Jump to content

Talk:Józef Piłsudski

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nihil novi (talk | contribs) at 09:47, 7 February 2024 (→"Józef Piłsudski" needs thorough copyedit). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleJózef Piłsudski is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 5, 2010.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 14, 2006Good article nomineeListed
May 25, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
June 7, 2006Good article nomineeListed
June 30, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 10, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 21, 2006WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
October 3, 2006WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
January 21, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 11, 2013, November 11, 2019, and November 11, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Foreign Policy

The following seems very derogatory to France and Britain and Pilsudski:Chancellor Hitler repeatedly suggested a German-Polish alliance against the Soviet Union, but Piłsudski refused, instead preparing his horse-mounted cavalry for suicide charges against the vast Soviet armored divisions.[48][158] Until his death, Piłsudski believed Poland's policy must be to maintain neutral relations with the Germany Empire, while maintaining tenuous -- and illusory -- alliances with the weak French socialist bureaucracies and the isolationist British.[146] Is this really what the source says and if so can the source really be reliable or unbiased ? After all the alliance with Britain and France seemed ineffective rather than an illusion. In 1939 it was real enough to bring France and Britain into the war making the German Polish War a World War even though it didnt save Poland for defeat or give Poland real independence six years later. I don't have any expertise in this field and don't have the source book but it just seems wrong to me. Spinney Hill (talk) 01:25, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i think it's an accurate statement. . is coverage of serious mistakes =?? derogatory?? No--wiki follows the reliable secondary sources. is it "derogatory" to some statesmen? Well the consensus of historians is that those statesmen made LOTS of serious--even fatal-- mistakes in late 1930s. Rjensen (talk) 04:46, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The answer appears to be in an earlier version which I have re-instated which uses the sourceSpinney Hill (talk) 09:52, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I FAed this ~10 years ago but since then the article has slightly deteriorated; the idiotic cavalry trolling is of course just that ([1]). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:01, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FA criteria

Regrettably, the article does not currently meet the FA criteria. I will start by listing the concrete issues:

  • Prose issues:
    • short, choppy paragraphs are an issue throughout.
    • Inconsistent use of British vs. American spelling
  • MOS: lead, and image location are some of the issues which jump out
  • Referencing:
    • Some of the non-cited statements have been flagged in the article
    • Much of the Honours section is unsourced
    • Bare urls are cited
    • Citation style is not consistent
    • Józef_Piłsudski#Sources lists some sources that are not actually cited in the article.
  • The "Legacy" section is a mix of things that are actually important and indiscriminate lists of relatively unimportant things named after him. This would benefit from being spun off into a separate article, along with the long (and poorly sourced) list of honors

