After my recent content expansion, I believe that the article is quite comprehensive. It was copy edited for the Good Article status earlier, if there are any English language issues remaining I'd appreciate your help - since I am not a native speaker I cannot easily address them. PS. I am aware of the large amount of red links; all represent notable subjects that need to be stubbed (most have articles at pl wikipedia). The amount of redness is a good illustration of our bias (non-English language subjects have a much poorer content coverage). Please note that per our policy red links are helpful and should not be removed (instead they should be "blued"). Self-nomination. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Comments (must be bird morning...)
1) http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~sarmatia/199/glass.html this is a book review, is it really a reliable source for "Polish culture was brutally suppressed during World War II by the country's occupiers, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, both of which were hostile to Polish culture and to the Polish people and sought their destruction." which I don't find a contentious piece of information but I'm sure there are persons who do. Probably better to go with a book/journal article here.
Hm, on your reply, this is a book review though, as I said. Surely one of the many many books on WWII give this data which would be less contentious than using a book review. It's not that I don't think it's reliable, I think it could be better so that when this article hits the main page, we don't have people complaining about the quality of the sources.
It'd be nice to see it backed up with reliable book sources if possible. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
2) re: http://www.projectinposterum.org/I'd point out to the author of the text: "Professor Piotr Wrobel holds the Konstanty Reynart Chair in Polish at the University of Toronto...". He seems pretty reliable, and if he published his text on the website of this NGO ("nonprofit, public benefit corporation established in 2004 in California with the following purpose: "The corporation is organized for the specific purpose of preserving and popularizing selected subjects of World War II history and its aftermath with a focus on Central and Eastern Europe"), I think it is pretty reliable, too.
3) re: http://www.polishresistance-ak.org/22%20Article.htm Publisher is a London Branch of the Polish Home Army Ex-Servicemen Association, author Grzegorz Ostasz in an academic (google search indicates he is a "assistant dean of the Marketing and Management Faculty of the Rzeszow Polytechnic" who "studied history at the Jagiellonian University in Cracow where he gained his PhD").
4) re: kasprzyk: that's harder, this is just a website, but estimates seem similar to the ones in Salmonowicz book. I've indicated that similar numbers can be found on p.213 of his book
6) re: I believe User:Mangostar is just converting long refs into short and adding it them to the references section (thanks)
7) re: Shirli Gilbert, Music in the Holocaust: Confronting Life in the Nazi Ghettos and Camps - indeed; I have not read the book, just used the info from its abstract / blurb
1) The review has the advantage of being accessible online. We can add book refs to that if needed, but I believe an academic review is a reliable source in itself.
3) Re: Ostasz - as I noted above, he studied history and got his PhD in it. Despite holding a position in the marketing dept (although this may be an error - Rzeszow page (also his homepage there) lists him as part of the Dept of Humanities, not Marketing), he is the author of several books about Polish history, and has given conference lectures on the subject (ex.here).
5) I've missed that one. It seems to be a website claiming to publish rare Polish documents from the past. I've removed it, Salmonowicz is much more reliable and he gives 10 times as high a number (and goes into much more detail, citing sources).
An academic book review is a great source for the article whose subject is a book but not on the events, covered in the book. If whatever facts the article claims are mentioned in the book, they should be referenced directly to the book, with page numbers, not to a review that says that they are in a book. --Irpen 21:16, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Feel free to provide specific page numbers from Piotrowski for that. For now, I have added another reference, to article by Professor Piotr Wrobel who wrote: "Poland's citizens were killed not only by the Germans. The Soviet occupation resembled German rule in many respects; indeed most scholars believe that "In the Soviet occupation zone conditions were only marginally less harsh than under the Germans." For their part, many Poles believe that the Soviet occupation was worse." --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:23, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm leaving out the remaining unstruck comments for other reviewers to decide for themselves. Unwatching this FAC for now (hope to find time to do a fuller review later) Ealdgyth - Talk 18:04, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Strong oppose. Article is not comprehensive. Cultural activities in Jewish ghettos isn't reflected at all. Holocaust is almost not mentioned. M0RD00R (talk) 16:31, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
You are incorrect. The holocaust was mentioned in the aftermath section; as was Jewish literature (i.e. early ban of it by the Germans). I have added the note that cultural activities were also carried out in ghettos, with refs to education, writers, theater and music in ghettos. My sources don't discuss the culture in Jewish ghettos in any detail, if you have any sources on that please expand the article, or even better, create a subarticle (details of Polish Jewish subculture in WWII are certainly notable, but please note this article is a general overview with focus on Polish culture, not Polish-Jewish culture).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
As far as I am concerned, Culture of Poland during WWII is as good as the current title; I'd not oppose the move (provided that relevant templates are updated). Jewish culture is not excluded; it is mentioned in several places. The article is just not structured to review Polish culture by (ethnic or otherwise) subcultures. PS. Again, I invite you to create an article on the Jewish culture in ghettos.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm afraid "Mentioned in several places" is not good enough for article to be comprehensive. And until it is not comprehensive it shouldn't promoted.M0RD00R (talk) 17:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment Use en dashes for page ranges in the references per WP:DASH. Gary King (talk) 16:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment the two vertical navboxes are very awkward, especially for users with narrower screens. Could someone make horizontal versions of these so that they can be included as footers instead? Mangostar (talk) 16:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for c/e refs in the Polish culture in WWII article; I am looking forward to seeing this part done :) Horizontal navboxes are a good idea, but templates are not my field of expertise.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment. Three issues here, two cosmetic and one content. For the cosmetic ones:
One, there are excessive redlinks in the "Underground Culture" section that should be removed.
