# Talk:Józef Ignacy Kraszewski

Please someone use here international phonetic alphabet instead of pronunciation presented as Krah-SHEFF-ski. 83.9.29.59 05:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The city now called Vilnius (Lithuanian) was called Wilna (Polish) during Kraszewski's lifetime. This should be explained or at least mentioned for English-language readers unfamiliar with the complex history of the region. And if the Gdańsk Vote of 2005-2006 may be taken as a guide, Vilnius probably should be referred to as Wilna in the article. – Sca (talk) 12:57, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Józef Ignacy Kraszewski/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Piotrus (talk · contribs) 13:38, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Jaguarnik (talk · contribs) 17:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Experienced reviewer buddy signing in. -- asilvering (talk) 19:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Will work on this review. Jaguarnik (talk) 17:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)


### Well-written:
The lead is far too short. It doesn't say anything about his life, just his accomplishments. The three sentences in the lead could be turned into one paragraph.
Lead expanded. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
to a family of Polish nobility (szlachta) of Jastrzębiec coat of arms. needs rephrasing, normally one doesn't say "a family of x coat of arms".
I am afraid it sounds 'good' to me, and I am not sure how to rephrase it. I am not a native speaker of English, and sometimes it shows. Ping User:Nihil novi. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
To be honest, I'm not quite sure how one would say it either. Jaguarnik (talk) 17:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Is it maybe "of the house of Jastrzębiec"? I've never heard anyone say someone is a family of a coat of arms - the coat of arms is simply the icon itself. It sounds kind of like saying "to a family of Polish flag" rather than "to a Polish family". Maybe "to a family of Polish nobility (szlachta) bearing the Jastrzębiec coat of arms"? -- asilvering (talk) 00:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
@Piotrus, speaking of non-native English, the article calls him a "publicist" - but my guess is that he's actually a "journalist"? Publicist has a more restricted meaning in English, where it's usually synonymous with "PR person". -- asilvering (talk) 00:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
@Asilvering: "to a family of Polish nobility (szlachta) bearing the Jastrzębiec coat of arms" sounds good, and I'll revise publicist - thanks. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
a gymnsium (secondary school) in Lublin; (gymnsium->gymnasium); additionally, there's no need to italicize gymnasium or add parentheses stating "secondary school".

Józef Ignacy Kraszewski spent much of his youth in the house of his maternal grandparents in Romanów. Is there any information why he did? If so, it would be good to add. Additionally, one of the sources talks about how his grandmother influenced him during this time and taught him French, history, and drawing; this could be added.
I've expanded this with your content - but which source talks about it? Unfortunately I cannot find out a source that addresses your first concern. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
he avoided being concripted (concripted->conscripted).

in 1829, in Svislach in modern Belarus, he graduated from the Svislach gymnasium Naturally, the Svislach gymnasium would be in Svislach, so either "he graduated from the gymnasium in Svislach" or "he graduated from the Svislach gymnasium". Additionally, I'm unsure that "in modern Belarus" is needed.
Doŭhaje [Wikidata] (Dołhe) - I think it's better to pick one spelling.
I've attempted to c/e the para while keeping both links (to town and school). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
They had four children: Konstancja, born 1839; Jan, born 1841; Franciszek, born 1843; Augusta, born 1849. add "and" before Augusta

He has been described as "too red for the whites, too white for the reds". Who was attributed as saying this?

He was effectively stateless, having lost his Russian citizenship - when was he stripped of his citizenship? Was this when he was forced to leave Poland?
This is my understanding, but the sources are not very clear on this (the ones I have dedicate a sentence to this, or so). I've reworded this to remove the claims made in that sentence, which perhaps went to far (about him being stateless and loosing his citizenship). The sources state only that his Russian passport expired, and Saxon authorities, supported by Russian authorities, attempted to deny him the right to say in Dresden, until he countered them with a French passport (fake, according to one source). See [1] and feel free to c/e further. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Magdeburg (in the Madgeburg fortress). correct misspelling of Magdeburg

Due to poor health, high profile of the case covered in contemporary European press - "Due to his poor health, the high profile of the case", contemporary can be removed.

Kraszewski's friends in high places - change to "influential friends", MOS:IDIOM applies

he was interred at "Saint Michael the Archangel and Saint Stanislaus the Bishop and Martyr Basilica - this can be cut down to just Skałka, no?
I guess... shortened.

Skałka in the Crypt of Merit - add comma after Skalka.

several, to English, Italian, Lithuanian and to varios Scandinavian languages - varios->various

When listing languages of translation, normally it is written with "into" - translated into Russian, Czech, French, etc...