I also see above that multiple editors have expressed concerns that the article downplays the authoritarian characteristics of his regime. Non-Polish sources describe his regime as a dictatorship, considering this one of the most prominent aspects of his life (notice it is mentioned in the short, one-paragraph summary in Encyclopedia of War).[1][2][3] In addition, The Polish Review did an issue dedicated to him in 2011[2] and there was an interesting article on the subject, published just this year.[4] (t · c) buidhe 06:30, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Smith, Helmut Walser (2011). The Oxford Handbook of Modern German History. OUP Oxford. p. 436. ISBN 978-0-19-923739-5.
  2. ^ Kopstein, Jeffrey S.; Wittenberg, Jason (2010). "Beyond Dictatorship and Democracy: Rethinking National Minority Inclusion and Regime Type in Interwar Eastern Europe". Comparative Political Studies. 43 (8–9): 1089–1118. doi:10.1177/0010414010370437.
  3. ^ Schwonek, Matthew R. (2011). "Piłsudski, Józef Klemens (1867-1935)". The Encyclopedia of War. doi:10.1002/9781444338232.wbeow492.
  4. ^ von Weikersthal, Felicitas Fischer (2020). "From Terrorists to Statesmen: Terrorism and Polish Independence". Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. 43 (1): 5–23. doi:10.1080/1057610X.2018.1471967.
I added missing references. I don't think anyone in Poland would disagree that his regime was a dictatorship. Which sections above specifically do you think contain constructive criticism that has not been addressed? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:54, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the lead still does not have a reference to it, despite being rather too long according to MOS:LEAD. (t · c) buidhe 10:55, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Soft dictatorship - [1] [2] - GizzyCatBella🍁 15:35, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Zajda, Joseph; Tsyrlina-Spady, Tatyana; Lovorn, Michael (2016-12-23). Globalisation and Historiography of National Leaders: Symbolic Representations in School Textbooks. Springer. ISBN 978-94-024-0975-8.
  2. ^ Ramet, Sabrina P.; Ramet, Sabrina (1997). Whose Democracy?: Nationalism, Religion, and the Doctrine of Collective Rights in Post-1989 Eastern Europe. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-8476-8324-6.
  • Mainstream organizations of ethnic minorities similarly expressed their support for his policies of ethnic tolerance, though he was criticized by, in addition to the Polish communists, the Jewish Labour Bund, and Ukrainian, German and Lithuanian extremists. So, according to Wikipedia, ethnic minority groups who support Pilsudski are "mainstream", while those who oppose him are "extremists"? Surely there is a more NPOV to phrase this. (t · c) buidhe 04:18, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi buidhe, GizzyCatBella and Piotrus, I anm pinging you because you commented on the above FAR notice. There are still outstanding issues for this article including citation needed tags, the honours section that has an "additional citations needed" banner, a long legacy section with many short paragraphs, and inconsistent formatting in the references section. Are any of you interested in bringing this article back to FA standards, or should this be brought to FAR? Z1720 (talk) 19:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720 I will see about adding missing references (or removing unreferenced claims) shortly. As for language issues and related copyediting, I'll also ping User:Nihil novi. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:30, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720 Just a ping that most if not all of the above was addressed, please let me know what was missed. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:18, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Piotrus: Thanks for the ping. I am adding this to my to-do list. Since you are a FA writer (I see 22 FAs on your user page!) Can you also assess to see if this article still meets FA standards? If it does, can you mark it as "Satisfactory" at WP:URFA/2020? URFA/2020 is a working group to review and repair older FAs, and your assessment will help us complete this task. Z1720 (talk) 19:51, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Since you are actively editing this article, I want to take a much closer review of the article and conduct a copyedit. I am following WP:BOLD and editing some parts of the article, but I will need to seek clarification on some parts because I have never heard of this person and I don't know the history of this article or its FAC. I hope that you, or another editor, can answer some of my questions below, and I am sorry if they seem silly, ill-informed or pedantic. Please also review the copyedits I make to ensure I didn't accidentally change the meaning of a sentence. Questions are below:

  • The first paragraph of Early life goes into a lot of detail of the political boundaries of Pilsudski's village. Why was this included into the article?
  • The Early life section is quite long. I split up the early paragraphs into level 3 headings. I put the PPS information in its own section, as it seems to be a separate part of his life from his early years. I'm not thrilled with the heading names I placed in the article, so if others think of better names or better places to split the information, please do so.
  • "(he knew French, German and Lithuanian in addition to Russian and his native Polish; he would later learn English)." Should this be placed in a note?
  • " During the exile, he participated in a prisoner mutiny and two of his front teeth were knocked off when he was hit by the back of a gun – missing teeth is the reason for his characteristic, bushy mustache." Is this the same incident mentioned in the previous paragraph?
  • "and settled in Adomavas Manor near Teneniai" is this Teneniai, and can it be wikilinked?
  • "According to his chief biographer, Wacław Jędrzejewicz," is this Wacław Jędrzejewicz, and can it be wikilinked?
  • "Maria died in 1921, and in October, Piłsudski married Aleksandra. By then, the couple had two daughters," Are these the daughters of maria or Aleksandra?
  • "During this period, almost all parties in Russian Poland and Lithuania took a conciliatory position toward the Russian Empire and aimed at negotiating within it a limited autonomy for Poland. Piłsudski's PPS was the only political force prepared to fight the Empire for Polish independence and to resort to violence to achieve that goal." I'm not sure what purpose this sentence is serving in this article. Can it be removed?
  • I tried adding Template:Inflation to 200,812 rubles, but it calculated an inflation of $8,475,746,758,631 in 2007, so I think I messed something up. Does this amount seem wrong to you? If so, any ideas on how to calculate this correctly?
  • "In 1914, Piłsudski declared, "Only the sword now carries any weight in the balance for the destiny of a nation."" The article doesn't have analysis of this quote. Is this here to showcase Pilsudski's opinion that violence was the only way to obtain his goals? This should be clarified in the article, or perhaps removed.

