Talk:Władysław Sikorski/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 03:09, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

hold

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
Not so good. See below for fixes.

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
References required for the last items in the Honours and awards section. Some broken links.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
A bit pro-Polish
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments

Prior to World War I, -> Prior to the First World War (for consistency) Y
Doesn't the infobox usually list the participation in various wars? Y
What does " (im. Franciszka Józefa)" mean? Y
"and graduating in 1908" -> "and graduated in 1908" Y
"related to land and petroleum trade" What does this mean?
- clarified ("was involved in private enterprises related to construction, real estate and petroleum trade"). I hope that's better. Y
"an organization dedicated to spreading the educational values" What are they? Y
"Union for Active Struggle(Związek Walki Czynnej)" Space required before parenthesis Y
"He was a commissioner in charge of the recruitment to the Polish Legions" -> 'He was a commissioner in charge of the recruitment of the Polish Legions"
- Are you sure? He was in charge of recruiting people to the Legions, not the Legions themselves. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"On 30 September 1914 he was promoted to podpułkownik" can we have the English equivalent in parentheses? Y
"Sikorski became involved with the Legions alternatives" -> Sikorski became involved with the Legions' alternatives Y
"Out of those series of conflicts, the origins of the Polish-Soviet War reach further than only "regulating" the Poland's east border" This needs to be re-worded, as it is gibberish. Or you could just drop it; the sentences works fine without it.Y
"to allow the Polish forces in the region to retreat in a planned formation" -> "to allow the Polish forces in the region to retreat in an orderly manner" ? Y
"which was to hold the front to the north of Modlin, between Narew and Wkra rivers" Was that it's mission, or what it actually did? Y
"Piłsudski, Polish commander-in-chief" -> " Piłsudski, the Polish commander-in-chief"Y
"was awarded the highest Polish military decoration" -> "and was awarded Poland's highest military decoration" Are you sure this is true? Leslie Morshead was awarded it.
- I am not sure what is the issue here. Virtuti Militari is the Poland's highest military decoration. It does come in several classes, though...? Pl wiki has different categories for VM depending when it was awarded, by whom, and the class (pl:Kategoria:Odznaczeni Orderem Virtuti Militari według klas). It's often pretty hard to dig out the class information, though. I can't quickly find info on the class of Morshead VM; Sikorski's according to our ref'ed article got the Silver (5th, lowest) and Commander (2nd) classes. I'll add a little info I dug out. In the period 1918-1939 only 19 people got the 2nd class; over 8,000 of the 5th class were given. Morshead received his medal in 1941 (awarded, btw, by Sikorski himself); different numbers apply for WWII period. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:02, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just whether the description is apt. We use this wording for the Victoria Cross and the US Medal of Honor, and anyone receiving them is automatically notable. I just wanted to make sure that this is the case here. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"appealed to Polish conservatives and liberals [alike]" Isn't that everybody?
- The PSB text clearly suggests ("cieszył sie popularnością w NIEKTÓRYCH środowiskach politycznych, zwłaszcza konserwatywnych i liberalnych") that there were others, through I am not going to venture what they'd be (communists? moderates?). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Marshal of the Sejm (the Polish parliament)" This appears to refer to the entire link. Y
"He obtained recognition for Poland's eastern frontiers" -> " He obtained recognition of Poland's eastern frontiers"Y
"United States. during the Conference of Ambassadors on 15 March 1923" -> "United States during the Conference of Ambassadors on 15 March 1923."Y
"He aided Treasury Minister Władysław Grabski reforms aiming aiming at curtailing the inflation and reforming currency, supported ethnic minorities" -> "He aided Treasury Minister Władysław Grabski's reforms aimed aiming at curtailing inflation and reforming the currency, and supported ethnic minorities."Y
"His government however lost support in the Sejm and resigned on 26 May 1923" -> "His government nonetheless lost support in the Sejm and resigned on 26 May 1923" Did he resign or the government? The text says the latter.
- PSB uses the phrase "government resigned". So doe the pl wiki article on his government (pl::Pierwszy rząd Władysława Sikorskiego). If there's a part of the text that contradicts this, please list it here and I'll review it (I don't see such contradiction myself at this point). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"however he remained however in" Too many "however"s here.Y
"while he remained in active service" -> "while he remained on active service"Y
