Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland/Archive 13

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Several Polish military personnel have been sent for deletion as unsourced. file:Eugeniusz Horbaczewski 1.jpg , file:Eugeniusz Horbaczewski.jpg , file:Henryk Pietrzak.jpg , file:Henryk Pietrzak niesiony.jpg , file:Stanislaw Skalski 1.jpg , file:Witold Urbanowicz.jpg , file:Wladyslaw Anders2.jpg -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 02:54, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Sourced to

Sikorski Museum. Could use a link, and if they are crown copyright, them may be PD. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}

15:51, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

You might want to update the templates with a better source description -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 22:00, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd appreciate if people would pay more attention to Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Reviews. Thanks! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:22, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look at a few of them later this week or this weekend. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 18:09, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Stupid question, but ja nie mam sił for it... Talk:Wrocław#Silesia. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:30, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Cześć, is anyone willing to take the lead in getting Dolovis' edit reverted? The book should have been closed with the last of the

Just honest curiosity; why can't you remove it yourself?  Volunteer Marek  15:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Volunteer Marek, for the same reasons Prokonsul Piotrus couldn't change it: for example because no mechanism such as the

Talk:Dominik Halmosi

RM exists for painless democratic input to change a line in a MOS page.

So the situation continues that on the one hand we have 4 million articles (title and text body) using European names where appropriate, on the other we have editors on 1 page Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) effectively saying that the users who created/edited those 4 million articles (titles and text body) are wrong. In my own case every WP:Project Poland bio I have made for example is wrong: names like "Andrzej Węgierski" are always "Wegerski" in the "general" sources that User:Dolovis' current top edit demands, just as "Walesa" "Vaclav" "Francois" etc. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:40, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I know Dolovis is being disruptive in this area, but it was my impression good old RM is good for dealing with that. Is there any new discussion about diacritics at WP:NCUE we should know about? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Piotrus, actually Dolovis, the editor who reverted you, was subsequently banned for behaviour on exactly this subject - locking "English names" on Slovak BLPs. No, there's no immediate new discussion at WP:NCUE, and I don't think there even can be since

WP:ENGLISH

is evidently at odds with the bulk of creators and editors busy churning out additions to our 4 million articles.

Actually if simply the word "follow the general usage in reliable sources" was deleted from

WP:ENGLISH that would solve the problem. But restoring your edit the banned user reverted would be even better. In ictu oculi (talk

) 03:54, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

And yes your impression good old RM is good for dealing with that is okay for Polish articles because they show up on WP:POLAND alerts. But WP:POLAND editors won't know about

Talk:Mărgărita Miller Verghy (closed), and the French/Spanish projects are basically dead. Ironically that sometimes means there's more effective opposition to French people's names on en.wp than Polish/Czech/Croat names. In ictu oculi (talk

) 03:58, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

These are all excellent redirects, but according to the actual meaning of the Polish article title, I think, the new entry should rather be named Nazi plunder of occupied Poland's cultural heritage to match. Poeticbent talk 23:47, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Better simpler:

talk

) 03:06, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

In fact,

talk

) 03:08, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I see the article was moved by Staszek to

I think plunder (as in war, #7.) is even more descriptive. Poeticbent talk 16:41, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Ummm, 7 is about loot, not plunder. So are you arguing for loot or plunder? If loot, that I think we should also start a discussion about moving

Nazi looting at the Talk:Nazi plunder. PS. The relevant parent article created by me as a stub a while back is Art theft and looting during World War II. It's worth nothing that another parent article, Looted art, uses the word loot rather than plunder, too. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}

17:01, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear enough apparently. Plunder is the word to be used, because it relates specifically to war (as per definition quoted at the beginning). Conversely, if you look at the definition of loot during war, it leads back to "plunder or pillage" (#7.) thus confirming the choice of the word plunder as more relevant. Poeticbent talk 18:00, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, your quote actually shows that "to loot a nation's art treasures" is a usage standard enough to be given as an example. Hence in our context the word "loot" is adequate. Eg see US govt docs use the term "loot" in the context of cultural treasures.

talk

) 02:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

On a related note, does anybody have access to [1]? Without full access, I am afraid we will have to remove this, as the visible snippet does not seem to verify the claim made in the article. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:37, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Please add few words about his pro-Sosabowski activities.Xx236 (talk) 07:36, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

It might be worthwhile, especially if you have some specific source which discusses it, but I want to note that the controversy with Browning is not even mentioned in the Sosabowski article itself. Volunteer Marek  17:19, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

