1.6%6,040 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2017-07-01Loss 0.1%488 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2018-01-01Loss 6.3%26,703 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2018-07-01Loss 4.8%20,714 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2019-01-01Loss 14.2%62,908 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2019-07-01Loss 0.8%3,291 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2020-01-01Loss 0.4%1,681 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2020-07-01Loss 1.9%8,786 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2021-01-01Loss 0.4%2,011 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2021-07-01Loss 0.1%488 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2022-01-01Loss 0.2%1,017 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2022-07-01Loss 0.0%246 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2023-01-01Loss 0.1%324 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2023-07-01Loss 13.7%86,867 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2024-01-01Loss 0.1%487 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2024-07-01Loss 0.1%616 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2025-01-01Loss 0.1%786 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2025-07-01Loss 0.2%1,691 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2026-01-01Loss 0.0%15 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2026-07-01Loss 0.0%76 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
Which words grew or shrank?
Words that became more common or less common between the compared versions. Handy for noticing a shift in topic or tone — not a score of bias.
Comparing 2009-01-01 -> 2026-07-01 (no L1 pivot — whole history). Rough word count: 5,145 → 3,971. Overall: wording shifted clearly.
Used more afterward
- getter0 → 7
- party0 → 6
- germany0 → 5
- mary0 → 5
- police0 → 5
- see0 → 5
- sławik0 → 5
- invasion0 → 4
- territories0 → 4
- united0 → 4
- ładoś0 → 4
- camp0 → 3
Used less afterward
- university46 → 0
- pages14 → 0
- isbn12 → 0
- zimmerman12 → 0
- aftermath11 → 0
- joshua11 → 0
- pdf11 → 0
- yadvashem11 → 0
- contested10 → 0
- memories10 → 0
- rutgers10 → 0
- press47 → 2
These are the standout words, not a full dictionary of the article. Boring markup words are filtered out. Treat this as a hint, not a conclusion.
How the footnotes changed
How the article's own footnotes changed across the rewrite: which websites and books were cited more or less. We only show the mix — we do not rate sources as good or bad.
Looking at 2009-01-01 → 2026-07-01 (no L1 pivot — whole history): 56 websites were cited more (or newly), 9 less (or dropped). Number of footnotes: 179 → 345. Different websites: 23 → 61.
Mix of citation types: book 71%, web 29% → book 50%, web 37%, journal 10%, news 2%.
| cited more often | before → after |
|---|---|
| archive.org | 0 → 18 |
| books.google.com | 43 → 58 |
| yadvashem.org | 0 → 9 |
| sprawiedliwi.org.pl | 0 → 5 |
| focus.pl | 0 → 4 |
| warsawvoice.pl | 0 → 4 |
| ushmm.org | 0 → 4 |
| zyciezazycie.pl | 0 → 3 |
| ipn.gov.pl | 4 → 7 |
| forum-znak.org.pl | 1 → 4 |
| prezydent.pl | 0 → 2 |
| muzeum.stalowawola.pl | 0 → 2 |
| cited less often | before → after |
|---|---|
| www1.yadvashem.org | 18 → 6 |
| books.google.ca | 5 → 0 |
| jewishgen.org | 2 → 0 |
| jstor.org | 2 → 0 |
| massorti.com | 1 → 0 |
| kki.krakow.pl | 1 → 0 |
| yad-vashem.org.il | 1 → 0 |
| wilk.wpk.p.lodz.pl | 1 → 0 |
| 209.85.173.104 | 1 → 0 |
Counted from the article’s own footnotes. We list domains only — we do not call any source trustworthy or untrustworthy.
Cross-language lead comparison
How the opening of the article presents the topic in different languages. Disagreement is a reason to read carefully, not a final answer.
The EN, ES, and ZH leads largely agree on the core narrative: Poles were the most numerous Righteous Among the Nations, faced death penalties for helping Jews, and were supported by the Underground State and Żegota. However, ZH diverges significantly by attributing the world's awareness of the Holocaust to Witold Pilecki's report via Jan Karski rather than the Bund report via Home Army couriers, citing a different (lower) count of Righteous Among the Nations, adding specific casualty statistics for Polish rescuers, and describing Allied appeals differently. The PL edition defines the topic much more broadly, encompassing all forms of Polish aid to Jews (informational, material, institutional) rather than focusing specifically on individual rescue efforts and recognition by Yad Vashem, making direct comparison difficult since PL's lead is a general definition rather than a narrative summary.
