Talk:Greater Poland uprising (1918–1919)

message: This article appears to be rather one-sided in depicting the Polish-German conflict, a more neutral point of view would be welcome. 
And whatever the historical and political aspects: 
the English used is awkward and full of spelling mistakes. 
If you want your opinion taken seriously, please clean up the language, especially in the calendary section - BTW a good example for the problem: the word calendary is not idiomatic English, how about Timeline instead?
----
Well, this article has been tagged for improvement since August - it is December now, and nothing relevant has happened. 
It is still very one-sided by providing only a partisan, if not nationalistic, pro-Polish view. It is still full of orthographic and grammatical errors, and it also makes a number of factual mistakes: e.g. on November 11, the Alles signed an armistice with Germany, not a formal capitulation. 
Please correct these shortcomings, otherwise this may be a candidate for deletion. 
66.52.202.26 13:34, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk

message: This page should be a disambig for the following uprisings, thus this and other articles from the following series should be renamed.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. Szopen 09:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I made the very change that Piotruś suggested even before I knew about this discussion, so yes, it makes sense to me. Appleseed (Talk) 21:41, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, it's true this is how it is solved on Polish wiki, but I think that the date-in-name is the best solution.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  logologist|Talk 04:17, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

text: But why to move it to some Polish name instead of English name? I thought WP:UE is binding... Halibutt 16:08, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I haven't studied enough to advocate for or against "move and disambig", but I just have to express my consternation/amusement? at how the uprisings are mentioned in a way that is so blantantly, pitifully POV. How can you mention; "An 1806 uprising was followed by the creation of the Duchy of Warsaw which lasted for eight years before being partitioned again between Prussia and Russia." without referring to Napoleon? The bullet list above is more NPOV and should be incorporated. Bwood 19:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move and disambig 

message: I have moved the page to Great Poland Uprising, in accordance with the Wikipedia Naming Conventions. On a tertiary note, shouldn't most of the city names be in German, as they were legally German Imperial territory? Ameise -- chat 17:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You realy think that deleting is better than correcting? WWII has it's timeline.  Radomil talk 18:29, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, this timeline is very, very drawn out, and also goes into very very vague references, or ones that are not overly signifigant. Plus, the timeline is longer than the article itself. And about my Poland comment, sorry, but I do believe that if you want to contribute you request a proper interpretation in the discussio page, otherwise the resulting text often does not make any sense -- Polish grammar and syntax is vastly different from English.Ameise -- chat 19:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use English Naming Conventions 

message: It seems to me this page is stuck somewhere in the middle between a list and an article. Certainly not an ideal solution. Jaqu 16:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List or Article? 

message: Just added two non-Polish sources to bibliography. This should help to resolve the doubts of those who never heard about the event before.
Note that Blanke, who's work contains a chapter on the uprising, writes explicitly from civilian German point of view. Therefore his vision of the event is quite different from standard Polish narrative and shows the uprising as unexpexted, unneccessary and frightening turmoil. The article would probably benefit from including a mention of that perspective.
Also, the Polish part of bibliography would benefit from some modernizing - there seems to be nothing written after 1989, while in several cases (personal memories) the books mentioned there qualify as primary sources and therefere do not necessarily make a suitable Wikipedia reference.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.24.162.59 (talk) 17:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny that Molobo would remove a German title with the pretext that it “doesn't seem to be reliable source”. At the same time we have a book by the National Democracy politician Roman Dmowski listed here. Double standards, what else (if one may draw parallels to Molobo's itch of finding 'nationalist' undertones in different German historians' works). I've taken the liberty to revert the removal of that book from 1919.  Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (woof!) 10:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-Polish sources in bibliography 

message: I added a more accurate map, the previous one missed large sections of Polish population in the eastern areas.--Molobo (talk) 03:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  More accurate map 

message: It looks like this page has been quite for awhile but I do agree with the comment made somewhere above that the time line is too long and too much like a list. It would be good to somehow collapse it and make it more succinct and presentable. Any thoughts?radek (talk) 00:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The timeline 

message: 9 February 1919 is listed twice. The second time it is actually placed after 18 February 1919.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.190.253.150 (talk) 00:53, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  timeline error 

message: This article is currently at start/C class, but could be improved to B-class if it had more (inline) citations. Also, the structure should be converted from timeline bullet list to prose. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 22:38, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: B-class review

message: This article page is simply blatant Polish nationalist propaganda which has little bearing on historical truth/fact. It is how the Polish nationalists wish the world to view things. The Allied Occupation Forces 1919-1930 archives, and many books written by those involved, demonstrate this page to be a silly nonsence. It is impossible to edit/correct this page as a scroll through the hundreds of edits show that a gang of Poles just delete them. References to Polish books which are inaccessible and/or unreadable to English-language speakers should not be acceptable. This is the English-language Wikipedia. 81.131.120.210 (talk) 10:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed 100%. 2A00:23C4:B607:CB01:C143:1C6F:3BC8:4CCA (talk) 13:47, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

text: This is a fiction page, an invented story by fanatical Polish nationalists. No English-language books of the period mention this and it does not get a mention in the British diplomatic papers which are widely available in printed editions. The Germans were resigned to the loss of Posen province and there simply was no fighting. Wikipedia has become unreliable allowing fanatics to write their own histories which have no basis in fact. 2A00:23C4:B607:CB01:C143:1C6F:3BC8:4CCA (talk) 13:45, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Propaganda page which should not be here

message: This article should be completely rewritten, it's an incredibly vague timeline with no sources which includes stuff like "The Xmen retreated from Y town" without the reader even knowing they occupied Y town in the first place. Crainsaw (talk) 16:30, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major rewrite needed