Misplaced Pages

Talk:Vilna offensive: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactivelyContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:41, 4 November 2006 editPiotrus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers285,696 editsNo edit summary  Latest revision as of 01:35, 12 March 2024 edit undoOpalYosutebito (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers154,383 editsm top: fixing/removing unknown parameters across Misplaced Pages using AutoWikiBrowserTag: AWB 
(444 intermediate revisions by 47 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Article history
== Name ==
|action1=WPR
Shouldn't this be under ]?--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 22:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
|action1date=04:20, 11 April 2007
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Vilna offensive
|action1result=reviewed
|action1oldid=121863652

|action2=GAN
|action2date=22 May 2007
|action2result=not listed
|action2oldid=132775982

|action3=GAN
|action3date=19:22, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
|action3link=Talk:Vilna offensive/GA1
|action3result=listed
|action3oldid=220821975

|currentstatus=GA
|topic=War
|dyk1date=5 November 2006|dyk1entry=...that the ''']''' set the stage for the future ] and ]s?
|otd1date=2011-04-16|otd1oldid=424312764
|otd2date=2012-04-16|otd2oldid=487706048
|otd3date=2019-04-16|otd3oldid=892750079
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|
{{WikiProject Military history
|class=GA
|B-Class-1=yes
<!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. -->
|B-Class-2=yes
<!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. -->
|B-Class-3=yes
<!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->
|B-Class-4=yes
<!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->
|B-Class-5=yes
|Polish-task-force=yes|WWI-task-force=yes|Russian-task-force=yes}}
{{WikiProject Lithuania|importance=Mid|dyk=yes|comments=}}
{{WikiProject Soviet Union|importance=Low|hist=yes|mil=yes|rus=yes|rus-importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Poland|importance=low}}
}}


{{Archive box|search=yes|
* ] <small>(2006–2007)</small>
}}
__TOC__
{{Clear}}

==Fair use rationale for Image:Polish army in Wilno 1919.jpg==
]
''']''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in '''this''' Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with ].

Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale2 -->

] (]) 08:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

==Tagging==

Certain croup of polish volunteers insisting that tag should be removed because, there is ''no ongoing discussion''. May I ask which WP official policy suggest and states that unsolved arguments stated previously and previuos discussion becomes invalid after some time? ] (]) 13:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

M.K, if you have issues with the article, please state them specifically. This will help us understand what your problem is. --]<sup>]</sup> 19:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
:Am I understand correctly, you failed to present any rationale with regards of official WP policies, which support that older unsolved arguments and discussion becomes invalid? I will wait for a while to receive more precise answer. ] (]) 15:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
::Currently it is you who have failed to present any arguments. Tags require ''rationale'', which is quite visibly lacking here. Removal of tags without rationale is perfectly in line with our policies.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 16:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

== Much turmoil ==

What is the intended meaning of this sentence in the lead: ''In the aftermath, the Vilna offensive would cause much turmoil on the political scene in Poland and abroad.'' --]<sup>]</sup> 08:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
:What is unclear about it? It was covered, discussed and criticized (and supported) by many for various reasons.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 18:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
It's very vague and it's only in the lead. I do not see the topic being discussed in the article's body. If it's important for the article, it should be explained in more detail. If it's not, why put such sentence in the summary only ? --]<sup>]</sup> 19:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
:It was supposed to describe the aftermath section. Feel free to adjust it if you feel it sounds strange.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 19:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

{{Talk:Vilna offensive/GA1}}

==References==
Hi, just noticed something you might want to address. The inline citations cite Davies, but there are two books by Davies in the references section. It might be a good idea to explain in the inline citation which one you mean.--] (]) 15:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
:Unless otherwise noted, they refer to his WERS monography on the PSWar.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 16:30, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Btw, I've added a new map but it doesn't want to go above the infobox, even through we have space on the left... --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 23:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

== Wrong reference to Prussia Empire? ==

One reads in the article following: "...The leader of the Polish forces, Józef Piłsudski, discerned an opportunity for regaining territories that were once the part of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, and since then were the part of the Prussia Empire, shaken by the 1917 Revolution and the ongoing Russian Civil War..." -- Vilnius, however, was never a part of Prussia Empire and there was no such thing as Prussia Empire at all. I think the reference here is made to Russian Empire. <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Latest revision as of 01:35, 12 March 2024

Good articleVilna offensive has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You KnowOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 11, 2007WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
May 22, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
June 22, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 5, 2006.The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the Polish capture of Wilno in 1919 set the stage for the future Polish-Soviet and Polish-Lithuanian Wars?
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 16, 2011, April 16, 2012, and April 16, 2019.
Current status: Good article
This article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMilitary history: European / Polish / Russian & Soviet / World War I
WikiProject iconThis 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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
European military history task force
Taskforce icon
Polish military history task force
Taskforce icon
Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
Taskforce icon
World War I task force
WikiProject iconLithuania Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LithuaniaWikipedia:WikiProject LithuaniaTemplate:WikiProject LithuaniaLithuania
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
A fact from this article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know? column.
WikiProject iconSoviet Union: Russia / History / Military Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Russia (assessed as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force.
WikiProject iconPoland Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.



