Talk:St. Mary's Church, Gdańsk

message: Setting aside the Gdansk/Dazig discussion for a moment, The name of the church in Polish is the Basilica of St. Mary, or else St. Mary's Basilica, not Church. Group29 (talk) 16:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Basilica

message: It's a compromise based on the fact that the name of the city was "Danzig" at the time of construction, and is now "Gdansk". Mkweise 19:01, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Note to future readers: at the time of writing the above the title was St Mary's Church of Danzig (Gdansk) — Jor (Talk) 15:25, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: You've got a point about Gdansk (Danzig) vs. Danzig (Gdansk). I have no objection to switching the order in which the names are listed, if that will put an end to the revert war. Mkweise 16:51, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no city called Gdansk. There is either Gdańsk in Polish or Danzig in Germen. If you don't find the letter ń on your keyboard, you should rather use the German name instead of making up a new one. 91.55.86.96 02:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Wik is reverting now (or continuing reverts: may be his IP). — Jor (Talk) 16:52, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather than use Talk pages he insists on a quick poll: Wikipedia:Quickpolls#St_Mary's_Church — Jor (Talk) 17:14, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: Is anyone opposed to moving to St Mary's Church or St Mary's Church, Poland? Then the city naming compromise is gone from the article title, and can be dealt with something like "standing in Gdańsk (Danzig), …" — the Gdańsk/Danzig article discusses the city name in detail. — Jor (Talk) 15:36, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Has been suggested before—but this isn't the only St Mary's Church, nor even the only one in Poland. We already have an article on St Mary's Church in Kraków. Mkweise 16:01, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm. Any others in Pommerania? St Mary's Church (Pommerania) / St Mary's Church in Pommerania / St Mary's Church, Pommerania? — Jor (Talk) 16:14, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: Alternatively a page MOVE to a neutral location. — Jor (Talk) 17:03, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I recuse myself from protecting my own revision. If this page needs protection, another admin should do it. Mkweise 17:09, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Any thoughts on using Pommerania as a disambig title instead of Danzig/Gdańsk? — Jor (Talk) 17:21, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems rather odd. It would be like moving the London Tube to Tube in Middlesex.Halibutt 17:40, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: 1)Agreed there. But we really do not need yet another location for the Danzig/Gdansk/whatever slugging match... — Jor (Talk) 17:42, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: LOL, how about St Mary's Church in you-know-where? Seriously, we should not sacrifice clear and unambiguous article titles for the sake of weasely political correctness. Mkweise 19:02, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case Wikipedia should create a 'list of cities in Poland with other names', and strongly enforce the forms given there... — Jor (Talk) 19:03, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Although it takes no clarvoyant to know that such a list will be as hotly disputed as the individual pages are now. Some German users refuse to accept Polish names, and some Polish users refuse to accept historic German names... — Jor (Talk) 19:08, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: There already is a List of European cities with alternative names. I think it might be good if all articles about Polish cities with disputed names linked there. As for St Mary's, I'd prefer St Mary's Church of Gdansk (Danzig) (current name first - after all, if you want to visit the church, you have to go to Gdańsk, not Danzig). But I can live with St Mary's Church of Danzig (Gdansk). --Kpalion 19:20, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no objection to your moving the article to St Mary's Church, Gdansk (Danzig), if Halibutt and Jor can live with that. If it's really true, as Halibutt states below, that User:Nico is the only one who has a problem with St Mary's Church, Gdansk that that's fine with me too—though of course the German name should remain in the article text in any case. Mkweise 20:03, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: I'd rather have both names in the title than two separate, competing articles under different names; that was a situation I found completely unacceptable. Mkweise 19:41, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps protecting redirect pages could be a good solution. This could prevent people from changing redirects to new competing articles which would differ from the main article in nothing but the title and the first sentence. --Kpalion 20:05, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope you mean not as a general rule, as this would effectively make it impossible to move a page in order to create a disambiguation page. — Jor (Talk) 20:07, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: According to Wikipedia policy, protecting a page is never a good solution, but rather an emergency measure that we resort to when all else fails. Mkweise 20:13, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: Well, I'd rather have this article at St Mary's Church in Gdansk since this is the name used in English (look at the links posted) and this is the name of the city. After the evidence has been posted and starting an edit war failed, Nico simply created a new, similar and competing article. IMO that should be fixed and the whole case ended.Halibutt 21:47, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright...since it appears that the total number of Wikipedians opposed to that is one, let's try it and see what happens. I'll use a comma rather than a preposition, since that's more in keeping with encylopedic style (compare e.g. Christ Church, Oxford). Mkweise 22:24, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page title should be acceptable to all (Danzig vs. Gdansk)

