Talk:Bolesławiec pottery
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bolesławiec pottery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110121201606/http://adamsimports1.com:80/Video.html to http://www.adamsimports1.com/Video.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110122204043/http://adamsimports1.com:80/links/potteryhistory.html to http://www.adamsimports1.com/links/potteryhistory.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:54, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Advert Like Content
[edit]"Polish Pottery is hand crafted with pride" - This reads like an advert, which is inappropriate in Wikipedia. This article has probably been written or edited by someone from the Boleslawiec company or with a financian interst in it. It needs to be rewritten by an independent source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:C435:EE00:29FE:F5C:53DB:F72F (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Polish POV
[edit]this article has a biased rather PR-like view on the subject. Bolesławiec pottery is a Polish continuation of the German Bunzlau pottery which was continued despite the expulsions and destruction of German heritage. Even Polish authors (Anna Kurpiel and Katarzyna Maniak: "Ceramika z Bolesławca — dziedzictwo w tranzycie") observe the discrepancy between the modern view of these ceramics and their social and historical biography, i.e. the German histroy. So:
- statements of modern PR terming them cultural symbols of Poland must be qualified
- Silesia (i.e. Bunzlau's Lower Silesia) was NOT a distputed region - it was not claimed by the Polish until 1945 and it was FULLY German-settled
- German tradition must be referred to as prior (maybe prior to this some medieval Slavic pottery, if proven)
--Tino Cannst (talk) 09:52, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Strange and rather irrelevant observation. What does "Slavic" have to do with this? Are you mixing pottery with language groups now? By saying "fully German" you are obviously presenting a POV/opinion and the 'Polish continuation' is what's known by all today. Oliszydlowski (talk) 12:45, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Oliszydlowski: Exactly, what does "Slavic" have to do with it? It seems a PR invention and politically biased because of claiming the expelled German craftmen's as Slavic
- I would include "fully German" in the article here, so no worry on POV.
- As for that the 'Polish continuation' is what's known by all today please consult the web on "Bunzlauer Keramik" and note the google translate of the DE version - this is what at least Germans take as the pottery and keep making, so EN wikipedia must reflect this. --Tino Cannst (talk) 19:57, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- "Fully German" easily makes you biased and even to some extent prejudiced. Silesia as a whole, whilst then German-speaking, always maintained its own distinct identity so I do not see how 'fully' applies here. Total POV. Not my problem that Bunzlau/Bolesławiec became the centrepiece of 'Polish' pottery in post-war years. Moreover, I do not see how 'German' tradition here is undernourished. I have added some German names from the period for clarification and removed the claim about the 'disputed region' you pointed out. And no Silesia was not 'fully German settled'. I will go over this article and reference it properly in the upcoming month. Merangs (talk) 07:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Merangs: Merci! --Tino Cannst (talk) 18:38, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
- "Fully German" easily makes you biased and even to some extent prejudiced. Silesia as a whole, whilst then German-speaking, always maintained its own distinct identity so I do not see how 'fully' applies here. Total POV. Not my problem that Bunzlau/Bolesławiec became the centrepiece of 'Polish' pottery in post-war years. Moreover, I do not see how 'German' tradition here is undernourished. I have added some German names from the period for clarification and removed the claim about the 'disputed region' you pointed out. And no Silesia was not 'fully German settled'. I will go over this article and reference it properly in the upcoming month. Merangs (talk) 07:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Strange and rather irrelevant observation. What does "Slavic" have to do with this? Are you mixing pottery with language groups now? By saying "fully German" you are obviously presenting a POV/opinion and the 'Polish continuation' is what's known by all today. Oliszydlowski (talk) 12:45, 2 April 2021 (UTC)