This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Lech Walesa es not Danziger
I have two related concerns about this page: (1) Most important, I am unable to authenticate what Walesa is claimed to have said to the United Nations Security Council about attacking Iraq. Mr Walensa has made a number of comments on this subject and we should try to present a balanced view. (2) The article uses the word "recently", without indicating a date. Perhaps we should include date information when we speak of something's having happened recently.
Two other concers: This page is completely NPOV. The most important information seems to be he was a "double spy" which has never been proved or documented in any serious way. Except this alomost nothing is said about his real political and social activity - the things which, contrary to his "double spying", are well proved and documented. The statement "a anti-communist puppy" is NPOV by itself.
Well - I have decided to change this page quite seriously. I have added the list of basic facts about Lech Wałęsa and have changed the "spy" story making its much more NPOV (at least IMHO). Sorry for my bad English.
I've done some fixups to the english spelling and grammar of this (otherwise excellent) article. I'll probably do some more, and perhaps some reformatting. In addition, I have some language questions which can hopefully be answered by Polish-speaking wikipedians: --
Finlay McWalter 23:52, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
This is awful - the only part that's actually an article is about ridiculous conspiracy theories. Someone should turn the timeline into paragraphs. john k 08:09, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I've rearranged the points form into paragraphs as suggested. No information has been added or removed. jp
What was the film about him? Iron Man, or something? I remember it was notable. Must go into the article. mikka (t) 16:45, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Andrzej Wajda's Man of Iron, is what i think you're talking about. Wajda's earlier Man of Marble, about Communism in the 1950's and 1960's, is also excellent.
I would. The central figure, i.e. the Man of Iron-whom the main character has been sent to slander-is Lech Walesa. mercruz (t) 16:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
This article is on the Spoken Wikipedia request list, so I am going to make a recording. If any of you want to add any significant changes, notify me now.
Markkasan 20:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
I see no reason to include a mispronunciation of his name in English at the top of the article, and for this reason removed all but the correct pronunciation. I am not very nationalistic but find it mildly offensive. Many Americans butcher many world leader's names - are we to start including phonetic mispronunciations at the top of encyclopedia articles?
-- Random Pole
Random pole is rights. It is utter madness to include the MISpronounciation - e.g. how it is read by an englishman with no idea about the Polish language 84.167.245.86 11:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
The reasons for move copied from the entry on the WP:RM page:
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. WhiteNight T | @ | C 01:24, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Following section was added to the Lech Walesa article:
==Recent controversy==
Lech Walesa has recently had to face up to accusations that he was a paid agent of the Sluzba Bezpieczenstwa (state security service) for more than 10 years during his rise to the top of the Solidarity movement the in Gdansk shipyards (during the 1970's). Walesa, under the codename "Bolek" (Lech Walesa's father's name), is said to have been recruited to pass information to the SB, and was bumped into the top leadership position within Solidarity by other embedded agents of the SB in an attempt to control the movement. His subsequent break from SB control is attributed to a new arrangement Walesa made with the CIA, then headed by George H. W. Bush.
Prior to the 2000 presidential election, Walesa was cleared to hold political office by a special "vetting court" (lustracja), which held that photocopies of documents pertaining to agent "Bolek", including signed receipts for payments from the SB, were inadmissible. The original documents, if they in fact existed, are said to have been pulled from SB files and destroyed during Walesa's term as the first president of a newly-democratic Poland, 1990-95.
Poland, unlike most other former soviet satellite states, never publicly opened the records of the state security apparatus following the disintegration of the Soviet block. While unproven and hotly contested, this version of Walesa's past is being increasingly discussed in Poland (as of December 2005). Walesa has been accused of this on numerous occasions on Polish television and radio shows, and responds in an increasingly angered way, threatening to take libel action if the accusations continue. Whether true or not, the allegations underscore the immense political savvy, however opportunistic, of a man who went from shipyard electrician without a high school degree to the president of his nation and international anti-communist mascot.
I moved this section to the talk page for following reasons:
-- Francis Schonken 13:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Jak_lefataliste, 31st December 2005:
The article seems to be missing the reasons he opposed the Soviet Union, why he supported the strike in the first place, and what was so bad about living under the Soviet Bloc (and no, it isn't enough to assume his actions speak for themselves). Why did he support Margaret Thatcher? Why did he go to Reagan's funeral (and why did he support him)? I know why, and plenty of others know why, so why isn't any of this in the article? Kamikaze Highlander 20:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
are you joking - he was terrible president.
The main picture is extremely pixelated and the other pictures are missing captions, can anyone who knows more about this guy work on that ? Mbisanz 23:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
From New York Times, Sept. 5, 2007:
Too much information, Lech! :-)
Sca 16:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
The honors section says that Lech Walesa has received 32 doctorates and is supported by a reference from Walesas official website. This information is faulty. His 33rd doctoral reception was in Trois Rivieres in Quebec, Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stanleymilgram ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
What institution is meant by "Connecticut State University"? Is that supposed to be Central Connecticut State University? Richard David Ramsey 21:42, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
any proves for that, I've never seen before such a coat of arms, he isn't nobile - it's enough to take a loo at his name... besides let someone xpand article with section 'falandyzacja prawa'...
Iznogud —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iznogud ( talk • contribs) 14:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
This is a hot topic now in Poland, I think it should also be included in the article. I do not have the book published by the IPN and I am not interested in Walesa as such, however, perhaps some editor would add information on his cooperation with the communist secret services in the 1970s as well as destruction of compromising documents, ordered by him in early 1990s, when he was president. Tymek ( talk) 17:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
To jest wszystko kłamstwo i pomówienia, Pan Prezydent Lech Wałęsa nigdy nie współpracował z SB - to jest polityczny atak na wielkiego polskiego wodza.
--- Member of Civillian Platform ---
_______Facts_______
It is not true that Lech Wałęsa cooperate with communist secret services. There is no evidence that he cooperate. There are only some fake materials made by communist secret services to discredit him. book published by Institute of National Remembrance about cooperation contains substantive errors and can't be reliable scientific publication. Without Mr Wałęsa we wouldn't be here now.
One of the young generation (Poland).
Because Golitsyn comment has nothing to do with Walesa's alleged cooperation with communist Secret Service and the book published by Centkiewicz. Many people said many things about Walesa, you just can't list them all here.-- Jacurek ( talk) 16:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
I've removed that convoluted section that looked more like a blatant copy and paste than an encyclopedic entry.
In my opinion, the accusations of anti-Semitism by that Israeli institute should not be included, as they seem to be Fact picking, and even if they were true as such, the proportional volume of the hand-picked facts drowns other information, giving a false impression to the reader.
We must also be very careful with articles about living people. Likeminas ( talk) 01:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
User:Piotrus submitted this to me by email. The fixes he made can be seen at the edit history of this page.
This article is verifiable, well written, neutral, etc. I'm passing it as a GA. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 16:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia e-mail Inbox X
Reply
Piotrus to me
show details Jan 23
Hi,
First, I want to thank you once again for your help with the teaching GA. This term, due to reasons below, I am doing my wiki teaching on Wikibooks, but I expect to return with the activity to Wikipedia in a few months :)
However, I would like to make another irregular request of you :)
As you may know, I am currently blocked - but some recommended I appeal my remedies soon, and that I also work on content to show I can be a constructive editor (as I guess my past 20+ FAs and such are not convincing enough :>). Anyway, at this point I have three draft articles that I think are close to a GA status, and if I could, I would nominate them on en wiki as many others in the past. Of course, I cannot do this. Nonetheless, I've posted them publicly here:
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedysta:Piotrus/brudnopis/en/Lech_Wa%C5%82%C4%99sa http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedysta:Piotrus/brudnopis/en/Stanis%C5%82aw_Koniecpolski http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedysta:Piotrus/brudnopis/en/sociology_of_leisure
The first two are major improvements of existing articles; the last one is a new article.
I was wondering if you could consider reviewing them - you can post comments about them to my pl wiki talk page, on their talk or email them to me. I would of course do my best to address them. Your help would allow me to do two things:
All I am asking you here is of course 100% wiki-legal, just in case you are wondering.
Anyway, I want to thank you again for your help in the past, and I hope we can work together again!
Piotr
-- This e-mail was sent by user "Piotrus" on the English Wikipedia to user "Peregrine Fisher". It has been automatically delivered and the Wikimedia Foundation cannot be held responsible for its contents.
The sender has not been given the recipient's email address, or any information about his/her e-mail account; and the recipient has no obligation to reply to this e-mail or take any other action that might disclose his/her identity. For further information on privacy, security, and replying, as well as abuse and removal from emailing, see < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Email>.
