Jump to content

Talk:Białystok

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleBiałystok has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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
June 10, 2011Good article nomineeListed
August 3, 2011Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article


Jewish majority

[edit]

The city had a Jewish majority all throughout the 19th century with Jews constituting 2/3 of the population. https://polona.pl/item-view/92168df9-1de5-41a1-80be-6c17aa0fc406?page=11 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.178.29.94 (talk) 20:38, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All paragraphs should have a minimum of 1-2 inline references (if only 1, then I often make a commented-out note at the end that the ref cites the para)
I think I have every paragraph with at least two references. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In etymology section, add first recorded use of the name and if the city had alternate names. We try and keep sections as prose, is there a need for some of these variants there? Maybe just limit to most notable and add the name is similar in other languages (if you can source it)
The city and the surrounding regions have been passed between many countries. There is also a significant Russian/Belorussian speaking minority in the area. Until WW II the population was majority Jewish with Yiddish being the primary tongue. Originally the city was part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the domain of the Kievan Rus. I've edited the section, but I still believe that the original form best expresses the names used. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, flows better now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
link or explain hydronym.
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The history section is unbalanced - looking at the History of Białystok daughter article, I think there can be some rejigging. The main article should mention the prehistory stuff.
Prehistory information isn't directly sourced at this time, thus it was left out of the main article. I've done some juggling, but that's why the child article exists - to go into the details. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, ok. I'll take another look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've made sure that there is a thread of information on some of the major "ownership" changes of the area, but there is so much complexity that's why the child article exists. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this is difficult, and the potted summary works ok, but the first paragraph has no inline references. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to Culture section and provided a reference for it. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The 2 short films need to make a statement more about the subject matter to warrant mentioning and we don't do direct name links like that - they can be in the inline references.
I've pulled them. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Updated to reflect satisfaction of the request. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Need to add the circumstances of the Jewish population leaving. It might be an idea to add new material to the daughter article first. Was there emigration before WWII at all? Did any survive the war, and then leave for Israel? I am not familiar with much of this. The history article has alot of information, and some key bits can be re-imported.
I've altered the article - few survivors of the ghetto liquidation by the Nazis in Aug 1943. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Economy section needs to be converted to paragraphs - subheadings are unnecessary and break up the prose too much.
I disagree, the subheadings provide some structure for the data otherwise it will be just a mish-mash of bits of economic data. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've reshuffled this section and trimmed out a few of the headings, I strongly believe the remaining subheading (Industry) remain. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I can work with that - can we link "Lipka Tartars"
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the modern day population growth is based on internal migration and urbanization. - from where? and can it be reffed?
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Governance section - is the district naturally left- or right-leaning? How does it go right next to Belarus WRT politics?
trying to keep the article factual and refrain from dealing with local politics. Especially since "left-right" leanings have different connotations from country to country. Technically PiS/PO in Bialystok are both "right-leaning" parties in some aspects and "left-leaning" parties in other aspects. It's not cut-n-dry - better to just leave it out - there is some reference in the child article. Ajh1492 (talk) 23:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is the unemployment rate particularly high (or low) for Poland? Is it a particularly impoverished area?
Updated. Ajh1492 (talk) 23:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since the border with Belarus is also the eastern border of the European Union, as well as the Schengen Area the city is a center for trade in mainly from the east - how does this impact on the city WRT business - anything to add?
More cars with Belarus license plates in the parking lots of the city's malls. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
same goes for Culture section. Also needs to be some mention of notable architecture in this section. Maybe the bit about old buildings being destroyed can go here instead of beginning of history section.
Trying to give a flavor of the city by category - in case someone was interested in a particular type of cultural event or sight - within a reasonable length article with a link to the child article at the top. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've tweaked the section lede to give a little better flow. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
None of the entities like Army Museum in Białystok should be italics (in their English form).
Done. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
same goes for Popular culture references section - this could be rearranged into themes - eg expatriate themes together (synagogue, bakery and bagel would line up nicely together). Erm, o-kay, I get the rationale but I will ask for sourcing elsewhere...to see if notable.
This section is a compromise. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There aren't enough entries to group & categorize into themes. Plus I've deleted the video game reference - I agree it's not notable. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed up. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
fix ref formatting - all accessdates should be the same - eg 31 January 2010 etc. Add as many authors, isbns and dates and parameters to refs as possible. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:30, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In progress. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Finished and double checked. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get a sense of the internal geography of the city reading this. can we add a few sentences on the Downtown (Central Business District) - is there one? Are there any neighborhoods with preserved architecture that are historical precincts or is it pretty minimal. Rich neighborhoods/poor neighborhoods. I am not looking for much but I think a few words on something here would be good.
Let me see what I can pull forward from the child articles. Ajh1492 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Pulled some forward, but I added a photo from the main street (Lipowa) in the center of the city. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:46, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about delay, am just giving it another going over. We're nearly there. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No troubles, would rather go over it with a fine-toothed comb since I'm trying to get the article towards FA status (no, I'm not in the wikicup). Ajh1492 (talk) 11:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I put a few more words in and two more photos to give a feel for the city. Ajh1492 (talk) 16:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am a bit of a greenie - any other info to add about the nature reserves? Rare plants/animals there? Are they used for recreation etc.
I did put a fact in about the city being the 5th most "wooded" city in Poland. No rare plants or animals, just generic oak, hornbeam, spruce and hazel trees. I do note that one is a riparian forest and the other is a fragment of the original state of the Bialystok Upland. I also have some information on Dojlidy Lakes recreation area and a photo. Ajh1492 (talk) 13:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's good, just a tiny bit more gave the section more of a sense of completeness. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One comment: the article is in category "Shtetls", but the article seems not to mention the word Shtetl. This should be corrected. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Technically a Shtetl was typically a small town with a large Jewish population in Central and Eastern Europe until The Holocaust, which brings into question of applying the usage to a city of 107,000. So the best solution might be to delete the category since there is significant discussion of the percentages in the History and Demographic sections of the article. None of the other major cities in Poland are in that category. [User:Ajh1492|Ajh1492]] (talk) 18:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A potential solution, although I wonder how correct the definition is. Looking at the history, I see "At the end of the 19th century, the majority of the city's population was Jewish". Do you think that an article about History of Jews in Białystok could/should be created? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is intertwined into the History of Białystok article, better to keep the history together so the reader can see the progression of history - can't smash everything into the main article. Plus I can then map it back against the main History of Poland articles. History of Jews in Podlaskie would be a better article. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exit summary and tips for FAC