Miłosz further noted that - change "noted" per MOS:SAID
Changed, although I am surprised this is not considered neutral, I started a discussion at linked MOS page if you are interested. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Miłosz drew a pararell between Kraszewski - change to parallel

Polish foremost painter - remove foremost, doesn't add much
Here, I disagree. Matejko is generally considered Polish foremost painter, so being compared to someone who is #1 in their field is significant. Not changed for now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
In any case, I've fixed the grammar here. -- asilvering (talk) 00:50, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Depending on how the discussion turns out, then "noted" might be fine; it's more I would rather remove it "just in case" Jaguarnik (talk) 15:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for opening the MOS discussion @Piotrus. I agree that "noted" is neutral, at least when context-independent. -- asilvering (talk) 20:59, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
primary focus of works- "in his works" sounds better
Changed although a bit differently, please double check.

As most important novels wit that theme - add the before most, correct wit to with, and it fits better at the end of the sentence

Miłosz noted that the best of these are first two - I think opined is better here
Some of his novels have be en described as critical of Germany, reflecting a push against the policies of Germanization. Others were critical of Russia. - two notes: how were they critical of Russia? Does the source say? Secondly, the parts about criticism of Germany and criticism of Russia do not need to wikilink to anti-German sentiment and anti-Russian sentiment, as those articles talk about hatred of Germans and Russians specifically, and criticism of German + Russian policy is not the same thing as bigotry.
I've expanded the relevant content: diff. I am not sure about unlinking the terms; for example the discussion of his anti-Russian work IMHO suggests it was, while maybe not hateful, intended to cause readers to see Russia with disgust. I am somewhat surprised to see we do not have articles on criticism of Germany or criticism of Russia (or criticism of Poland...). I was only able to locate Criticism of Israel and Criticism of the United States government. I've started discussions on anti-German and anti-Russian sentiment on whether criticism of... should redirect there, IMHO until such a separate article is created (and I'd be vary of POforking), they'd be fine redirects. I'd prefer to keep redirects here to related topics, until better articles are written. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
He became more religious after marriage (his relatives and friends included bishops Jan Paweł Woronicz and Ignacy Hołowiński and priest Stanisław Chołoniewski), - I don't think the "his relatives and friends" bit is really needed, as it doesn't say anything about his views about religion, just that he was related to them - one can't choose their relatives - or that he was friends with a religious person.
Right, but the source(s) made the point his period of increased pro-religiosity was likely influenced by the fact that his circle of relatives and friends after marriage included several prominent religious figures. I've added a clarification because the previous sentence indeed did not make that connection clear. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
are seen as contributing to Lithuanian National Revival. - add "the" before "Lithuanian National Revival"

He also played piano and composed music (Pastusze piosenki, 1845). - maybe the translation into English could be added here, since the other works in Polish in this article are listed with their corresponding English translation.

In other writings: the list of monographs and primary materials can be removed, as I don't think it gives much to the reader, especially when there's no translation or description of these monographs.
I can add translations of titles; in general I find giving examples of works mentioned useful - many of not all of them are notable and will one day have a dedicated article. Some of them have descriptions in analysis in works cited, even, except going to that level of detail here would be too much. How about I add translated titles for now? Just let me know what would be the preferred format - with a hyphen as I did for his music piece? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
He was the editor of the Gazeta Polska [pl] (1859–62, from 1861, renamed to Gazeta Codzienna). "from 1861, renamed to Gazeta Codzienna" can be removed, because it's not really relevant.
(often presudonymously, to avoid trouble with the Saxon government) - misspelled, change to pseudonymously

With his own funds he published a weekly, Tydzień Polityczny, Naukowy, Literacki i Artystyczny, but eventually gave up on the endeavor due to financial difficulties. - are the dates of publication known?
Omission corrected, I am surprised I did not add that in the first place. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

In 1868 he travelled to Switzerland, Italy, France, and Belgium. He published a travel account: Kartki z podróży 1858–1864 (Travels, 1858–1864). The two don't seem really related, as the travel account is about his travels before 1868; can the second sentence be moved to a different spot?
I c/e this a bit, do let me know if this is fine. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Beginning in the 1870s, he increasingly suffered from health problems. Which health problems specifically?
Expanded with disease names per source. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

