Talk:Bolesław I the Brave

message: Here is how this individual's name is spelled in English-language reference works.  If you have access to other major English-language reference works, please add to this list.  Thank you. --Elonka 00:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Encyclopedias and dictionaries 

message: What do you think of 'Boleslaw I the Brave of Poland' as a compromise? I really think that 'the Brave' (Chrobry) is more useful then 'of Poland', but why not have both in the title?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think most Poles recognizes "Chrobry" as anything else as Boleslaw's nickname. Most Poles don't know what "Chrobry" meant and I think they would connect that to other Boleslaw's. Szopen 07:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Best as I can tell that source just references the fact that Canute was Boleslaw's nephew. It does not support the fact that Boleslaw send troops to aid him in the conquest of England.VolunteerMarek 02:32, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name, revisited 

message: I heard that Boleslaw introduced some protection of beavers but I cannot cite any sources. If anyone could, I think that the information is worth placing here as that would make him one of pioneers of  environmental protection. Zbihniew 23:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection of beavers 

message: I removed the comment that he was the "first real Christian" ruler of Poland as this is a statement of faith rather than one of fact. A person who converts to Christianity is as much a Christian as someone born into the faith. Velkyal (talk) 12:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First "real" Christian 

message: Other editors have raised questions about the appropriateness of this redirect.  Can we confirm or deny that it is appropriate?  This should go to WP:RfD depending on consensus.  EnviroboyTalkCs 19:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for catching the error.  The redirect should of course have been from "Boleslaus  the Bold."  I've corrected it.  Nihil novi (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect: [[Ladislaus the Bold]] 

message: While some may be surprised by it, I do prefer the translation of royal nicknames, i.e. Chrobry to Brave, as Brave is much more meaningful to English readers of this article than Chrobry. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  01:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Nihil novi (talk) 03:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've got seven reliable recent sources in English on Boleslaw in front of me, and 4 of them call him "Chrobry", and 1 "the Brave". He is Chrabry [I think] in the Latin of "Gallus". Not that that means anything, but as the translation varies and the Polish one doesn't (besides an archaic a), I thought the rename would be better for pure identification purposes, esp. in consideration of the fact that "Brave" and "Bold" (i.e. Boleslaw II) are semantically almost indistinguishable in modern English. But meh, move it back if you must. Not a big deal. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 04:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chrobry or Brave? 

message: Vojtech was a Czech from a Czech dynasty so his Slavic name should be used primarily. The German name, "Adalbert" should of course be included in parentheses the first time around as Encyclopedic information.radek (talk) 14:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: On the other hand, Vojtech himself chose the name Adalbert and is primarily known by that name, eg . You should raise your concerns at Talk:Adalbert of Prague first. Skäpperöd (talk) 16:26, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undo anon edits 

message: For WP:POLAND: failed. Reasons: insufficient inline citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: B-class review

message: English Gbook hits: "Bolesław the Brave" (ca. 50), "Bolesław I the Brave" (35), "Boleslaw the Great" (11), "Bolesław I the Great" (5). Gscholar hits: "Bolesław the Brave" (174), "Bolesław I the Brave" (33), "Bolesław the Great" (21), "Bolesław I the Great" (2). Also note Polish use: Gbooks: "Bolesław Chrobry" (210+) and "Bolesław I Chrobry" (62) vs. "Bolesław Wielki" (179) and "Bolesław I Wielki" (17); Gscholar "Bolesław Wielki" (46) and "Bolesław I Wielki" (4) vs. "Bolesław Chrobry" (1000+) and "Bolesław I Chrobry" (134).--Zoupan 01:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder about your counts. I get 7,3k for "Bolesław the Brave" Polish king + 1.1k "Boleslaw I the Brave" Polish king vs 1.3k for "Bolesław Chrobry" Polish king + 4k "Bolesław I Chrobry" Polish king. So it is not just Polish sources which use Chrobry. I do agree that it seems Brave is more common then Chrobry at about 3:2. Still, Davies uses Chrobry (ex. ). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:52, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Please review the hits by going to the last page. Trust me, the above hits are actual.--Zoupan 13:08, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I want to thank User:Borsoka for the recent edits. I think it is reasonable to try to aim for a WP:GA here. I have scans of the PSB entry (unfortunately, this being letter B, they are old, from the 1930s, I think). I will try to see if they can help here. We need to lose some unreferenced content, and replace few refs or verify page numbers. This is almost B-class, perhaps B-class already (would like a 2nd opinion on that). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:14, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your message. I think, modern Polish literature should also be used. Unfortunatelly, I do not know Polish. Borsoka (talk) 12:42, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Pl Wikipedia has a section about works on him (:pl:Bolesław_I_Chrobry#Bibliografia), which suggests there is a modern (2000 or so) book. I do think, however, that for GA it is not necessary to use it. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

text: For now, I am passing it as a B-class. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:20, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aiming for a GA 

message: The following was a totally unreferenced section. I am moving it here - feel free to restore, with sources added. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:38, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extent of his domains 

message: I think we can leave it in the lead. It is not a common name for him, but Google Books does show several English and few dozens Polish books using this term, so it's not a hoax. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:57, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bolesław I the Great / Bolesław I Wielki 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Augustus II the Strong which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 14:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Why is Jan Matejko's art considered ,,fantasy portrayal"? For example, Walery Eljasz Radzikowski's art of the Piast the Wheelwright is accepted. Both of those artists lived in the same time period, so why is art accepted only from one of them?
:I have moved the coin image to the infobox. StAnselm (talk) 03:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Piast is, in all probability, a legendary figure. Bolesław is not. Matejko's depictionis a fantasy portrayal because it came from Matejko's imagination. It does not appear in scholarly biographies of Bolesław. I doubt the modern coin does either. If anything, the Gniezno Doors portrayal looks like something one might expect in a high-quality source specializing in early Piast kings (WP:LEADIMAGE). That image does more good in the section, however. Surtsicna (talk) 17:37, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image