[edit]

Right then, on thinking about it I do think we are over the line WRT GA criteria. I tried to give this a bit of a shove towards FAC, and my comments above still stand - I think the other areas worth looking at are prehistory of the area, and some note of local areas of note in terms of the city's layout (important neighbourhoods etc.) - Given its huge Jewish population historically, I think this could be enlarged a little, and the pop culture section turned into prose somehow. The other item of info I was curious about was the politics - beign close to the East, was it more communist, or is it more right wing as a reaction...or neither? I am sure there must be some information (in polish) about the city's character and politics. anyway, 'good' job so far. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:41, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


1. Well written?:

Prose quality:
Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:
Citations to reliable sources, where required:
No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:
Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail:


Hi, i just wanted to mention that the photo of the market square is photoshopped. The ground is much more pixellated than the sky. Apparently someone thought a more dramatic sky would be appropriate. Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes with this comment but I think the photo is beneath Wikipedia standards. Thanks. Toanke (talk) 13:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picking up the pieces and sorting before FAC

[edit]

Okay - need to check too-close-paraphrasing of sources. Rewording is alot easier when one has a few different sources to go on. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any specific sources you're referring to or in general?Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:55, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Marek, if you look at this sentence I changed and then at the reference it came from, you'll see the similar wording. It's worth checking web references. If someone can kick-start this process down the page. I am juggling about half a dozen tasks at the moment, and my main strength is copyediting, so checking some of the other web references and replacing with better book references would be a good first step. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for that one, here's the duplicate detector [1] - there doesn't seem to be much if anything. The main thing is that the history story follows the bulleted list in the source, but I think that's fine, as long as the text is reworded (which it is) and made into prose. I'll check other web sources.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I checked pretty much all the sources in the history section and they're fine. Spot checked some of the online English sources as well.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Rising Białystok'

[edit]

What's that and why is it in the info box? Some sort of Chamber of Commerce slogan? Sca (talk) 20:19, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Białystok. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:06, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Białystok. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Białystok. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:18, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Białystok. 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) 16:35, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT-free zone declared in city, violence in pride parade contrasted to Charlottesville

[edit]

I'm reverting this removal, as the declaration of the city as a LGBT-free zone has ramifications for a significant proportion of residents (LGBT residents and their friends and family). Furthermore, the New York Times has contrasted the widescale violence (dozens of injuries) and subsequent solidarity protests throughout Poland (and elsewhere) to the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia - and we mention the Charlottesville rally in the Charlottesville article. Couple with the extremely wide international coverage, this is certainly WP:DUE here. Icewhiz (talk) 09:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Perfectly fine to mention, however, it can be summarised into one/two sentences. Nobody died, plus this violence isn't the first of its type. No quotes by any parties (priests, protesters etc) are vital to the topic as they disturb neutrality. Oliszydlowski (talk) 13:14, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
^^^ In this particular case because of the parade the info merits inclusion, but there's a NPOV way to include it, as User:Oliszydlowski did, and there's the over-the-top POV COATRACK way that the info was originally added in. The general article on LGBT-free zone, if not merged outright to LGBT rights in Poland, would benefit from a similar neutral and reasoned approach.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well - if full information on this event - including the preceding incitement, well covered in RSes, is here only in summary form - the pride march itself probably merits an article given the scope of coverage devoted to it. Icewhiz (talk) 19:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Orthodox christans (Belarus) protested against the march. Icewhiz accuses nationalists.Xx236 (talk) 08:03, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The march was organised mainly by people from big cities who came with leased buses, not railways or public buses. Who financed the march?Xx236 (talk) 08:09, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Xx236: - it looks the marches are organized, yes. But do you have sources covering the organizers? I would like to write/expand their articles - but haven't found sourcing yet.Icewhiz (talk) 07:39, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @86.16.93.29: is removing this content, without more explanation than a single edsum saying they didn't see why it belonged here. To avoid 3RR i'd planned to bring it here and realised there was already a discussion. There seems a bit of disagreement as to what an appropriate depth of content is, but certainly there should be some (I would say more than 1/2 lines, but there's a range between that and the current length which I'd also be happy with). Nosebagbear (talk) 21:46, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Badly formed sentences in the "City layout" section

[edit]

The Bialystok#City layout section looks machine translated and needs improvement to meet Wikipedia:GA standards. This sentence really irked me:

On May 10, 1919, in according with the decision of the Sejm, Bialostoczek, Horodniany, Zwierzyniec-Letnisko, Starosielce, Słoboda, Ogrodniki, Pieczurki, Wysoki Stoczek were incorporated also, as well as too mill villages Marczuk and Antoniuk.

--Ca1ek (talk) 13:18, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Białystok&oldid=1211971386"