Talk:Józef Zajączek
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Regent
What is the right translation of Polish namiestnik? This is a person appointed by the king (or emperor) to rule the country in his behalf. Is regent a right word or maybe steward would be better. In collonies it was a vice-roy, but here this does not fit. Jasra 14:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Governor. It's a shame that such a significant figure in Polish history has this pitiable stub for an article, while numerous fairly obscure figures received enormous coverage from Polish nationalist editors. --Ghirla -трёп- 15:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Controversy about His Role in Polish History
How about instead of edit war simply writing about all the controversies related to this figure. Molobo's remarks contained some valuable information about the fact that his military skills were criticized, as well as that he refused to wear Polish uniform. There is no reason to remove them. Jasra 21:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. And I am looking forward to seeing this article expanded :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Ghirlandajo is free to add information how the brave hero Zajączek seeing the treachery of Polish hater Napoleon took offer of the great all loving peace giving Tsar to reastablish Polish Kingom united with its Slavic brother Russia in the name of Slavic brotherhood and love, only to be attacked by ungratefull Russophobic Poles led by Jesuit intrigue, despite the valian efforts of the great defender of Poland Novosilcov ;) Although I wonder if he will use Soviet Encyclopedia or even more objective source :). --Molobo 15:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- :D Seriously though I'd like to point out that anybody who thinks that Napoleon actually cared for Poles more than just as useful tools has nod read about the Polish Legions in Italy and how dear N. sent them to die in Haiti when they became a bit unconvinient...--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
I would like to know which exact facts in the article are questioned. So far I can see that the problem is the interpretation of his service to Russian tsar (because the facts are not debatable). There are also questions how skillful he was as military commander (unfortunately my knowledge on this is limitted). Definitely he was quite a skillful politition. Whether he used his skills only to satisfy his own ambition or maybe for the benefit of his country (economic growth of Opatówek, etc.) - is debatable. Personally, I think it was his own ambition, but presenting NPoV one should give also other possible explanations for his behaviour. Jasra 21:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Prince of Poland
Several other nobles had the title, so I removed the information. --Molobo 07:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
In fact it seems like some echo of Tsarists propaganda attempts. Look who had the title earlier:
http://www.geocities.com/polishnobles/Princes.html Poniatowski h. Ciolek. In 1764 the brothers of King Stanislaw-Augustus Poniatowski (Kazimierz, Andrzej and Michal) were awarded the hereditary title of Prince of Poland by the Polish Sejm (parliament). --Molobo 07:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Interesting if Russian Tsar tried in that way to justify his occupation of Poland. --Molobo 07:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I'll copy my reply from Wikipedia_talk:Polish_Wikipedians'_notice_board#J.C3.B3zef_Zaj.C4.85czek:
- I think this time Ghirla is right. His edit is referenced [1], and it was me who added that particular point. Note that according to the source he was not just a 'prince' but a 'prince of Poland'. He was certainly not the first or last prince, but I find it likely he might have been the first and last 'prince of Poland'. Perhaps we can elaborate more on the title to make it not as confusing. Finding what was his title in Polish and Russian would help - it is possible the source is mistaken, or it is possible the title was indeed unique.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:37, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