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotrus
show details Jan 24
I can reveiew Lech Wałęsa. Let's do it by email. We can copy the
comments over to wiki at some point.
To get it ready for a thorough review: expand lead, merge/remove single sentence paras, add and format all refs, explain why thecityreview.com and other odd refs are reliable, think of a better format (prose) for "List of honours and awards" and "Honorary doctorates" (may not need to list every one. Try to make a story out of them). - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 24
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
I can reveiew Lech Wałęsa. Let's do it by email. We can copy the
comments over to wiki at some point.
To get it ready for a thorough review: expand lead, merge/remove single sentence paras, add and format all refs, explain why thecityreview.com and other odd refs are reliable, think of a better format (prose) for "List of honours and awards" and "Honorary doctorates" (may not need to list every one. Try to make a story out of them).
Thanks. I'll work on lead and single sentences (already done some work, but want to expand the lead a little further). All refs should be formatted, although some templates are not supported on pl wiki and break the references (like all cite templates).
By all means, please list the potentially unreliable references here. Regarding http://www.thecityreview.com/olympics.html - yeah, I had a feeling it will not last long. But I found a better one:
http://tars.rollins.edu/wpi/cousteau.shtml -> Jean-Michel Cousteau (biography), Winter Park Institute, Rollins College
This should make it relatively reliable.
PS. Nihil novi will over the next few days work on improving the prose.
--
Piotr
"To be defeated and not submit, is victory; to be victorious and rest on one's laurels, is defeat." --Józef Piłsudski
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 24
Sounds good. Just email me when you're ready for a more thorough
review. If the cite template doesn't work, maybe you can copy/paste
the result into the ref tags for now.
- Show quoted text -
--
Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 25
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
Sounds good. Just email me when you're ready for a more thorough
review. If the cite template doesn't work, maybe you can copy/paste
the result into the ref tags for now.
They will work when the article is moved to en wiki; I am not sure how to nicely deal with it now. I think cite books and news will not be problematic, so I looked at cite webs:
http://www.ipn.gov.pl/portal/pl/229/7615/SB_a_Lech_Walesa_Przyczynek_do_biografii.html -> reliable Polish historical institute
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1983/press.html -> self-explanatory, I hope
http://www.constitutioncenter.org/libertymedal/recipient_1989.html -> website of another award he got, used as a source that he got it...
http://www.mofa.gov.tw/webapp/content.asp?cuItem=25174&mp=6 -> Taiwanese gov' press release, used to source his visit there
Those are all cite webs hidden by the template malfunction.
I looked over all the other refs, and I think they are reliable (many news sources, but uncontroversial).
The one controversy related to accusations of being an agent, I tried to source reliably, and tone down to NPOV (the current article, btw, due to very bad treatment of this issue (and also rants against his presidency) should be tagged as a BLP violation - could you do this?).
-- - Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 26
Looks good.
"Coincidentally (perhaps), Polish authorities lifted martial law on 1 January 1983, when this single came out." is a bit informal.
"Patrick Dailly's "Solidarity", starring Kristen Brown as Lech Walesa, was premiered by San Francisco Cabaret Opera in Berkeley and Oakland in September and October 2009." needs to be integrated.
"Wałęsa was the subject of several books and articles" should say a little more about this.
What ref supports "A charismatic leader"?
"Arrested again after martial law was imposed and Solidarity was outlawed, upon release..." sounds a little funny, or maybe it's OK. Not sure.
"he speaks and lectures" - Maybe just one?
This thing is really close, but explain why you feel the lists of awards and doctorates is the best way to include that info, if that's how you feel. - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 26
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
Looks good.
"Coincidentally (perhaps), Polish authorities lifted martial law on 1 January 1983, when this single came out." is a bit informal.
I removed "(perhaps)". I am not the best to address style/tone issues, but Nihil novi has yet to get to that part of the article.
"Patrick Dailly's "Solidarity", starring Kristen Brown as Lech Walesa,
was premiered by San Francisco Cabaret Opera in Berkeley and Oakland
in September and October 2009." needs to be integrated.
Done; must have missed it when I was converting this section into prose from original bullet points.
"Wałęsa was the subject of several books and articles" should say a
little more about this.
Well, I am unable to find any work that discusses books and articles on Wałęsa, or even lists them (LIW lists articles, but not books). I added some refs, but I don't really see how this can be expanded.
What ref supports "A charismatic leader"?
Good catch. It's Britannica; I added that as a referenced claim to the body.
"Arrested again after martial law was imposed and Solidarity was
outlawed, upon release..." sounds a little funny, or maybe it's OK.
Not sure.
Uh-oh, sounds like any English sentence to me :) Don't you just love working with non-native English speakers? :D
"he speaks and lectures" - Maybe just one?
Well, they are somewhat different. Lectures gives it the air of authority (anybody can speak), but he does deliver a lot of non-lecture speeches (in media, for example).
This thing is really close, but explain why you feel the lists of
awards and doctorates is the best way to include that info, if that's
how you feel.
Well, I don't see how they can be converted into any kind of a story. We could have a long list-like paragraph - he was awarded doctorates by (long list). Frankly, I find lists more readable in such situations - prose is good, but lists, well, sometimes should be just lists.
Btw, the org article still needs the BLP issues template. Sigh: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Lech_Wa%C5%82%C4%99sa&action=historysubmit&diff=340144613&oldid=339342839
-- - Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 26
Which template is it? I can't find it.
2010/1/26 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 26
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
Which template is it? I can't find it.
I was thinking about the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:BLP_dispute
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 27
Btw, the ArbCom amendment that clearly states others are allowed to proxy for me on LW is about to pass.
If it's ok with you I'd like to cc you in discussion I am having with the three editors whom ArbCom authorized to be my proxies.
I'd suggest that they wait till we are done with addressing the article issues you may yet raise; then they would transwiki it to en wiki. I am not sure who should nominate the article; but once it is done I presume you'll be able to insta-pass it (perhaps you could nominate it yourself?).
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 27
You can cc this if you want. I'll try and give you detailed comments
tomorrow morning.
2010/1/27 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 28 (13 days ago)
"his role in Polish politics diminished." - was diminished
There is some overreffing. " His father Bolesław was a carpenter who died shortly after World War II.[1][2][3]" probably doesn't need three refs, for example. There's lots of places that one ref is probably enough.
"On 8 December 1969 he married Danuta Gołoś. The couple have eight children: Bogdan, Sławomir, Przemysław, Jarosław, Magdalena, Anna, Maria-Wiktoria, Brygida.[3][2]" - Single sentence para.
"he was even considered for chairman of the strike committee." - "even" is informal.
"After that he worked as an electrician" - "after that" is too informal.
"Wałęsa famously scaled the the shipyard fence" - two "the"s
"Wałęsa famously scaled the the shipyard fence and became one of the leader of this strike." - Not clear how scaling a fence leads to being a leader.
"The Solidarity quicky grew, claiming over 10 million members - more than a quarter of Poland's population.[7] Wałęsa's role in the strike, negotiations and the newly formed independent Solidarity gained him fame on the international stage.[1][2]" - Sounds funny. Maybe use "Solidarity trade union" each time. Can also use just "trade union" sometimes for variety.
"Wałęsa kept this position until 13 December 1981, when he was arrested. General Wojciech Jaruzelski declared a state of martial law on 13 December." - Try and do date just once.
" In late summer of 1988, Wałęsa organized an occupational strike in Gdańsk Shipyard, demanding only the re-legalisation of Solidarity." - Does the article say it was outlawed? I missed it if it did.
"organize "half-free" elections to the Polish parliament." - What does "half free" mean?
"the Opposition took all seats in the Sejm that were subject of free elections and all but one seats in the newly re-established senate" - should be "all but one seat"
"Wałęsa was one of the most public figures of the Solidarity" - Is this the Solidarity Trade Union, or something else?
"appeaing on many dissident posters" - sp
I'll do more comments soon.
2010/1/27 Peregrine Fisher - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 28 (13 days ago)
I am not replying with "done" comments for small things - they are all done. Also, you didn't ask for it, but I translated the titles of all the (relatively few) Polish sources for the convenience of the English readers. For the few bigger/other comments:
There is some overreffing. " His father Bolesław was a carpenter who
died shortly after World War II.[1][2][3]" probably doesn't need three
refs, for example. There's lots of places that one ref is probably
enough.
True, but I like redundancy (what if a site goes 404, etc.).
"Wałęsa famously scaled the the shipyard fence and became one of the
leader of this strike." - Not clear how scaling a fence leads to being
a leader.
I hope the rewritten sentence sounds better; those are two related but separated events.
