This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
It's no longer the Kingdom of Prussia, it's no longer in Germany, and it's no longer called Custrin. Other than that, the article may, for all I know, be accurate. --
Stemonitis12:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Agreed. I have looked and there is no municipality in Germany by this name. It's in Poland:
Kostrzyn nad Odrą
Doing 1911 articles vis-a-vis changed borders is dangerous, if only that they get ripped apart immediately, by a merge template or a suggestion for immediate deletion.
I've now attempted to bring this up to date (part in Poland, tiny part in Germany, mostly destroyed). Can someone please research and merge the concentration camp material? --
The Anome14:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)reply
Leave it as it is. Küstrin is a ruined fort city that was never rebuilt, and is not the same as Kostrzyn. The related part in Germany is called Küstrin-Kietz, and in the GDR this was usually just Kietz. The Vorland is a region, not a specific settlement, and this should be rephrased.
ProhibitOnions05:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)reply
I'd follow the German example. While former German placenames should not be used for article names, Küstrin is an exception, when we're talking about the ruins; it is not the same thing as Kostrzyn (which was formerly Küstrin-Neustadt). The Poles generally refer to the ruins as Küstrin, not Kostrzyn. The Küstriner Vorland (and Küstrin-Kietz) is in a different country, and would have its own article under any circumstances. Regards,
ProhibitOnions12:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)reply
The example of German Wikipedia should not be followed in this case, since their
de:Küstrin and
de:Kostrzyn nad Odrą articles are essentially duplicates of each other, which is bad practice, and something we should avoid. I would have nothing against an article under
Küstrin devoted solely to the ruins of the old town. Nevertheless, the main article containing most of the information about the city and its history should be under
Kostrzyn nad Odrą. Another possibility would be to have
Küstrin as a short disambig page, which would simply state that this was a German city before 1945 which was divided into various parts, which it would then list, with appropriate links.
Let me also note that I would guess the common name used for the ruins of Kustrin by Poles would be Stary Kostrzyn (Old Kostrzyn), per
[1],
[2]. But of course I don't live there so that's just a guess based on web searching.
Balcer04:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I meant the German division of articles should be followed, not the German text, which is pretty weak. I live nearby and have been to the ruins many times, and in my experience they are usually referred to as Küstrin in Polish as well, inasmuch as it's seen as a historic site (a more famous example being Auschwitz vs. Oświęcim). However, the county is Kostrzyn, the passport stamps at the border crossing 300 m away read Kostrzyn, and of course the municipality, the former Küstrin Neustadt, is also known as this. (And never mind the fact that Küstrin was also formerly written Cüstrin). This is why I would, more or less, follow the German article distribution:
Küstrin for the former small Prussian/German city that was destroyed in 1945, and for the ruins today;
Kostrzyn for the present-day Polish municipality, founded 1945, and for previous history of Küstrin-Neustadt;
Küstriner Vorland for the district in Germany containing the small community Küstrin-Kietz, known as Kietz in the GDR, which was formerly part of Küstrin (although the Vorland was not, despite what the English article currently states). Alternatively, write an article about Küstrin-Kietz and link this, rather than Küstriner Vorland, to the other two articles.
In any event, linking Küstrin to Küstriner Vorland would be a mistake, because a Vorland is a region near or preceding something, but not coterminous with it.
ProhibitOnions(T)11:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I wonder though, to what extent can Küstrin and Küstrin Neustadt be treated as separate towns with separate histories before
1945? Was there a formal division of this kind? And if they were not separate urban entities, their history should be discussed in one place. That place is naturally the article about the town which continues the traditions of the ubran entity, in this case Kostrzyn.
Balcer13:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
If the two towns are seperate from each other they should be listed in seperate articles.
Not really the same situation at all, as obviously
Görlitz is a city existing today on German territory. The old Küstrin is a section of Kostrzyn/Küstrin, now in ruin, on Polish territory. There is no town called Küstrin on the German side of the border today.
Anyway, in the past there have been proposals to have two separate articles, for example ,
Breslau, for everything pertaining to that town before 1945, and
Wroclaw for everthing after 1945. That approach has not been adopted, in English Wikipedia at least. Let's not implement it here.
Balcer13:56, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
The old Küstrin is a section of Kostrzyn/Küstrin, now in ruin, on Polish territory. There is no town called Küstrin on the German side of the border today
Just curious, do you now support this approach for all Polish cities which were part of Germany before 1939?
Balcer14:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I read more on the history on the city and it seems that till XIII century it was part of Poland and had influence on Polish history. Thus the information on history of Kostrzyn should be merged to Kostrzyn nad Odrą.