Languages compared: en, pl, zh, es.
contradict opposite claims · differ different emphasis · missing only one side mentions it
| topic | how they compare | English says | other language(s) say | languages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How the world was informed of the Holocaust | contradict | Information came from a report by Jewish Labour Bund leadership smuggled out by Home Army couriers, made public June 9, 1942 “following a report from the Jewish Labour Bund leadership smuggled out of the occupied Poland by Home Army couriers” | Information came from a report by Polish officer Witold Pilecki about the Holocaust and concentration camps, delivered via courier Jan Karski “波兰军官威托德·皮雷茨基撰写了关于大屠杀和集中营的报告，经流亡政府信使扬·卡尔斯基传递” | EN, ZH |
| Number of Righteous Among the Nations | differ | 7,280 people recognized by January 2023 “By January 2023, 7,280 people in Poland have been recognized by the State of Israel as Righteous among the Nations.” | 6,992 Poles recognized (no date given) “已有6,992名波兰人被以色列认定为国际义人” | EN, ZH |
| Severity of punishment/obstacles compared to other occupied countries | differ | General mention of death penalty for rescuers and hostile environment, comparison via Paldiel quote about unequalled courage “Any kind of help to Jews was punishable by death, for the rescuer and their family” | Explicit claim that Polish rescue efforts faced the harshest obstruction of all Nazi-occupied territories, plus specific casualty figures for Poles killed for helping Jews | EN, ZH |
| Allied response to bombing request | differ | Polish government and Jewish groups asked Allies to bomb rail tracks to Auschwitz; Allies did not do so for debated reasons “pleaded for Allied forces to bomb train tracks leading to the Auschwitz concentration camp, although, for debated reasons, the Allies did not do so” | Polish government-in-exile and Underground State pleaded with US and UK to help stop the Holocaust generally, but to no avail “波兰流亡政府和波兰地下国恳求美国和英国帮助制止大屠杀，但无济于事” | EN, ZH |
| Scope and framing of article topic | differ | Focuses narrowly on rescue of Jews by Poles, individual risk, Righteous Among Nations recognition, and specific organizations like Żegota “Jews were rescued from the Holocaust by Polish people, at risk to their lives and the lives of their families” | Defines the topic broadly as all Polish aid to Jews during WWII, including humanitarian organizations, government-in-exile, underground state structures, and civilian population's informational and material assistance “ogół pomocy polskich organizacji humanitarnych, rządu polskiego na uchodźstwie, struktur państwa podziemnego oraz ludności cywilnej RP” | PL |
| Żegota branch locations | differ | Branches in Kraków, Wilno, and Lwów “with branches in Kraków, Wilno, and Lwów” | Branches in Kraków, Wilno (Vilnius), and Lwów (Lviv), described as located within ghettos “在克拉科夫、维尔纽斯和利沃夫等地设有分支机构” | EN, ZH |
Differences are invitations to read both sides — not a score of who is right.
Do the languages agree on basic facts?
Simple factual questions checked in several languages. Editions may agree, differ, contradict, or not say enough to tell. That is not a claim about who is right.
On the latest check, 2 questions produced: 0 contradict · 0 compatible difference · 1 agree · 1 not enough said.
| question | today |
|---|---|
| Approximately how many Jews were saved by Poles during the Holocaust? | not enough said |
| Both editions state no explicit total figure is given, only recognized rescuer counts. | |
| What was the penalty in German-occupied Poland for helping Jews? | agree |
| Both agree the penalty was death; en specifies it extended to the rescuer's family. | |
These checks are starting points for a reader. They do not decide who is right.
Versions we used
These are the exact public Wikipedia versions behind the checks on this page. Open any link to read the original. Wikidata item: Q3474378.
| language | comparison point | article title | version | when | text used (chars) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| en | saved | Rescue of Jews by Poles during the Holocaust | open version 1357153654 | 2026-06-01T01:39:14Z | 43,770 |
| pl | saved | Polska pomoc Żydom w czasie II wojny światowej | open version 79697942 | 2026-05-07T11:22:37Z | 33,698 |