" In late summer of 1988, Wałęsa organized an occupational strike in
Gdańsk Shipyard, demanding only the re-legalisation of Solidarity." -
Does the article say it was outlawed? I missed it if it did.
Good catch, added the info on this.
"organize "half-free" elections to the Polish parliament." - What does
"half free" mean?
It was explained in the next para which you cited; I rewrote this to be more clear and added some expansion.
"Wałęsa was one of the most public figures of the Solidarity" - Is
this the Solidarity Trade Union, or something else?
In 99% Solidarity means the Solidarity Trade Union. Often, sources don't specify that and one has to assume that's what they mean (there were a lot of various suborganizations and spin-offs with Solidarity in their names, but we can also speak of them all forming the "Solidarity movement").
"appeaing on many dissident posters" - sp
Fixed that and some other spelling mistakes that my check spotted.
I'll do more comments soon.
Great.
-- - Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 29 (12 days ago)
The way "solidarity" is used for multiple things is confusing. It
would be great if you could add an explanation early on, so readers
have a better idea of the possible meanings they will encounter later.
Also, maybe be explicit in all the cases that the refs allow you to
be. Whatever you think is best, but I'm finding the word confusing. It's probably a Polish to English problem, or something.
"that some of his former colleagues are satisfied running the government together with former communists." - "were satisfied"?
"On 9 December 1990..." - Extra italics?
"to become the first democratically elected president of Poland for the next five years." - Sounds like another first democratically elected president will be coming along.
The para that begins "In 1993 he founded his own political party" would do well with an intro sentence that describes what's coming.
"Wałęsa supported Poland's entry into NATO and the EU." - Maybe put what years those things happened in parenthesis or something.
What's a Nato-bis?
"The concept, though supported by Polish right-wing..." - Probably should be two sentences. It's pretty long, and the para only has two right now.
"He has however been criticized for his confrontational style..." - Makes you think the previous para would be praise, but it's also something bad.
"tarnished his own reputation" - "own" not needed.
"about him being to authoritarian" - "too"
"(Sejm).[7]/>[20]/>[15][18]"
"Finally, Wałęsa's problems were compounded by the difficult transition into the market economy, that while seen as highly successful in the long run, has resulted in Wałęsa's government loosing much of its popular support." - "Poland's difficult transition"? I think "has" should be removed, unless it's still going on.
"Wałęsa's BBWR party performed poorly in the 1993 parliamentary elections, at times the popular support for him has" - same problem with "has"
"and he himself narrowly lost" - "himself" not needed.
"Wałęsa claimed to go to "political retirement"" - "go into"?
"on the political scene became increasingly marginal" - Maybe "in politics became increasingly marginal"
I'll do more soon.
2010/1/28 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 30 (11 days ago)
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
The way "solidarity" is used for multiple things is confusing. It
would be great if you could add an explanation early on, so readers
have a better idea of the possible meanings they will encounter later.
Also, maybe be explicit in all the cases that the refs allow you to
be. Whatever you think is best, but I'm finding the word confusing. It's probably a Polish to English problem, or something.
Fixed all of those; but with regards to Solidarity, I am not sure what you find confusing. It is linked and explained on the first uses, both in lead and text. If refers to the Solidarity Trade Union; in few cases where it doesn't, a full name of the other entity is used.
I've went over and made sure that after the other entity name is used, the next Solidarity reference specifies we are talking about the trade union again.
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Feb 1 (9 days ago)
I am wondering if it would be possible to expedite the review? I would like to send an appeal to ArbCom regarding my site ban soon; and I'd love to have LW as a GA by then.
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Feb 1 (9 days ago)
I'll try to move quickly.
"Since his 1995 presidency" - Why don't we use his name since it's the beginning of a section.
"That year he has also founded" - No "has"
"In 1997 Wałęsa supported and helped" - is "supported" needed? It also gets repetitive with the supported later in the sentence.
"However, his the real leader of the party" - No "his"
"Wałęsa again stood for the" - Maybe "Wałęsa again ran in the"
"Simultaneously, he expressed support for Poland's newly-formed Democratic Party - demokraci.pl in the parliamentary elections of the same year" - ref?
"citing differences with the party's support of the Law and Justice party" - Maybe "citing their support of the Law and Justice party"
"secret informer of the Polish communist secret police - Służba Bezpieczeństwa" - dash is weired. Maybe commas around "Służba Bezpieczeństwa"?
"by international press.'[35]" - Extra single quote.
"to a big public surprise" - Maybe "to the public's surprise"
"Wałęsa received many other international prizes" - "has received"
"He was also the first recipient of the Liberty Medal on 4 July 1989 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania[48] and the Presidential Medal of Freedom." - Makes it sound like he was the first to get a PMF.
".[3]A History of Foreign Leaders and Dignitaries Who Have Addressed the U.S. Congress, The Office of the Clerk </ref>" - Fix ref tag.
The para that begins "In 2002, Wałęsa represented Europe" is choppy. Most of the sentences are "On date, Wałęsa did this", "In date, Wałęsa did that". Mix it up to remove choppiness.
"were big hits in Poland in the 1990" - 1990s?
"Wałęsa was the subject of dozens of books" - Maybe "has been" instead of "was"
OK, fix that stuff, and I'll pass it. Tell me what you want me to do on wiki.
2010/2/1 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Feb 1 (9 days ago)
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
I'll try to move quickly.
Thanks!
"Simultaneously, he expressed support for Poland's newly-formed
Democratic Party - demokraci.pl in the parliamentary elections of the
same year" - ref?
Couldn't find one - removed claim.
The para that begins "In 2002, Wałęsa represented Europe" is choppy.
Most of the sentences are "On date, Wałęsa did this", "In date, Wałęsa
did that". Mix it up to remove choppiness.
Tried to, but it's really difficult to do something with this para :( Any suggestions what else can be done with it would be appreciated.
OK, fix that stuff, and I'll pass it. Tell me what you want me to do on wiki.
Done. Once you tell me the article is 100% ready I'll email the editors who agreed to transwiki it. They should also nominate it to GAN after moving it; I'll ask them to notify you when this has happened so you can pass it.
Thank you for your help!
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Feb 2 (8 days ago)
OK, we'll call that good. Email me when it's ready to be reviewed.
Do you want me to copy our emails over to the GA1 page, or just make a
not of what we did?
Is anyone going to object to plopping the article in over what's currently there?
2010/2/1 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Feb 3 (7 days ago)
I added it.
2010/2/2 Peregrine Fisher - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 23:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Lech walesa is well known for recieving the nobel peace prize for bringing down communism in russia and organizing workers against the oppression. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.92.110 ( talk) 21:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page not moved: no concensus in 46 days. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 07:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Lech Wałęsa →
Lech Walesa — Not because either one is better, more correct or more accurate, but because "Lech Walesa" is more common in reliable English-language sources. See
WP:UE for choosing between anglicized and local spellings.
Dohn joe (
talk)
01:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Second, as to this particular proposal, I support it because as others have noted this subject is almost always referenced by name in English sources without diacritics, so the title of the article should reflect that.
Finally, as to how other articles should be treated, like Milosevic, let's take one step at a time. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 18:56, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Consensus is also determined by choices made in active discussions, and not by inertia. If we use (or omit) diacritics in many cases simply because nobody has thought to remove (or add) them, then that would seem to carry less weight than decisions that have actually been considered by Wikipedians in conversations such as this one.
The idea that we need to change policy prior to making individual case-by-case choices is completely anathema to how we work. The day that becomes true, Wikipedia dies. - GTBacchus( talk) 04:24, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
In short, focus in this discussion should be on what the relevant guidelines say and whether readers are better off with the article at Lech Wałęsa or Lech Walesa, regardless of what may or may not happen with use of diacritics in other titles. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 19:16, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I note that WP:DIACRITICS also says "Beware of over-dramatising these issues". Remember our goals: to place the article at the title that most readers would most immediately recognize. That's all anyone is trying to do. Powers T 13:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
It should be noted here that WP:DIACRITICS is not representative of actual practice on Wikipedia, nor of consensus - it would be accurate if it reflected the fact that we can all easily observe: that diacritics are used much more commonly on Wikipedia than they are in English sources as a whole (because we're an encyclopedia doing the boring job of conveying information to people), but any attempt to make it say that is reverted by one of a handful of guardians of that page. In other words, what's written there is just a few people's ideas, it shouldn't be treated as authoritative in any way.-- Kotniski ( talk) 13:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Several people have said that using "Walesa" would be "dumbing down" WP, or be "inaccurate". But if "Walesa" is a case of dumbing down and inaccuracy, why does WP tolerate Solidarity (Polish trade union) instead of Solidarność? Poland instead of Polska? Aren't the latter ones the "accurate" names as used in Poland? Dohn joe ( talk) 18:27, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Back on topic, I would very much like, as I mentioned somewhere above, to see some statistics regarding how move requests regarding the addition or removal of diacritics from personal names have gone down over the last few years. Who among us can claim that we really know what the general consensus is, or whether one exists at all? - GTBacchus( talk) 00:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I think I can safely say that the facts about usage of "Wałęsa" vs. "Walesa" are more or less accepted by all the participants in this discussion. Namely, that a large majority of news and book sources use "Walesa", while reference works are split to some degree. From that common factual foundation, there are nevertheless two strongly divergent, good-faith camps of support and oppose. Which means that there are philosphical differences that go well beyond the scope of this particular article.