"He would spend the coming years studying military theory" -> "He would spend the following years studying military theory" And how many years are we talking about?
- PSB is not precise on that, neither. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"in which he predicted the return of the maneuver warfare to the modern war theaters" -> "in which he predicted the return of the maneuver warfare" Y
"and advancing ideas similar" -> " and advanced ideas similar" It would be nice to know what they were. And how much influence he had.
- I was unable to find much on that, so OR I can say that he had little, but, well, OR. There are snippets mentioning his views, but I can't find any which are either extensive or accessible to me. If you'd have access to Fanning, WJ (1997). "The Origin of the Term" Blitzkrieg": Another View". The Journal of military history (0899-3718), 61, p. 283. this seems like one of the most reliable sources in English language. There's also Robert M. Ponichtera, "The Military Thought of Wladyslaw Sikorski," Journal of Military History, vol. 59 (1995), pp. 283-285 (alt cite I see lists pages 279–302), similarly unavailable as far as I can tell. His main book on that topic was published in in 1943, around the time of his death, and rather late in the war: English Modern warfare. Its character, its problems. With a note by George C. Marshall. New York: Roy Publ. 1943. According to Olgierd Terlecki (1981). Generał Sikorski. Wydawn. Literackie. p. 9. ISBN 978-83-08-00464-7. Retrieved 8 May 2013. the book was translated to French and Russian before English. The best description of his work - still not very helpful - I was able to find comes from the 1945 source: "The fruitage was seen in a number of books of interest to all: the story of the northern campaign in I920, a book on Polish-French relations, andmost famous of all-Modern Warfare, published in Polish and French (I934-5) and in English in 1942. No one would claim that this last work was essentially original, since serious studies of the evolution of strategy in the light of new weapons and their use had been appearing in English, German (based in part on Russian studies) and French. But this can be said, that Sikorski had digested these books, and out of his own experience was in a position to appraise their worth. Had the things said there been taken to heart, both in his own country and elsewhere, the course of this war might have been very different". [1] --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Alongside France's Charles de Gaulle and Russia's Mikhail Tukhachevski, he may be considered one of the pioneers of Blitzkrieg theory" -> "Alongside France's Charles de Gaulle and Russia's Mikhail Tukhachevski, he is considered one of the pioneers of Blitzkrieg theory" I also think that some Germans had a few thoughts about it too.
- Likely; but that's what the source says. Or said, I can no longer access it. Anyway, it was missing page range, I'll remove this sentence and the preceding one due to poor referencing. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"on September 28" -> "on 28 September"Y
"taking command over the newly formed" -> "taking command of the newly formed"Y
"November 7" -> "7 November"Y
"thus uniting in his person all control over Polish military" -> "thus uniting in his person all control over the Polish military"Y
"Sikorski policies included founding" -> "Sikorski's policies included the founding"Y
"Polish Government reached an agreement" -> "The Polish Government reached an agreement"Y
"of August 17, 1941" -> "of 17 August 1941"Y
"on April 13," -> "on 13 April"Y
"general Władysław Anders" -> "General Władysław Anders"Y
" July 4, 1943," -> "4 July 1943"Y
" July 16" -> "16 July"Y
"delivered an eulogy at his funeral" -> "delivered a eulogy at his funeral"Y
"September 17, 1993," -> "17 September 1993,"Y
"from Montreal, Ivan Maisky from London" -> "from Montreal, and Ivan Maisky from LondonY
" (28 November 28 – 1 December 1943)" -> "(28 November – 1 December 1943)"Y
" Potsdam conference in 1945" Link "Potsdam Conference"Y
There are four dead links.Y

That should do it. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:39, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll probably start looking at this in ~12h. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:12, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the external links and started working on the c/e of the issues noted above. I am ticking those I think I've dealt with, may I suggest that if you agree you strike out the entire sentence, and if not, remove my tick and comment underneath. I'll be living comments if I run into any issues more complex than fix and tick. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's all for now, barring any replies? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, that should do it. Passing now. Hawkeye7 (talk) 06:06, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unsupportable statement in the lead

"Sikorski had been the most prestigious leader of the Polish exiles, and his death was a severe setback for the Polish cause." How so? Whether he lived or died, the Soviet communists wouldn't have changed their occupation of Poland one iota. I think this should be removed. HammerFilmFan (talk) 12:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]