Holocaust is terrible, and terribly complex subject to study. In this particular context, I also suppose it is hard to find balanced views. Most people who spea

Holocaust is terrible, and terribly complex subject to study. In this particular context, I also suppose it is hard to find balanced views. Most people who speak on the topic have a significant agenda. Without in any way attacking or discrediting Jan Grabowski, one of the coauthors, he also has an agenda (and that's fine). See for example this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Grabowski#Views https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Grabowski#Views Distilling the Wikipedia article (oh how ironic), Jan Grabowski's view appears to be that any commemoration of Poles who helped Jews during WWII is inappropriate, since it was dwarfed by those who cooperated with Nazis. There were certainly many who did, directly or indirectly, and I won't offer or dispute any numbers. But he seems to be against even mentioning those who unambiguously did help their Jewish neighbours. He then authors a paper about how Wikipedia white-washes Polish involvement in the Holocaust. I can't help but feel the paper is influenced by his views - indeed, can a historian ever entirely divorce themselves from their views? But then, if true, the far-right nationalists editing articles on Wikipedia are also writing with an agenda. I guess I just mean, I find it hard to be outraged by (clearly malicious if true!) personal-view-tainted edits on Wikipedia, based on a paper that also seems tainted by personal views.