Talk:Władysław Sikorski's death controversy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Władysław Sikorski's death controversy has been listed as one of the History 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 Alternative Views (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative Views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the 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.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated GA-Class)
MILHIST 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.
GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Gibraltar (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gibraltar, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gibraltar and related articles 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 quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
 
GibraltarpediA project (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon
Bienvenido, آداب عرض, स्वागत, ברוך בואך, Benvido, Benvenuto, Benvinguts, Bienvenue, Bonvenon, Willkommen, Fàilte, Ongi etorri, Tere tulemast, Tervetuloa, Üdvözlet, Välkomna, Velkommen, vítáme vás, Witamy, Καλώς Ορίσατε, Добро пожаловать, Salvē, 歡迎, 欢迎, 歓迎, 환영합니다, ยินดีต้อนรับ, Dobrodošli, أهلاً وسهلاً, Вітаємо, Welkom, सुस्वागतम, Добредојдовте, Croeso, Добре дошли, Вітаем
This article is part of GibraltarpediA and the World's first Wikipedia City. Please visit the project page, See what we are doing, What we've done and help us!
WikiProject icon
 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.
 
WikiProject Poland (Rated GA-class, Low-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.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject United Kingdom (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Death (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Soldiers, An obituary for Geneva[edit]

Such title is quoted in Rolf Hochhuth.Xx236 (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Decrypting.... failed. I have no idea what the above comment is about. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
You have written about Soldiers, but the full title is like above [1].Xx236 (talk) 09:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Ah, thanks. Feel free to add it to the article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 19:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Concerns over neutrality and rigour of analysis[edit]

I don't want to review the article as such at this time, but in my opinon this article shows bias in the form of support for the conspiracy theories, rather than neutral analysis of their probability. IE:

  • It spends little time laying out results of formal investigation(s) but a lot of time looking into several conspiracy theories
  • it states the existence of the conspiracy theories, but states no rebuttals
  • several quoted sources(eg Nicholas Atkin; Michael Biddiss; Frank Tallett (8 March 2011). The Wiley-Blackwell Dictionary of Modern European History Since 1789. John Wiley & Sons. p. 389. ISBN 978-1-4051-8922-4. Retrieved 8 November 2012.) mention both the conspiracy theories but also that they are unlikely to be true/that the cause is probably natural, yet in the article only reference to the conspiracy theory is given, not to the mention that the writer believes they are probably untrue

I think this needs to be addressed before this can be considered a Good Article. At present it reads biased towards support for the truth of the conspiracy theories due to selective weight on pro-conspiracy sources, and of selective use of content from those sources. -PocklingtonDan (talk) 09:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

@User:PocklingtonDan: thank you for the comments. The article is about the conspiracy theories, and the lead as well as the "Investigation and controversy" section state clearly that the incident is officially classified as an accident. I am not sure where more debunking should be added, but if you think you see such a place, I'd like to invite you to add such a claim to the article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved for lack of consensus. This is a very close discussion, and a difficult call. WP:CONSISTENCY does seem to favor a "Death of" title, but opposers make the good point that most "Death of" articles do not involve deaths where assassination conspiracy theories are widely discussed. I count seven participants favoring a rename, four against, and one objecting to a merge of the topics, while stating the opinion that "the existing articles are fine where they are", which also suggests opposition to the rename. bd2412 T 02:38, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Władysław Sikorski's death controversyDeath of Władysław Sikorski – Having the article be about Sikorski's death - perhaps merging the article about the crash into this article (the reverse of a previously proposed merge) - would make it a more comprehensive and informative article. The Bushranger One ping only 00:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Object to merge. It's quite sneaky - if merge A to B was just rejected, trying to circumvent consensus by suggesting merge B to A. No. We have an article about the controversy, and an article about the plane crash. Two separate notable concepts. Now, if anyone would like to create a parent article to them under proposed name, by copying and compiling the content from those two, that would be fine. But the existing articles are fine where they are.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Try assuming some good faith with the nominator. The article should be renamed and the article should be merged, but it appears that these unnecessary forks are all designed to maximise the number of GAs possible. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Try to assume good faith with the authors. Władysław Sikorski's death was believed in Poland to be an assasination since 1943, there are hundreds of texts about it, two movies.Xx236 (talk) 14:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Rename per BR. Technically all deaths have a deal of controversy to them, and it's POV pushing too. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 15:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
The death is controversial according to British governments who keeps some documents classified, Allegedly till 2041.[2]Xx236 (talk) 07:31, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


There are plenty of conspiration theories regarding Sikorski's death and several internationally known texts, eg. a Soldiers (play) by Rolf Hochhuth.
I believe that Władysław Sikorski assasination conspiracy theories and Władysław Sikorski death IPN investigation deserve to be discussed separately. Xx236 (talk) 14:16, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Been through all this before. Look at the size of the JFK article and how therefore such forks are justified. These Sikorski articles cover much the same material in each case and can easily be merged. But this a rename discussion. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose move I think this is by far the better description of the topic. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:46, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Support This would be more consistent with our many "Death of" articles. Like Rushton2010, I have no strong opinion on the merge. At a glance, it seems logical, but if there was just no consensus for it, perhaps this isn't the time. --BDD (talk) 20:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Support For consistency. I don't think there's a real need to use the word 'controversy' in the title. No need for a merger as per @Xx236:. --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 11:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose move because the mian argumentation Pro is a consistency of inconsistent matters. see also above this article shows bias in the form of support for the conspiracy theories.Xx236 (talk) 07:31, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose, the controversies and debate about the subject makes the title logical.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:36, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose this move. I don't believe this move will serve to clarify matters. What needs to happen is a division of the subject into two articles: one, attesting only the known clear facts, at "Death of..."; and the other, detailing reliably sourced theories and conjectures regarding the possible conspirators in the death, at "Sikorski death controversy". This proposal only makes these two branches less distinct, not more so. Xoloz (talk) 19:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Tadeusz Kobylinski[edit]

Kobylinski left Poland for Ancona in Italy. After service in the BRitish Army, he died in London in 1961. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 15:25, 18 June 2014 (UTC)