His novels have helped to spread literacy in Poland - this statement doesn't make sense to me, did the novels teach people to read and write?
Well, more likely it it encouraged them to read, presumably as a pastime? See Miłosz: 257: his novels, intended as "ordinary bread", had little to do with the lofty Romanticism of his contemporaries and were an active factor, even as they are today, in the spread of literacy" (next sentence talks about popularity of his novels in Poland). Not sure how to clarify it. There is a wealth of sources in GS query 'kraszewski popularyzacja czytelnictwa', although I need to look into something particularly relevant. The point is, his books were popular and motivated people to learn how to read, to read more, and were used as such by teachers and educators (who preferred them over more difficult or challenging works - Kraszewski was effectively one of Polish most popular writers for the masses of the late 19th and early 20th century). PS. I've added some statistics, although they are for the 20th century. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
@Piotrus, I think this will work if reworded a bit. What do you think of this? -- asilvering (talk) 21:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
@Asilvering Looks good, I've added missing "and" and a relevant wikilink (red, for now). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
to Kraszewski's present era of partitions of Poland Saskie ostatki [pl] (Saxon Remnants, 1890) - remove present, put parentheses around Saskie ostatki

That series includes nine positions, out of which the most important are Historia Sawki  - what does positions mean here? Should it be novels?
Yes, fixing 
Ulana in turn has been praised for the "a bold and innovative analysis...- italicize Ulana, change to "its "bold and innovative..."

While Danek described the above four subgenres as Kraszewski's major directions, he also noted that Kraszewski, a very prolific writer, has written novels representing all major contemporary genres: romances, adventures, comedies, satires, memoires and their pastiches, gawędas, crime novels, psychological novels, sensation novels, and others. Change has written to wrote, as Kraszewski is no longer alive, so his writing career is complete: wrote. Additionally, I don't think this needs to have in-text attribution to Danek, as it is just a fact that Kraszewski wrote these novels.
Fixed written, kept attribution b/c it is more relevant for Danek's view on what were K.'s "four major subgenres". I felt this could use attribution as scholars love to differ in such typologies. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Agree. -- asilvering (talk) 21:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
representing all major contemporary genres:romances,adventures,...and others." I don't like the phrasing of this, as first it says "all genres", which feels definite, then it adds "and others", which feels definite. A rephrasing like "Kraszewski, a prolific writer, wrote novels representing many genres, including (and then list the genres here)".
Did something along those lines - how is it now? Feel free to c/e more to your liking. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
although written in Polish language Change to either "although written in Polish" or "although written in the Polish language".

he supported the cause of Polish independence, but opposed armed struggle, which in his literary works he thought unlike to succeed. I don't understand the last bit. Did he depict armed struggle in his literary works as unlikely to succeed? If so, the phrasing should be changed to "which he depicted in his literary works as unlikely to succeed".


### Sources: Spotcheck
Tarkowski, Paweł. "KRASZEWSKI Józef Ignacy (1812-1887), pisarz, publicysta, wydawca, historyk, rysownik". Słownik biograficzny Południowego Podlasia i Wschodniego Mazowsza. Uniwersytet Przyrodniczo-Humanistyczny w Siedlcach.
No complaints. Y Although there seems to be some information here that could be added to the article - for example, that his first childhood attempts at writing were in Biała.
Zajkowska, Joanna (21 December 2023). "Kraszewski w Wilnie – jak się narodził pisarz". Bibliotekarz Podlaski Ogólnopolskie Naukowe Pismo Bibliotekoznawcze i Bibliologiczne (in Polish). 60 (3): 149–166. doi:10.36770/bp.826. ISSN 2544-8900.
No complaints Y
"Kraszewski Józef Ignacy". Encyklopedia PWN (in Polish).
No complaints Y
Davies, Norman (24 February 2005). God's Playground A History of Poland: Volume II: 1795 to the Present. OUP Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-925340-1.
This source is used to source a statement that he was one of the most prolific writers in the world, but the page doesn't seem to state that as far as I can tell - just that his output was "unparalleled", but there's no comparison made to other writers worldwide. I don't doubt he is one of the most prolific writers in the world, but that source doesn't support it. But that's the only issue with that source.
Kącka, Eliza (2012). "Człowiek według Smilesa. Kraszewski pozytywistów (Struve, Chmielowski, Orzeszkowa)". Wiek XIX. Rocznik Towarzystwa Literackiego Im. Adama Mickiewicza (in Polish). XLVII (1): 457–470. ISSN 2080-0851
No complaints Y


### Verifiability criteria
Earwig doesn't flag any copyright violations; I don't see any original research, as all statements are attributed to the source; no signs of plagiarism.


### Broad in its coverage:
Doesn't feel too in-detail, but covers all relevant points: his life, analysis of his works, and his legacy. Only thing that I would recommend removing is the names of all the monographs and primary source collections, as stated above. 


