Line 630: | Line 630: | ||
On the inclusion of these, I think an important issue which should be clarified first and which can shed some light on what to do about it, is the question I raised above: why were already German names changed by Nazi Germany (or even, according to Herkus above, Weimar Germany). What was the motivation behind this renaming, who or what body was responsible for carrying it out, etc. Generally, however, since these names were in use only shortly, and under what might be termed "extraordinary circumstances" (i.e. Nazi party in power in Germany) I don't think they belong in the lede, though they might very well be significant enough to discuss, along with the proper context, in the body of relevant articles.[[User:Radeksz|radek]] ([[User talk:Radeksz|talk]]) 12:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC) |
On the inclusion of these, I think an important issue which should be clarified first and which can shed some light on what to do about it, is the question I raised above: why were already German names changed by Nazi Germany (or even, according to Herkus above, Weimar Germany). What was the motivation behind this renaming, who or what body was responsible for carrying it out, etc. Generally, however, since these names were in use only shortly, and under what might be termed "extraordinary circumstances" (i.e. Nazi party in power in Germany) I don't think they belong in the lede, though they might very well be significant enough to discuss, along with the proper context, in the body of relevant articles.[[User:Radeksz|radek]] ([[User talk:Radeksz|talk]]) 12:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
::I tend to agree: in my personal opinion changes made for purely political reasons don't really belong in the lede. However, we do mention all the names for [[Rastembork]], [[Łęk]], [[Żądzbork]], [[Lec]] and [[Wartembork]] in the lede. That last one even mentions the other politically-drive name used for the town. So it very much seems that my personal opinion flies in the face of what has become accepted here. [[User:Varsovian|Varsovian]] ([[User talk:Varsovian|talk]]) 14:04, 5 July 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:05, 5 July 2010
Poland Project‑class | |||||||
|
Template:Outline of knowledge coverage WPT
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Useful shortcuts
Useful templates
Please note we have two functioning userboxes:
| ||
| ||
There is also a Portal:Poland/Welcome message box that can be used to notify new users about this noticeboard and our related projects. Just slap {{subst:Portal:Poland/Welcome}}--~~~~ on their usertalkpage - it has its own heading. |
Piotrus' to do list #1
So I am back, if in a limited fashion. Thanks to all who helped with that, and thanks to all who kept this project alive in the meantime. Over the next days I will be suggesting a bunch of edits here, for your consideration. Please strike them out if you carry them; or let me know if you think they are unnecessary/unhelpful. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 06:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Extended content
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Task 13
|
---|
Main: weekly analysis of Portal:Poland/New article announcements (batch: Michał Brzozowski started at 10:52, 4 June 2010 to Jorginho Paulista started at 19:11, 8 June 2010
Sportsmen I don't care enough to examine: |
Task 14
|
---|
Main: weekly analysis of Portal:Poland/New article announcements (batch: Kotlet schabowy started at 04:21, 9 June 2010 to Szybowcowy Zakład Doświadczalny started at 23:22, 12 June 2010
--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC) |
Task 15
Main: weekly analysis of Portal:Poland/New article announcements (batch: Global storm activity of 2010 started at to Karolina Szarubka started at 18:52, 17 June 2010 (bot seems to have been down between 12 and 15 June)
Michal Wisniowski - move to [[Michał Wiśniowski]], add {{notability}} talk: Poland projject, start, lowZbigniew Jagiełło - add pl interwiki [[pl:Zbigniew Jagiełło]], {{DEFAULTSORT:Jagiełło, Zbigniew}} [[Category:1964 births]], date of birth to lead, talk: POLAND and bio projects, living, low, startUnity Line - {{Poland-company-stub}}, talk: POLAND, business and transport wikiprojectsTopolski Century - {{UK-museum-stub}}
Sport articles: 2009 Polska Energia Open, Warsaw GAA, Grzegorz Panfil
- Note: I left Michal Wisniowski under that name, because he uses the Latinized spelling on his website. Also, I tagged the article for refimprove rather than notability because it has two independent references. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- Given that the subject himself uses the latinised spelling, shouldn't the article also use it? Varsovian (talk) 14:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- Not sure if this is his official name, art name, or a westernized simplification, and I am not sure what are our policies on using artistic names in article titles. But, frankly, I don't care much (and I still think he may not pass WP:N). What has he done that makes him notable, again? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- Given that the subject himself uses the latinised spelling, shouldn't the article also use it? Varsovian (talk) 14:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Task 16
Main: weekly analysis of Portal:Poland/New article announcements (batch: Sparrow Feature Film 2010 started at 20:12, 17 June 2010 to Cisy Nałęczów started at 07:44, 21 June 2010
