Portal talk:Poland

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
portals 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
.PortalsWikipedia:WikiProject PortalsTemplate:WikiProject PortalsPortals articles
 FPo This portal has been rated as FPo-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This portal has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's
List of Portals
Note icon

  • This portal is manually maintained by Kpalion. Please contact these user(s) when you plan to make significant changes.
  • This portal's subpages have been checked by an editor, and are needed.
Please
automated editing software, and seek consensus before making major changes. Learn how to update the maintenance information here
. (March 2019)
Featured portalThe Poland Portal is a featured portal, which means it has been identified as one of the best portals on Wikipedia. If you see a way this portal can be updated or improved without compromising previous work, please feel free to contribute.
Portal milestones
DateProcessResult
August 9, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
August 31, 2009Featured portal candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured portal

List of portal subpages

Portal revamp discussion

I finished a complete revamp of the previously inactive Poland Portal. My main goals were to make it more eye-pleasing, more in line with Wikipedia's current portal standards and reliant as little as possible on manual updating.

I also tried to adjust the portal to the fact the virtually all of quality Poland-related articles we currently have are historical or biographical articles. Hence From Polish history instead of Selected article, and Selected biography are most prominently displayed. These should be chosen from among articles that are at least GA class. Selected location is supposed to provide a counter-balance to the history stuff, at the inevitable expense of quality: this section may feature articles that are at least C class; articles that do not consist mainly of a history section should be preferred. The Selected image sections should show either featured or quality images by English Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons standards. All these sections have randomized content, so no manual updating is necessary.

Did you know and Poland now sections will need occasional (at least once a month) manual updating. Hooks for the DYK section may be copied from the Main Page DYK archive (always five newest Poland-related hooks). Links to articles explaining recent, on-going and up-coming events seem to me to be more appropriate for an encyclopedic portal than a Wikinews feed. — Kpalion(talk) 19:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A good list of articles to add can be found in those categories:
--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Header banner

Poeticbent, I appreciate your interest in improving the portal but I can't see how a picture of a particular city, even as great one as Kraków, can be any more "neutral" or "representative" than an unspecific landscape which shows Poland as a mostly flat, agricultural and Catholic country which it, frankly, is. What's more you replaced (an edited version of) a quality image with a low-resolution panorama with the Skeletor and Łęg smokestacks in it (well, at least the baloon isn't there). But, since I prefer to compromise than to edit-war, how about randomizing the banner, just like the selected stuff? I could find some more (2-3) panos and rotate them. What do you think? — Kpalion(talk) 18:34, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could we have many banners, selected at random like the articles? I like both and I can think of some others... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:46, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • First of all, please be assured that I appreciate the effort Kpalion put into creating a derivative version of an open field with a distant church… as if Poland was somewhere in Saskatchewan, maybe. I went to see who created the image (I always do) and so, I was aware from the start that the decision to replace the rustic flatland could disappoint him somehow, but I did if for the greater good nevertheless. The image of Kraków features – not only the skyline of the Old Town – but also the Vistula river... we can hardly do better than that for a cross-county national symbol of Poland. On top of that, with the proper <div> formatting, the new image fits well even on a wide monitor like mine, whereas, the lonely church took up less than 50% of the available space leaving gaping holes on both sides. I see no reason to rotate the images considering sometimes their very limited widths, which would result in a visual mess. We can ask others for their feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland and if your idea is more popular than mine, I’ll go along with it of course. --Poeticbent talk 20:01, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I had to chose, I think I'd stick with Kraków. Poland may be geographically mostly flat, but it is also highly urbanized. And I recall some time ago a discussion in The Economist on how Eastern Europe is stereotypically illustrated as rural and backwards. Let's try to avoid that framing... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:26, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like I'm outvoted here. But it's funny how one of you associates "my" picture with Canada, one of the most developed countries in the world, and the other one says it makes Poland look like a backwards country. Well, at least user 藏骨殿 from Chinese Wikipedia liked it. — Kpalion(talk) 07:34, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Using article alerts