The support arguments, generally speaking, are:
The oppose arguments, generally speaking, are:
Does that sound about right? If not, feel free to edit the list. If so, given the volume of discussion already, unless someone has something groundbreaking to add, I'd suggest leaving it as is for the closing admin to evaluate. Dohn joe ( talk) 23:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
There are several move discussions current concerning omitting or including diacritics from article names similar to the one above.
I think that, regardless of the outcome of the move request above, it would be good to have some brainstorming of the issue in general.
I mean, we're spending a lot of time on this issue, and getting quite heated at times, and to what benefit? Does it matter all that much, and if so what is the damage? It seems to me that we're doing more damage in wasting time and discouraging some editors who lose these heated battles, or even who win them but then lose another similar next time around.
It's a distraction from more important tasks.
Most of the other damage involves Wikipedia taking a quotable stand. We have a standard that says we generally use common English, and so if we spell Walesa or Mitterrand's christian name or Hokkaido with a diacritic, then that's a statement that this is current English, and a highly influential one in my opinion. And that's one reason for the heat in the debate... Some nationalists want English to reflect their own national conventions.
Another factor is the concern about dumbing down Wikipedia. This is more complex than it might seem. In my opinion, Wikipedia's long-standing commitment to usage rather than rules is just the opposite of dumbing down. It reflects the 20th century attitude to linguistics, as pioneered by Wittgenstein, Ayer and Whorf to name just a few, and as opposed to the linguistic prescription which will always have followers but, academically, is a 19th century viewpoint.
There's no evidence that the 21st century will go back to prescription, but it will always be a battle, and Wikipedia can't avoid being part of it! But there is also some evidence that Wikipedia is changing, and that the consensus in favour of common usage is not so strong and general as it once was. Probably all institutions become more conservative with time. Arguments in favour of accuracy which would once have been rejected out of hand are becoming more common and more acceptable. We're becoming more academic, and less populist, and whether that's good or bad, it may be unavoidable.
One possibility that occurs to me is to introduce a standard for diacritics that says in essence when in doubt, and when they don't affect the underlying roman spelling, put them in.
I propose this for discussion as an addition to the general article naming policy.
It is a bit of a turnaround, and doesn't cover all cases. But it does cover most cases and would in my opinion benefit Wikipedia by saving a lot of time and trouble, and even simplifying some of the more detailed guidelines. It represents reverse instruction creep in fact.
It makes the article titles more informative, at no cost so far as searching goes. Any search program worth its salt will find the version with diacritics if you search without them, and people are also quite capable of recognising the version with diacritics as a match even if they didn't expect the diacritics for whatever reason.
The downside? We won't be quite as much a part of the leading edge of the information revolution. We'll be a little more conservative and less radical at a time of radical change. Perhaps that's not even a downside.
And we should get expert technical advice as to whether there are any browser issues that might make diacritics in article names a problem. Probably we should double check that anyway, in view of the large number of article titles that already include them, and find a technical solution if there's any problem. I hope there are no issues but with the proliferation of browser platforms to mobile phones etc. which will continue it's a good thing to double check.
Other opinions? Andrewa ( talk) 20:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
(If there's any interest please feel free to link from other forums, or copy my post to them, or both, but please don't remove it from the page to which I've posted it until it's eventually archived. Caught before! Links to other relevant discussions also good whether this is quoted there or not. TIA) Andrewa ( talk) 20:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
In practical terms, I think we end up in the same place. The above suggestion, "when it doubt, leave 'em in", probably agrees in almost all cases with a principle of following scholarly sources. This more broadly construed principle might be helpful in other disputed areas of article titling as well. - GTBacchus( talk) 06:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
As to the proposal itself, I have a couple questions. What do you mean by "Roman spelling"? Obviously, the original Roman alphabet had no "J" or "W". And other Latin-based alphabets, like German and Icelandic, have letters like "ß" and "Þ" - do we accept those letters? Or only English alphabet letters with dots and squiggles? And as for the spelling being "unaffected", "Gerhard Schröder" lacks the "e" of "Gerhard Schroeder", and would seem to affect the spelling - how do you account for umlauts? And how do we figure out what's "correct" in the source language? Dohn joe ( talk) 22:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Good questions. I was hoping to bypass the question of which sources to use or even prefer, to arrive at a way to decide an article title in most cases without wasting time on things that don't really matter so far as the title is concerned... which is there mainly to get people to the right page. The information they seek belongs in the page, not in the title.
(Off-topic: WP:Reliable sources explicitly allows mainstream news services, and prefers academic sources in some contexts and not others, and yes this is likely (certain!) to be a continuing topic of discussion.)
Roman spelling: Yes, I think I should have said English alphabet, see below.
Do we accept ß and Þ and similar - different issue. This proposal deals explicitly with extra marks added to ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ and corresponding lower case letters - English alphabet letters with dots and squiggles if you like. See below.
How do we decide what's correct in the source language(s)? I'd take the attitude that if there's doubt, we should assume we don't know and that this new rule simply wouldn't apply. This is the bit I'm most struggling with. The whole idea of the proposal is to minimise wastage of time and energy. Maybe better to just leave the clause about source language(s) out. The reason for putting it in is that in most cases there would be no controversy as to the spelling in the source language, and where there is such controversy we probably should take it into account. But unless someone comes up with a good way of phrasing it, for now let's leave it out. See below
Schroeder - The effect of this proposal would be that the choice was between Schröder and Schroeder (and not Schroder), but we'd still need to decide which of these was the better to use in the article name, using other criteria. (I think in this case, there's little support for Schroder anyway.)
Thanks for the contributions! Andrewa ( talk) 00:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Maybe a better solution would be for the policy to be more explicity "live and let live - and don't mess with the titles" - i.e., let São Paulo stay where it is, and let Tokyo stay where it is. Of course, people will always make move requests, but at least the guideline won't encourage it one way or the other. So, enshrining the WP-wide status quo, without an underlying rationale other than that time spent on researching Google Books for "São Paulo" vs. "Sao Paulo" is less important than time spent improving the content of the article. And maybe a note in the guideline that efforts should be made to include both local and English spellings and pronunciations in the lead. This would save the most time and angst, while ensuring that all versions of a title are up front in the article. Dohn joe ( talk) 01:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think the diacritics are used often enough on Tokyo to make the change possible, we would never get consensus IMO. Happy to be proved wrong!
Nor do I think there'd be any support for live and let live. Andrewa ( talk) 03:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
On another note - do you think there should be different guidance for places and people? My experience over the last month or so is that more people feel strongly about keeping diacritics in personal names (Walesa, Mitterrand, Schroeder), and not so much in place names (Zurich, Hokkaido). Is that a distinction you'd care to make? Dohn joe ( talk) 17:45, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I do not quite understand this discussion. On plWIki, the first line, in most of the articles state the name in Polish and in parentheses, the name in original language. Therefore, why not use it in English as: '''Lech Walesa''' ([[Polish language|Polish]]: {{lang|pl|''Lech Wałęsa''}}) => Lech Walesa ( Polish: [Lech Wałęsa] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup ( help)). -- WlaKom ( talk) 10:52, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Please continue discussion both of whether the change should occur and exactly what it should be above. These sections are to explore the detailed consequences of the initial proposal when in doubt, and when they don't affect the underlying roman spelling, put them in, possibly as clarified to When the underlying Roman spelling is unaffected, accents and diacritics that are often used in English and are accepted as correct in (all) the source language(s) should be included in article titles, even if in English they are more commonly omitted.
Please add and discuss specific impacts of the proposed change below. TIA Andrewa ( talk) 19:53, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think there will be many of these, because I think the proposal just reflects where Wikipedia is heading anyway. But there will be some. Many, perhaps most, of these would be changed in time even without this proposal, just with more discussion. Andrewa ( talk) 00:46, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Lech Walesa es not Danziger
I have two related concerns about this page: (1) Most important, I am unable to authenticate what Walesa is claimed to have said to the United Nations Security Council about attacking Iraq. Mr Walensa has made a number of comments on this subject and we should try to present a balanced view. (2) The article uses the word "recently", without indicating a date. Perhaps we should include date information when we speak of something's having happened recently.