This is an English Wikipedia, isn't it? (beware - Sarcasm) Stanisław Sosabowski doesn't inform about the period between Arnhem battle and end of war. pressure from the British diplomacy is mentioned later without any explanation. Xx236 (talk) 07:20, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

"The original text After the battle Sosabowski was unjustly made a scapegoat for the failure of Operation Market Garden, following a critical evaluation by English Lt. Gen. Frederick Browning. He was accused of criticizing Field Marshal Montgomery and the Polish General Staff was forced to remove him as the commanding officer of his brigade on 27 December 1944. He was made the commander of guard troops and in July 1948 he was demobilised. has been removed. I have restoret it, but sources are needed.Xx236 (talk) 07:36, 4 October 2012 (UTC) The editor who removed the paragraph is blocked now.Xx236 (talk) 07:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC) I have finally restored the vandalized version, no sources still.Xx236 (talk) 07:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC) Tony Hibbert (British Army officer) should be mentioned in Stanisław Sosabowski.Xx236 (talk) 07:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if this is a reliable source [2] but it does give pretty good info on what happened. Main page here. Volunteer Marek  13:43, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Btw, Hibbert, who's 90+ years old has a blog [3] though a good chunk of it is under construction. Volunteer Marek  13:47, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Name paragraph: The settlement was previously referred to as Okopy Svyatoyi Triytsi (Polish: Okopy Świętej Trójcy) - which name is to be preferred?Xx236 (talk) 07:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I think the name is fine as it is. Redirect

Okopy Świętej Trójcy exists. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}

21:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I mean not the name of the article, but the quoted above statement from "Name" paragraph. The langauage of constructors was rather Polish. The Ukrainian name isn't sourced. Ukrainian Wikipedia says "Замок, відомий в польській науковій літературі як Окопи Святої Трійці", so there are no sources of Ukrainian name. Xx236 (talk) 08:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I tagged the entire article as unreferenced, it's not like there are sources for the Polish name, either. Add sources, move unref claims to talk if you want. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:22, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Some aspects of history of Ternopil are presented from radical Ukrainian POV.Xx236 (talk) 09:11, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Have I read this article before? If not, this is the second about-a-place article I've read that has been overly consumed with being sacked, rampaged, destroyed,... VєсrumЬа ►TALK 02:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

the former partners from the Riga treaty - Soviet Ukraine also participated in the Riga treaty.Xx236 (talk) 11:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

File:Michał Wołodyjowski.jpg is going to be deleted, unless someone can help prove it is pre-1923 (See commons:commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Images_by_User:Bodiak). Alternatively, perhaps somebody can find and upload another free picture of the "little knight"? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 21:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Um, wouldn't it be PD since it's been more than 70 years since the author's death (1938+70=2008)?  Volunteer Marek  01:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes it would be PD. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 02:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh I see, for PD in US it must have been published pre 1923. Volunteer Marek  02:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I just learned about this recently. The commons:Commons:Hirtle chart is very helpful. Also note that images should have a PD tag for US and a PD tag for source country. See my recent uploads like File:Kniaziowa Kurcewiczowa - Piotr Stachiewicz.png for an idea how to properly tag such an image. (although one tag in practice suffices for most cases, until you get to a GA+ review, or some copyright cleanup expert takes interest...). PS. And yes, that basically means that a picture can be PD in Poland, but not in US, and thus cannot be hosted on Commons - this is the source for the fact that public domain in Poland is in the better shape than in US, and for the importance of the 2019 date in the future of copyright debates (1923+95). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:25, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Needs post-machine-translation cleanup.

It's tagged accordingly. Sigh. So much to do, so little time... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 23:26, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Yep. I only managed to tag it.

talk

) 23:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

One additional problem is that these may be machine translations from copyrighted sources - in which case the text would be a copyvio and would also have to be rewritten and paraphrased (in addition to being cleaned up). I'm thinking just cut it down to something more manageable.VolunteerMarek 04:25, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

The article includes Lithuanian name (unsourced) but the language of the Duchy was Ruthenian. BTW he acted in the Kingdom after the Union of Lublin. Xx236 (talk) 08:14, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