### Neutral:
Represents his views and views on his works in a neutral manner. As stated above, the wikilinks to anti-German sentiment and anti-Russian sentiment must be removed, as those articles are about dislike of the peoples, not criticism of state policies.


### Stable:
No edit wars or content disputes.


### Illustrated:
All images are in public domain, as far as I can tell. Copyright on photos of Kraszewski and his paintings are expired, and the images of the monument and homes are tagged as own-work by the authors. The caption "Kraszewski's extant house on Mokotowska Street, Warsaw" doesn't need "extant".


### Overall:
I will put this review on hold to allow for the addressing of the issues brought up. As I am a new reviewer, I will ask that another reviewer check this review to make sure that I have addressed all needed criteria and given a fair review. Jaguarnik (talk) 22:03, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

For the images, File:Bracia Kraszewscy - Lucjan, Kajetan i Józef, Drezno 1871.jpg is incorrectly sourced - the link is dead and we don't have any information about the actual source of this image. It looks like it may have been scanned out of a book - which presents additional copyright complications. c:COM:HIRTLE is a useful explainer here. If we can't get a clearer idea of where this image came from, we'll have to remove it. File:Józef Ignacy Kraszewski.PNG has similar source integrity problems, but I'm more hopeful that we can sort this one out. The others all look good, though if we could get a proper URL source for File:J.I. Kraszewski Archiwum Państwowe w Łodzi41.Jpeg that would be great. -- asilvering (talk) 19:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
@Masur Can you double check the images mentioned here and either start a deletion on Commons or see if they fall under Polish-PD or such? TIA Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
File:Bracia Kraszewscy - Lucjan, Kajetan i Józef, Drezno 1871.jpg - Masur tagged as no source, source has been fixed (url) by @Wieralee
File:Józef Ignacy Kraszewski.PNG - uploader @Mathiasrex sadly passed away in 2022 (RIP). I was able to find this: https://polona.pl/preview/25742edd-9e9f-4761-915a-c83dbc6123b4 - is this enough to solve this? What do we need to do outside changing link in Commons?
File:J.I. Kraszewski Archiwum Państwowe w Łodzi41.Jpeg - I also found it in Polona: https://polona.pl/preview/010249e2-3d9a-422a-ade8-978eda28151d dated to 1880
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
@Piotrus, that first one, Bracia Kraszewscy, is still incorrect - the source leads to a different image (though one obviously from the same photography session). Since that is going to be PD, and also is a better image, you should probably just properly upload the image linked in the source and delete the old b&w one that looks like it was scanned from a book. For the other two images, I suggest replacing them as well - the source you found is a better resolution for both of them. -- asilvering (talk) 21:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
@Asilvering I'll ping @Wiralee and @Masur again, since if this is not the exactly same picutre, we are back to square one on that image (although we can upload the new impage Wiralee found as a new image). I've  uploaded better versions for images #2 and #3, although for #2 I am getting some strange white space I don't know how I can remove, and I cannot  upload the best version b/c mediawiki software detecs some clash between jpg and png and I don't know how to resolve either issue except upload a new version of the file :( Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
@Wieralee Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
@Piotrus and Asilvering: I've asked for deletion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bracia Kraszewscy - Lucjan, Kajetan i Józef, Drezno 1871.jpg. I'm not interested in fighting to keep this file. Wieralee (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
@Wieralee Could you upload the new one you found as a replacement? TIA. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
You're quite right to point out the short lead, since MOS:LEAD is one of the few MOS guidelines that are mandatory for GAs. Your other comments look good; I'll have another look once Piotrus comes through with edits. -- asilvering (talk) 19:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
@Asilvering @Jaguarnik Thanks for the feedback. I'll try to address the issues shortly, that said, I am on holidays and my Wiki access/time is more limited than usual, as is my access to sources. I hope to comment more within few days. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
@Asilvering @Jaguarnik I had a bit of time today and finished my first pass addressing objections. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
@Asilvering@Piotrus I looked through and I don't have any further complaints. I think the article is ready to be a good article. Jaguarnik (talk) 16:55, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your careful review, @Jaguarnik. I think this is ready to go as soon as the images are swapped out, since Piotrus has found better versions of all of them, with clear copyright info. -- asilvering (talk) 21:09, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
@Jaguarnik, I've just gone ahead and removed that one outstanding image (along with a new one that wasn't formatting correctly) so you can go ahead and pass this. If the better image is added, that's great, but for now I'd rather not hold this GA up eternally over a single image. -- asilvering (talk) 00:59, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Alright, thank you very much. I'll pass it now. @Piotrus Congratulations on another Good Article. Jaguarnik (talk) 05:34, 26 July 2024 (UTC)