Two other concers: This page is completely NPOV. The most important information seems to be he was a "double spy" which has never been proved or documented in any serious way. Except this alomost nothing is said about his real political and social activity - the things which, contrary to his "double spying", are well proved and documented. The statement "a anti-communist puppy" is NPOV by itself.
Well - I have decided to change this page quite seriously. I have added the list of basic facts about Lech Wałęsa and have changed the "spy" story making its much more NPOV (at least IMHO). Sorry for my bad English.
I've done some fixups to the english spelling and grammar of this (otherwise excellent) article. I'll probably do some more, and perhaps some reformatting. In addition, I have some language questions which can hopefully be answered by Polish-speaking wikipedians: --
Finlay McWalter 23:52, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
This is awful - the only part that's actually an article is about ridiculous conspiracy theories. Someone should turn the timeline into paragraphs. john k 08:09, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I've rearranged the points form into paragraphs as suggested. No information has been added or removed. jp
What was the film about him? Iron Man, or something? I remember it was notable. Must go into the article. mikka (t) 16:45, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Andrzej Wajda's Man of Iron, is what i think you're talking about. Wajda's earlier Man of Marble, about Communism in the 1950's and 1960's, is also excellent.
I would. The central figure, i.e. the Man of Iron-whom the main character has been sent to slander-is Lech Walesa. mercruz (t) 16:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
This article is on the Spoken Wikipedia request list, so I am going to make a recording. If any of you want to add any significant changes, notify me now.
Markkasan 20:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
I see no reason to include a mispronunciation of his name in English at the top of the article, and for this reason removed all but the correct pronunciation. I am not very nationalistic but find it mildly offensive. Many Americans butcher many world leader's names - are we to start including phonetic mispronunciations at the top of encyclopedia articles?
-- Random Pole
Random pole is rights. It is utter madness to include the MISpronounciation - e.g. how it is read by an englishman with no idea about the Polish language 84.167.245.86 11:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
The reasons for move copied from the entry on the WP:RM page:
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. WhiteNight T | @ | C 01:24, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Following section was added to the Lech Walesa article:
==Recent controversy==
Lech Walesa has recently had to face up to accusations that he was a paid agent of the Sluzba Bezpieczenstwa (state security service) for more than 10 years during his rise to the top of the Solidarity movement the in Gdansk shipyards (during the 1970's). Walesa, under the codename "Bolek" (Lech Walesa's father's name), is said to have been recruited to pass information to the SB, and was bumped into the top leadership position within Solidarity by other embedded agents of the SB in an attempt to control the movement. His subsequent break from SB control is attributed to a new arrangement Walesa made with the CIA, then headed by George H. W. Bush.
Prior to the 2000 presidential election, Walesa was cleared to hold political office by a special "vetting court" (lustracja), which held that photocopies of documents pertaining to agent "Bolek", including signed receipts for payments from the SB, were inadmissible. The original documents, if they in fact existed, are said to have been pulled from SB files and destroyed during Walesa's term as the first president of a newly-democratic Poland, 1990-95.
Poland, unlike most other former soviet satellite states, never publicly opened the records of the state security apparatus following the disintegration of the Soviet block. While unproven and hotly contested, this version of Walesa's past is being increasingly discussed in Poland (as of December 2005). Walesa has been accused of this on numerous occasions on Polish television and radio shows, and responds in an increasingly angered way, threatening to take libel action if the accusations continue. Whether true or not, the allegations underscore the immense political savvy, however opportunistic, of a man who went from shipyard electrician without a high school degree to the president of his nation and international anti-communist mascot.
I moved this section to the talk page for following reasons:
-- Francis Schonken 13:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Jak_lefataliste, 31st December 2005:
The article seems to be missing the reasons he opposed the Soviet Union, why he supported the strike in the first place, and what was so bad about living under the Soviet Bloc (and no, it isn't enough to assume his actions speak for themselves). Why did he support Margaret Thatcher? Why did he go to Reagan's funeral (and why did he support him)? I know why, and plenty of others know why, so why isn't any of this in the article? Kamikaze Highlander 20:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
are you joking - he was terrible president.
The main picture is extremely pixelated and the other pictures are missing captions, can anyone who knows more about this guy work on that ? Mbisanz 23:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
From New York Times, Sept. 5, 2007:
Too much information, Lech! :-)
Sca 16:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
The honors section says that Lech Walesa has received 32 doctorates and is supported by a reference from Walesas official website. This information is faulty. His 33rd doctoral reception was in Trois Rivieres in Quebec, Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stanleymilgram ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
What institution is meant by "Connecticut State University"? Is that supposed to be Central Connecticut State University? Richard David Ramsey 21:42, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
any proves for that, I've never seen before such a coat of arms, he isn't nobile - it's enough to take a loo at his name... besides let someone xpand article with section 'falandyzacja prawa'...
Iznogud —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iznogud ( talk • contribs) 14:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
This is a hot topic now in Poland, I think it should also be included in the article. I do not have the book published by the IPN and I am not interested in Walesa as such, however, perhaps some editor would add information on his cooperation with the communist secret services in the 1970s as well as destruction of compromising documents, ordered by him in early 1990s, when he was president. Tymek ( talk) 17:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
To jest wszystko kłamstwo i pomówienia, Pan Prezydent Lech Wałęsa nigdy nie współpracował z SB - to jest polityczny atak na wielkiego polskiego wodza.
--- Member of Civillian Platform ---
_______Facts_______
It is not true that Lech Wałęsa cooperate with communist secret services. There is no evidence that he cooperate. There are only some fake materials made by communist secret services to discredit him. book published by Institute of National Remembrance about cooperation contains substantive errors and can't be reliable scientific publication. Without Mr Wałęsa we wouldn't be here now.
One of the young generation (Poland).
Because Golitsyn comment has nothing to do with Walesa's alleged cooperation with communist Secret Service and the book published by Centkiewicz. Many people said many things about Walesa, you just can't list them all here.-- Jacurek ( talk) 16:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
I've removed that convoluted section that looked more like a blatant copy and paste than an encyclopedic entry.
In my opinion, the accusations of anti-Semitism by that Israeli institute should not be included, as they seem to be Fact picking, and even if they were true as such, the proportional volume of the hand-picked facts drowns other information, giving a false impression to the reader.
We must also be very careful with articles about living people. Likeminas ( talk) 01:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
User:Piotrus submitted this to me by email. The fixes he made can be seen at the edit history of this page.
This article is verifiable, well written, neutral, etc. I'm passing it as a GA. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 16:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia e-mail Inbox X
Reply
Piotrus to me
show details Jan 23
Hi,
First, I want to thank you once again for your help with the teaching GA. This term, due to reasons below, I am doing my wiki teaching on Wikibooks, but I expect to return with the activity to Wikipedia in a few months :)
However, I would like to make another irregular request of you :)
As you may know, I am currently blocked - but some recommended I appeal my remedies soon, and that I also work on content to show I can be a constructive editor (as I guess my past 20+ FAs and such are not convincing enough :>). Anyway, at this point I have three draft articles that I think are close to a GA status, and if I could, I would nominate them on en wiki as many others in the past. Of course, I cannot do this. Nonetheless, I've posted them publicly here:
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedysta:Piotrus/brudnopis/en/Lech_Wa%C5%82%C4%99sa http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedysta:Piotrus/brudnopis/en/Stanis%C5%82aw_Koniecpolski http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedysta:Piotrus/brudnopis/en/sociology_of_leisure
The first two are major improvements of existing articles; the last one is a new article.
I was wondering if you could consider reviewing them - you can post comments about them to my pl wiki talk page, on their talk or email them to me. I would of course do my best to address them. Your help would allow me to do two things:
All I am asking you here is of course 100% wiki-legal, just in case you are wondering.
Anyway, I want to thank you again for your help in the past, and I hope we can work together again!
Piotr
-- This e-mail was sent by user "Piotrus" on the English Wikipedia to user "Peregrine Fisher". It has been automatically delivered and the Wikimedia Foundation cannot be held responsible for its contents.
The sender has not been given the recipient's email address, or any information about his/her e-mail account; and the recipient has no obligation to reply to this e-mail or take any other action that might disclose his/her identity. For further information on privacy, security, and replying, as well as abuse and removal from emailing, see < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Email>.
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotrus
show details Jan 24
I can reveiew Lech Wałęsa. Let's do it by email. We can copy the
comments over to wiki at some point.