The article usues mostly German sources, contains errors or outdated informations. Some controversial statements are unsourced. There exists Kashubian language discussing partially the same facts.Xx236 (talk) 06:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I removed some of the more blatant OR but in terms of sources, sourced text is sourced text, regardless of the nationality of the author. What matters is if it is reliable. Two things that would need to be done here is 1) to get the actual sources and double check the info (translating it from German) and 2) include other sources to ensure NPOV balance. Normally I would try to do that but I don't have much time currently. Volunteer Marek  18:44, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Please see [4] (sorry, Polish only at this point). Polish NGO that is trying to get his work released to public domain is looking for relatives, they only have a week (court order) to carry out this detective work. If you know anything about the Gołębiewski, Poniatowski or Majdaniuk families from Lublin region shortly after WWII, and can't read Polish, I'll be happy to translate more. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:57, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

At that time Polish, Latin and Ruthenian were used, certainly not Lithuanian, so quoting the Lithuanian name in the lead is POV.Xx236 (talk) 08:21, 10 October 2012 (UTC) I have replaced the dead link to the Polish text. Was it really the original and only one language of the Union? An English translation is needed.Xx236 (talk) 08:32, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Lithuanian statutes were written in Ruthenian, but Lithuanian must also have been used, if the May 3 Constitution, over 200 years later, was still translated into Lithuanian. Written Lithuanian existed from at least 1547. The 1588 Lithuanian statutes (and later Grand Duchy documents) were still written in Ruthenian, so Polish could not have been the "only one language" of the Union. Orczar (talk) 14:05, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Please find the Ruthenian text of the Union treaty or a source it existed. Please comment which names of the Union should be listed in the lead - either historical ones (Polish, Ruthenian) or modern (Polish, Ukrainina, Belarus, Lithuanian).Xx236 (talk) 06:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

What about Jewish languages? They existed long before the Union.Xx236 (talk) 06:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Both texts should be hosted at wikisource. I am surprised pl wikisource does not have the text, it is public domain. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:46, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

The leads of both article are probably too long and quote several sources. They should rather summarize the articles

WP:LEAD .Xx236 (talk

) 06:38, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

The length of both leads is fine. CM3 is an A-class article, and the sources in lead were deemed necessary, as the claim in question is controversial and caused several talk discussions. For the Union, they probably should be removed, yes. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:01, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Why an A-class article contains a Lithuanian name in the lead but not Belarus, Ukrainian or Jewish?

Four sources stating the same - aren't they too many? Xx236 (talk) 08:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Apparently not, as the issue(s) was ignored by GA, A and FA-class reviewers. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

It's a former FA. Xx236 (talk) 06:36, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

That's ancient history, much more recently this article has been improved to modern GA/A-class standards (which go way way beyond the old FA ones). I cannot make this article FA as I lack the required English prose skills (hint to anyone with such skills reading this...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:11, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I've compiled some information at commons:User:Piotrus/PolishCopyright. Feel free to add, improve and discuss! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:47, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

That's really useful, thanks Piotrus. Perhaps we should put a link to that on our project page? Volunteer Marek  18:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure, that's a good idea. I hope people will help refine it, I am sure the text can be made more clear. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, nobody else seems willing to contribute, so I am going to add it to our main page. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:12, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Please contribute.Xx236 (talk) 08:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• There was a discussion about the name (liberation) of the article in 2011, no results.
• The rapes consist one aspect of the Soviet presence in Poland, the other ones being Soviet martial war, executions, mass arrests and deportations, feeding of Soviet Army, delivering materials, state and criminal robbery.Xx236 (talk) 07:37, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Lots of content to be written, yes. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:24, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I have trouble confirming it ever existed, through I doubt it is a hoax. As I note on

http://www.dworypalace.travel.pl/?p=1699 Xx236 (talk) 06:23, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

http://dolny-slask.org.pl/entity.action?view=&id=512329 Xx236 (talk) 06:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

• Dworypalace is incorrect (that's in the other Gawrony village), but [5] seems to be the one. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

A couple of references in German: [6], [7]. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:39, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, could you translate the relevant parts? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The first link which has photos of the building in the painting states the current building was built in 1906. The other link is basically the original German the English article was written from. Note this is a Schloß, a manor house (stately home) not a castle (fortification). In neither of the text is it clear if a castle was ever on the knight's estate. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:58, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The first link seems to incorrectly attribute the location of the village/castle to Wołów County. If the article is literal on the translation of the second source, than it is a copyvio and should be deleted :( Also, I think we should move the article to Gawrony Palace, and replace instances of word castle with palace. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 19:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Władysław Raginis, an article that your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 06:08, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I have started Polish Exodus from Eastern Europe in

Sounds reasonable. I'd recommend aiming for

T:TDYK when you are done. It's easy, just ensure above-stub size and enough inline refs. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}

15:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• Please find more sources per
  ISBN 1403932204
  .