This brings me to WWI. Please ping me when the above are addressed/resolved, and I will take another look. However, I am also very busy in real life so please excuse my delays in responding. Z1720 (talk) 21:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720 Thank you for your c/e and other comments, but please note that when splitting some paragraphs you seem to have created some inadvertently unreferenced ends-of-paragraphs (ex. "Józef was the second son born to the family.". Can you re-add references fur such cases?
My replies to your comments:
  • "Political boundaries". Assuming this is from what I wrote ~10 years ago, apparently I thought it was relevant, I still think it is not UNDUE.
  • I think I am a little confused as to why some of this stuff is here, as opposed to further down in the article when the things happen in Pilsudski's life (for example, his village becoming part of the USSR after WWII). It seems like a lot of information to put at the beginning of the bio that is outside of chronological order. Z1720 (talk) 01:05, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Languages and note. It could be moved to a note, but one of the wiki-controversies about the subject is his nationality/ethnicity/etc. As such, discussion of his cultural background, including languages known, is arguably more due in the main text than in some comparable articles.
  • presumably so, I removed one problematic ref, the other is ok-ish (pl:Viva! (dwutygodnik)).
  • Teneniai wikilink - done
  • Wacław Jędrzejewicz wikilink - done
  • daughters - Aleksandra (feel free to c/e to make it more clear). I also added a missing ref which was lost long ago during some random c/e...
  • "During this period" - this sentence illustrates how Pilskudski's political views and activities differed from many of his contemporaries and I think it is relevant?
  • I think we should flip the order, perhaps something like, "During this period, Piłsudski's PPS was the only political force prepared to fight the Empire for Polish independence and to resort to violence to achieve that goal. Almost all of the other parties in Russian Poland and Lithuania took a conciliatory position toward the Russian Empire and aimed at negotiating within it a limited autonomy for Poland." This allows the reader to immediately know how this relates to Pilsudski, instead of waiting until the second sentence. Z1720 (talk) 01:05, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to the bullet points above underneath each point, in order to keep the conversation organised and easy to follow, as is done at WP:FAC. I have signed all of the comments that I have added. If I did not add a comment, it means that I think it is resolved. I hope this is OK, and editors are invited to respond under the bullet points below:

  • "Soon afterward he officially established the Polish Legions," How soon afterwards? Is there a date or more specific timeline?
  • "which would remain for years to come. The Polish Legions fought against Russia, at the side of the Central Powers, until 1917." This needs a citation.
  • "Soon after forming the Legions," is there a more specific time period? A date, or perhaps "a few weeks/a few months later"?
  • "On 5 November 1916 the Central Powers proclaimed the "independence" of Poland," Why is independence in quotes? If it is a quotation from the Central Powers, I think the document that declares this should be quoted. If it is because Poland wasn't technically independent at this time, then it should be removed per MOS:SCAREQUOTES. Even if the independence of Poland is in doubt, I don't think the reader will actually think that Poland was independent after reading this sentence, only that the Central Powers made a declaration. If there is still concern about this, then maybe a short sentence explaining the creation of the Kingdom of Poland (1916–1918) can be added here.
  • "the most determined Polish leader," The most determined leader among who?
  • "and soon, like Vladimir Lenin before them," I'm not sure if this is relevant to the article. Is it important for the reader of this article to know that Lenin was placed on a train to his country's capital?
  • I think "File:Pilsudski and officers 1915.jpg" might have to be removed because of MOS:SANDWICH concerns. I think the other two images in the WWI section are better representations of Pilsudski during this time. Thoughts?
  • For "File:Jozef Pilsudski3.jpg": What year (or approximation) was this photo taken in?

