Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 174: Line 174:
::The article has been deleted and now restored, and I would appreciate some uninvolved people to weigh in at [[Talk:Advice_Polack]] on the reliability of the sources on the article that are being contested. I understand that NIE for example is considered to have a significant bias at an editorial level, but have yet to see any rational argument that their article about this meme is not reliable. Also other sources, such as an interview with TVN24, are being contested and removed. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">[[User:John Vandenberg|John Vandenberg]] <sup>'''([[User talk:John Vandenberg|chat]])'''</sup></span> 05:07, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
::The article has been deleted and now restored, and I would appreciate some uninvolved people to weigh in at [[Talk:Advice_Polack]] on the reliability of the sources on the article that are being contested. I understand that NIE for example is considered to have a significant bias at an editorial level, but have yet to see any rational argument that their article about this meme is not reliable. Also other sources, such as an interview with TVN24, are being contested and removed. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">[[User:John Vandenberg|John Vandenberg]] <sup>'''([[User talk:John Vandenberg|chat]])'''</sup></span> 05:07, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
:::NIE is not just "considered to have a significant bias at an editorial level", it's considered a gutter tabloid. In the particular article you are trying to use for Wikipedia they are basically trolling the poor guy; presenting the story as "this is popular culture and the world we live in, hence newsworthy", while the whole time trying to get him to say one of those "Advice Polack" things for laughs. Sound familiar? The interview with TVN24 is not being contested on RS grounds but rather on BLP grounds. There is a living person involved here after all, he is the subject of this meme, and his life has already been negatively affected by it. I do plan on putting the article up for AfD sometime soon.<span style="color:Blue">[[User:Volunteer Marek|Volunteer ]]</span><span style="color:Orange">[[User talk:Volunteer Marek|Marek]]</span> 05:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
:::NIE is not just "considered to have a significant bias at an editorial level", it's considered a gutter tabloid. In the particular article you are trying to use for Wikipedia they are basically trolling the poor guy; presenting the story as "this is popular culture and the world we live in, hence newsworthy", while the whole time trying to get him to say one of those "Advice Polack" things for laughs. Sound familiar? The interview with TVN24 is not being contested on RS grounds but rather on BLP grounds. There is a living person involved here after all, he is the subject of this meme, and his life has already been negatively affected by it. I do plan on putting the article up for AfD sometime soon.<span style="color:Blue">[[User:Volunteer Marek|Volunteer ]]</span><span style="color:Orange">[[User talk:Volunteer Marek|Marek]]</span> 05:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
::::It would be interesting to see if this article would be notable enough for pl wiki, alas I don't have time to spend on this subject myself. I think it is probably notable, but care must be taken to remove BLP parts (which, to be frank, is not much - just avoid giving the guy's name in the article, it's not that important anyway). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]&#124;[[User talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</font>]]</sub> 00:35, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


== Imperial Russian people by occupation ==
== Imperial Russian people by occupation ==

Revision as of 00:35, 21 December 2012

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPoland Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage WPT


GLADYSZOW

I have imported a very clear cancellation of this village, in the Gorlice County for Klein catalog. See the page "Postmarks of Poland, 1850-1919". Despite searches, I see no trace of it in Articles in Wikipedia English. For Google, the village is now in Novy Sacz county. Finally, I found it in Polish and Dutch (only!).

Gładyszów where?

Jacquesverlaeken (talk) 21:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you are requesting the translation of pl:Gładyszów? to Gładyszów? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I added the image to commonscat:

.Staszek Lem (talk) 16:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stołowe Mountains!

Please see the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Table_Mountains#Table.3F — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sylwia Ufnalska (talkcontribs) 06:06, November 16, 2012 (UTC)

Good practice in referencing (seeking consensus)

