From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Białystok has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Cities (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Poland (Rated GA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Russia / History / Human geography (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the human geography of Russia task force.

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Okay, I'll read through and copyedit as I go. Please revert if I make any inadvertent changes. I will jot queries below: Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
All paragraphs should have a minimum of 1-2 inline references (if only 1, then I often make a commented-out note at the end that the ref cites the para)
I think I have every paragraph with at least two references. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
In etymology section, add first recorded use of the name and if the city had alternate names. We try and keep sections as prose, is there a need for some of these variants there? Maybe just limit to most notable and add the name is similar in other languages (if you can source it)
The city and the surrounding regions have been passed between many countries. There is also a significant Russian/Belorussian speaking minority in the area. Until WW II the population was majority Jewish with Yiddish being the primary tongue. Originally the city was part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the domain of the Kievan Rus. I've edited the section, but I still believe that the original form best expresses the names used. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Ok, flows better now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
link or explain hydronym.
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
The history section is unbalanced - looking at the History of Białystok daughter article, I think there can be some rejigging. The main article should mention the prehistory stuff.
Prehistory information isn't directly sourced at this time, thus it was left out of the main article. I've done some juggling, but that's why the child article exists - to go into the details. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Aha, ok. I'll take another look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I've made sure that there is a thread of information on some of the major "ownership" changes of the area, but there is so much complexity that's why the child article exists. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree this is difficult, and the potted summary works ok, but the first paragraph has no inline references. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Moved to Culture section and provided a reference for it. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
The 2 short films need to make a statement more about the subject matter to warrant mentioning and we don't do direct name links like that - they can be in the inline references.
I've pulled them. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Updated to reflect satisfaction of the request. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Need to add the circumstances of the Jewish population leaving. It might be an idea to add new material to the daughter article first. Was there emigration before WWII at all? Did any survive the war, and then leave for Israel? I am not familiar with much of this. The history article has alot of information, and some key bits can be re-imported.
I've altered the article - few survivors of the ghetto liquidation by the Nazis in Aug 1943. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Economy section needs to be converted to paragraphs - subheadings are unnecessary and break up the prose too much.
I disagree, the subheadings provide some structure for the data otherwise it will be just a mish-mash of bits of economic data. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I've reshuffled this section and trimmed out a few of the headings, I strongly believe the remaining subheading (Industry) remain. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I can work with that - can we link "Lipka Tartars"
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Most of the modern day population growth is based on internal migration and urbanization. - from where? and can it be reffed?
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Governance section - is the district naturally left- or right-leaning? How does it go right next to Belarus WRT politics?
trying to keep the article factual and refrain from dealing with local politics. Especially since "left-right" leanings have different connotations from country to country. Technically PiS/PO in Bialystok are both "right-leaning" parties in some aspects and "left-leaning" parties in other aspects. It's not cut-n-dry - better to just leave it out - there is some reference in the child article. Ajh1492 (talk) 23:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Is the unemployment rate particularly high (or low) for Poland? Is it a particularly impoverished area?
Updated. Ajh1492 (talk) 23:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Since the border with Belarus is also the eastern border of the European Union, as well as the Schengen Area the city is a center for trade in mainly from the east - how does this impact on the city WRT business - anything to add?
More cars with Belarus license plates in the parking lots of the city's malls. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
same goes for Culture section. Also needs to be some mention of notable architecture in this section. Maybe the bit about old buildings being destroyed can go here instead of beginning of history section.
Trying to give a flavor of the city by category - in case someone was interested in a particular type of cultural event or sight - within a reasonable length article with a link to the child article at the top. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I've tweaked the section lede to give a little better flow. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
None of the entities like Army Museum in Białystok should be italics (in their English form).
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
same goes for Popular culture references section - this could be rearranged into themes - eg expatriate themes together (synagogue, bakery and bagel would line up nicely together). Erm, o-kay, I get the rationale but I will ask for sourcing see if notable.
This section is a compromise. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
There aren't enough entries to group & categorize into themes. Plus I've deleted the video game reference - I agree it's not notable. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Fixed up. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
fix ref formatting - all accessdates should be the same - eg 31 January 2010 etc. Add as many authors, isbns and dates and parameters to refs as possible. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:30, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
In progress. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Finished and double checked. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't get a sense of the internal geography of the city reading this. can we add a few sentences on the Downtown (Central Business District) - is there one? Are there any neighborhoods with preserved architecture that are historical precincts or is it pretty minimal. Rich neighborhoods/poor neighborhoods. I am not looking for much but I think a few words on something here would be good.
Let me see what I can pull forward from the child articles. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Pulled some forward, but I added a photo from the main street (Lipowa) in the center of the city. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:46, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about delay, am just giving it another going over. We're nearly there. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

