File talk:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-A0706-0018-030, Ukraine, ermordete Familie.jpg

This image should not be used on wikipedia as the images description was created in the communist GDR (as evidenced by the Bundearchives registration number: Zentralbild - IML / 1.8.1962 - IML = Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus and the date of the image description is 1962); therefore the text describing the event is actually not the original description, but a later addition. It is thus unclear if the description (fascist German officer executing boy whose family has just been murdered) is a correct description of the depicted event.

Also note inconsistencies within the image:

• none of the uniformed persons carries a weapon
• at least three of the dead to the right wear Soviet military boots
• there is a second boy to the left of the image, who seems to be smiling.

Noclador (talk) 10:14, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Nonsense. See here: [1]. --Diagram Lajard (talk) 10:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

(Editing conflict with Diagram Lajard) Noclador, we cannot go by your original research. Fact is that prestigious institutions like the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum are showcasing this photograph: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/media_ph.php?ModuleId=10005130&MediaId=3140 where it is attributed to the Documentation Centre of Austrian Resistance (Dokumentationsarchiv des Oesterreichischen Widerstandes). It is not up to us to decide on the status of authenticity of the photograph – such judgements are only relevant if and when they are made by reliable sources. --Widerborst (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I am not disputing the authenticity of the photo itself, I am cautioning against the description as it is here on wikipedia as it comes from the Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus of the GDR. I saw the attribution to the Dokumentationsarchiv des Oesterreichischen Widerstandes (DÖW) at the USHMM - and that does not make the image description any truer: This image was part of the exhibition "Vernichtungskrieg. Verbrechen der Wehrmacht 1941 bis 1944". In the "Bericht der Kommission zur Überprüfung der Ausstellung „Vernichtungskrieg. Verbrechen der Wehrmacht 1941 bis 1944“" [2] (the report by a commission of historians about the veracity of the exhibition) the way the image was used there was deemed unacceptable: "Inakzeptabel ist es dagegen, wenn Fotografien für die Ausstellung aus einem Buch reproduziert wurden, der Katalog aber ein Archiv als Fundort angibt (184/13 und 207/54: im DÖW als Reproduktion aus Schnabel, „Macht ohne Moral“ nachgewiesen;". in short: the DÖW took the image out of the 1957 book by the KZ-survivor Reimund Schnabel, who was a East Berlin writer. so: we have the DÖW, who took the photo and its description out of a East German book and we have the Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus who had the original - therefore both sources for the description are East German. As said before it is better not to use this image as there are serious and profound doubts as to the veracity of the images description. Noclador (talk) 11:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The Holocaust Memorial Museum is a reliable source. I don't see any problem in using the phot, and espicially, no need to do some original research. --213.209.114.238 11:20, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

1) Log in Diagram Lajard when you comment! 2) original research??? the report on the exhibition "Vernichtungskrieg. Verbrechen der Wehrmacht 1941 bis 1944" was done by the most respected German historians - their task was not to conclude if the images are genuine, but they traced the image back to a East German writer in 1957. Now: how reliable is that writer as a source??? Noclador (talk) 11:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

"there are serious and profound doubts as to the veracity of the images description" – If you have no reliable sources that make the claim that there are indeed serious and profound doubts as to the veracity of the image description, if you are the only one making that claim, then this entire discussion is irrelevant for any further actions here. None of the sources you cite make that claim. Your blanket distrust of East German sources and your personal analysis of the image content is completely irrelevant as well. --Widerborst (talk) 11:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC) PS: The question as to the reliability of whatever source the photo is coming from has already been answered by the USHMM using it as presenting it as authentic, including the description. If you have no reliable source challenging the status to which the USHMM has elevated the photo and its description, then you have no case to argue.

note: an email request to the DÖW for comment was answered by Dr. Elisabeth Klamper as follows: "Tatsächlich ist es so, dass das von Ihnen angesprochene Foto in den Anfangszeiten des DÖW - das nicht von Historikern, sondern überlebenden Widerstandskämpfernund Verfolgten gegründet worde ist -, in bester Abssicht offensichtlich aus dem Buch Reimund Schnabels kopiert worden ist. Anfang der 1990er Jahre wurden zahlreiche Fotos aus den Beständen des DÖW von freien Mitarbeitern des USHMM kopiert und später in dessen Bestände integriert. Inzwischen ist das Wissen um die Herkunft und Tradierung mancher Fotos gewachsen, vor allem in Zusammenhang mit den Vorgängen rund um die Wehrmachtsausstellung. Weitere Informtionen zu diesem Foto gehen allerdings aus den hier aufliegenden Unterlagen nicht hervor."

notable points:

• the photo has copied from the book of Reimund Schnabel ("aus dem Buch Reimund Schnabels kopiert worden ist")
• during the nineties photos were copied from the DÖW for the USHMM by freelance workers ("von freien Mitarbeitern des USHMM kopiert")
• the DÖW does not have any additional information about the photo besides the one stated above ("Weitere Informtionen zu diesem Foto gehen allerdings aus den hier aufliegenden Unterlagen nicht hervor.")

in short: everybody just copied from Reimund Schnabel without ever authenticating the description. end of note. Noclador (talk) 02:49, 1 July 2011 (UTC)