Talk:Battle of Kostiuchnówka

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Battle of Kostiuchnówka has been listed as one of the History good articles 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 reassessment.
An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on January 3, 2008.
June 9, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Ukraine Portal
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Map needed
 It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Europe may be able to help!

[edit] Good Article (GA) nomination put on hold

In my opinion this article does not yet qualify for GA-status as it needs considerable editing:

  • Remove redlinks, or better still, provide proper links. There are many.
  • Referencing: most if not all relevant references refer to one (Polish) source. The fact that it is in Polish is not a problem in itself, but makes it difficult to verify the information. Moreover, it can not be properly established whether the article is truly NPOV when all info comes from one source only.
  • The article can use some extra images and definitely needs a map.

Makeshift Thackery (talk) 07:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Per WP:RED, red links to notable entities are acceptable. The fact that en wiki has no articles on otherwise notable Polish and Russian localities and military units should not prevent us from promoting related articles.
  • I am not aware of any other English sources discussing this event.
  • I have added a fair use map (Image:Map of battle of Kostiuchnowka 1916.jpg - scanned and translated by me from the Polish original); it got deleted as 'repleacable fair use' despite my argument that it will be near impossible to create one (due to the fact that there are so few sources and that they are so difficult to obtain, as you've noted; see also here). Alas, copyright paranoia people won this one. I have requested a free map to be made; it has not been done (see here). The only solution I have is to add the map I uploaded originally as an external link.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
I have to agree this does not meet the benchmark of Good Article status, due to having a single source, a lack of imagery and an overall lack of emphasis. I'm not being rude, it's a "good" article, just not a "Good Article". Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 19:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
If you can travel back in time and take photos, it would be great. I don't think that there are many more related pictures in existence; I think that the current photo and a painting are more then enough (yes, map would be great, alas - see my post above). There are also very few sources - but point me to ones I have not used in the article and I will do my best to get them, read them and use them to expand it. What do you mean "overall lack of emphasis"? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Photos like http://www.wp.mil.pl/galeria/542/zdjecie_542_6684.jpg or http://www.wp.mil.pl/galeria/542/zdjecie_542_6685.jpg would be nice, modern photos of the memorials. Any chance you can get someone in the area? Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 01:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Not really, not until somebody uploads them to Commons. I am not sure what is the condition of the remaining memorials, though.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Any ideas on the status of this review? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I replied and I was not replied to, so I am waiting on whether there is anything else that needs to be done or answered or not :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind taking over this review, if nobody objects in the next couple of days. Nikki311 21:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Please do. I will be back on Mon/Tue to read comments.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

WP:Good article usage is a survey of the language and style of Wikipedia editors in articles being reviewed for Good article nomination. It will help make the experience of writing Good Articles as non-threatening and satisfying as possible if all the participating editors would take a moment to answer a few questions for us, in this section please. The survey will end on April 30.

  • Would you like any additional feedback on the writing style in this article?


  • If you write a lot outside of Wikipedia, what kind of writing do you do?


  • Is your writing style influenced by any particular WikiProject or other group on Wikipedia?


At any point during this review, let us know if we recommend any edits, including markup, punctuation and language, that you feel don't fit with your writing style. Thanks for your time. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 03:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Kostiuchnówka/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'm going to take over this review. I've read the article, and here are some areas that I think need improvement:

  • Per WP:LEAD, for an article this size, the lead should be one or two paragraphs only. I'd merge that last sentence into the last paragraph.
  • Image:Pilsudski in Kostiuchnówka's trenches.jpg is fair-use. It needs to be scaled down, as it is currently not low resolution. It also needs a detailed fair-use rationale using Template:Non-free use rationale.
  • In some parts of the article, dates are formatted day month (6 June) and in others, month day (July 4).
  • The battle is considered the largest and most vicious of those involving the Polish Legions in World War I. - who says this? It sounds weasel-ly unless you tribute this comment to a source in the text. Such as According to (person/book), the battle... or (Person/book) considers the battle...
  • serving as one of his primary tools for restoring Polish independence. - primary? cite it or it is original research
  • Autumn saw heavy fighting - can autumn see? --> There was heavy fighting in autumn - this happens a couple of time in the article
  • but this would change drastically with the launching - be concise --> but this changed drastically with the launching
  • Add   between numbers and units. See WP:NBSP for more info.
  • of those days - sounds too colloquial; can it be reworded?
  • would be stopped --> was stopped
  • excellent performance - WP:PEACOCK; the sentence still makes sense if the word excellent is left out
  • he would be arrested --> he was arrested
  • What kind of restoration has taken place on the monuments?
  • The casualties are mentioned in the lead, but not in the text. I think it should be mentioned - maybe in the beginning of the aftermath?
  • Why are there no casualties reported for the Russian Empire? Does nobody have at least some kind of estimate?
  • Further reading should be above external links
  • There are some comma problems, but I'll fix those when everything else is finished.

That's about it. I'll look through the article again after some progress is made. The article will be on hold for seven days for improvements. Good luck! Nikki311 06:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to avoid confusion...the seven day holding period will start on Monday when you get a chance to look through my suggestions. Nikki311 18:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
To avoid confusion - I got a chance to look over them just now :) The image in question is already scaled down. Please don't hesitate to improve English language, I am not a native speaker. I will try to address/fix the content issues soon.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that with help of Greg (thanks) most of the above issues have been addressed. Regarding restoration: they started in 1998 and are mostly done by Polish Boy Scouts who visit Ukraine every year. They have found and restored the cemetery in Polski Lasek, but not the one at Polska Góra; they have rebuld the six obelisks in various places (the text is not clear if any of them was at Kostiuchnówka).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 10:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Looks good. I did some copyediting, and I will pass the article. Nikki311 05:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)