No troubles, would rather go over it with a fine-toothed comb since I'm trying to get the article towards FA status (no, I'm not in the wikicup). Ajh1492 (talk) 11:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Any more to add to Districts and Metropolitan Region section? Notable small villages/towns that are now suburbs? Any other info to give a basic idea of overview? Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I put a few more words in and two more photos to give a feel for the city. Ajh1492 (talk) 16:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I am a bit of a greenie - any other info to add about the nature reserves? Rare plants/animals there? Are they used for recreation etc.
I did put a fact in about the city being the 5th most "wooded" city in Poland. No rare plants or animals, just generic oak, hornbeam, spruce and hazel trees. I do note that one is a riparian forest and the other is a fragment of the original state of the Bialystok Upland. I also have some information on Dojlidy Lakes recreation area and a photo. Ajh1492 (talk) 13:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
That's good, just a tiny bit more gave the section more of a sense of completeness. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

One comment: the article is in category "Shtetls", but the article seems not to mention the word Shtetl. This should be corrected. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Technically a Shtetl was typically a small town with a large Jewish population in Central and Eastern Europe until The Holocaust, which brings into question of applying the usage to a city of 107,000. So the best solution might be to delete the category since there is significant discussion of the percentages in the History and Demographic sections of the article. None of the other major cities in Poland are in that category. [User:Ajh1492|Ajh1492]] (talk) 18:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
A potential solution, although I wonder how correct the definition is. Looking at the history, I see "At the end of the 19th century, the majority of the city's population was Jewish". Do you think that an article about History of Jews in Białystok could/should be created? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
It is intertwined into the History of Białystok article, better to keep the history together so the reader can see the progression of history - can't smash everything into the main article. Plus I can then map it back against the main History of Poland articles. History of Jews in Podlaskie would be a better article. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Exit summary and tips for FAC[edit]

Right then, on thinking about it I do think we are over the line WRT GA criteria. I tried to give this a bit of a shove towards FAC, and my comments above still stand - I think the other areas worth looking at are prehistory of the area, and some note of local areas of note in terms of the city's layout (important neighbourhoods etc.) - Given its huge Jewish population historically, I think this could be enlarged a little, and the pop culture section turned into prose somehow. The other item of info I was curious about was the politics - beign close to the East, was it more communist, or is it more right wing as a reaction...or neither? I am sure there must be some information (in polish) about the city's character and politics. anyway, 'good' job so far. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:41, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:
Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:
Citations to reliable sources, where required:
No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:


Pass or Fail:

Hi, i just wanted to mention that the photo of the market square is photoshopped. The ground is much more pixellated than the sky. Apparently someone thought a more dramatic sky would be appropriate. Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes with this comment but I think the photo is beneath Wikipedia standards. Thanks. Toanke (talk) 13:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Picking up the pieces and sorting before FAC[edit]

Okay - need to check too-close-paraphrasing of sources. Rewording is alot easier when one has a few different sources to go on. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Are there any specific sources you're referring to or in general?Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:55, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Marek, if you look at this sentence I changed and then at the reference it came from, you'll see the similar wording. It's worth checking web references. If someone can kick-start this process down the page. I am juggling about half a dozen tasks at the moment, and my main strength is copyediting, so checking some of the other web references and replacing with better book references would be a good first step. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Well, for that one, here's the duplicate detector [1] - there doesn't seem to be much if anything. The main thing is that the history story follows the bulleted list in the source, but I think that's fine, as long as the text is reworded (which it is) and made into prose. I'll check other web sources.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
I checked pretty much all the sources in the history section and they're fine. Spot checked some of the online English sources as well.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)