Poeticbent talk 15:52, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• The title can be descriptive and new, but in this case, it is likely to be seen as controversial, and without references, renamed (or used as a rationale for article's deletion). So yes, please provide as many references as possible. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:27, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I have moved the article to

Flight and expulsion of Poles from the USSR.Xx236 (talk

) 12:58, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I posted your request to pl wiki: pl:Wikipedia:Kawiarenka/Ogólne#Pro.C5.9Bba_o_zdj.C4.99cie_.28Warszawa.29. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:23, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

• Here you are: Commons:Category:Keret House Panek (talk) 17:20, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Xx236 (talk) 07:42, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that 70% of the content of

From the Talk page: Guderian ordering killing of POW's (?!?!) This seems contradictory to absolutely everything written about Guderian by scholars and historians. Given that the source cited is a newspaper, as opposed to a history book or scholarly journal article, I am removing it until better sources can be found. 130.111.252.52

Are there any sources supporting the story? Battle of Wizna quotes Williamson. pl:Władysław Raginis: W polskiej historiografii istnieje niepotwierdzony przekaz. Xx236 (talk) 12:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I replied at Talk:Władysław_Raginis#Guderian_ordering_killing_of_POW.27s_.28.3F.21.3F.21.29. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

No former discussion.Xx236 (talk) 08:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC) The article needs sources - due to East Prussia's strategic position that allegedly undermined the defense of Poland.[citation needed] (alleged !).Xx236 (talk) 08:11, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

It's C-class. It's expected to have errors, and be incomplete. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:00, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Anna Frodesiak#zmiana nazwy

Please respond to this editor if you can. Many thanks.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

The article should be checked. I have just corrected several basic errors - 1989 elections weren't free, the name of the daily is Gazeta Polska Codziennie, Gazeta Polska being a weekly. I'm not sure but Gazeta Polska Codziennie is probably a tabloid. Father Rydzyk's media aren't mentioned.Xx236 (talk) 08:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

It's C-class. It's expected to have errors, and be incomplete. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Xx236 (talk) 08:53, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

"Of the 73182 articles in this project 14633 or 20.0 % are marked for cleanup, with 18641 issues in total." No need to report specific tags here... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:01, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

There has been tremendous growth in this page, and it is now about 40,000kbytes long. It has pictures and significant research that I think can do well if it was translated. Can anyone translate or start the request for this page to be translated into Polish? I'm confident that a lot of people would love to read this page.--Votevotevote2012 (talk) 21:40, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Anybody can figure out the Polish name for this article? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:31, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

• Check it out. I'm surprised though, how little has been done so far. Poeticbent talk 19:04, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I am done rewriting this article, now in our B-class review queue. I've also written

The movie and the TV series were produced by the same team. Why have you removed the series?Xx236 (talk) 09:00, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Because this claim was unreferenced. This is B-class article now, and GA in the future, please don't add unreferenced information.

Wikipedia:Verifiability not truth. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}

18:55, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I had some time on my hands so I translated the Polish-Soviet War Battle of Białystok from PL:WP and added the correct Infobox. Feel free to add any tidbits you might have with citations. Ajh1492 (talk) 21:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, but I don't like the language. During the battle, among others used several armored trainsXx236 (talk) 12:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

It was more of a question asking if anyone happen to have some additional sources with further details that they could add before I finished cleaning up the article. Ajh1492 (talk) 16:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

And I'm asking if the article is written in standard English. is located in the center of the street - which street? I don't see any reason to support a mess.Xx236 (talk) 07:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

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!).

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

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)

I added the image to commonscat: .

talk

) 16:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Gładyszów.

