Content deleted Content added
Ghirlandajo (talk | contribs) →[[History of Solidarity]]: object |
|||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
* '''Weak Support''' - some of issues Irpen and Grafik mentioned are worth to attend but overall it looks good [[User:Alex Bakharev|Alex Bakharev]] |
* '''Weak Support''' - some of issues Irpen and Grafik mentioned are worth to attend but overall it looks good [[User:Alex Bakharev|Alex Bakharev]] |
||
* '''Support'''. Very good article. POV issues can always arise but this one really deserves it. - [[User:Darwinek|Darwinek]] 12:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC) |
* '''Support'''. Very good article. POV issues can always arise but this one really deserves it. - [[User:Darwinek|Darwinek]] 12:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC) |
||
* '''Object''' per Irpen and Grafik fr. We have too many biased FAs (such as [[Soviet-Polish War]]) with <nowiki>{{NPOV}}</nowiki> tag applied to them most of the time. No need to spawn more propaganda on Main Page. --<font color="FC4339">[[User:Ghirlandajo|Ghirla]]</font> <sup><font color="C98726">[[User_talk:Ghirlandajo|-трёп-]]</font></sup> 08:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:00, 16 October 2006
History of Solidarity
It has been some time since I nominated a FAC, but I hope it was worth it :) History of Solidarity, perhaps the most famous trade union in the world, and one of the most widely recognized Poland-related subjects. Pictures, citations... I hope you enjoy it. Comments, as always, appreciated! -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Imporper refs.To begin with, please either remove or rereference statements referred to books published by Xlibris. This is the house for self-published authors. Serious academics do not use it as they are published by the Unviersity press and reputable publishers. While it might be OK to refer to such book when stating a fact one witnessed (memoirs are OK), judgements from such books (like Solidarity is responsible for the Europe-wide fall of communism), are unacceptable. --Irpen 22:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- One book by XLibris is used as inline citation three times, in all cases it is accompanied by another source (Lynne Rienner Publishers, Routledge). While you may dispute reliability of Xlibris, please note that Solidarity's importance in the fall of communism is also supported by this citation, and I am sure you will agree Routledge is a reliable publisher ("The first blodless transition from Communism to democracy [...] set the signal for other countries").-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Even "set the signal" is a highly POV statement that belongs to a single author. But even that is not the same as "sparked off". Anyway, I already corrected that. But pls remove the refs to XLibris book entirely as it is used exclusively to support not facts but opinions. --Irpen 23:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- I see no reason to remove XLibris book, it's a useful secondary refs, nowehere used as an only ref. And since you seem not convinced about causation in Solidarity contributing to the Autumn of Nations, here is another citation, from Princeton University Press book: "[Solidarity's] influence throughout the region was incalculable. [...] We will then see how the [...] Polish opposition inspired the rest of the region through 1989". See this page from that book for a specific example of how Solidarity influenced events in Hungary. I hope that two citations are enough for you, if not, then please provide references that state Solidarity's had little or no influence on the Revolutions of 1989 and fall of communism. PS. In case 2:0 is not convincing, here is 4:0 - [1], [2]. You'll forgive me if I will not cite the text here at that time (those two refs specifically mention Solidarity's contribution to the 'fall of communism')-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Even "set the signal" is a highly POV statement that belongs to a single author. But even that is not the same as "sparked off". Anyway, I already corrected that. But pls remove the refs to XLibris book entirely as it is used exclusively to support not facts but opinions. --Irpen 23:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- One book by XLibris is used as inline citation three times, in all cases it is accompanied by another source (Lynne Rienner Publishers, Routledge). While you may dispute reliability of Xlibris, please note that Solidarity's importance in the fall of communism is also supported by this citation, and I am sure you will agree Routledge is a reliable publisher ("The first blodless transition from Communism to democracy [...] set the signal for other countries").-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Reagan and Pope pictures. What are they doing here and how do they illustrate the article? --Irpen 23:50, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps you should read the article and see where the text mentions Reagan and Pope. Then you will see the relevance of those photos. If still in doubt, letm me throw this helpful ref; it should clarify the reasons for why those pics are there.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- I read the article. I see those pics out of place. --Irpen 00:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Could you be more specific? On my screen they are more or less below the para describing the importance of those personas.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- This image of Reagan talking to Pope or this one when talking to Gorby are just clutter. The only time Reagan is mentoned in the text is in the sentence: "Ronald Reagan imposed economic sanctions on Poland". How is this illustrated by those images? --Irpen 01:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Sanctions were important, and the text also mentions aid to Solidarity. Further the caption of the picture is a good place to note the alliance of Reagan and the Pope. As for the Gorby picture, it's and old relic, from before I found more relevant pictures; if you think it's really an unneeded clutter, be bold and remove it, although Gorby was important to Solidarity too - perahps you'd like to expand the para mentioning him with a sentence or two on how his policies allowed Solidarity to fluorish?