This brings me to "Rebuilding Poland". Sorry that I am going slow with this review, I am busy at the moment so don't have time to read through large amounts of the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:05, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720 As you can see, I was busy as well and just caught up here. All issues fixed by adding cites, references or removal of information. Regarding the last image, I think it may need to be deleted due to lack of source (it is probably PD but we need proof). We could replace it with either File:Józef Piłsudski we Wiedniu (1914).jpg or File:Pilsudski 1910 1920 LOC hec 14263 restored.jpg which are roughly similar and from the right time frame. Which one would you prefer? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:15, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: I prefer "Pilsudski 1910 1920 LOC hec 14263 restored" as it's clearer, it's a portrait shot so we can see his face more clearly and the military gear in the first image is plain and doesn't give additional information to the reader. Z1720 (talk) 15:25, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response above Piotrus. Don't worry about the delays, I'm just happy someone is improving the article. More thoughts below:

  • "On 11 November 1918 in Warsaw, Piłsudski was appointed Commander in Chief of Polish forces" Is "in Warsaw" necessary here?
  • "On that very day, which would become Poland's Independence Day, he proclaimed an independent Polish state." Did he declare the independent Polish state after he became Commander in Chief? If so, I want to change "On that very day" to "Later that day"
  • "He drove himself hard, working all day and all night. He maintained a simple lifestyle, eating plain meals alone at an inexpensive restaurant." I think this wording is idealising Pilsudski a little too much. I assume that someone running a country is continuously working, so I don't think that's notable. I think the sentence about the simple lifestyle is trying to show that Pilsidski was a good person, and I think the subsequent sentence about his reputation as a loner is more neutral in describing his personality and leadership style. I think these two sentences can be deleted. Thoughts?
  • I removed File:PL Turek Pilsudski Monument 11.jpg from the Rebuilding Poland section because there were lots of images in this section I did not know how it related to the text here, as it was built in 1936.
  • "thousands of officers and deserters joined the Red Army, and thousands of civilians volunteered for war work." Were these Polish officers and deserters? If so, this should be noted and if not it should probably be removed.
  • Norman Davis's quote is very long. Can this be summarised?
  • "In the West, it was perceived at the time that it General Maxime Weygand of the French Military Mission to Poland saved Poland; modern scholars, however, agree that Weygand's role was minimal, at best." I'm not sure if this sentence is needed in a biography about Pilsudski, and suggest deleting it.
  • "A junior member of the French military mission, Charles de Gaulle, adapted some lessons from the Polish-Soviet War as well as from Piłsudski's career." I am not sure if this is needed in this article, and recommend deleting it.
  • Rebuilding Poland and the Polish-Soviet war sections are both very long. Is it possible to incorporate Level 3 headings?
  • There are too many images in "Retirement and coup", causing MOS:SANDWICH I suggest removing one or two images.
  • All images need alt language.