Per

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

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)

Here's another case study: if you think LDR format is better, please consider restoring my edit at University of Warsaw: [9]. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

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)

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

An editor submitted

• 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.[10]. Poeticbent talk
  23:34, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
  • 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: [11], 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
    talk
    ) 08:54, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

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)

I haven't found any source supporting alleged Wiesbaden paszteciki. Maybe the local name is different.Xx236 (talk) 11:47, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

The machine was designed to produce Pirozhki. Xx236 (talk) 11:55, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

• The article lacks WikiProject Poland rating.
• It says operating brothels is prohibited. pl:Agencja towarzyska is a brothel, isn't it? There are plenty of them.Xx236 (talk) 11:35, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

According to article in Polish Wikipedia and one of its external sources,[12] 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)

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)

You call those pepople Ukrainians, they call themselves Lemkos. Xx236 (talk) 12:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

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)

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

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)

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)

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)

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. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 00:59, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

The article lacks sources since 2006. References include a Lithuanian forum and Jagiellonian University Observatory. Xx236 (talk) 07:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

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. VєсrumЬа ►TALK 14:37, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

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)

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

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)

As some of you may remember, an article on

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

The only printed source is a 2010 article in "Gazeta Wyborcza". How many other "GW" articles have given birth to en Wikipedia articles? Do you know any? A recent subject in GW is the critic of Polish Wikipedia.

The "Przegląd" article is misquoted, it's about several memes and the alleged (sub)title is a title of a 10-lines paragraph.

I don't know anything about the notability of the quoted internet portals, I don't read them.

Writing about bashing dump Polacks with giant swastika - a notable subject for WikiProjectPoland. Let's discuss also memes written in public toilets with pictures and ststistics.Xx236 (talk) 10:43, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

If [13] is notable, why only Polandball? Let's write about all 8 local memes.Xx236 (talk) 10:49, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments appreciated. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Just sayin' :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:13, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Wesołych Świąt Bożego Narodzenia to all of you. :) - Darwinek (talk) 16:50, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Wesołych Świąt oraz Szczęśliwego Nowego Roku! Poeticbent talk 17:51, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Hej, Wesołych Świąt, Szczęśliwego Nowego Roku i wszelkiej pomyślności dla wszystkich.Volunteer Marek 19:55, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

This banner is erroneus. We know only the Royal Banner of Sigismund III [14]. Stanisław II August Poniatowski has no Order of the Golden Fleece. Mathiasrex (talk) 09:24, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

There's a fresh dispute arising at the

A bit amusing, I wonder if he knows that Endecja parties supported creation of Israel and provided Jewish organization with military and training. Had experience with the user before. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 00:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Endecja wasn't able to provide Jewish organization with military and training under Sanacja (1926-1939). Xx236 (talk) 06:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Effective 1/1/2013 there are (as usual) a lot of changes regarding the village names in Poland. See e.g. this article. It would be good if we could use some bot to facilitate the changes. - Darwinek (talk) 19:01, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Let's wait for a bit first. The number is still growing, from 149 (mentioned above) to 158, so they need to make up their mind some time, and give us a document to go by. [15] Poeticbent talk 00:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I removed SOME of the weasel wording from

The other school is Kozminski University.Xx236 (talk) 13:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Please take into account search results, and follow the going standard, meaning, reliable third-party sources preferably in the English web literature (as oppose to attempts at translation by Polish webmasters only). Google maps are also a good place to start, because they are practical and user-friendly. But most importantly, use the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) guideline. It says in section Use English: If a native name is more often used in English sources than a corresponding traditional English name, then use the native name." Poeticbent talk 18:19, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

From an article talk page of

• Sienkiewicza St., Kielce, Southern Poland - www.travelpod.com
• Sienkiewicza Street - Kielce Poland - www.mapofpoland.net
• Sienkiewicza St., Kielce - www.tripadvisor.ca
• Sienkiewicza Street, Poland - www.booking.com
• Kielce Sienkiewicza Street - www.grhotels.com

I think, the original title was better represented. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 16:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Ulica Sienkiewicza means Sienkiewicz's street, street of Sienkiewicz. It is like

talk

) 17:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

My answer also concerns google maps. These all use brainless conversion "<cosik tamo> XXXXiego" -> "XXXXiego <some thingy>" and surely this has nothing to do with "is more often used in English sources", because bot translators are not "sources" (or are they? God save wikipedia, and its WP:RS then).

The general advice about titles does to take into acoount native language grammar intricacies, and they must be resolved by native speakers, whoi know how their language is mangled in English. Therefore I posted the question to this board for considertation. It is not incidentally that

PS. I'd like to notice I dont' favor any convention. It is quite possible that, eg, squares and bridges are to be named "XXXski Square", but streets are named "XXXskiego Street". But there must be consistency.