Erazm Otwinowski - borderline, but I think {{Poland-noble-stub}}, talk - regular: {{WikiProject Poland|class=stub|importance=low}} and {{WPBiography|class=stub|importance=low||living=no}}Jerzy Bolesławski - unreferenced living BLP, also talk needs project polandMaria Grzegorzewska - discussion project templates same as Eraz aboveBenedykt Wiszowaty - {{Poland-bio-stub}}, discussion project templates same as Eraz aboveWyższa Szkoła Filologiczna - {{Poland-university-stub}}, [[Category:Universities and colleges in Wrocław]], [[Category: 2002 establishments]]; talk: Poland and {{WikiProject Universities|class=stub}} tags- On that note, assess University of Wrocław as start, mid; Wrocław University of Economics as stub, low, Wrocław University of Technology (needs Poland project tag) as start, mid, Tadeusz Kościuszko Land Forces Military Academy (stub also add MILHIST), Jewish Theological Seminary of Breslau (start, doesn't need Poland project), Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences (stub, needs stub template), Wrocław Medical University (stub, talk page templates)
Great Theatre, Poznań - if Poznań-stub doesn't exist (we really should create stubs for major Polish towns), {{GreaterPoland-geo-stub}} will do for nowTramways in Kraków - Poland, we really need to create Kraków and Warsaw wikiprojects... sigh talk needs Poland and {{TrainsWikiProject|class=start|importance=mid|Streetcars=yes}} template; please notify User talk:Zyx that his article would be eligible for DYKing if he were to add more inline refsMaćków - prod? doesn't seem like a notable disambig, or ref stub...PWS-5 - DYK nom: {{subst:NewDYKnom | article=PWS-5 | hook=... that only five models of '''[[PWS-5]]''', a Polish [[liaison aircraft]], were produced? | status=new | author=Pibwl | nominator= Piotrus}}Polish referendums, 1996 - Poland, politics project tags; not enough content to DYK, unfortunately - consider telling this to the creator (User talk:Kubek15) and inviting him to our projectPWS-6 - DYK nom: {{subst:NewDYKnom | article=PWS-5 | hook=... that '''[[PWS-8]]''', was the the first Polish aircraft fitted with [[slats]] - but only one model (the prototype) was ever made? | status=new | author=Pibwl | nominator= Piotrus}}Abraham Blum - talk: start, low. DYK nom: {{subst:NewDYKnom | article=Abraham Blum | hook=... that '''[[Abraham Blum]]''', a Polish-Jewish activist, was one of the leaders of the [[Bund]] in the [[Warsaw Ghetto]]? | status=new | author=Radeksz | nominator= Piotrus}}(I saw that Radeksz is going to nominate this himself)
Sport articles: Jakub Kosecki, Czarni Sosnowiec, Daniel Gołębiewski, Damian Jaroń , Krystian Feciuch, Daniel Ciach, AZS PWSZ Biala Podlaska, TS Mitech Żywiec , TKKF Gryf Szczecin , ZTKKF Stilon Gorzów Wielkopolski , Praga Warszawa , Gol Częstochowa, Atena Poznań , Jan Nawrocki, Bolesław Banaś, Jerzy Wójcik, Irena Nawrocka, Cisy Nałęczów . On that note, many entries in List of football clubs in Poland are missing Poland WikiProject, and some even the {{football|class=|importance=}} one.
Popmusic articles (which I also find utterly not inspiring to even look at): Mgła, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 12:17, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Task 17
Main: weekly analysis of Portal:Poland/New article announcements (batch: Fundamental Rights Agency started at 22:15, 23 June 2010 to Ryszard Wójcik started at 22:54, 25 June 2010
Wrocław Walking Pilgrimage - talk: Poland and Christianity project tagsHieronim Moskorzowski - {{Poland-noble-stub}}, talk: Poland and BLP project tags, living=noNaval Air Squadron - add iwiki [[pl;Morski Dywizjon Lotniczy]] and [[Category:Military units and formations of the Polish Air Force]], talk: WPMILHIST template, Polish taskforce - {{WPMILHIST|class=stub|Aviation=yes|Polish=yes}}- Luba Blum-Bielicka - assess as start, low; I presume Radek will expand and DYK it himself (Can somebody ask him if this is the case?)
Tadeusz Dąbrowski - Poland-artist-stubJaroslav Lev of Rosental - generic copyedit template for that mess, unless we want to get more specific...Robert B. Lisek - another copyedit template, plus {{peacock}} as well, regular talk templates, categories need cleanup - Year of birth unknown (also on pl wiki), Polish artists...Category:Katyn Massacre Victims - needs a maintenance rename (via WP:CFD) to Category:Katyn Massacre victimsproposed rename to Category:Katyn massacre victims since main article is Katyn massacre
Popmusic: Black'N'Roll
Sport: Ryszard Wójcik
Brought to you by --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 13:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Task 18
Main: weekly analysis of Portal:Poland/New article announcements (batch from Riverine Air Escadrille started at 01:19, 27 June 2010 to Frank Curto Park started at 08:07, 1 July 2010
Riverine Air Escadrille - [[Category:Military units and formations of the Polish Air Force]], talk: WPMILHIST template, Polish taskforce - {{WPMILHIST|class=stub|Aviation=yes|Polish=yes}}- State Higher Vocational School in Skierniewice - {{Wikify}}, talk: Poland and educational wikiproject tags
Boleslaw II the Generous (the Bold) - fork, please redirect to Bolesław II the Bold- Do dzwonka - Poland-stub, tv-stub
Katyń Memorial - {{NewJersey-stub}}, talk: MILHIST
Popmusic: Jerzy Pławczyk , Brunette models
Sport: Jerzy Pławczyk , Agnieszka Gortel, Marcin Malinowski
A few this time... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:51, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- IMO "State Higher Vocational School in Skierniewice" sounds a bit awkward in English. Any suggestions for a better translation? Dr. Loosmark 16:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
The article is POV, it's goal is to accuse "Polish collaborators", who weren't frequently Polish or were rather victims than collaborators. This Wikipedia doesn't discuss French people in the Wehrmacht nor Czechs in the Wehrmacht (Sudentengermans).