--
Molobo19:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
Could you be more specific? In my opinion, since there is no town of Küstrin on the German side of the border across from Kostrzyn, the
Cieszyn/
Český Těšín comparison does not fit too well. To be more specific, the whole
de:Küstriner Vorland, the Gemeinde/Commune/Gmina opposite Kostrzyn, has 2,953 inhabitants, so Küstrin-Kietz, the part of the city which remained on the German side after 1945, must have even less, and does not even rate an article in the German Wikipedia. For comparison, Kostrzyn has 17,620 inhabitants. Thus there can be no talk of any symmetry, as in the
Cieszyn/
Český Těšín case.
Balcer05:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I mean a nifty table organizing the articles. At Cieszyn/whatever we have separate articles on both towns, one on their history and two on the historical region. Here we could prepare the following:
Kostrzyn for the actual town
Kustrin-Kietz for the remainder on the other side
History of Kostrzyń and Kustrin for... you guessed it
Kustriner Vorland and for the historical region
At the same time we should try to keep as much of common history in the article on city's history, not to repeat it everywhere. In short, I do not propose to create/delete any articles, just limit their scope and reorganize their relations to each other. How about that? //Halibutt06:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)reply
One thing I should point out about Küstrin-Kietz is that it is not terribly close to the Polish border (and thus to the ruins of Küstrin or the town of Kostrzyn); it is a separate village a couple of kilometers away that happened to once fall under the jurisdictional boundary of Küstrin. It's hardly a divided city, like Gubin/Guben or Görlitz/Zgorzelec.
ProhibitOnions(T)06:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I agree with ProhibitOnions here. As the place does not qualify as a divided city, there is no great need for a special table. I would propose this variation of article scheme suggested by Halibutt:
Kustriner Vorland - Commune in Germany, should have same format as other communes
Kustrin-Kietz - even German Wikipedia considers this place too small for an article, so English Wikipedia should probably do the same, but we can include a short note
Küstrin Fortress - history of the fortress, which is quite notable. One could go into extensive detail here. On German Wikipedia there is a pile of pictures which could be moved to Commons and used here. The discussion about the ruins of the old city naturally belongs here as well.
Küstrin - brief disambituation page to direct readers to above entries
Sounds good, I only pointed out a general idea, I leave it up to others how to implement it :) I'm simply not knowledgeable enough. //Halibutt07:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC)reply
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
It's no longer the Kingdom of Prussia, it's no longer in Germany, and it's no longer called Custrin. Other than that, the article may, for all I know, be accurate. --
Stemonitis12:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Agreed. I have looked and there is no municipality in Germany by this name. It's in Poland:
Kostrzyn nad Odrą
Doing 1911 articles vis-a-vis changed borders is dangerous, if only that they get ripped apart immediately, by a merge template or a suggestion for immediate deletion.
I've now attempted to bring this up to date (part in Poland, tiny part in Germany, mostly destroyed). Can someone please research and merge the concentration camp material? --
The Anome14:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)reply
Leave it as it is. Küstrin is a ruined fort city that was never rebuilt, and is not the same as Kostrzyn. The related part in Germany is called Küstrin-Kietz, and in the GDR this was usually just Kietz. The Vorland is a region, not a specific settlement, and this should be rephrased.
ProhibitOnions05:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)reply
I'd follow the German example. While former German placenames should not be used for article names, Küstrin is an exception, when we're talking about the ruins; it is not the same thing as Kostrzyn (which was formerly Küstrin-Neustadt). The Poles generally refer to the ruins as Küstrin, not Kostrzyn. The Küstriner Vorland (and Küstrin-Kietz) is in a different country, and would have its own article under any circumstances. Regards,
ProhibitOnions12:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)reply
The example of German Wikipedia should not be followed in this case, since their
de:Küstrin and
de:Kostrzyn nad Odrą articles are essentially duplicates of each other, which is bad practice, and something we should avoid. I would have nothing against an article under
Küstrin devoted solely to the ruins of the old town. Nevertheless, the main article containing most of the information about the city and its history should be under
Kostrzyn nad Odrą. Another possibility would be to have
Küstrin as a short disambig page, which would simply state that this was a German city before 1945 which was divided into various parts, which it would then list, with appropriate links.
Let me also note that I would guess the common name used for the ruins of Kustrin by Poles would be Stary Kostrzyn (Old Kostrzyn), per
[1],
[2]. But of course I don't live there so that's just a guess based on web searching.