I prefer Sienkiewicz Street to Sienkiewicza Street. In some case, original name may be better -

Ujazdów Avenue, hmmm). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}

18:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

The English term seems to come form Polish. However, its grammatical form (espescially grammatical number) is dubious for me. Perhaps "fladry barrier" or "fladry line" is a better name for this article. "Fladry barrier" seems to be common in Google results.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.24.102.71 (talk • contribs) 04:38, January 13, 2013

I never heard anything similar in Polish, other than Flądra, Polish for flounder. I see pl:Fladry, but... shrug. If there is no English name for this, leave it. We don't invent names; encyclopedias educate, don't invent. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

If anything, this article should be renamed into fladra. Such a term exists in the Polish language, but I doubt if it is encyclopedic. Tymek (talk) 22:27, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

The article

Those of you who have commented at the AfD, thank you. I also wanted to ask, what language is the film? IMDb says English, but I have a hard time believing that because there is a lack of English-language media coverage about this film. Can someone verify the film's spoken language from one of the Polish-language sources? Thanks, Erik (talk | contribs) 17:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

As you can see in the official Polish trailer here, the film is in English (with Polish subtitles in Poland). I guess the decision to shoot in English was made in order to reach a wider audience worldwide, but it doesn't seem to have helped much. — Kpalion^(talk) 19:25, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

That works for me! Have restored the language field. Erik (talk | contribs) 19:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

(e/c) If you need secondary sources, here's what dziennik.pl (I hope it qualifies as a reliable source) wrote: Nieudolny, budzący nawet nie śmiech, lecz politowanie produkt, w którym marnują się dobrzy aktorzy, osobliwie zmuszeni do mówienia po angielsku, choć anglojęzyczny z urodzenia jest jedynie grający Marca F. Muray Abraham ("A poorly executed product, provoking not even laughter, but only sympathy, where good actors are wasted, bizarrely made to speak English, even though the only native English speaker there was F. Muray Abraham playing Marco" - my translation). — Kpalion^(talk) 19:42, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

This is perhaps the worst review this movie has ever received... others' are a bit better. It is a Polish-Italian co-production. I have no idea if it's really that bad, considering some 10,000 extras and 3,000 horses. Poeticbent talk 00:15, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I haven't seen the movie either, but the trailer is enough to convince me that it fails miserably at least on historical accuracy, a minimum of which I would expect from an epic historical movie. — Kpalion^(talk) 07:00, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

The new article, and possible DYK nomination,

Thank you for this nice article, although it is not eligible for DYK due to numerous unreferenced paragraphs. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 18:38, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I am aware of it, thats why I'm hoping somebody will help out with it. I will also be working on the article, but my time as always is so limited. Tymek (talk) 19:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Xx236 (talk) 09:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

A Jewish-Polish charity. Any thoughts on it notability? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Never heard of it. Did you ask at

WP:Judaism? - Darwinek (talk

) 18:47, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

This charity is not associated with Poland anymore, but it has global recognition. The "Kollel Polin" supported Polish immigrants, and carried the name of the miracle worker Rabbi Meir. JFW | T@lk 22:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

There is an incredibly large amount of information about the

Yishuv haYashan

.

Kolel Polin in particular is still quite influential (controversially) in modern-day Chareidi politics, particularly in Jerusalem, where it is at the center of an ongoing feud between

Kanaim regarding Batei Warsaw

(article created by the same COI editor as this one).

There are two major problems here, though:

1. This article was written as a blatant advertisement, as discussed a few months go at the COI noticeboard
2. The article's name is unjust; all of the dozen or so kolelim are formally called Kupath Rabbi Meir Baal Haness: "the fund of Rabbi Meir Baal haNes" is nothing more than a glorified name for "charity for the Jews of Israel".

הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) (formerly R——bo) 23:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

• Notable. But only in name related to Poland. Debresser (talk) 06:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Why do you say that? It played quite an important part in the history of the Jews in Poland, as did the collecting branches of all kolelim in their respective homeland domains (Hibat Yerushalayim in Galicia; Shomrei haHomot in Hungary; etc.). הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) (formerly R——bo) 13:49, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

It's probably one of the two most famous RMBH (Rabbi Meier Ba'al Haness) charities, along with "Shomrei HaChomos". -- Avi (talk) 07:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, perhaps some of you could add the notability and importance claims to the article's lead? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

• Keep because it is
  WP:NOTABLE but regrettably as is often the case when it first gets posted it is not in its best form. It can be improved. As with all subjects connected with Haredi Judaism sources are hard to come by on the web since they spurn the Internet. Be patient. Thank you, IZAK (talk
  ) 03:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)