To get it ready for a thorough review: expand lead, merge/remove single sentence paras, add and format all refs, explain why thecityreview.com and other odd refs are reliable, think of a better format (prose) for "List of honours and awards" and "Honorary doctorates" (may not need to list every one. Try to make a story out of them). - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 24
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
I can reveiew Lech Wałęsa. Let's do it by email. We can copy the
comments over to wiki at some point.
To get it ready for a thorough review: expand lead, merge/remove single sentence paras, add and format all refs, explain why thecityreview.com and other odd refs are reliable, think of a better format (prose) for "List of honours and awards" and "Honorary doctorates" (may not need to list every one. Try to make a story out of them).
Thanks. I'll work on lead and single sentences (already done some work, but want to expand the lead a little further). All refs should be formatted, although some templates are not supported on pl wiki and break the references (like all cite templates).
By all means, please list the potentially unreliable references here. Regarding http://www.thecityreview.com/olympics.html - yeah, I had a feeling it will not last long. But I found a better one:
http://tars.rollins.edu/wpi/cousteau.shtml -> Jean-Michel Cousteau (biography), Winter Park Institute, Rollins College
This should make it relatively reliable.
PS. Nihil novi will over the next few days work on improving the prose.
--
Piotr
"To be defeated and not submit, is victory; to be victorious and rest on one's laurels, is defeat." --Józef Piłsudski
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 24
Sounds good. Just email me when you're ready for a more thorough
review. If the cite template doesn't work, maybe you can copy/paste
the result into the ref tags for now.
- Show quoted text -
--
Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 25
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
Sounds good. Just email me when you're ready for a more thorough
review. If the cite template doesn't work, maybe you can copy/paste
the result into the ref tags for now.
They will work when the article is moved to en wiki; I am not sure how to nicely deal with it now. I think cite books and news will not be problematic, so I looked at cite webs:
http://www.ipn.gov.pl/portal/pl/229/7615/SB_a_Lech_Walesa_Przyczynek_do_biografii.html -> reliable Polish historical institute
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1983/press.html -> self-explanatory, I hope
http://www.constitutioncenter.org/libertymedal/recipient_1989.html -> website of another award he got, used as a source that he got it...
http://www.mofa.gov.tw/webapp/content.asp?cuItem=25174&mp=6 -> Taiwanese gov' press release, used to source his visit there
Those are all cite webs hidden by the template malfunction.
I looked over all the other refs, and I think they are reliable (many news sources, but uncontroversial).
The one controversy related to accusations of being an agent, I tried to source reliably, and tone down to NPOV (the current article, btw, due to very bad treatment of this issue (and also rants against his presidency) should be tagged as a BLP violation - could you do this?).
-- - Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 26
Looks good.
"Coincidentally (perhaps), Polish authorities lifted martial law on 1 January 1983, when this single came out." is a bit informal.
"Patrick Dailly's "Solidarity", starring Kristen Brown as Lech Walesa, was premiered by San Francisco Cabaret Opera in Berkeley and Oakland in September and October 2009." needs to be integrated.
"Wałęsa was the subject of several books and articles" should say a little more about this.
What ref supports "A charismatic leader"?
"Arrested again after martial law was imposed and Solidarity was outlawed, upon release..." sounds a little funny, or maybe it's OK. Not sure.
"he speaks and lectures" - Maybe just one?
This thing is really close, but explain why you feel the lists of awards and doctorates is the best way to include that info, if that's how you feel. - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 26
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
Looks good.
"Coincidentally (perhaps), Polish authorities lifted martial law on 1 January 1983, when this single came out." is a bit informal.
I removed "(perhaps)". I am not the best to address style/tone issues, but Nihil novi has yet to get to that part of the article.
"Patrick Dailly's "Solidarity", starring Kristen Brown as Lech Walesa,
was premiered by San Francisco Cabaret Opera in Berkeley and Oakland
in September and October 2009." needs to be integrated.
Done; must have missed it when I was converting this section into prose from original bullet points.
"Wałęsa was the subject of several books and articles" should say a
little more about this.
Well, I am unable to find any work that discusses books and articles on Wałęsa, or even lists them (LIW lists articles, but not books). I added some refs, but I don't really see how this can be expanded.
What ref supports "A charismatic leader"?
Good catch. It's Britannica; I added that as a referenced claim to the body.
"Arrested again after martial law was imposed and Solidarity was
outlawed, upon release..." sounds a little funny, or maybe it's OK.
Not sure.
Uh-oh, sounds like any English sentence to me :) Don't you just love working with non-native English speakers? :D
"he speaks and lectures" - Maybe just one?
Well, they are somewhat different. Lectures gives it the air of authority (anybody can speak), but he does deliver a lot of non-lecture speeches (in media, for example).
This thing is really close, but explain why you feel the lists of
awards and doctorates is the best way to include that info, if that's
how you feel.
Well, I don't see how they can be converted into any kind of a story. We could have a long list-like paragraph - he was awarded doctorates by (long list). Frankly, I find lists more readable in such situations - prose is good, but lists, well, sometimes should be just lists.
Btw, the org article still needs the BLP issues template. Sigh: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Lech_Wa%C5%82%C4%99sa&action=historysubmit&diff=340144613&oldid=339342839
-- - Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 26
Which template is it? I can't find it.
2010/1/26 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 26
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
Which template is it? I can't find it.
I was thinking about the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:BLP_dispute
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 27
Btw, the ArbCom amendment that clearly states others are allowed to proxy for me on LW is about to pass.
If it's ok with you I'd like to cc you in discussion I am having with the three editors whom ArbCom authorized to be my proxies.
I'd suggest that they wait till we are done with addressing the article issues you may yet raise; then they would transwiki it to en wiki. I am not sure who should nominate the article; but once it is done I presume you'll be able to insta-pass it (perhaps you could nominate it yourself?).
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 27
You can cc this if you want. I'll try and give you detailed comments
tomorrow morning.
2010/1/27 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 28 (13 days ago)
"his role in Polish politics diminished." - was diminished
There is some overreffing. " His father Bolesław was a carpenter who died shortly after World War II.[1][2][3]" probably doesn't need three refs, for example. There's lots of places that one ref is probably enough.
"On 8 December 1969 he married Danuta Gołoś. The couple have eight children: Bogdan, Sławomir, Przemysław, Jarosław, Magdalena, Anna, Maria-Wiktoria, Brygida.[3][2]" - Single sentence para.
"he was even considered for chairman of the strike committee." - "even" is informal.
"After that he worked as an electrician" - "after that" is too informal.
"Wałęsa famously scaled the the shipyard fence" - two "the"s
"Wałęsa famously scaled the the shipyard fence and became one of the leader of this strike." - Not clear how scaling a fence leads to being a leader.
"The Solidarity quicky grew, claiming over 10 million members - more than a quarter of Poland's population.[7] Wałęsa's role in the strike, negotiations and the newly formed independent Solidarity gained him fame on the international stage.[1][2]" - Sounds funny. Maybe use "Solidarity trade union" each time. Can also use just "trade union" sometimes for variety.
"Wałęsa kept this position until 13 December 1981, when he was arrested. General Wojciech Jaruzelski declared a state of martial law on 13 December." - Try and do date just once.
" In late summer of 1988, Wałęsa organized an occupational strike in Gdańsk Shipyard, demanding only the re-legalisation of Solidarity." - Does the article say it was outlawed? I missed it if it did.
"organize "half-free" elections to the Polish parliament." - What does "half free" mean?
"the Opposition took all seats in the Sejm that were subject of free elections and all but one seats in the newly re-established senate" - should be "all but one seat"
"Wałęsa was one of the most public figures of the Solidarity" - Is this the Solidarity Trade Union, or something else?
"appeaing on many dissident posters" - sp
I'll do more comments soon.
2010/1/27 Peregrine Fisher - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 28 (13 days ago)
I am not replying with "done" comments for small things - they are all done. Also, you didn't ask for it, but I translated the titles of all the (relatively few) Polish sources for the convenience of the English readers. For the few bigger/other comments:
There is some overreffing. " His father Bolesław was a carpenter who
died shortly after World War II.[1][2][3]" probably doesn't need three
refs, for example. There's lots of places that one ref is probably
enough.
True, but I like redundancy (what if a site goes 404, etc.).
"Wałęsa famously scaled the the shipyard fence and became one of the
leader of this strike." - Not clear how scaling a fence leads to being
a leader.
I hope the rewritten sentence sounds better; those are two related but separated events.
" In late summer of 1988, Wałęsa organized an occupational strike in
Gdańsk Shipyard, demanding only the re-legalisation of Solidarity." -
Does the article say it was outlawed? I missed it if it did.
