Talk:Great Seimas of Vilnius

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Great Seimas of Vilnius 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 August 30, 2007.
December 7, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
Great Seimas of Vilnius is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Lithuania on Wikipedia. To participate simply edit the article or see our to-do list. On the 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.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.
Comments M.K. 09:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Lands

I will revert this, but first let me explain. The text in diff suggest that the thinking was "We [the Seimas] want autonomy in these governorates because they are ethnically Lithuanian." However, the matter was more or less like this: "We [the Seimas] demand autonomy in ethnic Lithuanian lands. In case you are wondering which lands exactly are etchnic Lithuanian, here is a definition for you: such and such governorates." It is an important difference. Renata 16:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The wording still was unclear and could suggest that this were indeed ethnic Lithuanian lands. I changed it to more neutral. What is wrong btw with wording "They claimed as ethnic Lithuanian lands" ? --Molobo 17:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the resolution doesn't actually make a claim. If Renata, as an admin, doesn't object, we could put the text of the second paragraph here in talk (unfortunately no English translation available at this time) and we could then discuss its wording and meaning. Any connotations/interpretations need to be referenced. Novickas 17:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Current formulation is satisfying. Is there a map of claims by Lithuanian state? --Molobo 15:33, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Polish publication Pravitel'stvennyi Vestnik?

The article states: Those parts of the memorandum that demanded Lithuanian autonomy and protested the possible attachment of Suwałki Governorate to autonomous Poland were reprinted in the Polish publication Pravitel'stvennyi Vestnik on November 10. The Russian government sought to demonstrate that granting autonomy to both Poland and Lithuania would be complicated. Shouldn't this be 'Russian publication'? The title and context suggests so.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I see it is resolved, thank you.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:40, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Successful good article nomination

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of December 7, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass
2. Factually accurate?: Pass
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass
4. Neutral point of view?: Pass
5. Article stability? Pass
6. Images?: Pass

A few notes for future improvement:

  • The first paragraph of "Historical Background" could use a general reference, although its content seems uncontroversial.
  • Since there is no article on Jonas Kriaučiūnas, could you add a bit more information on him? A short sentence would be enough as a start.
  • "After the Seimas, rural areas were left on their own without central guidance."—remained on their own?
  • "While the first Russian responses were disorganized and confused [...]" could use a reference.
  • A map, especially a historical one, could be very useful to this article.

Overall, nice work and an interesting read. I am listing the article under "History"; if you prefer it to be listed under "Political events", please feel free to move it at WP:GA. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automatic addition of "class=GA"

A bot has added class=GA to the WikiProject banners on this page, as it's listed as a good article. If you see a mistake, please revert, and leave a note on the bot's talk page. Thanks, BOT Giggabot (talk) 05:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)