Balcer04:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I meant the German division of articles should be followed, not the German text, which is pretty weak. I live nearby and have been to the ruins many times, and in my experience they are usually referred to as Küstrin in Polish as well, inasmuch as it's seen as a historic site (a more famous example being Auschwitz vs. Oświęcim). However, the county is Kostrzyn, the passport stamps at the border crossing 300 m away read Kostrzyn, and of course the municipality, the former Küstrin Neustadt, is also known as this. (And never mind the fact that Küstrin was also formerly written Cüstrin). This is why I would, more or less, follow the German article distribution:
Küstrin for the former small Prussian/German city that was destroyed in 1945, and for the ruins today;
Kostrzyn for the present-day Polish municipality, founded 1945, and for previous history of Küstrin-Neustadt;
Küstriner Vorland for the district in Germany containing the small community Küstrin-Kietz, known as Kietz in the GDR, which was formerly part of Küstrin (although the Vorland was not, despite what the English article currently states). Alternatively, write an article about Küstrin-Kietz and link this, rather than Küstriner Vorland, to the other two articles.
In any event, linking Küstrin to Küstriner Vorland would be a mistake, because a Vorland is a region near or preceding something, but not coterminous with it.
ProhibitOnions(T)11:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I wonder though, to what extent can Küstrin and Küstrin Neustadt be treated as separate towns with separate histories before
1945? Was there a formal division of this kind? And if they were not separate urban entities, their history should be discussed in one place. That place is naturally the article about the town which continues the traditions of the ubran entity, in this case Kostrzyn.
Balcer13:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
If the two towns are seperate from each other they should be listed in seperate articles.
Not really the same situation at all, as obviously
Görlitz is a city existing today on German territory. The old Küstrin is a section of Kostrzyn/Küstrin, now in ruin, on Polish territory. There is no town called Küstrin on the German side of the border today.
Anyway, in the past there have been proposals to have two separate articles, for example ,
Breslau, for everything pertaining to that town before 1945, and
Wroclaw for everthing after 1945. That approach has not been adopted, in English Wikipedia at least. Let's not implement it here.
Balcer13:56, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
The old Küstrin is a section of Kostrzyn/Küstrin, now in ruin, on Polish territory. There is no town called Küstrin on the German side of the border today
Just curious, do you now support this approach for all Polish cities which were part of Germany before 1939?
Balcer14:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I read more on the history on the city and it seems that till XIII century it was part of Poland and had influence on Polish history. Thus the information on history of Kostrzyn should be merged to Kostrzyn nad Odrą.
--
Molobo19:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)reply
Could you be more specific? In my opinion, since there is no town of Küstrin on the German side of the border across from Kostrzyn, the
Cieszyn/
Český Těšín comparison does not fit too well. To be more specific, the whole
de:Küstriner Vorland, the Gemeinde/Commune/Gmina opposite Kostrzyn, has 2,953 inhabitants, so Küstrin-Kietz, the part of the city which remained on the German side after 1945, must have even less, and does not even rate an article in the German Wikipedia. For comparison, Kostrzyn has 17,620 inhabitants. Thus there can be no talk of any symmetry, as in the
Cieszyn/
Český Těšín case.
Balcer05:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I mean a nifty table organizing the articles. At Cieszyn/whatever we have separate articles on both towns, one on their history and two on the historical region. Here we could prepare the following:
Kostrzyn for the actual town
Kustrin-Kietz for the remainder on the other side
History of Kostrzyń and Kustrin for... you guessed it
Kustriner Vorland and for the historical region
At the same time we should try to keep as much of common history in the article on city's history, not to repeat it everywhere. In short, I do not propose to create/delete any articles, just limit their scope and reorganize their relations to each other. How about that? //Halibutt06:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)reply
One thing I should point out about Küstrin-Kietz is that it is not terribly close to the Polish border (and thus to the ruins of Küstrin or the town of Kostrzyn); it is a separate village a couple of kilometers away that happened to once fall under the jurisdictional boundary of Küstrin. It's hardly a divided city, like Gubin/Guben or Görlitz/Zgorzelec.
ProhibitOnions(T)06:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)reply
I agree with ProhibitOnions here. As the place does not qualify as a divided city, there is no great need for a special table. I would propose this variation of article scheme suggested by Halibutt:
Kustriner Vorland - Commune in Germany, should have same format as other communes
Kustrin-Kietz - even German Wikipedia considers this place too small for an article, so English Wikipedia should probably do the same, but we can include a short note
Küstrin Fortress - history of the fortress, which is quite notable. One could go into extensive detail here. On German Wikipedia there is a pile of pictures which could be moved to Commons and used here. The discussion about the ruins of the old city naturally belongs here as well.
Küstrin - brief disambituation page to direct readers to above entries
Sounds good, I only pointed out a general idea, I leave it up to others how to implement it :) I'm simply not knowledgeable enough. //Halibutt07:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC)reply