Good catch, added the info on this.
"organize "half-free" elections to the Polish parliament." - What does
"half free" mean?
It was explained in the next para which you cited; I rewrote this to be more clear and added some expansion.
"Wałęsa was one of the most public figures of the Solidarity" - Is
this the Solidarity Trade Union, or something else?
In 99% Solidarity means the Solidarity Trade Union. Often, sources don't specify that and one has to assume that's what they mean (there were a lot of various suborganizations and spin-offs with Solidarity in their names, but we can also speak of them all forming the "Solidarity movement").
"appeaing on many dissident posters" - sp
Fixed that and some other spelling mistakes that my check spotted.
I'll do more comments soon.
Great.
-- - Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Jan 29 (12 days ago)
The way "solidarity" is used for multiple things is confusing. It
would be great if you could add an explanation early on, so readers
have a better idea of the possible meanings they will encounter later.
Also, maybe be explicit in all the cases that the refs allow you to
be. Whatever you think is best, but I'm finding the word confusing. It's probably a Polish to English problem, or something.
"that some of his former colleagues are satisfied running the government together with former communists." - "were satisfied"?
"On 9 December 1990..." - Extra italics?
"to become the first democratically elected president of Poland for the next five years." - Sounds like another first democratically elected president will be coming along.
The para that begins "In 1993 he founded his own political party" would do well with an intro sentence that describes what's coming.
"Wałęsa supported Poland's entry into NATO and the EU." - Maybe put what years those things happened in parenthesis or something.
What's a Nato-bis?
"The concept, though supported by Polish right-wing..." - Probably should be two sentences. It's pretty long, and the para only has two right now.
"He has however been criticized for his confrontational style..." - Makes you think the previous para would be praise, but it's also something bad.
"tarnished his own reputation" - "own" not needed.
"about him being to authoritarian" - "too"
"(Sejm).[7]/>[20]/>[15][18]"
"Finally, Wałęsa's problems were compounded by the difficult transition into the market economy, that while seen as highly successful in the long run, has resulted in Wałęsa's government loosing much of its popular support." - "Poland's difficult transition"? I think "has" should be removed, unless it's still going on.
"Wałęsa's BBWR party performed poorly in the 1993 parliamentary elections, at times the popular support for him has" - same problem with "has"
"and he himself narrowly lost" - "himself" not needed.
"Wałęsa claimed to go to "political retirement"" - "go into"?
"on the political scene became increasingly marginal" - Maybe "in politics became increasingly marginal"
I'll do more soon.
2010/1/28 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Jan 30 (11 days ago)
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
The way "solidarity" is used for multiple things is confusing. It
would be great if you could add an explanation early on, so readers
have a better idea of the possible meanings they will encounter later.
Also, maybe be explicit in all the cases that the refs allow you to
be. Whatever you think is best, but I'm finding the word confusing. It's probably a Polish to English problem, or something.
Fixed all of those; but with regards to Solidarity, I am not sure what you find confusing. It is linked and explained on the first uses, both in lead and text. If refers to the Solidarity Trade Union; in few cases where it doesn't, a full name of the other entity is used.
I've went over and made sure that after the other entity name is used, the next Solidarity reference specifies we are talking about the trade union again.
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Feb 1 (9 days ago)
I am wondering if it would be possible to expedite the review? I would like to send an appeal to ArbCom regarding my site ban soon; and I'd love to have LW as a GA by then.
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Feb 1 (9 days ago)
I'll try to move quickly.
"Since his 1995 presidency" - Why don't we use his name since it's the beginning of a section.
"That year he has also founded" - No "has"
"In 1997 Wałęsa supported and helped" - is "supported" needed? It also gets repetitive with the supported later in the sentence.
"However, his the real leader of the party" - No "his"
"Wałęsa again stood for the" - Maybe "Wałęsa again ran in the"
"Simultaneously, he expressed support for Poland's newly-formed Democratic Party - demokraci.pl in the parliamentary elections of the same year" - ref?
"citing differences with the party's support of the Law and Justice party" - Maybe "citing their support of the Law and Justice party"
"secret informer of the Polish communist secret police - Służba Bezpieczeństwa" - dash is weired. Maybe commas around "Służba Bezpieczeństwa"?
"by international press.'[35]" - Extra single quote.
"to a big public surprise" - Maybe "to the public's surprise"
"Wałęsa received many other international prizes" - "has received"
"He was also the first recipient of the Liberty Medal on 4 July 1989 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania[48] and the Presidential Medal of Freedom." - Makes it sound like he was the first to get a PMF.
".[3]A History of Foreign Leaders and Dignitaries Who Have Addressed the U.S. Congress, The Office of the Clerk </ref>" - Fix ref tag.
The para that begins "In 2002, Wałęsa represented Europe" is choppy. Most of the sentences are "On date, Wałęsa did this", "In date, Wałęsa did that". Mix it up to remove choppiness.
"were big hits in Poland in the 1990" - 1990s?
"Wałęsa was the subject of dozens of books" - Maybe "has been" instead of "was"
OK, fix that stuff, and I'll pass it. Tell me what you want me to do on wiki.
2010/2/1 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Piotr to me
show details Feb 1 (9 days ago)
Peregrine Fisher wrote:
I'll try to move quickly.
Thanks!
"Simultaneously, he expressed support for Poland's newly-formed
Democratic Party - demokraci.pl in the parliamentary elections of the
same year" - ref?
Couldn't find one - removed claim.
The para that begins "In 2002, Wałęsa represented Europe" is choppy.
Most of the sentences are "On date, Wałęsa did this", "In date, Wałęsa
did that". Mix it up to remove choppiness.
Tried to, but it's really difficult to do something with this para :( Any suggestions what else can be done with it would be appreciated.
OK, fix that stuff, and I'll pass it. Tell me what you want me to do on wiki.
Done. Once you tell me the article is 100% ready I'll email the editors who agreed to transwiki it. They should also nominate it to GAN after moving it; I'll ask them to notify you when this has happened so you can pass it.
Thank you for your help!
--
- Show quoted text -
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Feb 2 (8 days ago)
OK, we'll call that good. Email me when it's ready to be reviewed.
Do you want me to copy our emails over to the GA1 page, or just make a
not of what we did?
Is anyone going to object to plopping the article in over what's currently there?
2010/2/1 Piotr - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher
Reply Forward
Reply
Peregrine Fisher to Piotr
show details Feb 3 (7 days ago)
I added it.
2010/2/2 Peregrine Fisher - Show quoted text - -- Peregrine Fisher - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 23:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Lech walesa is well known for recieving the nobel peace prize for bringing down communism in russia and organizing workers against the oppression. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.92.110 ( talk) 21:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page not moved: no concensus in 46 days. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 07:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Lech Wałęsa →
Lech Walesa — Not because either one is better, more correct or more accurate, but because "Lech Walesa" is more common in reliable English-language sources. See
WP:UE for choosing between anglicized and local spellings.
Dohn joe (
talk)
01:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Second, as to this particular proposal, I support it because as others have noted this subject is almost always referenced by name in English sources without diacritics, so the title of the article should reflect that.
Finally, as to how other articles should be treated, like Milosevic, let's take one step at a time. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 18:56, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Consensus is also determined by choices made in active discussions, and not by inertia. If we use (or omit) diacritics in many cases simply because nobody has thought to remove (or add) them, then that would seem to carry less weight than decisions that have actually been considered by Wikipedians in conversations such as this one.
The idea that we need to change policy prior to making individual case-by-case choices is completely anathema to how we work. The day that becomes true, Wikipedia dies. - GTBacchus( talk) 04:24, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
In short, focus in this discussion should be on what the relevant guidelines say and whether readers are better off with the article at Lech Wałęsa or Lech Walesa, regardless of what may or may not happen with use of diacritics in other titles. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 19:16, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I note that WP:DIACRITICS also says "Beware of over-dramatising these issues". Remember our goals: to place the article at the title that most readers would most immediately recognize. That's all anyone is trying to do. Powers T 13:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
It should be noted here that WP:DIACRITICS is not representative of actual practice on Wikipedia, nor of consensus - it would be accurate if it reflected the fact that we can all easily observe: that diacritics are used much more commonly on Wikipedia than they are in English sources as a whole (because we're an encyclopedia doing the boring job of conveying information to people), but any attempt to make it say that is reverted by one of a handful of guardians of that page. In other words, what's written there is just a few people's ideas, it shouldn't be treated as authoritative in any way.-- Kotniski ( talk) 13:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Several people have said that using "Walesa" would be "dumbing down" WP, or be "inaccurate". But if "Walesa" is a case of dumbing down and inaccuracy, why does WP tolerate Solidarity (Polish trade union) instead of Solidarność? Poland instead of Polska? Aren't the latter ones the "accurate" names as used in Poland? Dohn joe ( talk) 18:27, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Back on topic, I would very much like, as I mentioned somewhere above, to see some statistics regarding how move requests regarding the addition or removal of diacritics from personal names have gone down over the last few years. Who among us can claim that we really know what the general consensus is, or whether one exists at all? - GTBacchus( talk) 00:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I think I can safely say that the facts about usage of "Wałęsa" vs. "Walesa" are more or less accepted by all the participants in this discussion. Namely, that a large majority of news and book sources use "Walesa", while reference works are split to some degree. From that common factual foundation, there are nevertheless two strongly divergent, good-faith camps of support and oppose. Which means that there are philosphical differences that go well beyond the scope of this particular article.