Two, the "Culture in Exile" section should either be expanded or folded into another section; it's too small in its current state.
Now, the content one. I am concerned that the article deals more with the Nazi treatment of Polish cultural figures than actual Polish World War II culture. I raised this during when I reviewed the article for GA a few months ago, but it hasn't been fixed. The best and simplest way to address this is by splitting the "Underground Culture" section into subsections: one dealing with academia's plight, one about writers and authors, and one about Polish theater. It wouldn't completely solve the problem, but it would point the article into a more usable direction from which we can work to improve it. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
As I noted in my nomination, red links are to notable articles and thus the correct way to deal with them is to write the missing articles.
This section is short, but whether its too short to be a section is a matter of discussion. Certainly it can use more expansion in the future.
I disagree. Many names are mentioned, but majority of them where added AFTER the GA review. The names also serve to inform about individuals, but the texts focuses on the concepts (theatre, press, etc.). Each para is deveoted to one or more phenomena, so it would be hard to section it properly, and some of the resulting sections would be on the short side.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment: Do we need the long red-linked list of underground actors, really. For one it hinders readability, and also would not a qualifying statement "many" not suffice. Ceoilsláinte 13:36, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Oppose based on comprehensiveness and prose. This is a fascinating topic with a lot of potential, and while the article has done a good job of identifying many of the important aspects of the topic it does not go far enough in developing those aspects for an uniformed reader. I know nothing about Polish culture and have an American's basic idea of what happened in WWII. From this article I mostly understand what happened - that the Nazis tried to extinguish the culture and other people worked to keep it. What I don't have a good understanding of is what the culture actually was. I've listed below questions or comments about specific pieces of the article.
It might be a good idea to start the article with a brief explanation of what Polish culture was like before the German invasion. As it is, the article begins with an invasion and then starts talking about changes.
I am glad there will be a dedicated article, but I think it might help to summarize that information briefly here so that the reader can have a better idea of the magnitude of the changes. Karanacs (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I think there may also need to be a bit more background in the rest of the article too, as many of us are not very familiar with Polish cultures or some of the Nazi Germany issues. For example, I wasn't entirely sure when Germany invaded Poland (I just knew it was in the late 1930s), so it might be wise to explain the date, and I did not know what ""Nur für Deutsche" status" meant. In the next paragraph, I have never heard of AB-Aktion, Sonderaktion Krakau and the massacre of Lwow professors. I can go read all the wikilinks, but it might be better to place a bit more context in the article itself. That way people won't get discouraged and stop reading.
September 1939 added. Nur für Deutsche translated. Since the articles to Sonderaktion and so on are linked, I am not convinced we need to explain them there - this is, after all, what interlinks and subarticles are for. In our context it is enough to know that they are specific examples of anti-Polish actions.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I would also include a bit more explanation of why Germany was in such a rush to rid themselves of those who were intelligent.
Did many Poles speak German during this time period? As the Polish language was outlawed, I wondered if there was anything to take its place? Were people allowed to read books in German?
Well, Polish language was outlawed as the official language, but people still spoke it widely. Germans didn't had the power to make everyone change their language immediately. And yes, some Poles spoke German, although I could not cite a statistic for it ATM. Germany was a major Polish neighbor before the war, and during the war it was even more important... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd recommend a good copyedit by a native speaker. You might ask user:Risker to help - she does good work and often helps out with articles at FAC.