An example of a Polish collaborator is in this Wikipedia Anthony Sawoniuk, the article recently rewritten on the basis of http://www.independent.co.uk/news/nazis-hired-killer-who-lay-low-for-50-years-1084566.html , which claims that his mother was Polish but he was nicknamed "Andrusha". Maybe for a British journalist "Andrusha" is a typical Polish name, not for me. Can someone explain me, why the article discusses Sawoniuk's citizenship? What citizenship could have a village boy around 1921? Xx236 (talk) 09:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Poles in the Wehrmacht certainly does have some factual errors. I'll go through some other sources and add the correct facts. Please note that the article on Sawoniuk does not state that he was in the Wehrmacht, it states that he was in the police (a fact on which Sawoniuk agreed). However he maintained that his police unit carried out 'anti-partisan' operations, while a British court found that he had actually taken part in the holocaust. I have left a note regarding the sentence you object to at the talkpage for that article. Please also note that the article actually now links to seven separate sources, not just one.Varsovian (talk) 10:08, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Do "correct facts" include that Andriusha Sawoniuk was Polish?Xx236 (talk) 12:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Born in Poland to a Polish mother and a father of unknown nationality. That makes him more Polish than Chopin! Chopin's father was known not to be Polish and Chopin didn't serve in the Polish army. If Sawoniuk isn't Polish, neither is Chopin. But please don't 'correct' the Chopin article. As far as I can see, Poles in the Wehrmacht doesn't so much as mention Sawoniuk. Perhaps you'd like to discuss the topic of this section or start another one in which to discuss another topic? Varsovian (talk) 12:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Do "correct facts" include that Andriusha Sawoniuk was Polish?Xx236 (talk) 12:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- What exactly has a war criminal to do with F.Chopin!? Dr. Loosmark 13:07, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Absolutely nothing. Other than the fact that if he isn't Polish, neither is Chopin. Clearly Chopin is at least partly Polish. Unless we can find a source which says that Sawoniuk's father was a nationality other than Polish, Sawoniuk is purely Polish. Varsovian (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- "Sawoniuk is purely Polish". Do you have a reliable source for that claim or is that yet again your personal opinion? Dr. Loosmark 14:50, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- His mother was Polish. We know that. We do not know what nationality his father was. If his father was Belarussian, Sawoniuk would be Polish-Belarussian. If his father was French, Sawoniuk would be Polish-French (just like Chopin). We know that Sawoniuk was a Polish national and we know that he was in the Polish police and the Polish army. What nationality would you like him to be? And more importantly, what sources do you have to back that stance? Varsovian (talk) 14:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- And even more importantly, what sources do you have to back your stance?? I don't see anyone else making any claims about his nationality.--Kotniski (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- As noted above, the Independent. Varsovian (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- The Independent article you cite above doesn't support any of your claims except that his mother was Polish.--Kotniski (talk) 15:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Loosmark was nice enough to give me a source about the subject being in the Polish police in Belarus (although Loosmark mistranslated the source as saying that the subject was in the "Belarusian police", a most unfortunate mistake) source (diff, I'm not accusing Loosmark of misconduct but I do need to be careful of my sanctions and anybody misunderstanding my comments and concluding that I am accusing Loosmark of deliberately mistranslating the article, which I am not doing).) Varsovian (talk) 18:59, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- The Independent article you cite above doesn't support any of your claims except that his mother was Polish.--Kotniski (talk) 15:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- As noted above, the Independent. Varsovian (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- And even more importantly, what sources do you have to back your stance?? I don't see anyone else making any claims about his nationality.--Kotniski (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- His mother was Polish. We know that. We do not know what nationality his father was. If his father was Belarussian, Sawoniuk would be Polish-Belarussian. If his father was French, Sawoniuk would be Polish-French (just like Chopin). We know that Sawoniuk was a Polish national and we know that he was in the Polish police and the Polish army. What nationality would you like him to be? And more importantly, what sources do you have to back that stance? Varsovian (talk) 14:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- "Sawoniuk is purely Polish". Do you have a reliable source for that claim or is that yet again your personal opinion? Dr. Loosmark 14:50, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Absolutely nothing. Other than the fact that if he isn't Polish, neither is Chopin. Clearly Chopin is at least partly Polish. Unless we can find a source which says that Sawoniuk's father was a nationality other than Polish, Sawoniuk is purely Polish. Varsovian (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- As far the only source that Sawoniuk's mother was Polish is The Independent, a very competent source in Polish matters, eg. "Polish death camp", „The Independent on Sunday”, 16.01.2005., 20.12.2009 "southern Polish death camp" (which may be geographical). The last name Sawoniuk is Belarussian and the family was probably Orthodox. Xx236 (talk) 13:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- What exactly has a war criminal to do with F.Chopin!? Dr. Loosmark 13:07, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- This source states "Sawoniuk, born in 1921, described himself as Polish.
He was one of the ethnic minorities which made up about ten per cent of the town's population. Although there were Poles, Ukranians, Belorussians and German `Volkdeutsch' - all speaking their own languages - the majority of Domachevo's 5,000 population was Jewish." Varsovian (talk) 16:02, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yet another UK Newspaper? Dr. Loosmark 16:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
He was a Polish citizen till WWII. If we have a source about his ethnicity, or multiple sources, cite them. I find it interesting that Polish wiki claims he was Belorussian, but Google Translation of Belorussian entry indicates that Belorussian entry also claims him as Belorussian (not Polish...). Do we have a reliable source for his Belorussian ethnicity? I don't have time to look for them, but I'd expect that the technical correct description would be Polish citizen of Belorussian ethnicity (till WWII). After WWII, his citizenship likely changed; note that his village was first a part of the Belorussian SSR (Brest Voblast), then (at the time of his crime), of the Reichskommissariat Ostland. I am pretty sure that Soviets decreed all Polish citizens became Soviet citizens on the occupied territories. I am not sure what happened in R. Ostland. How to describe it in the lead... I am not sure (but footnotes are always an option).
