Talk:Polish-Swedish wars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Military history WikiProject     (Rated Start-Class) 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. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (nations and regions): Polish military history task force WikiProject Sweden (Rated Start-Class) The article on Polish-Swedish wars is supported by WikiProject Sweden, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Poland (Rated Start-Class) Poland Portal Polish-Swedish wars 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! Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Lithuania     (Rated Start-Class) Polish-Swedish wars 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! Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Comments Please leave a short summary to explain the ratings and to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents 1 1617 2 Rajtar 3 Placenames 4 List of battles for the warbox 5 Comments. 6 As a disambiguation page?

[edit] 1617

Any info on the conflict in 1617 would be appreciated - I am not sure if there even was any major conflict. Also, information on truces ending the early 1600 conflicts (signed where, by whom, for how long, with what provisions) and commanders (especially Swedish ones) would be welcomed, as the info I have so far is rather sparce. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 19:55, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rajtar

Any idea what's the correct English name for raitar/rajtar cavalry? See [1]. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 19:56, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Placenames

Thanks, Piotrus, for writing up a long and nice article. Perhaps the use of placenames can be made a bit more consistent by using the following convention: first time usage of the name - Current Name (Historical Swedish Name, Historical Polish Name) and thereafter every time just the current name, which in English language for Estonia and Latvia would correspond to the name in Estonian, or Latvian, respectively. Historical Swedish-language names for places in Estonia and Latvia tend to be identical with the (for various reasons the most widely known and used) German-language names. What say you? Cheers, --212.209.42.132 19:35, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Tnx for the suggestion. We are actually discussing a very similar policy at the Wikipedia:Eastern_European_Wikipedians'_notice_board - feel free to contribute there, we would be happy to expand this to other regions. I'd basically recommend using the English name first and throughout the article, and in the first use add all other names in perenthesis, in alphabetical order of their nations (for example: Estonian: xx, Finnish: yy, German: pp, Polish: zz, Swedish: mm). It would be good to mention which language spelling is which (i.e. keep the Polish, Swedish, etc. adjective before their names). What do you think of that? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:23, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

I do agree that the English name should come first, and any alternative names in parenthesis should show what language they are in. However, to keep having more than two name forms wihin parenthesis seems a bit too much. The good news is that the current English name for places in Estonia is always spelled the same way as the current Estonian name (and as far as I know, the same is true for Latvia/n, if we do not count diacritical marks) - so no need to state the same name twice. Current local name is current English name. Historically most often used English-language place name in earlier sources would, as a rule, be the historical German-language name (local dominant language in Livonia during the Polish-Swedish War as well). In most English-language articles about the history of Estonia and Latvia it is thus standard convention to use no more than two names: the current local-language (=English) name and the historical German-language name, or vice versa.

As a Pole, you (I guess) would argue that since the article is about "Polish-Swedish" war, we should also include everywhere the names of places in Polish and Swedish as well. In Estonia and Latvia the current Swedish-language names are the same as in local language, and historical Swedish-language names are identical with the historical German-language names. So, for example, we could use Pärnu (German, Swedish: Pernau, Polish: Parnawa).

However, note that in order to be consistent, either all mentioned place names (including those in Sweden-proper, Poland-proper, Germany, Russia etc.) should on first instance have alternative spellings both in Polish and Swedish in the brackets. If you think that this is too much, then we could agree to limit the mentioning of Polish and Swedish names to those places which were at some time controlled either militarily or administratively by Poland or Sweden, respectively. (Note that in that case, for example, Tallinn (German, Swedish: Reval) was never controlled by Poland:) Cheers, --212.209.42.132 21:50, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not paper, we have room for all the larger variant. Btw, please consider registering. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:08, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of battles for the warbox

Warbox to do: Karkhus, Wenden, Wolmar, Tallin, Dorpat, Biały Kamień, Kircholm, Parnawa, Salis, Kockenhausen, Mitawa --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 01:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments.

"After the battle, Koniepolski saw the need to reform the army and strengthen the firepower of infantry and artillery to match the Swedish units. The Swedes, on the other hand, learned arts of cavalry attacks, charges and melee combat from the Poles."

Are you implying that Gustav II Adolourf learned his modern battle tactics from Koniepolski rather then the opposite? Gustavus Adolphus is considered to be the father of modern warfare and was the one that introduced modern tactics during the 30 years war. You forget mentioning that sweden during the polish war was in war against both Denmark and Russia which i belive is of great importance. Im not an expert in history. But i have been told in school that Gustav II Adolf was the first to introduce modern warfare, then again i might have missunderstood your article or my history lessons. Otherwise this is a good article even though the author sometimes get a bit carried away.

I'll try to find some sources, but IIRC some (Polish?) sources do state that while GA was definetly better on 'modern' tactics (infantry, artillery, logistics, etc.), the one place Polish tactics were better was the cavarly (charge) tactics, and it was something GA learned from Poles. Again, I'll try to verify this.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 13:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] As a disambiguation page?

I'd say it's better as such (now we have separate pages for each of the wars, it makes sense not to have to be editing two large identical accounts of each war, but to have a precis here with a {{Main| link to each separate page), but I invite discussion. Certainly, if that way is to work, this and all the separate pages need substantial editing, and better introductions in the separate pages to link them all together. Neddyseagoon - talk 10:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd prefer to keep it as an article. Main template help, but it is a notable topic.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)