Per Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Avoiding_clutter: "Inline references can significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window and can be extremely difficult and confusing. There are three methods that avoid clutter in the edit window: list-defined references, short citations or parenthetical references. (As with other citation formats, articles should not undergo large scale conversion between formats without consensus to do so.)" I'd like to introduce list-defined references as a standard for Polish-themed articles, to make it more friendly to edit (less code -> closer to WYSWIWYG). Per WP:CITEVAR recommendation I'd like to ask editors interested in Poland-themed article for input on this. While LDR add a little code to the total size of the article, it amounts to only 10% or so of the total article size, so load time should not be significantly affected (nobody should notice a 10% change; also, section edit load time will shorter anyway...), and editing experience should become much friendlier. Here's an example of what LDR means in practice: [1]. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:50, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I'm not against this sort of additional formatting. However, I work with inline citations a lot more often when adding new material because of convenience. By the same token, when sources are book-long and truly reliable I prefer using Template:Sfn rather than WP:LDR because it allows me to mark different pages in the same book with no effort. By comparison, in bigger articles for example, LDR's tend to obscure the content of ext. source behind a criptic "name" which means nothing, making scrutiny more difficult... I have to go to the bottom of the article to see what it's worth, or use Ctrl+F (Find on this Page) function of Internet Explorer to locate the reference hidden below main copy. It's the pain in the ass sometimes, however, the only real concern for me, is always the actual quality of external source cited. Poeticbent talk 05:48, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another case study: if you think LDR format is better, please consider restoring my edit at University of Warsaw: [2]. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Lech Wałęsa ... better known in English as Lech Walesa" in lede, again

Again an editor, a different one this time, has targeted Lech Wałęsa for anglicisation here. Why do they do this to the former President of Poland but not to Charlotte Brontë or Renée Zellweger? In ictu oculi (talk) 13:15, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This idiocy has already been reverted, thanks for reporting. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 19:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor submitted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Szczecin pasty to AFC; however, we're not sure if this meets WP:Notability because none of the reviewers read Polish. Can someone check this out, maybe add a proper footnote or two so this can be published? Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • The "pasty" translation is wrong, however, Polish Pasztecik deserves an article on its own. It is a variety of spring roll, wrapped in a wheat flour crêpe, but softer... not as crispy as the Chinese chūn juǎn. The city of Szczecin though is not a part of it, and could only be mentioned in passing as one of varieties. — Pasztecik in Polish Wikipedia is a redirect, but you can find its recipie in endless Google results.[3]. Poeticbent talk 23:34, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, actually you're wrong. "Pasztecik szczeciński" is a much different thing from the Polish "pasztecik". It doesn't come from Poland, but from the Soviet Union and is a very strange and interesting cultural phenomenon. It does have its own article on Polish Wikipedia: [4], and is clearly notable because of being: 1) such strange thing from the viewpoint of the history of culture (Soviet influence in the formerly German Polish city etc.; an example of fastfood in communist states, like zapiekanka, but even more interesting because of its military provenience) 2) a unique example of creating new Polish traditions on the formerly German territories - and they totally lack their own regional things ,espescially culinary things 3) being commonly known in Pomerania and even listed on the official state "traditional products" list - which means that it is officially protected by European Union law 4) being really good. Laforgue (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC) I've expanded it somewhat. It would be interesting to find more information about its (Russian?) roots. The original dish is probably a form of pirozhki, but I'm not sure. The pasztecik machines are a bit misty to me, the seem to be produced in Ukraine... Laforgue (talk) 08:54, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
pl:Pasztecik szczeciński seems notable, it has articles on pl and de wikis. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 19:28, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't found any source supporting alleged Wiesbaden paszteciki. Maybe the local name is different.Xx236 (talk) 11:47, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The machine was designed to produce Pirozhki. Xx236 (talk) 11:55, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rating added, and no, escort agency is not the same thing as a brothel. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't written about escort agency outside Poland but about pl:Agencja towarzyska Nazwy agencja towarzyska, w eufemistycznym znaczeniu, używają w Polsce, domy publiczne i inne – legalne lub nie – przedsięwzięcia oferujące usługi prostytutek which means that operating brothels is prohibited but they work under cover-names. Xx236 (talk) 07:13, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Polish minority was allowed to use bilingual street signs

Poles in Sapotskin consist the majority in the town. Is it possible to change the above phrase to Polish majority was allowed to use bilingual street signs?Xx236 (talk) 09:11, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zakerzonia