And yes, the irony of "everybody wants Chopin, nobody wants Sawoniuk" is hardly lost on me - and hardly new, this is not the first time such an issue came up. Ethnicity and nationality distinctions can be controversial and confusing (if we argue about citizenship alone, then Sawoniuk was Polish, but consider also - what was the most numerous group of people who died in the Holocaust...?).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- You might suspect that he was a "Polish citizen of Belorussian ethnicity" but according to a WP:RS [6] he described himself as Polish, not Belorussian. The only reference we currently have to his mother describes her as Polish but we don't know if that means by ethnicity or by nationality or both. Rumour in the town was that his father was Jewish (as the article states). Varsovian (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- I wouldn't put too much weight on that - since after escaping to the West he wanted to enter the Polish II Corps describing himself as anything but Polish would not have worked too much. Dr. Loosmark 20:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sources about him being Belorussian are not that hard to find (in Polish): [7], [8]. The refs have the reliability of an average newspaper report (but I don't think we have any better for the nationality...?). Anyway, I find it interesting that most reliable sources discussing him (or, in fact, all I looked at - at [9] (which I recommend interested editors review and use instead of the less accurate newspaper reports) simply don't mention his nationality. Outside Wikipedia, fortunately, it is not important. Oh, somebody should add {{Cleanup-link rot}} to the article (or fix the problem). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Strangely, it is easier to find French sources about Chopin being French than Polish sources about the same thing. Varsovian (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Strange indeed. One then wonders why a webpage was used as a source that Chopin was French during the discussions on the Chopin article talk page. Dr. Loosmark 21:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- More than a webpage was used as a source that Chopin was French, but everything was ignored. It just happened that the webpage was written by a jurist who knows what he is talking about & explained the à propos of the 1804 Code Napoléon, which you rejected as written by "French bureaucrats", just like the US Constitution must have been written by a bunch of American bureaucrats, I imagine.
- --Frania W. (talk) 22:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Strange indeed. One then wonders why a webpage was used as a source that Chopin was French during the discussions on the Chopin article talk page. Dr. Loosmark 21:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Interesting that you should use [10] as a source which supports the claim that Sawoniuk was Belorussian. Apart from the fact mentioned below that PL WP asserts that the Blue Police was (with the exception of one unit) never described as "Polish", I note that PL WP states that most officers (Sawoniuk was an officer) in western Belarus were Poles. Varsovian (talk) 08:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Strangely, it is easier to find French sources about Chopin being French than Polish sources about the same thing. Varsovian (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- You might suspect that he was a "Polish citizen of Belorussian ethnicity" but according to a WP:RS [6] he described himself as Polish, not Belorussian. The only reference we currently have to his mother describes her as Polish but we don't know if that means by ethnicity or by nationality or both. Rumour in the town was that his father was Jewish (as the article states). Varsovian (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
"most"? The article says "up to 40%". Xx236 (talk) 06:31, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Sawoniuk's father was a schoolmaster. He was Jewish but he represented the Polish state, he had to be Polonized. Sawoniuk's step-brother is Orthodox and in Belarus Poles are Roman-Catholics. It's possible that the mother married an Orthodox man.
No Belarus source labels Sawoniuk as Polish. Xx236 (talk) 06:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sawoniuk's father is unknown (as many sources state). Local gossip was that the father was the schoolmaster but that is purely gossip. Your speculation about the religion of Poles in Belarus is interesting but irrelevant: we are talking about Poland; in interbellum Poland there were Orthodox Poles and in postwar Poland there are Orthodox Poles. And even if there were none, you would still need to provide a RS which states that all Polish people who lived in interbellum Poland were Catholic and that not being Catholic means that a person there then was not Polish. And even if you could provide such a source, it will still be only about Sawoniuk's half-brother. Your speculation about who his mother might have married is equally un-useful, the sources I've seen refer to her as being unmarried and that she died while Sawoniuk was a child, leaving him to be raised by his grandmother (maternal obviously). Varsovian (talk) 07:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- "Purely gossip" comes from Sawoniuk's brother. Sawoniuk's mother cleaned the school, apparently the job included some extra tasks. At least Sawoniuk believed to have a bad Jewish father.
- Your comment about my "irrelevant speculations" is irrevelant, I'm writing about mixed nationality/religion areas in the East, where the situation was totally different than eg. in Kalisz, where Orthodox people were mainly Russian officials and soldiers. Being Catholic meant in the East being Polish till being executed as a Pole.
