Talk:Greater Poland Uprising (1848)

message: Polish victories in the battles of Miłosław and Sokołów against the Prussian Army? Did someone inform the Prussians to show up? Or tell historians to report about these victories? Norman Davies writes: The year 1848, for example, is notable for the fact that the Polish lands were not seriously involved in the excitements besetting almost all the surrounding countries. It is a crucial date in German History, and in the Marxist movement, but not, unfortunately, in Poland. This article is a tall tale. Nominated for deletion. -- Matthead  Discuß   02:03, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It was not a major event, but :pl:Bitwa pod Miłosławiem and such did occur.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  13:46, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What? 

message: I shall expand the article.--Molobo (talk) 19:46, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanding the article 

message: I made a partial update. Will add sources and wikify with spelling check later. Also two large battles in the Uprising will be detailed.--Molobo (talk) 17:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partial update 

message: Added info box, some details on battles. Spellcheck. Will add more soon.--Molobo (talk) 17:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job. I linked the uprising from Revolutions of 1848 in the German states where it now has its own dedicated section.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  19:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third update 

message: The version prior to 3 March 2009  was based on sources published in 1935, 1952 and 1967 and two "modern" books published in 1982 and 1994. These "modern" books were edited by Lech Trzeciakowski, former (1974-78) director of the Western Institute, which is described on WP: Most of the institutes publications during the communist era that refer to Polish-German questions have an anti-German slant based on political considerations . Unfortunately the article was completely missing inline citations, so it's impossible to see which information was based on which source. I tried to find reliable modern sources and suggest to expand the article only based on such sources , with a clear and checkable citation. HerkusMonte (talk) 20:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The anti-German bias of older Polish historiography is equated by the anti-Polish bias of older German historiography. I certainly agree that any Polish or German sources should be treated with caution. That said, you'll note that the very review of WI you quote also notes it is responsible for a lot of quality scholarship, and there is no indication that Trzciankowski in particular has any anti-German bias. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  21:40, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We should use modern sources and handle older sources with care. There's a very interesting article by Krzysztof Makowski, a translation of the Polish original, unfortunately only partially online . Maybe someone's got access to the complete article? HerkusMonte (talk) 22:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can give me the Polish name of the original I can look for it. What makes you say it is a translation? The page I see is fully in German, and unfortunately I don't speak that language.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  00:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The last sentence (p.172) "translated from Polish by Malgorzata Grzywacz". Unfortunately I don't know the original title and when and where it was published, I'll try to find it. BTW, what's the problem with "encroachments"? HerkusMonte (talk) 07:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What "encroachments"? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  17:42, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Majority of the sources are from XXI century. The book from 1935 however is very informative and detailed, and I will certainly used, no worries I didn't detect any bias in it, its quite neutral and tries to detail the events without making any judgments or national biases.
--Molobo (talk) 22:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The book of 1935 is your source for the claim, the Poles were "branded with a chemical substance", is this what you call "informative and neutral without national biases"? And you mean this for serious I'm afraid. HerkusMonte (talk) 07:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes the detailed study of the Uprising from 1935 and republished in 1960 is excellent source with much information, and quite neutral,critical of many Polish actions as well. As it is to my knowledge the argest and most detailed scholary study of the even, I certainly will use more of it. What problems do you have with this information. Also it is confirmed by other sources.--Molobo (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated sources 

message: Informative background text, added information on many aspects, explained that the uprising was across whole Prussian Partition of Poland(and yes it is the term for the territory not only the event-check it if in doubt), the reasons for hostility of Germans and Prussia to Poles. Sourced most of the sentences. More work of course is on the way. But I like how the article has grown from deletation nomination to large article.--Molobo (talk) 22:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The article has in fact grown to an unreadable mess. HerkusMonte (talk) 07:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Please use paragraphs. Giant blocks of text are indeed bad style. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  17:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I made a major expansion 

message: Volunteers from Berlin tried to join this legion and support the Polish struggle for liberty as it was expected, the Legion would fight against the Russian rule in Congress Poland, but these volunteers were rejected
Can't find this in the source provided. Maybe its from something different or I missed a sentence ?--Molobo (talk) 22:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's on the linked page(161), the whole page describes the events in Berlin, the supposed struggle against Russia and the rejected volunteers. (Der Andrang der sich zur polnischen Armee meldenden Berliner war so groß, daß...) HerkusMonte (talk) 07:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

text: P.S. Please use , , or  instead of adding ?? into the text. HerkusMonte (talk) 08:15, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: *This is an article about the uprising of 1848, not about the history of the Grand Duchy between 1772 and 1848. The current version is much too long.
*"My" version was based on Prof. Makowski's article, who gives a short introduction into the situation prior to 1848, we shouldn't overstuff this article like it is now. If someone believes, Makowski's view isn't neutral or wrong, we might add some sentences, but the current background section is (sorry) horrible. HerkusMonte (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the section is now too long. I suggest moving excess material to existing article on the Grand Duchy.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  20:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background section 

message: Why is information about German colonists removed? It is properly sourced and nothing really strange, they were moved in large numbers in several waves after 1815. Is anyone claiming colonists weren't settled by Prussian state?--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Towns like Posen or Thorn etc. and especially the western parts of the Grand Duchy of Posen always had a large number of German-speaking population, a long time before the area became part of the Kingdom of Prussia. To describe all Germans living in that area as "colonists" is extremely biased and an easy way to discredit a certain group of the local populace. That the militia consisted only and exclusively of "foreign" colonists - rather absurd. HerkusMonte (talk) 16:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Typical POV pushing. We know this story already. All Germans living in the area annexed by Poland after WW2 must have been 'colonizers' etc. Totally unacceptable in an encyclopedia. Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (woof!) 16:36, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

text: WP:Cherrypicking - scholars describe the German militias in a neutral way as - German militias, while others prefer a more biased language and call Germans "colonists". I'm not surprised you prefer the biased version. HerkusMonte (talk) 09:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  German colonists