message: Cautious, why did you remove my reference to the Teutonic Order?Halibutt 10:48, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: TO

message: #The CIA World Factbook 2003 calls the city Gdansk.
#Encyclopedia Britannica Online calls the city Gdansk.
#en:Wikipedia calls the city Gdansk.
Now, since the church is IN Gdansk right now, the title should probably be (IMHO) St Mary's Church in Gdansk (as previously suggested by Halibutt), this is in line with the article title of St Mary's Church in Kraków. Anyone who searches for St Mary's Church in Danzig will still get there as it will be a redirect. The fact that Gdansk was previously named Danzig (English language of course) is only relevant if we use OF in the title rather than IN. Anyone have a better suggestion than this? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:35, Apr 3, 2004 (UTC)
While we're at it, why is the title of the article Kraków on En? Shouldn't it be at Krakow seeing as how English doesn't have an accented o? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:35, Apr 3, 2004 (UTC)
:The traditional English name for Kraków is Cracow. However, it's been decided (see: Talk:Cracow) to use the Polish name. Krakow is neither Polish nor English - it's a hybrid resuliting from ommiting the diacritic due to technical reasons. Since it's technically possible to use Ó in Wikipedia article titles, it should be written Kraków. --Kpalion 21:06, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It was decided there to use Krakow, which is used about 8 times as often as Kraków in English (950,000 to 130,000 with an english language restriction on Google, more in favor if you confine it to English top-level domains). Looks as though it was discussed there, then Wik moved it to Kraków a month later. Jamesday 06:19, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: That's what I think too.Halibutt 07:21, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Other sources

message: First the city was founded by Slavs. Second from the 1400s up till 1793 the city was a Part of Poland. And saying that it was the "Teutonic city of Danzig" that finished the church even though it was a part of Poland in 1503 is totaly wrong. 24.2.152.139 23:16, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, the construction started under the Teutonic Order, but the city changed hands again during the process in 1454. But what should be the apropriate wording?Halibutt 00:19, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Teutonic city of Danzig" is wrong. 

message: Is it really the largest brick church in the world? Polish Wiki says only "the largest brick church of the Baltic area". It should be checked Pibwl 20:33, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: the largest in the world.--Emax 21:55, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: It probably depends on how you measure it. Is the length, the height (towers included/not included?), the area, the volume...? Measured inside or outside? Or maybe the numver of seats? St Mary's in Gdańsk is most probably the largest brick church in the world by one or more, but most likely not all, of theses criteria. --Kpalion (talk) 22:06, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Mowiac "najwieksza", liczy sie powierzchnia calkowita lub uzytkowa (nie jestem pewny)--Emax 23:39, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: It's definitely not the highest brick church in the world though. have a look at Church of Our Lady, Bruges and St. Martin's Church, Landshut --Lamadude (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Largest?

