Jump to content

Talk:Flag of Gdańsk

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleFlag of Gdańsk has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 2, 2022Articles for deletionKept
July 15, 2022Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 7, 2022.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the use of the flag of Gdańsk (pictured) was discontinued during World War II and was not restored until 1991?
Current status: Good article

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Styyx (talk20:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Gdańsk
Flag of Gdańsk
  • ... that King Casimir IV granted the privilege for authorities in Gdańsk to begin using an emblem of a royal crown on their city flag (pictured) in May 1457? Source: [1]
    • ALT1: ... that the two crosses on the flag of Gdańsk (pictured) likely originate from a gonfanon flown from the stern of a ship? Source: [2]
    • ALT2: ... that use of the flag of Gdańsk (pictured) was discontinued by Nazi Germany and was not restored until the City Council did so in 1991? Source: [3]
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/John Caffey
    • Comment: Rescued from AfD; article is still nominated for deletion at the time of this DYK nom but should be closed and kept before too long. A review would still be much appreciated, though a tick can't be given until the AfD is closed. The AfD has been closed, so the article is open to a DYK review now.

5x expanded by PCN02WPS (talk). Self-nominated at 16:52, 10 July 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Looks good. I'm not thrilled with the hooks. How do people feel about Alt2a? --evrik (talk) 23:30, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Flag of Gdańsk/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Steelkamp (talk · contribs) 13:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I will be reviewing this article over the coming days. Good luck. Steelkamp (talk) 13:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Steelkamp I have addressed these points - could you take another look? PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:23, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good article criteria

[edit]

Well written

[edit]
  • in various forms since the 13th century – It is unclear to me whether this means various forms of the city or various forms of the flag. Could change this to The flag, in various forms, has represented the Polish city of Gdańsk since the 13th century Steelkamp (talk) 16:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...rectangular flag, which was longer than it was wide (in a vertical orientation)... – Could just change this to ...rectangular flag in a vertical orientation – That would avoid the confusion of which direction is the long direction and also would be more concise. Steelkamp (talk) 16:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It wasn't immediately clear to me that Danzig and Gdańsk are actually the same city. I was confused as to why the article was going into detail on the trade and customs flag. Steelkamp (talk) 16:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiable with no original research

[edit]
  • What is "Wydział Symbolologii". Is it some kind of university/learning institution or a self published source or something else? If its a self-published source, then it might be a problem. Steelkamp (talk) 16:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Upon some research, it is one of many divisions of Akademia Rzygaczy, which is described on the linked page as follows: The purpose of its existence was to publish the effects of amateur research on the history of Gdańsk, with an emphasis on a detailed history relating to places, objects and people that were not previously of interest to the authors of popular science publications. It is described as having multiple contributors apart from the creator of the site. All of the facts present on this site that also appear on other sources I used check out. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:09, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same is true with The Flag and State Encyclopedia. I am concerned that this is a self-published source. Steelkamp (talk) 16:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've done some spot checks on the sources. That turned out fine. The above points have been sufficiently addressed. Steelkamp (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Broad in its coverage

[edit]

Neutral

[edit]

Stable

[edit]

Illustrated, if possible

[edit]

General

[edit]

Ok, this article passes the good article criteria. Steelkamp (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Book citations added

[edit]

Hi @AjaxSmack, I know the DYK has already got a tick but I just wanted to follow up and let you know that I now have a copy of the book that we talked about during that nomination and I have added the appropriate citations to back up some of the FotW claims; what few mentions Gdansk gets in the book are now represented in the article. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and thanks for all of your work on this article. It's nice to have a substantive account of this interesting flag. —  AjaxSmack  01:28, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

unreliable sources

[edit]

FOTW is not reliable, being a SPS. @PCN02WPS, could you replace them with quality sources? 48JCL 22:33, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]