This brings me to "In government". Z1720 (talk) 17:20, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: any progress on the above? Z1720 (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720 I am sorry, I have zillion things on my watchlist and I am afraid I often miss talk updates. If I could ask you to directly ping me when you comment here, I hope it will speed things up!
Regarding the issues raised above, I simplified the sentence about him working "long hours", but I think it is interesting to know a bit about his lifestyle, including the fact that he liked dining at cheap restaurants. I agree this puts him in a sympathetic light, but as it is relevant and referenced, I think that's fine (as in, I don't think it is unduly biased or promotional). If you feel strongly about this, we can start a dedicated talk page discussion about this and invite further comments?
I have rewritten/removed some other content you mentoned. I shortened the quote by Davis, through I hate to gut it further as it is quite elegant. One section heading was added. Which image would you suggest we remove? Are alt language GA-level requirement? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:21, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: Sorry about not pinging you in responses; my watchlist is getting full, too, and I think I'm going to purge it soon.
  • Re the restaurant info: I think it would be OK to include if it was explained to the reader why this is important: was this different from how other members of his leadership acted? Was this a policy that all leadership in his party/country/administrators were expected to act? Context will help bring this away from idolizing and more towards informative.
  • Re images: File:Dworek_w_Sulejówku would be my suggestion to remove as it is hard to see the individual people in the thumb. Alt language is a requirement for FAs, as it is part of MOS:ACCESS. This is also something frequently asked for in image reviews at FAC, so I'm just following their lead. I have a lot of projects on my plate, but I'll add this article to my queue of articles to review. If I don't respond in a week, please ping and remind me. Z1720 (talk) 16:23, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720 Re: the restaurant, I think the context is "most politicians/leaders", today or in the past. I find it self-explanatory on that level, and I don't think it needs contextualizing to his party/culture or such. As for the image, good pick, I'll remove it. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:30, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I am so sorry that I have not given more comments; real life got busy. Please let me know if I missed any questions/concerns above. Here are some more comments:

  • "sought to "restore public life to moral health"." Who said this quote? Was this of the opinion of Pilsudski?
  • "Others contend that, particularly from the late 1920s, he supported the development of these military branches." Who are these others?
  • I have made changes and cuts to the article. Please review and let me know if there are objections. I think lots of short paragraphs were added after its promotion, so many of these cuts were redundant, off-topic, or out of place prose imo.
  • Note A needs a citation
  • General comment: the citations seem to be a mix of <ref>, template:r and template:sfn. These need to be standardised so that only one citation template is used throughout the article.
  • Images still need MOS:ALT

I am at the end of the article. I'll do another readthrough once the above are complete. Z1720 (talk) 02:52, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry to interrupt but I deleted a passage about the "robust union" in the lead section since I could not find it in the provided citation. Also, I have added the missing letter ń for Szczerbińska in the infobox. In the Descendants section, there is an expression "Both were very involved"; is there an alternative term for "very"? It sounds somewhat unprofessional for an FA article. Perhaps "highly involved" or "actively involved"? Regards. Merangs (talk) 03:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I traced the "moral health" problem - over 10 years ago someone expanded the quote for the term "moral health" to "restore public life to moral health", creating impression this was a larger quote. I'd suggest rewriting this to (no quotes in main body) "sought to restore moral health to public life". I also found [sought to restore moral health to public life a RS] for this (the old version was sourced to a Polish encyclopedia ([3]), not sure why this ref got lost over the years, but anyway, we prefer secondary sources (books) to tertiary (encyclopedias), right? I'll be working on referencing the names section over the next few days (it was never referenced, but AFAIK is correct), any help with ALT for images would be appreciated. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:54, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC, I don't think Sejm should be italicised as Sejm is a proper noun. I started removing italics from instances, but would like to hear others' opinions. Z1720 (talk) 21:14, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720 I concur re Sejm, I didn't notice any italics - but I'd have removed them myself (outside titles, of course). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:46, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments:

  • "Józef was the second son born to the family." Needs a citation
  • "and health problems that would plague him throughout life." Can this be more specific?
  • "Rebuilding Poland" is quite long. Any level 3 headings we can add to that section?
  • "but the April Constitution served Poland until World War II, and carried its Government in Exile until the end of the war and beyond." When was this constitution no longer used?
  • Refs still need to be standardised into one ref format, and added refs since this article's FAC should be evaluated to ensure they are of high-quality.

