From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
|
Ambassadors and envoys from Russia to Poland (1763–1794) is within the scope of the Russian History WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Russian History. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
Wow, I have only just skimmed through the article but it seems really great to me! It could easily be a strong GA if not FA candidate! (which makes me a bit sad, because somehow positive aspects of our country's history and in general our country, as well as contemporary Poland topics do not get the same attention) My concerns would be:
- some inline citations are not properly done - why won't you use the <ref> tags and {{cite book}} (and related) templates?
- the list at the bottom is pretty redundant - if anything, I would incorporate it into a nice table that would also serve as a TOC :D
That said, I wish I have created even one article like that during my tenure here! Bravada, talk - 01:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe the negative aspects are more interesting, just as action films :) But we have good articles on subjects like Constitution of 3rd May or History of Solidarity (contemporary, see?), too. As for citatons: for DYK-level I don't always use refs (too time consuming), and cite book template is always something I found too editor unfriendly to we worth the effort. Hopefully we will get citation pop up wysiwig thingy shown on Wikimania soon :) The list is somewhat redundant, yes, a table version would be nice, but not as an alternative ToC, I think.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 09:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well, given the section headings, the TOC already repeats most of the information contained in the list, so a separate table would be as redundant as the list is now. And I like all kinds of extra touches in the articles that make them look more "professional" :D The cite book template is not THAT hard to use, and if the citations would be raised as a reason for objection in GAN or FAC, I would find it valid.
- As concerns the topics, "contemporary" for me means "post-1989", and the history of the Solidarity is a largely pre-1989 topic (and the post-1989 part is hardly uplifting...) What I mean is that e.g. the Balcerowicz's Plan article is nowhere near as detailed and well-done as this one. Not to mention the article on Warsaw etc. The History of Poland (1989–present) article hardly mentions social and economic changes that took place since 1989. Reading WP only one can get the impression that Poland was constantly repressed, later became a poor communist country and later Wałęsa took down communism (to simplify that a bit) and now we have a government led by twins and that's all.
- I still live in the same place I did in 1989 and if I could take a picture of the view out of my window then and now, the change would be absolutely striking and very positive. Everytime I look through the window I thank God it's 2006 and not 1989 (not quite when I turn on the TV, but that's another thing). I somehow can't see that reflected in WP. But that's just my afterthought after a very short night :D Bravada, talk - 10:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- 1) Feel free to remove or change the list, I translated it from pl wiki without much thought. 2) As for cite stuff - I agree it would be done for GA/FAC, but it is not (yet) requirement for DYK, so I sometmes cut corners :) On a sidenote, this is not yet comprehensive enough for DYK, I failed to find much information on some ambassadors, who are still barely stub-sections, and considering the article's title and the rather extensive section on Sejm Niemy I wonder if it should not be split/renamed/etc. 3) I agree that post-1989 is one of our less developed periods - but we have only so many editors interested in Polish matters, and I think nobody is very interested in that period (my favourite is the time of PLC, then SPR and IIWW). Hopefully this will change at some point as we gain more editors.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