I just became aware of the article and the category Category:Zakerzonia which is a redlink but nevertheless is populated by various villages in eastern Poland. I haven't checked all articles so categorized, but those I did check didn't mention Zakerzonia (except for the category itself). I have reverted some of those. The categorization was part of an effort by 87.210.232.221 who also added Ukrainian names to multiple Polish villages. I've reverted some of those (villages bordering Belarus, not Ukraine, for example), but I'm not knowledgeable enough to tell whether his edits should all be reverted or wether some are worth keeping. A review by an expert would be helpful. Huon (talk) 18:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to article in Polish Wikipedia and one of its external sources,[5] Zakerzonia is a fairly new term, created by OUN-UPA in World War II, and at present, it is used mostly for political actions by Ukrainian nationalists who demand that Poland give it up. I also noticed that 87.210.232.221 added Ukrainian names to cities and towns of southern Poland which have never had any sizable Ukrainian minority (or any shared history) including Piwniczna-Zdrój and Krynica-Zdrój. Please keep your eyes open. Poeticbent talk 19:20, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would certainly help if you could cite sources of impeccable neutrality rather than Polish ones, especially paper articles. It's other people's business what they do with the term Zakerzonia, but since the corresponding article is a part of the English Wikipedia, this topic is supposed to be neutral and there's nothing wrong with making an inventory of places belonging to the area. As for Piwniczna-Zdrój area that has to do nothing with Ukrainians according to you, I can only wonder how all those Ukrainians managed to be deported from that vicinity without ever having lived there. Finally, the very word північна (piwniczna) is the feminine singular form of the Ukrainian adjective meaning northern. The corresponding Polish word is północna. Why on earth would Poles use Ukrainian words as Polish place names? 87.210.232.221 (talk) 20:39, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You call those pepople Ukrainians, they call themselves Lemkos. Xx236 (talk) 12:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Poeticbent's source is a newspaper article reporting on an Ukrainian demonstration, a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards. It's definitely more neutral than the organizations of deported Ukrainians. It doesn't mention Zakerzonia, though. If you want to claim that the likes of Piwniczna-Zdrój had a significant Ukrainian past that justifies inclusion of the Ukrainian name in the article, and that it was (or is) commonly associated with Zakerzonia, please present truly reliable sources that explicitly say so. I haven't seen such a source for any of your edits I checked. Without such a source, there are issues of undue weight for the Ukrainian names, and categories per WP:CAT must be supported by the article text, which in turn must be supported by reliable sources. Huon (talk) 21:25, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Zakerzonia literally means "Behind the Curzon Line" (Za-Kerzon-ia) which consists of pre-WWII Polish lands east to the joint Soviet-Nazi demarcation line. In September 1939, after the military defeat of Poland, the Soviet Union annexed all territories east of the Curzon Line. The name does not need to be specifically mentioned by the press because everybody knows what's going on with the Ukrainian Far-right politics these days. Poeticbent talk 22:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Minority living in Podlachia was classified as Belarus in PRL. There exists however a border region between Belarus and Ukrainian ethnicities and some former Belarus people declared to be Ukrainian after 1989.Xx236 (talk) 09:37, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Piwniczna Zdrój and Krynica-Zdrój may belong to Lemkivshchyna. There is however unclear if Lemkos want to be Ukrainian nationalists. Lemko painter Nikifor was born in Krynica. Xx236 (talk) 09:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can define Category:Zakerzonia and we'll define Category:Kresy and Category:South-Western Kresy (or something). I'm not sure if the majority of readers will be happy.Xx236 (talk) 12:47, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Both articles inform about Polish resistance in Belarus. They should be probably included in the scope of the WikiProject Poland.Xx236 (talk) 07:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to tag them with WPPOLAND or the Polish taskforce for milhist. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:15, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is this name sourced? If yes - the article should be rewritten, because it starts with The Jagiellonian dynasty.Xx236 (talk) 10:03, 6 December 2012 (UTC) There is however the Jagiellonian University.Xx236 (talk) 10:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, "Jagiellonian" is the far more common usage. Daniel Stone also uses this form in his (widely hailed) seminal work on Poland-Lithuania, e.g.,"Zygmunt August's death in 1572 concluded the reign of the Jagiellonian dynasty that united Poland and Lithuania in 1386." I'm up to my eyeballs but would support a request for rename if filed at the article. VєсrumЬаTALK 00:59, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article lacks sources since 2006. References include a Lithuanian forum and Jagiellonian University Observatory. Xx236 (talk) 07:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
True, not a very good showing for the the dynasty responsible for the birth of Poland-Lithuania. Might be a nice small project for after the holidays to fix up refs... :-) I'll dig out my copy of Stone. I think we could rename the article without any bru-ha-ha, but I'll post there. VєсrumЬаTALK 14:37, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quick google books search suggests Jagiellonian is 2x as popular as Jagiellon (~900 to ~450). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:15, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Xx236 (talk) 13:22, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good call. An article tagged with the ongoing NPOV conflict should not be OTD. I changed it, feel free to monitor Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/December 7 and see if there is any further discussion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:14, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedian in Residence at the Józef Piłsudski Institute of America, NY