More comments after the above are addressed. Z1720 (talk) 04:17, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added cite and subheadings. I don't have access to Urbankowski to check if he went into any details. As for the constitutions, it's complicated, since the Gov't in Exile used in - AFAIK until it dissolved itself c. 1989; in Poland the constitution was abolished de facto first by the occupying powers, and then by the communist gov't. It's probably too complicated to discuss it in the text in detail. As for the refs, ouch, over the years they were reformatted by some people away from my preferred format (I hate the "helpers" who swoop by and add the Harvard templates that don't work nicely with most other code) and in all honesty I really dislike spending my time on tweaking the citations... know any wikignome who could help? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:12, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: Is the sfn template the preferred style for this article? I can fix the citations on my next readthrough. Z1720 (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720: Sigh, it seems nowiki parameter or someone's lack of using it for a ref parameter earlier(?) broke the reply gadget. I meant to say thank you, it would be appreciated, but I dislike sfn as it doesn't work with VE. Instead I use the classic <ref name-book1>cite template</ref> code, with the minor twist that I use {{rp}} for page numbers now. This way we don't get multiple footnotes for the same book - we get one footnote ex. [1] for all the times a given book is used, but the page numbers are in the body, not the footnotes. I am open to hearing what you prefer, but for me, the make it or break it deal is that a cite format should play nicely with the VE. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:04, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: I am happy to do this conversion, but I'm a little confused about the preferred formatting. Can you provide an example of the full coding, as it would look in the markup? (Maybe by using a reference from this article?) Thanks, Z1720 (talk) 01:54, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720 For my current preferred formatting, see my recent GAs Space travel in science fiction (note: it has a very big footnote sections due to consensus on talk to split examples from text for readability), Earth in science fiction (ditto), or Hyperspace. I prefer to quote specific pages, but use the rp template instead of (as I did in the past) to have a 'full reference with a page' in the footnote. I find this system pretty good both for the editor and the reader, and VE friendly. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:13, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note b

Note "b" does not make any sense so far as I can see. Can anyone improve it?Spinney Hill (talk) 08:41, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have rewritten the note, the middle was 'philosophized' way too much. This is not the Simple English Wikipedia, but this was totally in the realm of high academese, or some related "post-modern" garbage. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:52, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

infobox

The infobox was too long and contained lists of names that distract from the more important elements in it. Therefore, I have removed/collapsed them [4] (t · c) buidhe 20:51, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In government section

It says in this section 31st of May, it doesn't say which year

Should be fixed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EmilePersaud 16:03, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. 1926, of course. Can be infered from the prior section too. But I agree, it should have been clarified. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:58, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 June 2021

Rokkas Piłsudski is watching this.. StrangePersonality (talk) 05:26, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Living Concrete (talk) 07:54, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Surname.

It says at the top that his name was Pilsudski not Pilsudski but the spellings appear to be exactly the same. What is going on here please?. Is there a mistake which still needs to be corrected?Spinney Hill (talk) 09:42, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At the top of what? Can you quote and/or be more precise? I don't see any inconsistency anywhere. Anyway, it's Piłsudski not Pilsudski. Maybe your computer doesn't display WP:DIACRITICS correctly? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:51, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Three lines below the title and one above the start of the main text (certainly while logged in). No I see no diacritic in the name at either point although there is one over the O in Josef. -an accute accent in the main title and a dot in the first word of text.. Spinney Hill (talk) 11:59, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2022

Hello,

Requesting info box edit: add his position of Minister of Military Affairs (1928-1935) - because this is pretty important as it allowed him to influence the state until his death. Now it looks at first glance that he played no important role after 1928. Rebelbear (talk) 11:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. Snowmanonahoe (talk) 12:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of reliable source for "red tram" quote

The Head of State section under Rebuilding Poland contains the following paragraph:

The day after his arrival in Warsaw, he met with old colleagues from his time working with the underground resistance, who addressed him socialist-style as "Comrade" (Towarzysz) and asked for his support for their revolutionary policies. He refused it and answered: "Comrades, I took the red tram of socialism to the stop called Independence, and that's where I got off. You may keep on to the final stop if you wish, but from now on let's address each other as 'Mister' [rather than continue using the socialist term of address, 'Comrade']!" He declined to support any party and did not form any political organization of his own; instead, he advocated creating a coalition government..