message: There are some problem with this paragraph I thought someone could look into: "After the Partitions of Poland, Prussian authorities took many precious items from the church, including cloths and vestments made of fabrics from ancient Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt, obtained during the Crusades; as well as renaissance wares from Venice, Florence and Lucca (more than 1000 items altogether).[2] Many artifacts were sold: the winged triptych by Jan van Wavere, sold to archduke Maximilian, is today held in the Church of the Teutonic Order in Vienna; and the sculpture of Madonna and Child by Michael of Augsburg from the main altar, sold to count Sierakowski, is today located in the chapel in Waplewo Wielkie).[1] In addition, the Prussians melted down gold and silver reliquaries for reuse; they reused golden threads from embroideries in uniforms for Prussian officers"
Neither the Polish, German, nor Kashubian Wikipedia pages mention this.
I am not sure the references for some of this are reliable, because I can't find some of the information here in them. 
Likewise some of the information sounds incredible. For example, the turning of the priceless church vestments from Ancient Mesopotamia into gold embroidery thread for the uniforms of Prussian officers, etc., etc.,. Let's clean up the article to make sure all of the information is factual.
Furthermore, the  the constant use of "the Prussians did x..." (usually something painted in a very negative light) is problematic. We could just as well substitute in "The Boogey Man dix x...", but we don't need to, in order to see that this savors strongly of ultra-nationalist propoganda. And who are these "Prussians" anyway? We need to at least edit to government, or Prussian government etc.,. 
The phrase "After the Partitions of Poland" is also highly problematic. The rennovations described here did happen in the late 18th century. Opening the paragraph in the context of the Partitions of Poland, and to the exclusion of any other historical currents in the country, though would make it seem that the rennovations were the result of the Partitions, which is not at all for certain. The fact is, that many medieval churches, in Poland and Germany, both Catholic and Lutheran, for better or worse, were rennovated, particularly into the neo-classical style, during this period. That this is not mentioned, or that the paragraph is not opened in the likely more approriate context of church architecture and design, again give the impression of history tinged with nationalistic rhetoric.
In all, to the casual observer of the article, it could sound as though Prussian (German) people off the street came in and defiled a Polish Church.
This is very far from the truth, and for that matter, the transferal of the church after the explusion of the German population from the Lutheran church department to the Catholic diocese (Rather than to the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Poland - which was and is comprised of ethnic Polish Protestants) is more complicated than described in this article. The events of 1946 in anycase were not the equal and oppososite countereacation to the rennovations of the 18th century, as the flow of the narration might seem to hint at to some readers, and they were not a "restoration" in any sense except the architectural one.
Let's clean this paragraph up, keeping what is historical, and leaving out what is allegorical; the church building and its deocration standing in for the breaking up, supression and ultimate ressurgience of the Polish nation.
I am very far from discouraging this kind writing. On the contrary, such a comparison is poigniant and eloquently conceived. But let it be drawn openly and directly, and explicitly as such. Subtly blending historical data with this kind of poetic thought, does neither justice, and even if unknowingly so, promotes dangerously nationalistic alternative histories of Poland's rich multi-cultural, and vibrant religiously diverse history.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.62.15 (talk) 05:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 18th Century Rennovations

message: An early 20th c. source contended that the Metropolitan Cathedral of Villanueva of Medellin, Colombia also claimed to be the largest brick church, but a 2006 Fodor's stated the Colombian cathedral is the 3rd largest. I corrected that article with the following cite.[http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks%3A1&tbo=1&q=Metropolitan+Cathedral%2C+Medellin&btnG=Search+Books#q=Metropolitan+Cathedral,+Medellin&hl=en&tbo=1&tbs=bks:1&ei=y76XTNvaD4b_ngeioJSbCA&start=0&sa=N&fp=c8c8e7193f290409 See note at top of web page, referring to p. 451 in book, not available for viewing through GooglebooksParkwells (talk) 20:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Largest?

message: These alienations and also later sales to private collectors ....
:— "Alienations" does not make sense here in English. A more accessible English word should be substituted. Sca (talk) 00:37, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Liturgical garments

message: ... some of the bricks melted ...
:— Can bricks melt, like metal? Sca (talk) 00:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: War damage

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on St. Mary's Church, Gdańsk. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040622100541/http://www.organy.art.pl/artykuly.php?art_id=22 to http://www.organy.art.pl/artykuly.php?art_id=22
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified