Talk:Zaolzie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is part of WikiProject Czech Republic, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to the Czech Republic. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Zaolzie is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Poland on Wikipedia. To participate simply edit the article or see our current projects and discussions. On the main project page we have some tools to help you out. Don't hesitate to ask questions!
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Good articles Zaolzie has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

If it is now part of Czechia, why does it use the Polish name?

Because it has a major Polish population and Czechs don't even know there is something like Zaolzie. - Darwinek 12:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I made minor change about reasons of Czechoslovakia for military operations. This was because "only railway going to Slovakia went throughout this area and access to the railway was critical: newly-formed Czechoslovakia was at war with revolutionary Hungary trying to re-establish control over Slovakia. This set up stage for conflict." (see History of Cieszyn and Těšín (not edited by me) see http://raven.cc.ku.edu/~eceurope/hist557/lect12.htm This part of article was added only for "synchronisation" of articles and for "balancing" of Czech and Polish view. For conclusion - both republics were in war with bolsheviks and both had some reasons for conflict.

If you wanted to give the arguments of one side of the conflict, you should equally add the arguments of the other side to keep the NPOV. Also it should be clearly explained what the war with Hungary had to do with it ? --Wojsyl (talk) 15:34, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Czechoslovakian war with Red Hungary is in same context as mentioned Polish war with Red Russia, and for understanding of reasons of Czechoslovakian actions. See above: " only railway going to Slovakia went throughout this area and access to the railway was critical: newly-formed Czechoslovakia was at war with revolutionary Hungary trying to re-establish control over Slovakia." I think, that this is understanding for necessarity and thus is impossible to build new railway. One think (but this is only my personal oponion), that if Red Hungary anexed Slovakia, then Poland was in big problems with bolsheviks froum south, east and nordeast, but because Czechoslovakian army liberated Slovakia, Poland was secure from south. Yopie.
Except for the fact that the railway maps of the epoch show that the main train route from Prague to Bratislava went not through Ostrava (not Cieszyn by any means), but through Brno. Check the map on the right, or here, or here... //Halibutt 03:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article

I find that this article meets the Good Article criteria. It presents an interesting and fairly detailed look at the region and its conflicts. Areas I would recommend further work on, to approach Featured Article status:

  • While it is well-referenced, most of those references are to a single source, Zahradnik. Adding more citations to Długajczyk, Siwek, and Badziak would be a good idea before FA.
  • A copyediting pass to tighten prose further would be in order. While it's well-written, there are some redundancies and one or two unclear sentences. (For instance, "On September 1, 1939 Zaolzie was annexed by Germany after it invaded Poland." -- does "it" refer to Zaolzie? I know, anyone with a basic knowledge of world history will know it's meant to refer to Germany, but the wording could still be clearer.)
  • History prior to the early 1900s is pretty thin. Is there anything more to be said?
  • Similarly, "the area's economic significance grew." Can this be treated in more depth?
  • Make sure everything's in line with the manual of style. It mostly seems to be, but FA can be very detail-oriented. (One thing I did notice in this vein is that "Since 1945" is a full section rather than a subsection under "History.")

On the whole, this is an excellent article, informative and interesting. I would recommend a peer review as the next step. Congratulations, and thanks for your hard work. Shimeru 21:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../z/a/o/Talk%7EZaolzie_cc3e.html"