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 02:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- If you want to speak about alliance of Reagan and Pope do so in relevant articles. And in any case, even if you think it belongs to this article (IMO it does not) "good place to note" it is the article's text which should be illustrated by the pic. The pic was disconnected from the article it was supposed to illustrate. Same with Gorby pic. The pic was disconnected and had a nonsense caption too. The meeting, by itself, does not signify the imnprovement of relations. Brezhnev met Ford, Carter and Reagan. See eg. Strategic Arms Limitation Talks. --Irpen 02:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Considering that Solidarity was one of the main rasons and targets of Reagan and Pope alliance, I'd believe it deserves a mention here. You are correct that the information should be in text, not the picture - I will fix it. As for the Gorby meeting, I don't know much about it, so I am assuming you are right and it was unnecessary.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 16:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- If you want to speak about alliance of Reagan and Pope do so in relevant articles. And in any case, even if you think it belongs to this article (IMO it does not) "good place to note" it is the article's text which should be illustrated by the pic. The pic was disconnected from the article it was supposed to illustrate. Same with Gorby pic. The pic was disconnected and had a nonsense caption too. The meeting, by itself, does not signify the imnprovement of relations. Brezhnev met Ford, Carter and Reagan. See eg. Strategic Arms Limitation Talks. --Irpen 02:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Sanctions were important, and the text also mentions aid to Solidarity. Further the caption of the picture is a good place to note the alliance of Reagan and the Pope. As for the Gorby picture, it's and old relic, from before I found more relevant pictures; if you think it's really an unneeded clutter, be bold and remove it, although Gorby was important to Solidarity too - perahps you'd like to expand the para mentioning him with a sentence or two on how his policies allowed Solidarity to fluorish?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 02:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- This image of Reagan talking to Pope or this one when talking to Gorby are just clutter. The only time Reagan is mentoned in the text is in the sentence: "Ronald Reagan imposed economic sanctions on Poland". How is this illustrated by those images? --Irpen 01:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Could you be more specific? On my screen they are more or less below the para describing the importance of those personas.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- I read the article. I see those pics out of place. --Irpen 00:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps you should read the article and see where the text mentions Reagan and Pope. Then you will see the relevance of those photos. If still in doubt, letm me throw this helpful ref; it should clarify the reasons for why those pics are there.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Several things plague the current form of the article:
- Paragraph layout is moderately messy. There is too much one sentence paragraphs that could be merged.
- I merged few of the shortest ones, those that remain contain distinct information and can remain alone, but if you disagree, do be bold and merge them.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Pictures could use alternate layout (left, then right, then left and so on) to save space in some more sections (e.g.) "Martial law (1981-1983)".
- Good idea, applied.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- And the most important thing: numerous POV issues. The text reads in some places like a newspaper or a schoolbook (and a bad one), not like an encyclopedia article. Let's look at this precisely.
- "deepening internal crisis of Soviet-style societies due to degradation of morale" - care to explain this one? Are you talking about Poland or Warsaw pact in general? Cause if what we have in Russia and some former Soviet republics now is an improvement of the morale, then I'm the Chinese emperor... Degradation of economy, maybe, but of the morale...
- We are not talking about modern morale, but morale back then.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- "stomped out by the government" - unencyclopedic. Sure a more neutral formulation could be used.
- Replaced with supressed.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- "The fall of the communist regime marked a new chapter in the history of Poland and in the history of Solidarity." - This reads like a bad newspaper.
- I like it. De gustibus non est disputandum. Feel free to rewrite it into something you like more.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Finally, the thing about Solidarity responsible for the fall of the USSR and/or its "influence led to the intensification and spread of anti-communist ideas and movements throughout the countries of the Eastern Bloc, weakening their communist governments." is quite questionable in itself.
- "deepening internal crisis of Soviet-style societies due to degradation of morale" - care to explain this one? Are you talking about Poland or Warsaw pact in general? Cause if what we have in Russia and some former Soviet republics now is an improvement of the morale, then I'm the Chinese emperor... Degradation of economy, maybe, but of the morale...
- Paragraph layout is moderately messy. There is too much one sentence paragraphs that could be merged.
I'm stopping here but there are some other examples as well in the text... -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 17:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- In which part of the article do we claim that Solidarity was responsible for the fall of USSR? As discussed above, we have academic refs that it was responsible for fall of communism in Poland and contributed to the Autumn of Nations in the entire region. What is it that you find questionable, exactly - and what refs do you have to back up your case?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Support wholeheartedly. Another great article. Sure, it could do with some better pictures or twice the number of refs (every sentenced referenced by at least three sources could be nice), but I believe it's as close as it gets. And don't forget the lead - all is there and that's how FA leads should look like. //Halibutt 23:28, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Support - some of issues Irpen and Grafik mentioned are worth to attend but overall it looks good Alex Bakharev
- Support. Very good article. POV issues can always arise but this one really deserves it. - Darwinek 12:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- Object per Irpen and Grafik fr. We have too many biased FAs (such as Soviet-Polish War) with {{NPOV}} tag applied to them most of the time. No need to spawn more propaganda on Main Page. --Ghirla -трёп- 08:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)