- Your "sources" inform continously about "Polish death camps". Happy "sources" (or rather "pure gossip").Xx236 (talk) 10:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- As noted above several times, if you have issues with regard to the reliability of sources such as the BBC, The Independent and the Guardian, WP:RSN. As to you claims regarding Orthodox religion, do you have any sources which say that Sawoniuk can't have been Polish because he was Orthodox? If not, we can't put your claims into the article (for precisely the same reason that we aren't even allowed to mention that under the 1920 Polish citizenship law an illegitimate child born in Poland to a Polish mother is Polish and so Sawoniuk was born a Polish citizen, despite the fact that we have a source which explicitly states that Sawoniuk was born Polish). Varsovian (talk) 11:35, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sawoniuk's father is unknown (as many sources state). Local gossip was that the father was the schoolmaster but that is purely gossip. Your speculation about the religion of Poles in Belarus is interesting but irrelevant: we are talking about Poland; in interbellum Poland there were Orthodox Poles and in postwar Poland there are Orthodox Poles. And even if there were none, you would still need to provide a RS which states that all Polish people who lived in interbellum Poland were Catholic and that not being Catholic means that a person there then was not Polish. And even if you could provide such a source, it will still be only about Sawoniuk's half-brother. Your speculation about who his mother might have married is equally un-useful, the sources I've seen refer to her as being unmarried and that she died while Sawoniuk was a child, leaving him to be raised by his grandmother (maternal obviously). Varsovian (talk) 07:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Which another article in this Wikipedia discusses the citizenship of a child? What makes Sawoniuk so exceptional? Would you please learn about Eastern Poland (Kresy) customs if you want to discuss the subject? I don't discuss Welsh problems, because I know very little about Welsh problems. Yes, I have problems with "Polish death camps" propaganda of British media. Xx236 (talk) 08:28, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
- The article on Polish nationality law discusses the citizenship of children. If you have issues with the BBC, The Independent and the Guardian being "propaganda", please take them to WP:RSN. I note that you have provided no sources which support your suggestion that Sawoniuk can't have been Polish because his half-brother was Orthodox. Varsovian (talk) 11:12, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
The article was just created by user:Bandurist. Isn't that the same as the Blue Police? The article lacks inline citations too. Dr. Loosmark 23:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes; note that he uses the same pictures. It is a poorly written content WP:CONTENTFORK and as such, I recommend speedy redirect, after merging the few new and referenced sentences on the subject, after verification (for example, the last para of the first sections seems like it can be rescued, but the beginning "The Polish Auxiliary Police and Polish Auxiliary Police were" suggests that there may be factual errors - so verification of sources is necessary prior to any merger. PS. That said, the article is not only a content fork, it is a strange mix of several articles. The paragraphs on Selbschutz should probably be split into a new article. PS. It is possible Bandurist intended to write on Hilfspolizei - the section on Hilfspolizei#General_Government_.28occupied_Poland.29 needs expansion, but he most certainly confused several related subjects, see also Talk:Schutzmannschaft. PPS. On that note, I see than an anon redirect my article on Hilfspolizei to Schutzmannschaft ([11]) - frankly, I am not sure if this redirect was correct (we could use a German speaker and history expert on this). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- I also see there is a discussion at Talk:Polish Auxiliary Police - please inform the editors there that we also have a discussion here. I will also add that Polish Wikipedia has no article on "Polish Auxiliary Police"; from pl:Policja_Polska_Generalnego_Gubernatorstwa_(1939-1944)#Podobne_formacje (Blue Police#Other formations section): "Poles, Ukrainians, Belorusians and others were also drafted into German auxiliary police units... those units where however never described as "Polish", with a singular exception of the infamous Polnisches Schutzmannschaftsbataillon 202." (and perhaps the few other units listed here). If this is however what the article intends to describe, it is hardly clear (from the messy state it is in), plus, the name is likely wrong (unofficial). I'd suggest expanding this section and seeing if a literature offers hints for a better name (cursory glance at the literature sees that term used in lower capital cases, suggesting it is rather generic, and not very specific). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- It is interesting that Polish Wikipedia should state that Blue Police units were never described as "Polish". This Polish source contains the words "granatowej policji białoruskiej" and it has been claimed by more than one Polish speaking editor that this means "Belorussian Police". Strange that the Blue Police were never called Polish but clearly have been called Belorussian. It's also strange that they should be called "blue", Pl WP says that the Belarusian Auxiliary Police wore black uniforms. Varsovian (talk) 07:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Please read what I wrote again. I said that the pl wikipedia says that formations other than Blue Police where not known as Polish. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:03, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- It is interesting that Polish Wikipedia should state that Blue Police units were never described as "Polish". This Polish source contains the words "granatowej policji białoruskiej" and it has been claimed by more than one Polish speaking editor that this means "Belorussian Police". Strange that the Blue Police were never called Polish but clearly have been called Belorussian. It's also strange that they should be called "blue", Pl WP says that the Belarusian Auxiliary Police wore black uniforms. Varsovian (talk) 07:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- I also see there is a discussion at Talk:Polish Auxiliary Police - please inform the editors there that we also have a discussion here. I will also add that Polish Wikipedia has no article on "Polish Auxiliary Police"; from pl:Policja_Polska_Generalnego_Gubernatorstwa_(1939-1944)#Podobne_formacje (Blue Police#Other formations section): "Poles, Ukrainians, Belorusians and others were also drafted into German auxiliary police units... those units where however never described as "Polish", with a singular exception of the infamous Polnisches Schutzmannschaftsbataillon 202." (and perhaps the few other units listed here). If this is however what the article intends to describe, it is hardly clear (from the messy state it is in), plus, the name is likely wrong (unofficial). I'd suggest expanding this section and seeing if a literature offers hints for a better name (cursory glance at the literature sees that term used in lower capital cases, suggesting it is rather generic, and not very specific). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Spelling of Mme. Hanska's Name
Hello, folks working on Poland-related articles! I'm setting out to FA-ify (eventually) the article on the wife of Honoré de Balzac, Madame Ewelina Hańska. First on my radar is the spelling of her name. As I've noted over at the article talk page, every book I've read about M. de Balzac spells her name "Eveline". (And always without the accent on the "n" in Hańska.) I'm wondering why the Wikipedia article is so different, and if anyone would mind a move (or provide a citation for the spelling as we see it here). Thanks in advance for your help! Scartol • Tok 22:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- The name seems used, including in English works, see Google Book Search and search for "Ewelina Hańska" (wiki doesn't like the Google Book Search URLs anymore, I am afraid, they seem broken recently). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it's used, but it's much less common (certainly in the texts which focus on her life) than Eveline. WP:EN says the following: "If one name is clearly most commonly used in the English-language references for the article, we should probably use it." Ergo, it seems to me that "Eveline Hańska" would be the one to go with. Scartol • Tok 23:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- True. I was never that fond of the application of common names to people (diacritics, for example, are not that common, due to technical reasons), but she is an aristocrat, and those are a class (of problems, naming wise) in themselves. I would not oppose a move (I assume the old name will be kept in the lead as the second bolder alternative), and I might support it if it could be shown that best sources about her use the spelling you discuss. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 09:37, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it's used, but it's much less common (certainly in the texts which focus on her life) than Eveline. WP:EN says the following: "If one name is clearly most commonly used in the English-language references for the article, we should probably use it." Ergo, it seems to me that "Eveline Hańska" would be the one to go with. Scartol • Tok 23:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- I think in this particular case "Eveline" is indeed used by majority of English language sources, though "Ewalina" is not infrequent either. I believe Britannica uses "Eveline". I think moving it to "Eveline Hańska" and including "Ewalina" in the lead of the article is fine.radek (talk) 10:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