Please see the announcement at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Wikipedian_in_Residence_at_the_J.C3.B3zef_Pi.C5.82sudski_Institute_of_America.2C_NY. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:30, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Polish-speaking enthnos of Balts

Check this. It seems that new ethnic groups may be found not only in jungles of Borneo :-) Staszek Lem (talk) 21:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm beginning to think that this is a bit of a hoax.VolunteerMarek 08:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Restoring Polandball

As some of you may remember, an article on Polandball, created by Russavia (talk · contribs), was deleted a while back following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polandball. I have not participated in that AfD, as IIRC I was still under some form of interaction ban with Russavia, but while I found his judgement in creating this article questionable, I do think that it is an a notable Internet meme, and I might have voted keep. Anyway, I think it may be worth discussing whether we should not have this article restored. Note it exists on simple:Polandball and even on pl wiki (pl:Polandball); there is also a commons:Category:Polandball, which I think is overpopulated (as someone seems to be using Commons as their personal host for Polandball images...), but that's a different issue. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 21:54, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A long time ago I nominated the Russian article for deletion, but the content of this article (translated on a million wikipedias now) has much improved and I now believe Polandball is at least as notable as Advice Polack. Would love to hear more opinions from native Polish netizens about either article and the sources they are using. John Vandenberg (chat) 15:04, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the other one is particularly notable either. Just more internet stupidity, which, according to sources, already ruined the life of one person. Why should Wikipedia take part in these kinds of fucked up endeavors, especially given the pretty blatant BLP issues involved? Honestly, John, you really should know better.VolunteerMarek 20:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Becaus Wikipedia is not censored, even when it is ethical for it to consider that. (see also Kidnapping_of_David_Rohde#Role_of_Wikipedia). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:39, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how the David Rohde media blackout story is relevant. If anything it suggests that sound editorial judgement and common sense and decency are more important than justifying inclusion of any ol' junk on "not censored" grounds.Volunteer Marek 05:16, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is internet stupidity, but thats popular culture. Like it or not, it is part of the world we live in.
The article has been deleted and now restored, and I would appreciate some uninvolved people to weigh in at Talk:Advice_Polack on the reliability of the sources on the article that are being contested. I understand that NIE for example is considered to have a significant bias at an editorial level, but have yet to see any rational argument that their article about this meme is not reliable. Also other sources, such as an interview with TVN24, are being contested and removed. John Vandenberg (chat) 05:07, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
NIE is not just "considered to have a significant bias at an editorial level", it's considered a gutter tabloid. In the particular article you are trying to use for Wikipedia they are basically trolling the poor guy; presenting the story as "this is popular culture and the world we live in, hence newsworthy", while the whole time trying to get him to say one of those "Advice Polack" things for laughs. Sound familiar? The interview with TVN24 is not being contested on RS grounds but rather on BLP grounds. There is a living person involved here after all, he is the subject of this meme, and his life has already been negatively affected by it. I do plan on putting the article up for AfD sometime soon.Volunteer Marek 05:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would be interesting to see if this article would be notable enough for pl wiki, alas I don't have time to spend on this subject myself. I think it is probably notable, but care must be taken to remove BLP parts (which, to be frank, is not much - just avoid giving the guy's name in the article, it's not that important anyway). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:35, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial Russian people by occupation

There is a porposal to merge Category:Imperial Russian people by occupation to Category:Russian people by occupation. Since much of Poland was within the Russian Empire, and many Poles in the arts gravitated to Moscow or St. Petersburg to advance their careers and worked within the general culture of the Russian Empire, this has the potential to effect how we categorize many articles related to Poland. Your participation in the CfD will be helpful.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:20, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One of the arguments that has been used to oppose the (sensible) merger proposal is that Poles born in Congress Poland would somehow be happier being called "Imperial Russians" instead of simply "Russians". I doubt many would be happy with either, so I would urge a wider audience to consider these issues. cwmacdougall 06:26, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is HERE. cwmacdougall 06:26, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]