Revision as of 05:21, 23 May 2006 editPiotrus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers285,784 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:48, 11 February 2007 edit undoPiotrus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers285,784 edits {{WikiProject Poland|class=B|importance=High}}Next edit → | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject Poland|class=B|importance=High}} | |||
Let me voice my opinion concerning the latest additions to this article. It's hard for a laymen in architecture to see a difference between the Jesuit cathedrals in the PLC and the New World. Please elaborate on those features that set the Baroque art in Poland apart from that in, say, Sweden, Ukraine, Belarus, and Bohemia. Sarmatism and shaving seem to be of little relevance to the baroque art, so unrelevant stuff should be removed. --] | ] 10:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | Let me voice my opinion concerning the latest additions to this article. It's hard for a laymen in architecture to see a difference between the Jesuit cathedrals in the PLC and the New World. Please elaborate on those features that set the Baroque art in Poland apart from that in, say, Sweden, Ukraine, Belarus, and Bohemia. Sarmatism and shaving seem to be of little relevance to the baroque art, so unrelevant stuff should be removed. --] | ] 10:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | ||
----- | ----- |
Revision as of 03:48, 11 February 2007
Poland B‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Let me voice my opinion concerning the latest additions to this article. It's hard for a laymen in architecture to see a difference between the Jesuit cathedrals in the PLC and the New World. Please elaborate on those features that set the Baroque art in Poland apart from that in, say, Sweden, Ukraine, Belarus, and Bohemia. Sarmatism and shaving seem to be of little relevance to the baroque art, so unrelevant stuff should be removed. --Ghirla | talk 10:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
This article needs revision in order not to violate copyright at this site. I've made a start. --Wetman 13:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- It would be useful to pull more information from the website which it seems to be plagarizing from. The original article is of a much superior quality. The current one gives no sense to the opulence of the Commonwealth at this time. -~~
- The article clearly indicates its sources, so it is not a plagiarism. And while certain similarities are visible, as a consequence of using this text as a major and primary reference, it seems to have been sufficiently different not to be a copyvio. Of course, it could surely use expantion, feel free to do so - especially if you can find other sources to use.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)