Talk:Załuski Library

Libraries Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

POV?

The language of the article - "the biggest in the world", "Russians have stolen" - is encyclopaedic and POVish. Let's wait for academic references - not in Polish, please. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 07:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you prefer Russian? But here you have 2 in English (one translated from French).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 12:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Ghirlandajo's suggestion that the Soviets returned the books as a sign of good will is also an absurd. Treaty of Riga forced them to do so, I doubt they would be equally willing to return stolen property if it wasn't for the war they lost... //Halibu tt 13:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

English references have been added, so unless you have something else to point out please stop tagging this article as POVed.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:42, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Riga

moved from Talk:Józef Andrzej Załuski by --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder whether the books of Załuski library were returned to Poland after the treaty of Riga. Any ideas? //Halibu tt 04:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They (well, some of them) were retunred after the PSW. I'd guess they were part of ToR reparations, but don't have a specific citation for that. Anyway that should probably go to Biblioteka Załuskich article.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the 1930s, the Soviet goverment returned most of the library to Poland as a gesture of good will. It its present form, the article is full of POV language and megalomania. The references already provided cannot be called academic. Let's wait for valid, non-Polish references. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 07:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And how so? //Halibu tt 11:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bingo :) [1]. Citation for treaty of Riga. I'll be also moving this discussion to Talk:Załuski Library, as it is rather OT here.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stole? Confiscated? Looted?

I agree that stealing may be too 'primitive' of a word. Confiscate is however not right, as it implies a degree of legality - and the only legality Russians had was the 'law of the jungle' - i.e. they were backed up by their army. Perhaps a better term would be looting?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 15:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stealing is distinguished from looting by its clandestine character, no? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd think so. Stealing is more of a generic term, but if we want to be precise, then looting seems better: it was not clandestine, and it covers for example 'looting of art treasures by the Nazis during WWII' - which I'd guess means any 'stealing' done by organized military.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 15:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Załuski Library. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 20:10, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]