Were the 1500+ writers declared dangerous the authors of the prohibited books, or might they have written books not on the list? I'm a bit confused as to how the two pieces of that sentence fit together.
The section on "Under Soviet occupation" seems to say that there were institutions, such as the Lwow University that were still in existence, but the section on the Nazis implied that all of that was wiped out
Geography is my weak point, and, again I know minimal info about Polish history. I assumed the Soviets took over Poland after the Nazis were kicked out. More background would be helpful. Are there any images that show Poland subdivided into the areas where the Soviets held control and those where the Nazis had control? Karanacs (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the poster above who said that the effects on Jewish culture are glossed over in this article. The article touches on the destruction of the ethnic minorities in Poland but needs to go into a bit more detail. Discuss a bit about the minority groups that were virtually eliminated and what effect this had on the country.
I agree that many of the topics I've brought up could be detailed enough to have an entire subarticle. The problem is that those subarticles would then need to be summarized here. Even if there is not a subarticle, the information should still be summarized here. I really feel comprehensiveness is an issue here, which may very well mean consulting additional sources. Karanacs (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I think the lists of actors, musicians, and writers from the underground culture are too long. It's fine to pick out three or four of each, but if you want to mention 19! or more, create a list instead and reference that.
Because it is not good prose to have a sentence that says "These important musicians continued to play: " and then list 19 or more names. The article gives no information about what was important about those people. I think you could easily create a new article that is a list and capture that information, but it feels out of place in this article. Karanacs (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Why was it necessary to have underground postage stamps? Was the mail cancelled? What did they do with these postage stamps since they were likely not able to be used?
I guess Polish underground post article should be written, but it is outside the scope of this article. Briefly, Warsaw Uprising insurgents recreated various institutions of the Polish state; the stamps boosted morale and the post was actually delivered (inside insurgent held Warsaw).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
This type of brief detail should be included in the article; those of us with minimal knowledge of Polish history are left confused. Karanacs (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
The article says there was no underground radio station, yet there is a sound clip from a Polish insurgent radio station
The article says there was no underground radio station until the uprising started, and insurgents could protect it. Otherwise it would have been quickly discovered by German radio locators and destroyed by normal German patrols in occupied Poland.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Too much of the section on the underground culture reads like a bulleted list converted to prose. The article is missing the detail that would make the culture come to life.
The section Culture in exile is very short. What types of work were the Polish writers producing? Did their works make it back into Poland or were they popular in other parts of the world or help inform other parts of the world about the Polish troubles?
I agree it could be expanded, but my sources did not cover this in any detail. I believe it covers the besics needed for the FA, though.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Did the war effect the food supply and the types of dishes that people ate? Food is a large part of a culture as well, and if people were unable to make their native dishes that is worth a mention.
Interesting point. Yes, it did, same with clothes... everyday life was significantly affected. Again, this was not covered in my sources, but I will see if I can find anything on that.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
"nearly three-quarters of the Polish people have emphasized the importance of World War II to the Polish national identity" - how? This sentence doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
At the risk of undoing edits someone probably told you to make in the lead, I did some editing there to make it flow better. Can you state in the lead what parts of culture were particularly valuable and vulnerable? Music? Literature? Recreation?
What is museal?
State who Hans Frank was.
The article reads almost like a list of Nazi acts without the bullet points. I think each portion of Polish culture should include a bit more analyzation, and the beginning of each should include a topic sentence. By beginning with direct detail it reads more list-like. It might help to consider it a story, with each tier getting a bit worse.
The paragraph about Polish book stores is quite confusing. I think you need to take care here to use more detail in careful sentences. Remember, most people reading this are unfamiliar with Polish culture: what is important to Poles and what is not.
More to come - still reading --Moni3 (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The images throughout the article sandwich the text. They need to be smaller and spaced widely enough so that the article doesn't appear between the images.
What is "crash Sovietization"?
The lists of names in the Underground culture section are overwhelming. Since most of them are red-linked, why are they there?
Starting at Underground culture, the article loses cohesion. I think the article needs a few copy edits to focus on making that section neater, and the section after that either merged into another or expanded.
The entire article needs a copy edit for smoothing phrases, integrating parenthetical statements, and pointing out which Polish elements of culture need brief explanations.
I think this is a very interesting article, but not yet ready for FA status. I hope to see it again in the future. Best of luck. --Moni3 (talk) 22:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.