The support arguments, generally speaking, are:
The oppose arguments, generally speaking, are:
Does that sound about right? If not, feel free to edit the list. If so, given the volume of discussion already, unless someone has something groundbreaking to add, I'd suggest leaving it as is for the closing admin to evaluate. Dohn joe ( talk) 23:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
There are several move discussions current concerning omitting or including diacritics from article names similar to the one above.
I think that, regardless of the outcome of the move request above, it would be good to have some brainstorming of the issue in general.
I mean, we're spending a lot of time on this issue, and getting quite heated at times, and to what benefit? Does it matter all that much, and if so what is the damage? It seems to me that we're doing more damage in wasting time and discouraging some editors who lose these heated battles, or even who win them but then lose another similar next time around.
It's a distraction from more important tasks.
Most of the other damage involves Wikipedia taking a quotable stand. We have a standard that says we generally use common English, and so if we spell Walesa or Mitterrand's christian name or Hokkaido with a diacritic, then that's a statement that this is current English, and a highly influential one in my opinion. And that's one reason for the heat in the debate... Some nationalists want English to reflect their own national conventions.
Another factor is the concern about dumbing down Wikipedia. This is more complex than it might seem. In my opinion, Wikipedia's long-standing commitment to usage rather than rules is just the opposite of dumbing down. It reflects the 20th century attitude to linguistics, as pioneered by Wittgenstein, Ayer and Whorf to name just a few, and as opposed to the linguistic prescription which will always have followers but, academically, is a 19th century viewpoint.
There's no evidence that the 21st century will go back to prescription, but it will always be a battle, and Wikipedia can't avoid being part of it! But there is also some evidence that Wikipedia is changing, and that the consensus in favour of common usage is not so strong and general as it once was. Probably all institutions become more conservative with time. Arguments in favour of accuracy which would once have been rejected out of hand are becoming more common and more acceptable. We're becoming more academic, and less populist, and whether that's good or bad, it may be unavoidable.
One possibility that occurs to me is to introduce a standard for diacritics that says in essence when in doubt, and when they don't affect the underlying roman spelling, put them in.
I propose this for discussion as an addition to the general article naming policy.
It is a bit of a turnaround, and doesn't cover all cases. But it does cover most cases and would in my opinion benefit Wikipedia by saving a lot of time and trouble, and even simplifying some of the more detailed guidelines. It represents reverse instruction creep in fact.
It makes the article titles more informative, at no cost so far as searching goes. Any search program worth its salt will find the version with diacritics if you search without them, and people are also quite capable of recognising the version with diacritics as a match even if they didn't expect the diacritics for whatever reason.
The downside? We won't be quite as much a part of the leading edge of the information revolution. We'll be a little more conservative and less radical at a time of radical change. Perhaps that's not even a downside.
And we should get expert technical advice as to whether there are any browser issues that might make diacritics in article names a problem. Probably we should double check that anyway, in view of the large number of article titles that already include them, and find a technical solution if there's any problem. I hope there are no issues but with the proliferation of browser platforms to mobile phones etc. which will continue it's a good thing to double check.
Other opinions? Andrewa ( talk) 20:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
(If there's any interest please feel free to link from other forums, or copy my post to them, or both, but please don't remove it from the page to which I've posted it until it's eventually archived. Caught before! Links to other relevant discussions also good whether this is quoted there or not. TIA) Andrewa ( talk) 20:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
In practical terms, I think we end up in the same place. The above suggestion, "when it doubt, leave 'em in", probably agrees in almost all cases with a principle of following scholarly sources. This more broadly construed principle might be helpful in other disputed areas of article titling as well. - GTBacchus( talk) 06:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
As to the proposal itself, I have a couple questions. What do you mean by "Roman spelling"? Obviously, the original Roman alphabet had no "J" or "W". And other Latin-based alphabets, like German and Icelandic, have letters like "ß" and "Þ" - do we accept those letters? Or only English alphabet letters with dots and squiggles? And as for the spelling being "unaffected", "Gerhard Schröder" lacks the "e" of "Gerhard Schroeder", and would seem to affect the spelling - how do you account for umlauts? And how do we figure out what's "correct" in the source language? Dohn joe ( talk) 22:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Good questions. I was hoping to bypass the question of which sources to use or even prefer, to arrive at a way to decide an article title in most cases without wasting time on things that don't really matter so far as the title is concerned... which is there mainly to get people to the right page. The information they seek belongs in the page, not in the title.
(Off-topic: WP:Reliable sources explicitly allows mainstream news services, and prefers academic sources in some contexts and not others, and yes this is likely (certain!) to be a continuing topic of discussion.)
Roman spelling: Yes, I think I should have said English alphabet, see below.
Do we accept ß and Þ and similar - different issue. This proposal deals explicitly with extra marks added to ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ and corresponding lower case letters - English alphabet letters with dots and squiggles if you like. See below.
How do we decide what's correct in the source language(s)? I'd take the attitude that if there's doubt, we should assume we don't know and that this new rule simply wouldn't apply. This is the bit I'm most struggling with. The whole idea of the proposal is to minimise wastage of time and energy. Maybe better to just leave the clause about source language(s) out. The reason for putting it in is that in most cases there would be no controversy as to the spelling in the source language, and where there is such controversy we probably should take it into account. But unless someone comes up with a good way of phrasing it, for now let's leave it out. See below
Schroeder - The effect of this proposal would be that the choice was between Schröder and Schroeder (and not Schroder), but we'd still need to decide which of these was the better to use in the article name, using other criteria. (I think in this case, there's little support for Schroder anyway.)
Thanks for the contributions! Andrewa ( talk) 00:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Maybe a better solution would be for the policy to be more explicity "live and let live - and don't mess with the titles" - i.e., let São Paulo stay where it is, and let Tokyo stay where it is. Of course, people will always make move requests, but at least the guideline won't encourage it one way or the other. So, enshrining the WP-wide status quo, without an underlying rationale other than that time spent on researching Google Books for "São Paulo" vs. "Sao Paulo" is less important than time spent improving the content of the article. And maybe a note in the guideline that efforts should be made to include both local and English spellings and pronunciations in the lead. This would save the most time and angst, while ensuring that all versions of a title are up front in the article. Dohn joe ( talk) 01:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think the diacritics are used often enough on Tokyo to make the change possible, we would never get consensus IMO. Happy to be proved wrong!
Nor do I think there'd be any support for live and let live. Andrewa ( talk) 03:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
On another note - do you think there should be different guidance for places and people? My experience over the last month or so is that more people feel strongly about keeping diacritics in personal names (Walesa, Mitterrand, Schroeder), and not so much in place names (Zurich, Hokkaido). Is that a distinction you'd care to make? Dohn joe ( talk) 17:45, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I do not quite understand this discussion. On plWIki, the first line, in most of the articles state the name in Polish and in parentheses, the name in original language. Therefore, why not use it in English as: '''Lech Walesa''' ([[Polish language|Polish]]: {{lang|pl|''Lech Wałęsa''}}) => Lech Walesa ( Polish: [Lech Wałęsa] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup ( help)). -- WlaKom ( talk) 10:52, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Please continue discussion both of whether the change should occur and exactly what it should be above. These sections are to explore the detailed consequences of the initial proposal when in doubt, and when they don't affect the underlying roman spelling, put them in, possibly as clarified to When the underlying Roman spelling is unaffected, accents and diacritics that are often used in English and are accepted as correct in (all) the source language(s) should be included in article titles, even if in English they are more commonly omitted.
Please add and discuss specific impacts of the proposed change below. TIA Andrewa ( talk) 19:53, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think there will be many of these, because I think the proposal just reflects where Wikipedia is heading anyway. But there will be some. Many, perhaps most, of these would be changed in time even without this proposal, just with more discussion. Andrewa ( talk) 00:46, 21 December 2010 (UTC)