I wonder if we could use Wikipedia:WikiProject_Poland#Article_news to automate some tasks, such as adding new DYKs to the Portal DYK list? I was also wondering about dividing DYKs into two sections: new ones and a selection from a past archive. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the bot is not working now anyway. For now, I have no problem updating DYK manually once a month. But generally, yours is a neat idea. If we could have a bot that not only searches for Poland-related hooks on the Main Page DYK, but also copies them and pastes on top of Portal:Poland/Did you know; and at the same time, removes the oldest hook from there and pastes it on top of Portal:Poland/Did you know/archive – then it would be great. It would almost entirely eliminate the need of manual intervention. I don't have the know-how to develop such a bot though. Are you able to create it?
As for using old hooks, I believe that DYK on the portal should serve the same function as on the Main Page, that is, to advertize new articles. If there ever is a shortage of new Poland-related articles, then we may resort to using archived DYK hooks, by so far this is not the case. — Kpalion(talk) 10:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfrtunately I don't have the know how to create such a bot, but we could ask at
WP:VPT. As a portal caretaker, could you ask? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:34, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
First let's wait until ArticleAlertbot is fixed. — Kpalion(talk) 16:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of bot-alternating sections in Portal:Poland which make it attractive to revisit and easy to maintain, instead of adding new DYKs manually (per above), I would rather suggest a new page called More selected DYKs; or, 'Poland-related archive', in place of the current 'Archive – Start a new article' (leading here). The new section would alternate, similar to the already existing: articles, biographies, pictures and locations. For as long as our DYKs constantly change, their 'freshness' would be of much lesser importance in my view, thus maintaining similar feeling of surprise. – If you were to do that, please make a note of all the genuine Poland-related DYK 'leads' from the Main Page (over thirty of them at present) listed at User talk:Poeticbent, with pictures already there for your convenience. As of now, there are inadequacies at Portal:Poland/Did you know/archive caused by manual override, for example: May 2009 subsec features the lead from 30 April 2009,[1] and so on. --Poeticbent talk 15:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not exactly clear to me, what is the problem that you are trying to fix? I mean, what is it that you don't like about the current DYK process? — Kpalion(talk) 16:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Take as an example another subsection at Portal:Poland/Did you know/archive: i.e. June 2009. I just noticed that that subsec features a 'made up' lead from May 13 (DYK featured on May 13, not in June, and not as lead),[2] which can be perceived as somewhat self-serving. Why to invent Poland-related DYK leads and put them under wrong dates, when there are plenty of real ones for constant alternating? --Poeticbent talk 17:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting more and more confused. What do you mean by "real" and "made-up" entries? What do you mean by "wrong dates"? And more fundamentally: what do you think is the purpose of having a DYK section on the portal? — Kpalion(talk) 17:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry that you're feeling confused. — What I mean by a "real" leading DYK is a DYK that appeared on the Main Page as a leading DYK... meaning, it is recorded in Wikipedia archives as the actual "real" leading DYK illustrated with an image approved by the committee. In other words, I would prefer that you refrained from selecting your own leads for the Poland Portal with the pictures selected by you, and your own arbitrary dates which don't match the actual dates of Main Page publication. --Poeticbent talk 18:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I see your point now, but apparently we have different views on what DYK is. Your view is that Main Page DYK hooks are somehow official and unchangeable. My view is that we could just as well create completely new hooks for the portal, and that re-using those from the Main Page, sometimes with minor modifications, is just a convenience. And I see no reason why the portal DYK archive should list the hooks under the dates when they appeared on the Main Page and not the dates when they appeared on the portal. — Kpalion(talk) 18:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I’m glad to see that our two different points of view regarding Poland-related DYKs begin to sound clearer now. For me, the Main Page hooks are the only DYKs declared official by the Wikipedia DYK community – meaning, they have been checked and double-checked against the exacting guidelines of Wikipedia official policy of no original research and no personal point of view, with special attention given to good references, proper formatting, good English and so on. That’s why I’d like to see them as unchangeable. You’re right about that. – The Main Page hooks for me are a record of what has already been achieved in terms of presenting Poland-related subjects to the general (i.e. cross-national) readership. In a sense, they’re the only DYKs formally confirmed as written without bias. Btw, I’d love to see what Piotrus thinks about this. --Poeticbent talk 19:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Polish Requiem

Polish Requiem is an article on music, DYK 1 March, but may be of interest here as well. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:54, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for nominating. Articles featured in the DYK section on the main page are featured on this portal's DYK in the following month, so this article will be included in the April DYK selection. — Kpalion(talk) 21:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The DYK about Polish Requiem (selection 2) might be changed to
... that composer Krzysztof Penderecki (pictured) dedicated the Libera me, Domine of his Polish Requiem to the victims of Katyn?

