Talk:Subdivisions of Congress Poland

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Poland Mid‑importance

	Poland portal 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Maps Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Maps and Cartography 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.MapsWikipedia:WikiProject MapsTemplate:WikiProject MapsMaps articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.
	This article had an importance automatically assigned to it. Once it has been checked by a human, please remove `\|autoi=yes`.

Map needed

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Poland may be able to help!

Map request

We need administrative maps to fill in the period 1844-1867, when the Kingdom had only 5 governorates. A map for the period 1867-1893 would also be useful.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 15:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Something along the lines of these [1]?

There are also a few real nice ones on PL.WP. I'll have to find them again. Can someone help translate the PL.WP entry for this article, they have a LOT more detail then the EN.WP article.

Ajh1492 (talk) 19:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good find on the maps, perhaps we should email the website owners and ask them for a permission to use the images under a free license? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree with split at 1867

I've reverted the split and redirecting of Vistula land to Privislinsky Krai. The rationale is a follows:

Privislinsky Krai is a fork of the Vistula land; the articles should be merged (name is open to discussion)
Privislinsky Krai is an article about a state; this article and the content that was split from it is part of the series of articles on administrative division of former Polish states
Vistula land was redirected to Privislinsky Krai, without any content being transfered, when in fact it is a more developed article
finally, it is disputable whether we can claim that Privislinsky Krai should be classified as a state; officially the Congress Poland was never replaced by it, and there was never anything like an "administrative division of Privislinsky Krai"

--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Reforms of 1867 were put into place by the Tsar to remove all traces of Poland. It was a response to the January Uprisings.

WP:PL refers to it as Kraj Przywiślański

Technically, "Congress Poland" in an informal name for the Kingdom of Poland.

Privislinsky Krai isn't a fork of Vistula land, it's an edit/consolidation of post-1867 information into a timeline driven format with a table so it makes more sense and is readable.
Privislinsky Krai isn't a state, it is a Subdivision and is using the proper Former Subdivision infobox.
All the relevant post-1867 information from Vistula land was moved into Privislinsky Krai, any pre-1867 information was moved into Congress Poland.
Privislinsky Krai isn't a state, it's a subdivision. Why can't a subdivision be further subdivided?

Ajh1492 (talk) 22:56, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First, as the name suggest, Privislinsky Krai is a fork of the Vistula land. Those articles should be merged, and I am at this point not saying which name is more correct, but both names refer to the same phenomena. Second: per WP:V, please provide sources, per WP:V, that clearly state that Congress Poland indeed was replaced in 1867 by Privislinsky Krai.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To centralize the discussion, please direct any replies to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Poland#Privislinsky_Krai.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Administrative division of Congress Poland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070610121007/http://univ.gda.pl:80/~literat/glogre/0015.htm to http://univ.gda.pl/~literat/glogre/0015.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:26, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]