German names for Polish villages
user:HerkusMonte started a mass campaign to add German names into the lead of small Polish villages: [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23] , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] , [29] , [30] , [31] , [32] , [33] , [34] and so on and so forth. I have never seen such a mammoth size campaign before and I believe it should have been discussed first. I think it's especially problematic that he also adds into the lead separate names which were invented in 1938 by Nazi Germany. I think we should discuss and try to reach a consensus about this. I will invite user:HerkusMonte to give his opinion on the matter. Dr. Loosmark 17:56, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- What do you think is problematic about this? It seems standard practice. It's your reverts that I don't see any reason for.--Kotniski (talk) 18:29, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think as well, it is a standard practice for villages, which has been historically part of Prussia/Germany or were inhabited by German minority. It is used throughout the WP in articles about villages from various countries - Darwinek (talk) 18:42, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Standard practice? To have names invented in the Nazi period (1938) in the lead? Interesting practice I have to say... I wonder if German wiki has them as well. Dr. Loosmark 18:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Neo-Nazi propaganda or attempt to provoke Polish users? Adding names invented by the Germans Nazis for Polish towns and villages during the Nazi occupation of Poland is a pure Nazi propaganda or bloody provocation. Urgent admin. attention is required here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.254.80.90 (talk) 18:53, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- While giving Germanised names for Polish cities that were under German control before 1945 is allowed per rules of Wikipedia, adding in the lead names given by Nazis seems very inappropriate. Using that logic, we would have to give German names to ALL cities in Poland as it was fully under German control in WW2-for instance Warschau for Warsaw, Litzmanstadt for Łódż and so on.I would prefer to mention Nazi changed name in the proper context of the name change(germanisation campaign or honours for Prussian/German Empire/Nazi leaders) in the main text rather than in the lead.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 18:55, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Well I would assume good faith and wouldn't speculate on the reasons. However I'd like to know under what circumstances were those villages renamed in Nazi Germany in 1938, and what exactly is the rationale of having those names, which were used only for a brief period (1938 to 1944/45), in the lead. Those aren't exactly some historical names. Dr. Loosmark 19:01, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Neo-Nazi propaganda or attempt to provoke Polish users? Adding names invented by the Germans Nazis for Polish towns and villages during the Nazi occupation of Poland is a pure Nazi propaganda or bloody provocation. Urgent admin. attention is required here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.254.80.90 (talk) 18:53, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- (ec)The first sentence is where readers are likely to be looking for past names. Another possibility, if the naming situation with a particular place is more complex, is to create a separate section of the article (and put something like "(see Names below)" in the first sentence to draw readers' attention to it), but I don't see any particular point in doing that here. As long as it's made clear in the first sentence that these names applied only for a limited time, I don't think readers are going to be misled or significantly distracted. But removing the information altogether can't be right to the encyclopedia. (I made exactly the same point the other day to another editor who was removing Polish names from Lithuania-related articles - it would be good if editors of different nationalities worked together in cooperation or friendly rivalry to make the encyclopedia better, not keep seeing conspiracy every time information is added by the "enemy".)--Kotniski (talk) 18:57, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Polish names in Lithuania are historical, the ones introduced around 1937 were part of Nazi policy and replaced historical ones.
- (ec)The first sentence is where readers are likely to be looking for past names. Another possibility, if the naming situation with a particular place is more complex, is to create a separate section of the article (and put something like "(see Names below)" in the first sentence to draw readers' attention to it), but I don't see any particular point in doing that here. As long as it's made clear in the first sentence that these names applied only for a limited time, I don't think readers are going to be misled or significantly distracted. But removing the information altogether can't be right to the encyclopedia. (I made exactly the same point the other day to another editor who was removing Polish names from Lithuania-related articles - it would be good if editors of different nationalities worked together in cooperation or friendly rivalry to make the encyclopedia better, not keep seeing conspiracy every time information is added by the "enemy".)--Kotniski (talk) 18:57, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Xx236 (talk) 07:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think that while Germanised names can stay, those given during Germany's Nazi period should be moved to the main text with explanation. Notice that Łódż doesn't have Litzmanstadt in its lead.What do you think?--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Nazi names for occupied Polish places are probably not interesting enough in themselves (unless they were notorious for a concentration camp or something), but for long-time German places, once you've given the established German name - which undoubtedly does belong in the lead - I find it misleading to omit the Nazi/de-Slavicized one, since otherwise we're giving the false information that "the" German name was X. (We really need articles on these various name-changing campaigns, to link to to explain the context of the name changes. We don't need another battleground.)--Kotniski (talk) 19:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think that while Germanised names can stay, those given during Germany's Nazi period should be moved to the main text with explanation. Notice that Łódż doesn't have Litzmanstadt in its lead.What do you think?--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Kotniski, I am not advocating removing the Nazi name altogether, but rather removing it from the lead of the article. Otherwise soon somebody will add "Stalinogród" into Katowice's article lead. Dr. Loosmark 19:08, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I am not for removing it, but for placing it in the main text of the article, along with explanation as to the nature of the change, don't you think that move would actually improve encyclopedic value of the article? Also I am interested in source of the information HerkusMonte is putting into those articles. Perhaps we should ask for sources to ensure these names are correct.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:13, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
For places in East Prussia it makes sense to have the old German names. However, there is no good reason that I can think of to have the Nazi German names - where they differ from the older ones - in the lede. I can see in articles that have already been adequately developed including the fact that the names were changed under the Nazis, as well as an explanation as to why. So what was the motivation for changing those names? Why did "Zawoyken" become "Lilienfelde" (both German names) or "Wujaken" become "Ohmswalde"? Were the previous names just not-German-enough-too-Slavic sounding or something? Which administrative unit in the Nazi government made these kinds of decisions? Etc. On that note, I'd also like to note that none of these changes have been sourced.radek (talk) 03:43, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
I think that while Germanised names can stay - if only the Wikipedia Lithuanian editors were as reasonable and willing to compromise as that. If we were to follow their example, then we'd simply remove all references to the German names (or Germany for that matter) with edit summary of "undo" and no other explanation. Alas, I agree with Kotniski and MyMoloboaccount here and personally I favor consistency and fairness.radek (talk) 03:43, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- 1.Well, Radeksz, that's exactly what Loosmark did, full reverts without explanation or with a simple comment: "unnecessary info" [35]
- 2.WP:PLACE#General guidelines is absolutely clear about historic names: "#The lead: The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names 2)... used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order".