Poznań Town Hall

Hi
I have a problem with the User:Radomil, he changes, wherever possible a picture of the Poznań Town Hall into a bad quality one and partially copyrighted made by himself (File:Ratusz Poznań Woźna.jpg) with the trash in the foreground. Thank you for your consideration. BurgererSF (talk) 07:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Helo needed in the article 'Nazi concentration camps'

We can stamp out 'Polish camp' controversy forever. If we'll change Nazi into nazi German it will be clearer who's responsible for suffering and death of miillions. Please, support the change. Have your say and spread the word. It's high time to underline it was Nazi Germany responsible for that. Discuss the move of the article 'Nazi concentration camps' here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nazi_concentration_camps --Rejedef (talk) 19:51, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please help re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Paloma_Lokus

Hello, I've tried, for a month, to get my article about Paloma Lokus, a Polish-American singer who participates in the current "The Voice of Poland", accepted. The subject meets notability guidelines, especially that for living persons, as well as "the golden rule". My article is well-cited by reliable 3rd party, independent sources such as Eska.pl, I'm getting no respect or understanding from these three editors, please help if you can, thank you! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Paloma_Lokus Respect, Reddoggzz (talk) 03:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice from the Portals WikiProject

WikiProject Portals is back!

The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.

As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.

There are

design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals. So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt
.

Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.

And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.

From your friendly neighborhood

Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   07:42, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Did you know updated

I have updated the Did you know section of the portal. The DYK section on the main portal page was static, just listing the same DYK content, with no new content ever being displayed. I moved content from Portal:Poland/Did you know/archive to subpages of Portal:Poland/Did you know to correct this, so now the DYK content shuffles on the main portal page when the page is reloaded/purged. North America1000 10:46, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Northamerica1000, let's move the discussion here. I'm pasting here what you wrote on your talk page with my reply below. — Kpalion(talk) 10:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"The DYK section on the main portal page was static, just listing the same dyk content. This has been one of the reasons why people have been supporting deletion of portals at MfD. I have been moving the archived content to subpages of Portal:Poland/Did you know, so now the content shuffles on the main portal page when the page is reloaded/purged. North America1000 10:31, 17 May 2019 (UTC)"[reply]
My idea for the DYK section here so far has been to advertise those Poland-related articles that had been most recently created or improved. Until a year ago I was manually harvesting Main Page DYK hooks for anything Poland related. Then I decided to use the new tool to do the same automatically. Now, the issue is that the number of new Poland-related hooks is quite low – the current rate is about 3 per month. This means that even if you harvest hooks from the past two months, it's still not enough for shuffling.
So, I don't hate your idea to shuffle older hooks. But I would still like to have some mechanism for adding new hooks into the mix with as little manual intervention as possible. I'm not sure what that would be, though, so perhaps you will have some ideas? — Kpalion(talk) 10:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Kpalion: It's manual, but an easy way to find new hooks is to search Recent additions, with a search such as this. At MfD, a common complaint is that the DYK content harvested using automation is not always actually aligned with a portal's thesis, but nevertheless being harvested because it has a particular word in the hook. People have literally been lamblasting these types of errors at MfD, stating that it is ridiculous, pathetic, a joke, worthless, etc. As stated before, it has been a variable at MfD for the deletion of several portals. Another common variable at MfD is that static pages that do not show new content are not fulfilling the purposes of portals; static pages have been used many times now as a rationale for deletion. North America1000 20:42, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Northamerica1000, So, just to make sure I understand, it's better to rotate recycled 10-year-old hooks than have a static selection of a few recent ones? I thought DYK in portals should serve the same purpose as it does on the Main Page, that is, bring attention to the best recent changes. How does reusing old hooks serve this purpose? And if there's a different purpose, then what is it? — Kpalion(talk) 07:59, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to delete all portals

The discussion is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal to delete Portal space. Voceditenore (talk) 15:16, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Łaznowska Wola

Hello, I am planning to translate the German article about Łaznowska Wola into English. Is there a certain pattern I should use? What should I think of? I am the main author of the German article. --10:19, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Here is now my translation. I will still work a bit on it. --UtaH (talk) 17:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
UtaH, this is a talk page to discuss improvements to page Portal:Poland, this isn't a general place to discuss things related to Poland and Polish language (see banner at the top of the page). You can read up on how to translate articles from another language to English at Help:Translation. —⁠andrybak (talk) 15:19, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no Polish food portal?

Just this. Seems like a crazy omission: am I missing something?

Iskandar323 (talk) 13:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

🤮🤮🤮 Synotia (talk) 06:26, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of councilors at Warsaw City Council

Hi, the article Warsaw City Council currently contains six lists of the council members, which I wonder if provide a reader with any meaningful information. Also overall majority of listed persons do not have individual articles, and in my opinion would fail to meet notability guidelines for creating them. I would be graetful for any opinion from more experienced editors. Chears!

P.S. Alternatively, maybe creating separete article-list titled "List of Warsaw City Council members", where councilors of all terms could be listed is an option.-- Antoni12345 (talk) 19:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal_talk:Poland&oldid=1218616093"