Talk:Partitions of Poland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Improper naming[edit]

It's wrong to call it "Partitions of Poland". It should be called "Partitions of Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth", because it represents the partitions of the commonwealth, not any Poland-only divisions of land. 151.225.149.106 (talk) 00:49, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe the reliable sources typically call it "partitions of Poland" Rjensen (talk) 08:46, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
No, various reliable sources call it both but "Partitions of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth" is more historically accurate and politically neutral, therefore it should be changed. Sources calling it "Partitions of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth": [1][2][3][3] ...and many more here: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22partitions+of+the+Polish-lithuanian+commonwealth%22#q=%22partitions+of+the+Polish-lithuanian+commonwealth%22&tbm=bks Kaukutis talk 03:55, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Google Book search
  1. "partitions of the Polish-lithuanian commonwealth" About 85 results
  2. "partitions of Poland" About 30,800 results

Poeticbent talk 04:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

See old discussion at Talk:Partitions_of_Poland/Archive_2#Requested_move. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:53, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Restricting access[edit]

Since this article has become the aim of repeated vandalism by unregistered user with IP 60.231.70.79 (it's not his first involvement in vandalism, see his talk page: talk), I suggest that the access to editing this article would be restricted to registered users only. Kaukutis (talk) comment added 00:26, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Chill out Kaukutis (talk · contribs). People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Read the Google Book search from above. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 06:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Poland vs Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth[edit]

If partitioning affected only Poland why Lithuania did not remain independent and found itself a part of Russia? ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roman Frankiv (talkcontribs) 18:01, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Inaccessibility to the Color Blind[edit]

I appreciate that it is not easy to find a map for every article where it is needed, let alone a quality map. The map entitled "Elimination" in this article is actually, a quality map, but it has a major deficiency: its choice of colors.

This map needs eight colors in order to convey the history of the partitions. And ideally, those eight should actually be based upon just three base colors, with three shades of color A for Prussia's annexations, three shades of color B for Russia's annexations, and two shades of Color C for Austria's annexations. Unfortunately, the three base colors chosen here are blue, green and turquoise. Given that turquoise is clearly a shade of blue (and some shades of turquoise are arguably shades of green), this renders the maps difficult for even a person with full color sight to immediately take in. And for some persons with certain types of color blindness, it would be literally impossible to make out.

It would be nice if we could have a map that used red or orange instead of the turquoise. That still would not solve everyone's problems, but it would increase the accessibility for at least some folks. Unschool 05:15, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks like the maps below were produced by only one user with notable consistency of color. However, I can try to alter them in Photoshop to conform with your ideas using pastel shades of blue for Prussia, pastel shades of green for Austria and pastel red for Russia. I guess, Poland would be in shades of sandy yellow perhaps. Doing this will probably take some time. Thanks for the suggestion anyway. Poeticbent talk 05:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 Done. Poeticbent talk 16:15, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
OMG, I can't believe you did that--and so fast! Thank you very much; it's 100% better! Unschool 02:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Summary table clarity — with or without flags[edit]

I added flag icons to the summary table earlier today (with r735390520), as I found it a rather complex table and pretty hard to parse. Use of flag icons can be controversial on Wikipedia sometimes, so it didn't surprise me all that much that someone reverted them — in this case Poeticbent with r735402520 and a mention of WP:ICONDECORATION.

To my mind, the flags are justifiable as that policy says Icons ... should ... serve as visual cues that aid the reader's comprehension, but that's clearly a subjective call. Rather than bothering with a 3RR dance on something that's really not that big a deal either way, in the scheme of thing, I figure I should ask editors' opinions here to see if there's a clear consensus either way. (Obviously, no consensus would mean the article should stay as-is — the status quo always wins.)

Without flags:

Cumulative division of the Commonwealth territory[1]
Partition To Austria To Prussia To Russia Total annexed Total remaining
Area  % Area  % Area  % Area  % Area  %
1772 81,900 km2 (31,600 sq mi) 11.17% 36,300 km2 (14,000 sq mi) 4.94% 93,000 km2 (36,000 sq mi) 12.68% 211,200 km2 (81,500 sq mi) 28.79% 522,300 km2 (201,700 sq mi) 71.20%
1793 57,100 km2 (22,000 sq mi) 7.78% 250,200 km2 (96,600 sq mi) 34.11% 307,300 km2 (118,600 sq mi) 41.89% 215,000 km2 (83,000 sq mi) 29.31%
1795 47,000 km2 (18,000 sq mi) 6.40% 48,000 km2 (19,000 sq mi) 6.55% 120,000 km2 (46,000 sq mi) 16.36% 215,000 km2 (83,000 sq mi) 29.31%
None
0%
Total 128,900 km2 (49,800 sq mi) 14.57% 141,400 km2 (54,600 sq mi) 19.27% 463,200 km2 (178,800 sq mi) 66.16% 733,500 km2 (283,200 sq mi) 100%

With flags:

Cumulative division of the Commonwealth territory[1]
Partition To Austria Austria To Prussia Kingdom of Prussia To Russia Russia Total annexed Total remaining
Area  % Area  % Area  % Area  % Area  %
1772 81,900 km2 (31,600 sq mi) 11.17% 36,300 km2 (14,000 sq mi) 4.94% 93,000 km2 (36,000 sq mi) 12.68% 211,200 km2 (81,500 sq mi) 28.79% 522,300 km2 (201,700 sq mi) 71.20%
1793 57,100 km2 (22,000 sq mi) 7.78% 250,200 km2 (96,600 sq mi) 34.11% 307,300 km2 (118,600 sq mi) 41.89% 215,000 km2 (83,000 sq mi) 29.31%
1795 47,000 km2 (18,000 sq mi) 6.40% 48,000 km2 (19,000 sq mi) 6.55% 120,000 km2 (46,000 sq mi) 16.36% 215,000 km2 (83,000 sq mi) 29.31%
None
0%
Total 128,900 km2 (49,800 sq mi) 14.57% 141,400 km2 (54,600 sq mi) 19.27% 463,200 km2 (178,800 sq mi) 66.16% 733,500 km2 (283,200 sq mi) 100%

Thoughts anyone? — OwenBlacker (Talk) 13:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Looks too much like the Rio 2016 medal count, while in fact the partitions were a dark chapter of history that undoubtedly inspired the further European wars of territorial acquisitions. Poeticbent talk 15:38, 20 August 2016 (UTC)