- 3.We should not mix up the situation in pre-war Germany and occupied Poland. A lot of names of villages and towns were already changed before 1933, e.g. 47 % of all village names in the district of Lötzen were already changed in the Weimar Republic (see also: Andreas Kossert: Mazury, Zapomniane południe Prus Wschodnich)
- 4.The "Nazi names" were the official names and somebody born in that area will still find this name in his passport. These names are still in use and that's why it's necessary to mention them.
- 5.The source is M. Kaemmerer, Ortsnamenverzeichnis der Ortschaften jenseits von Oder u. Neiße, ISBN 3-7921-0368-0.[36] HerkusMonte (talk) 06:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Many Nazi crimes were also legal. "Hitlersee" isn't legal in Poland and has been removed from a monument in the village. Xx236 (talk) 06:57, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Re#1&2 - In my experience I find that that particular guideline is not followed closely, or much at all in fact, especially when it comes to Polish or Yiddish names being the "alternative names". Loosmark was following general practice, as she exists. It seems like the guideline is only applied when it comes to foreign names in Polish places, but never vice versa. Sort of like some folks enforce the Gdansk/Danzig vote when it comes to putting in German names in Polish historical articles, but never the other way around.
- Re#4 - it's not necessary, though in some cases it may be interesting enough to include. But no reason for it to be in the lead. Put it in the article text. And explain why and how.
- Re#3&5 - Do the sources discuss why the names were changed from previous German names to new German names?radek (talk) 06:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think the guideline is followed quite widely, and certainly should be, since it helps give readers key information clearly. That there may have been nasty campaigns to remove Polish names from articles on places to the east is no reason to "retaliate" by removing German names from articles on Polish places - the problem of Polish-name removal needs to be addressed in itself. I still don't see any particular problem with these Nazi-era names being in the first sentence (though that's not the only alternative); like I said before, giving only one German name could be misleading.--Kotniski (talk) 06:57, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with you that the guideline should be followed, though I disagree on the extent to which it actually is. And I don't think the problem of Polish-name removal CAN BE addressed separately, particularly since sometimes it's the SAME editors who support adding the German names and removing the Polish names, and support each other. The whole thing should be dealt with comprehensively, otherwise these silly little disputes are going to keep flaring up.radek (talk) 08:54, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think the guideline is followed quite widely, and certainly should be, since it helps give readers key information clearly. That there may have been nasty campaigns to remove Polish names from articles on places to the east is no reason to "retaliate" by removing German names from articles on Polish places - the problem of Polish-name removal needs to be addressed in itself. I still don't see any particular problem with these Nazi-era names being in the first sentence (though that's not the only alternative); like I said before, giving only one German name could be misleading.--Kotniski (talk) 06:57, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- This Wikipedia seems to be divided into several projects, in one Germans are "expelled", in another one Poles are "repatriated, transferred or resettled". Gdańsk can be "Danzig" but Vilnius is always Vilnius. The "letters contain the first unambiguous reference to Vilnius as the capital" - Vilnius? The letters are available in Lithuanian (originally Latin), so I am not able to verify.Xx236 (talk) 10:37, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- So the truth is I do not understand what is this discussion about. Place names in other languages we have in interwiki.
I did not notice any recommendations that the articles about the Polish towns are to be translated into German. If we give the name in German, why can not be given, equally, in the English language, Russian, or Arabic? The reasons are purely subjective and I do not think that can be resolved.