I tried to find the source of this quote, but it appears (and correct me if I'm wrong here) that it in fact originated from Adolf Nowaczyński, who wrote of Piłsudzki in 1919 that he "got off the party tram at the stop called Independence". I believe a quote closer to the one cited in the Wikpedia article can be found in the monograph White Eagle, Red Star by Norman Davies, where he cites it as something that Piłsudzki himself "supposedly" said. On the other hand, Piłsudzki biographer Andrzej Garlicki says this quote is "not in [Piłsudzki's] style".

The "red tram" quote is no doubt a compelling representation of Piłsudzki's fascinating and somewhat mysterious relationship with socialism (plus it contributes to the popular conception of the man as a silver-tongued devil), but I think there's simply far too much disagreement about its authenticity for it to be included in the article the way it appears now. I suggest either removing the quote altogether or specifying that it's of dubious validity.

Sources consulted:

@Spontaneously Seems like a valid point. I'll review the sources soon. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:10, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In progress: An editor is implementing the requested edit. Working on it! Actualcpscm (talk) 18:41, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done, thanks for pointing this out! :) Actualcpscm (talk) 18:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Have a good day. Spontaneously (talk) 19:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Actualcpscm Looks good! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is worth adding at this place the story of the red banner at the Royal Castle (Although on November 12 a red banner was hung over the Royal Castle with Pilsudski's permission to calm the revolutionary mood, but after a few weeks, when the wave of important social reforms of the government appointed by the Provisional Head of State Jędrzej Moraczewski swept through the country, the banner was ordered without much publicity to be taken down by Pilsudski's closest associate at the time - Kazimierz Sosnkowski. The red-and-white banner returned to the Castle. Poland as a Republic - the Republic was reborn after 123 years of slavery; link), but it is better to find confirmation in the good RS. Marcelus (talk) 08:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Typo/Grammar error

Grammar error: In the "Legacy" section, "comrades-in-arms of Piłsudski's" should be "comrades-in-arms of Piłsudski" 81.187.20.112 (talk) 21:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

“First Marshall” should be changed to “First Marshal” in the short description. 142.167.21.12 (talk) 15:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zułów

@Cukrakalnis can you give a reasoning for the Lithuanisation of the Zułów estate name? Marcelus (talk) 22:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so intent on Polonizing the name of a Lithuanian village? The Polish name was definitely not the one used in the Russian Empire which was forcibly russifying everything it could, so there is no argument for using the Polish name due to historical accuracy. Cukrakalnis (talk) 09:32, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Administrators! The above user is a Lithuanian nationalist and he should refrain from editing this page. Zułów was a Polish village, owned by Polish nobility, of which Piłsudski was part. HetmanWL (talk) 16:02, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HetmanWL Please read WP:AGF and WP:NPA Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding this, I support using the Polish spelling, since this concerns the Polish-speaking Piłsudski family. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:44, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also the reasoning given (The Lithuanian village was certainly not called by a Polish-language name during the Russian Empire's existence, that's absurd) is faulty; because there is no logical connection between both statement; just because some village was part of Russian empire it doesn't mean it couldn't be called by a Polish name. Marcelus (talk) 08:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right. Btw, pl wiki article is at pl:Zułowo not Zułów. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then commit to editing the name to the proper Polish form, please @Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 2A00:F41:80EB:9A95:50B8:3473:8A19:941E (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Józef Piłsudski" needs thorough copyedit

I have done some work on the article's "skeleton".

This featured article very badly needs a thorough-going copyedit for English usage and style, which I don't now have time to undertake.

Thanks.

Nihil novi (talk) 09:43, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Józef_Piłsudski&oldid=1204557712"