Talk:1957 Polish parliamentary election

message: I would like a clarification on the source" "Bartłomiej Kozłowski, Wybory styczniowe do Sejmu 1957". What are the scholarly credentials of the source were this article is published. How academic is this publication. If it's not, it may or may not be OK depending on the credentials of the author. What are those? it is an important source since more than a half of the inline refs point to it. So, we better have it reliable. --Irpen 02:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He is a journalist. The article was published on  non-profit educational polska.pl/poland.pl portal (see this), an initative of Naukowa i Akademicka Sieć Komputerowa. As such it seems quite reliable - on the level of popular science magazines - and cerainly passess both WP:V and WP:RS.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Please try to read our policies. The sources, unlike your arguments, are quite reliable.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:V, WP:RS, WP:ATT. Of course, it would help if you'd read my previous reply where I explain how the author and the portal are reliable. As it appears you intend to use your favourite tactic of ignoring key points others write and repeat your initial points, don't expect me to repeat myself. again-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Unfortunatly the above policies have less strict criteria. Consider joining Citizendium, which - for better or worse - has higher critiera of what is reliable than we. And no, our policies do elaborate on what is reliable and not (suprising, when you consider the name Wikipedia:Reliable sources, don't you think so?). As I have quoted you relevant policies ad nausueam in the past years I will not do so again.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: And, while we do not know the academic creditentials of the person who wrote the article, the people who commissioned the author to compose the article seems credible to me. We take a lot less information and use it as sources. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that if the article comes from a publisher with the scholarly reputation, the individual author's reputation becomes less of a concern. This source, however, is some internet portal. I do not object to internet portals on principle, but one of the two things has to be scholarly, either the author or the source. --Irpen 05:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And you will keep ignoring my post explaining that a NASK-run portal is considered highly credible, much more than some news portal, right?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Read the sentence before 'It is also the national registry of the .pl domain'. Hint: the word 'also' means it is something else. Unfortunatly, yes, 99% of the article is in geek mode and concentrates on NIC aspect. But, long story short, NASK is also a University of Warsaw-affiliated research and development organization. Read homepage.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  06:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: From speaking with Piotrus, the journalist does have a website at  where we can ask what his C.V. is. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: In the same way that University of Toronto Press (for example) estabilishes academic credibility for whatever they publish in fields other than printing presses or Toronto local information. It is an online academic publisher. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  06:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Please cite specific policies. And yes, it is known for publications of educational articles on Polish history.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I have explained to Piotrus ad naseum that the Zerkalo Nedeli article in question is written by an othewise established scholar, a professor of history from Kiev university. If the portal article is also written by someone with established academic credentials, I withrdraw my objections. As of now, both the source and the author are unscholarly which makes the particular ref dubious. --Irpen 17:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is your double standards that are dubious, Irpen. For the last time, this article fullfills WP:RS/WP:V/WP:ATT. EOT.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Irpen, a site created by a major Polish university (Warsaw Uni) and research centers (NASK) and recommended by, for example, Polish government, Library of Congress or The Economist is reliable per WP:RS/WP:ATT - it is a 'mainstream website' and 'published by university' (well, by an organization closely affiliated with one and reliable by its own right) - or just look at that list - it's a partner of The Head Office of the State Archives, Warsaw University Library, Polish Constitutional Tribunal, Polish National Commission for UNESCO and other notable and quite reliable organizations... Nowhere we have a policy requiring authors of cited publications to hold a PhD. Please cite a policy that would put the reliability of that source in doubt or stop this pointless argument.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: FYI, JSTOR does not publish articles. It only indexes and archives those that are published elsewhere. But if you replace the references to the dubious source with those to the peer-reviewed journals covered by JSTOR, I will withdraw my objections as far as the sources are concerned. --Irpen 20:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what JSTOR is. And I have explained ad nauseum above that the current references are reliable. But you have motivated me to expand this article to at least a GA status, and I fill confident with the new refs I can do it. Then I would really like to work on the 1947 election, it's quite a fascinating topic...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources question

message: I have downloaded and am now reading JSTOR articles (currently in further reading). They seem to confirm all of the article; I'll add them as inline citations to accompany current - indeed, less academic - publications. However, let me repeat, all the numbers and facts are confirmed.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI, JSTOR does not publish articles. It only indexes and archives those that are published elsewhere. But if you replace the references to the dubious source with those to the peer-reviewed journals covered by JSTOR, I will withdraw my objections as far as the sources are concerned. --Irpen 20:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what JSTOR is. And I have explained ad nauseum above that the current references are reliable. But you have motivated me to expand this article to at least a GA status, and I fill confident with the new refs I can do it. Then I would really like to work on the 1947 election, it's quite a fascinating topic...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: In any case

message: 200px|right|thumb|Here is the result.
The article has RS - since the Midwest Journal of Political Science even has some stuff on Vietnam elections which I use....I have copyedited the article and it is NPOV and tells us the necessary information about the background, rules and results of the election. It is free of OR, has a statistical graphic and gives all the core details one would expect of an election. Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 06:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA pass