I propose to add a table with the names of places in other languages and colloquialisms, or dialect. Otherwise, I see no point in naming the outside of the original.--WlaKom (talk) 11:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Some users unfortunately still see a problem having a German name in the lead for villages, which has been in Poland only since 1945. Also please, do not mix up terms "German" and "Nazi". - Darwinek (talk) 11:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- I don't understand your point about mixing up the terms "German" and "Nazi". Please note that some of those villages were added 2 names: one "historical" German and another German which was changed to in 1938 (well allegedly, as no sources were provided). Now unless you can demonstrate that the entity which existed in 1938 was not Nazi Germany I am not quite sure what you mean. Dr. Loosmark 11:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Original German names should stay for sure - for East Prussia, sure. But a lot of time this kind of thing is taken farther, for example with Bydgoszcz or Poznań which were only under German rule during the partitions and during the Nazi occupation. Or the German name is peppered throughout the article without regard to style or aesthetics just to "mark it". Or the word "German" occurs 7 times in a single sentence in the lead, just so you know... etc. (In fairness, some of these quite real examples were due to a now banned anon editor - though I keep finding his "work" in many articles still).radek (talk) 12:00, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Well, not only for East Prussia. Going to the times before partitions is ridiculous, in this manner, no "foreign" names could be applied for 90% of articles about villages of most European countries. Polish people unfortunately forget often that these territories were not only under German administration but they were ethnically mostly German or mixed. That's why plenty of names are used in the lead - because of factual demographic presence of other ethnic group than Poles. That's why e.g. Lesko has Yiddish name in the lead, though the town was never administered by Jewish state entity, nor Jews live there today. - Darwinek (talk) 12:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, but I didn't say "only" East Prussia. Rather, the point was that there are some places where German names probably belong in the lead, and then there are other places - which currently have them - where they don't but they're there essentially due to nationalistic POV pushing and German irredentism. Of course there's a good number of places (in Silesia, Pomerania (or Pomerelia or whatever)) where it's in between and somewhat of a judgement call. And again - the important thing is that whatever the reason for inclusion, it is spelled out clearly and it gets followed consistently when it comes to other places, like present day Lithuanian towns with historically large Polish populations.radek (talk) 12:56, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- You are right. Still I think some "unified stance" could not be achieved due to very nature of Wikipedia. You are right also pointing out the correct example of Polish names for Lithuanian municipalities. Attitude of Lithuanian editors is largely worrying and I've never met similar stance of such extent throughout the WP. "Minority names" are not a problem in articles about Swedish, German, Austrian, Czech, Slovak or Hungarian towns. The only problem seems to be with Lithuania. - Darwinek (talk) 13:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- The problem also happens with double naming for East Prussian cities-for example giving the name Królewiec in case of events connected to Polish history or people.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- You are right. Still I think some "unified stance" could not be achieved due to very nature of Wikipedia. You are right also pointing out the correct example of Polish names for Lithuanian municipalities. Attitude of Lithuanian editors is largely worrying and I've never met similar stance of such extent throughout the WP. "Minority names" are not a problem in articles about Swedish, German, Austrian, Czech, Slovak or Hungarian towns. The only problem seems to be with Lithuania. - Darwinek (talk) 13:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- The partitions are very specific events and to going to the times before the partitions is not at all ridiculous. It's one thing that a city or town has a historical demographic presence and quite another if the demographic presence is that of just an occupier. (and the partitions were de facto an occupation). Imagine if somebody would suggest to put the Japanese names into the lead of the Chinese cities which were occupied by the Japan. Dr. Loosmark 12:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Absolutely agreed. That's why I think demographic presence is much more important in these cases, than historical allegiance. The problem however also seems to be the extent of certain article. If it's a well-established longer article, e.g. Bydgoszcz, it could benefit from a "Name" section. However, most of articles here are still tiny stubs. In such cases, it should be mentioned in the lead I think. - Darwinek (talk) 12:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- I see your point. In such a case, I think using common sense and/or consensus should be used. "Names" section of some large city can contain dozen names in dozen languages, but the lead should probably reflect historically or "ethnically" the most important ones. - Darwinek (talk) 13:07, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- So you're saying "Wilno" in lead of "Vilnius", right? Honestly, I don't think "common sense" is going to help us much here as some people appear to have a quite different interpretation of what is common or what makes sense. And the last, I dunno, five, six, years on Wikipedia have pretty much shown that you're not gonna get a clear consensus on many places - and even if you do, two or three dedicated editors are quite willing to stonewall any kind of implementation of the said consensus.radek (talk) 13:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
A minor comment: controversial names, if left in lead, could be followed by a note ... I don't have strong feelings here, as long as the names are reliably referenced, bolded and present somewhere in the article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 11:46, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
More generally, let me restate that this issue needs to be dealt with comprehensively. Part of the problem is that there are guidelines but sometimes they are enforced, sometimes they are invoked, sometimes they are ignored, sometimes they are misrepresented etc. A lot of it DOES depend on whether you're talking about Polish-German issues or Polish-Lithuanian issues. And quite often the editors which take one position in a particular debate have no problem what so ever, completely flipping their reasoning and taking an opposite position in the next debate, when the shoe's on the other foot. That kind of a mess is basically an invitation for edit wars, disputes, accusations and battlegrounds. What is needed is an all around consistency, fairness and CLARITY in regard to policy. This is why you can't just try to address these flare ups locally (i.e. an article at a time). Also, since this is WP:Poland but it obviously involves broader issues, I suggest that a general RfC on naming for Polish-German-Lithuanian places be opened, rather than continuing the discussion here.radek (talk) 12:06, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Source seems to be self-published
I checked the source given by HerkusMonte and it seems to be self-published. Its publisher specialises on printing books on demand [37] Per Wiki Reliable Sources [38] Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media—whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:37, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Nazi names for Polish places
On the inclusion of these, I think an important issue which should be clarified first and which can shed some light on what to do about it, is the question I raised above: why were already German names changed by Nazi Germany (or even, according to Herkus above, Weimar Germany). What was the motivation behind this renaming, who or what body was responsible for carrying it out, etc. Generally, however, since these names were in use only shortly, and under what might be termed "extraordinary circumstances" (i.e. Nazi party in power in Germany) I don't think they belong in the lede, though they might very well be significant enough to discuss, along with the proper context, in the body of relevant articles.radek (talk) 12:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- I tend to agree: in my personal opinion changes made for purely political reasons don't really belong in the lede. However, we do mention all the names for Rastembork, Łęk, Żądzbork, Lec and Wartembork in the lede. That last one even mentions the other politically-drive name used for the town. So it very much seems that my personal opinion flies in the face of what has become accepted here. Varsovian (talk) 14:04, 5 July 2010 (UTC)