Archives

Fair use rationale for Image:Polish army in Wilno 1919.jpg

Image:Polish army in Wilno 1919.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Tagging

Certain croup of polish volunteers insisting that tag should be removed because, there is no ongoing discussion. May I ask which WP official policy suggest and states that unsolved arguments stated previously and previuos discussion becomes invalid after some time? M.K. (talk) 13:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

M.K, if you have issues with the article, please state them specifically. This will help us understand what your problem is. --Lysy 19:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Am I understand correctly, you failed to present any rationale with regards of official WP policies, which support previuos edits that older unsolved arguments and discussion becomes invalid? I will wait for a while to receive more precise answer. M.K. (talk) 15:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Currently it is you who have failed to present any arguments. Tags require rationale, which is quite visibly lacking here. Removal of tags without rationale is perfectly in line with our policies.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Much turmoil

What is the intended meaning of this sentence in the lead: In the aftermath, the Vilna offensive would cause much turmoil on the political scene in Poland and abroad. --Lysy 08:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

What is unclear about it? It was covered, discussed and criticized (and supported) by many for various reasons.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

It's very vague and it's only in the lead. I do not see the topic being discussed in the article's body. If it's important for the article, it should be explained in more detail. If it's not, why put such sentence in the summary only ? --Lysy 19:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

It was supposed to describe the aftermath section. Feel free to adjust it if you feel it sounds strange.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

1. Well written?: Fail Pass

1.1 Prose

Although generally good, I feel that the entire article could benefit from a copyedit. If you wish, I can do this myself (I already copyedited the section that had the "please copyedit" tag on it, so I'm off to a start). Of particular note:
  • There's quite a bit of information that relies on parentheses (which tends to disrupt the flow of the article). Would it be possible to work the text in the parentheses into the article itself without that disruption? For example:
    • "After three days of street fighting (April 19-21)" could be reworded as "After three days of street fighting from April 19-21"
    • "The forces moving on Vilna included the cavalry group of Colonel Władysław Belina-Prażmowski (nine squadrons supported by a light battery of horse artillery, about 800 men) and infantry under General Edward Rydz-Śmigły (three battalions of the Polish 1st Legions Infantry Division with two batteries of heavy artillery, about 2,500 men)." should probably be reworded to:
      • "The forces moving on Vilna included the cavalry grou pf Colonel Wladyslaw Belina-Prazmowski, composed of 800 men in nine cavalry squadrons and a battery of horse artillery; and infantry under General Edward Rydz-Smigly, his force containing 2,500 men in three battalions of the Polish 1st Legions Infantry Division and two batteries of heavy artillery."
  • Generally, military ranks shouldn't be shortened to Col. Gen. Luit.-Gen. etc. Although us military history junkies (you and I included) will know what that means, someone coming to the page to locate information on the offensive probably won't. It just helps to make the page as clear as possible

*In the section Jewish Deaths, you say that "dozens of people connected with Litbel were arrested, and some were executed". then, in the Soviet counteroffensive section, you state "The Polish victory infuriated the Soviets, leading to dozens of arrests and several executions among those connected to Litbel". I'd suggest removing one of these to avoid the redundancy of it.

Oh. Ok, don't know why I didn't catch that before. Cam (Chat) 19:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
  • for those page viewers who don't know where Vilna is, it may help to expand upon where exactly Vilna is located in Poland/Lithania. Although you and I both know where Vilnius is located, most people won't.

1.2 MoS

  • There are a couple issues concerning the formating of date wikilinks. Most notably:
    • Dates should be wikilinked at their first appearance. I didn't catch a wikilink for April 15, although I did catch one for April 19, just something to check.

2. Factually accurate?: Minor Fail Pass

Very well cited. However...
  • Looking through the article history, there seems to be some disagreement concerning what some of the sources said about certain events or statistics. To be on the safe-side, I'd double-check the errors to ensure that they are errors.

"*Well, I can try to answer specific questions, but as far as I remember (it was some time ago that I wrote this article), the sources used were reliable... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I'm able to take that stuff in stride. Cam (Chat)

3. Broad in coverage?: Pass

coverage is quite broad and comprehensive. No objections.

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

Although there has been a lot of editing lately, none of it appears to be in the form of edit-warring. As such, this section is passed.

6. Images?: Pass with comment

The maps check out ok for copyrights. However, I'd be interested to see whether there is a Polish Public-Domain template in place for use in the copyright for the infobox image.

As such, I have placed this article On Hold. Although (technically), it says "one week until pass/fail" I feel that some common sense has to be applied when reviewing GA-Articles. Provided that progress is made, I won't be failing this article any time soon. If you have questions, feel free to contact me on My Talk Page. All the best, Cam (Chat) 05:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Passing GA...Cam (Chat) 19:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations! —PētersV (talk) 22:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

References

Hi, just noticed something you might want to address. The inline citations cite Davies, but there are two books by Davies in the references section. It might be a good idea to explain in the inline citation which one you mean.--Jackyd101 (talk) 15:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Unless otherwise noted, they refer to his WERS monography on the PSWar.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:30, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Btw, I've added a new map but it doesn't want to go above the infobox, even through we have space on the left... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Wrong reference to Prussia Empire?

One reads in the article following: "...The leader of the Polish forces, Józef Piłsudski, discerned an opportunity for regaining territories that were once the part of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, and since then were the part of the Prussia Empire, shaken by the 1917 Revolution and the ongoing Russian Civil War..." -- Vilnius, however, was never a part of Prussia Empire and there was no such thing as Prussia Empire at all. I think the reference here is made to Russian Empire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.139.88.253 (talk) 08:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Categories: