Jump to content

Talk:Michał Węsławski

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Treatment of the Lithuanian language

[edit]

Why were Lithuanian-language names for Lithuanian-born people removed [1]? Why was the Lithuanian-language Vokiečių removed from Vokiečių Street [2], a street in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius? Why were the Lithuanian toponyms named only in their Polonized versions, despite those Polonized toponyms being linked to the correct Lithuanian-language locations (e.g. Gegrėnai|Giegrany [3] and Santekliai|Sontekle [4])? Clearly, the argument that Marcelus did not know their location can't be used, because he linked them to their proper names. Marcelus' behaviour with Lithuanian-language names, toponyms and etc. is alarming.--Cukrakalnis (talk) 20:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Węsławski never used his Lithuanian name, as far as I am aware, share your sources if you know otherwise. Węsławski called these places Giergany and Sontekle. Vilnius was a Russian city, that's why I used English name of the street Marcelus (talk) 21:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Węsławski never used his Lithuanian name, as far as I am aware, share your sources if you know otherwise. You should follow Wikipedia's rules instead of your imaginary standards. Nowhere in Wikipedia rules does it state that a person can only be named by a name that the person used. He was born in Lithuania and knew Lithuanian himself. Your double-standard of compulsively adding lang-pl templates to people of the Lithuanian National Revival but then removing a lang-lt template on the article of a Lithuanian-born person who spoke Lithuanian is problematic.
Węsławski called these places Giergany and Sontekle. You are making claims you have no sources for and you absolutely don't know that. If some German only called Warsaw - Warschau, would it justify changing every mention of that city in his article on en.wiki to the German version? Of course not. And you know it.
Vilnius was a Russian city, that's why I used English name of the street Your explanation is illogical. If it was a Russian city, then why don't you use the Russian word for German? No, that didn't matter to you. And even if it did, that is irrelevant, because you are flaunting Wikipedia policies by creating your own imaginary standards. Cukrakalnis (talk) 21:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know really, it's just weird to call the street by Lithuanian name if the city was Russian. My source called it "Niemiecka" so I translated it literally. I was adding lang-pl to people who published under the Polish name or were born into Polish-spekaing families. Marcelus (talk) 22:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that you removed lang-lt of Lithuanian-born people who spoke Lithuanian (both father and son). Hypothetically, even a Russian-language name in lang-ru could be added if their name was russified when they were writing in Russian. Just as Lithuanian names were polonized when writing in Polish. The problem is that you removed. Cukrakalnis (talk) 14:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cukrakalnis The problem is that you still didn't give me a source of him using that name Marcelus (talk) 15:08, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Stop inventing your own standards, we are on Wikipedia, which has its own rules and policies. Cukrakalnis (talk) 15:29, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which policy I am breaking? Marcelus (talk) 16:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An actually relevant question here is:
Which policy were you following (if you were following one at all) by insisting to use the name that he himself used? Cukrakalnis (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Policy of writing an article based on sources Marcelus (talk) 21:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Joseph Stalin, Napoleon and Alexander the Great did not call themselves "Joseph Stalin", "Napoleon" and "Alexander the Great". Their names were Iosif Vissarionovich Stalin/Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili (neither of which matches "Joseph Stalin"), Napoleone Buonaparte/Napoléon Bonaparte (neither of which matches "Napoleon") and Alexandros (not "Alexander the Great"). However, their Wikipedia articles are called differently. You clearly don't know Wikipedia policies, because you are making claims that are nowhere to be found within them - namely, calling a man based on the name he called himself. Cukrakalnis (talk) 21:51, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cukrakalnis That's ridiculous comparison Marcelus (talk) 22:19, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Besides your gramatically incorrect and groundless objection, you sneering at the standard practice on Wikipedia indicates how little regard you have for Wikipedia's rules and policies and that you instead prefer to follow your own imagination. Cukrakalnis (talk) 15:49, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Writing articles based on sources is according to you against Wikipedia's rules? That actually explains a lot Marcelus (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you accuse me of saying that which I never said? Your answer is a classic case of WP:STRAWMAN, because you are ignoring the core issue here. Your whole argument for removing the LT name of this person was that a person can only be called by a name that they themselves used ([5], [6]). Obviously, there is no such rule on Wikipedia (as can be seen in the articles Joseph Stalin, Napoleon and Alexander the Great), so you are just inventing your own standards. Even worse, you are accusing me of going against WP:RS, when YOU are the one removing sourced statements ([7]). Cukrakalnis (talk) 16:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cukrakalnis Seriously what's your problem here? I asked for the source, you provided, end of story. Marcelus (talk) 17:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is you setting up an arbitrary standard (which is "use only the name that a person himself used") and forcing others to follow it, despite that being nowhere to be found within Wikipedia's rules and policies and in fact being opposite to standard practice, which can be seen in the articles Joseph Stalin, Napoleon and Alexander the Great. Cukrakalnis (talk) 17:12, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cukrakalnis and @Marcelus - Hello you two 🤷‍♀️, that was quick.🙂 - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This section started on January 7, while the other one, on Čiurlionis' article, started on January 9. Cukrakalnis (talk) 13:42, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@GizzyCatBella That's basically the same issue. The difference is here still Napoleon Bonaparte is the golden standard for @Cukrakalnis, in Čiurlionis' article it no longer is Marcelus (talk) 16:04, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I saw that. - GizzyCatBella🍁 16:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcelus @GizzyCatBella So readjustment of someone's views upon discovery of new material is now frowned upon? It seems as though both of you are essentially assuming WP:BADFAITH of me.
And Marcelus is still WP:STRAWMANning why I brought up the three examples (including Napoleon) in this case. I'll reiterate once more - this case is different from Čiurlionis' case. I was bringing up these three articles (Alexander the Great, Napoleon and Joseph Stalin) on this precise talk page to prove that Marcelus' invented standard of only naming someone by the name that they themselves used is nowhere to be found within Wikipedia's rules and standards. Cukrakalnis (talk) 12:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm assuming that all your changes on Čiurlionis article were done only to hide Polish sounding name of his. Marcelus (talk) 12:23, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Besides showing your WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality towards me and you not adressing that you invented your own standards and tried to force others to follow them, I inform you that Čiurlionis' polonized name Czurlanis sounds more Lithuanian than it does Polish, so calling it a Polish sounding name is false. Cukrakalnis (talk) 13:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not showing any WP:BATTLEGROUND, I'm just said what I think is the reason for your change, why should I hide it? Czuralnis definitely sounds Lithuanian, because it has Lithuanian origins. Marcelus (talk) 15:44, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 Cielquiparle (talk) 13:15, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that the first non-Russian mayor of Vilnius since the January Uprising was approved only after 43 years in 1905? Source: Wołkanowski, Waldemar (2015). Michał Węsławski. Biografia prezydenta Wilna w latach 1905-1916 [Michał Węsławski. Biography of the President of Vilnius in 1905-1916] (in Polish). Opole. p. 137.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link): At the Council session on December 7,. M. Węsławski chaired the session for the first time. Doctor J. Sumorok welcomed him on behalf of all councilors and gave a short speech in Polish: "Mr. President! We welcome You, as the first Polish president after 43 years"
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: After the January Uprising, Lithuania was put under martial law, and in 1876 a new city law was introduced, giving wealthy residents the right to elect a president. However, even if a non-Russian was elected, the governor blocked the election. Thus invalidated at least two elections of Poles (1893 and 1897) were thus invalidated. Until finally, on the wave of the political thaw in 1905, Węsławski's election was recognized. You can see the list of mayors: Mayor of Vilnius

5x expanded by Marcelus (talk). Self-nominated at 20:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC).[reply]

Length Newness Cited hook Interest Sources Neutrality Plagiarism/paraphrase
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

It's all good except:

  • This needs a copy edit; there are some typos and some phrasing oddities (probably translation artifacts) that need some refinement.
  • I would recommend a more straightforward hook:

Ready to go. jengod (talk) 15:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcelus and Jengod: ALT1 looks good...but the fact stated in the hook could be stated in the article more explicitly and clearly. (Is the following sentence the one supporting the hook? If so...I think it needs some further editing anyway.) Michał Węsławski finally took office on December 2, 1905, as his deputy was elected Mieczysław Malinowski. It was a significant event, since until then it had been impossible for a Pole to run a governorate city.[44] Cielquiparle (talk) 12:11, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: fixed as requested Marcelus (talk) 12:17, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michał_Węsławski&oldid=1208928852"