Talk:Cyprian Norwid

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

B-class review[edit]

For WP:POLAND - failed, due to insufficient inline citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Père-Lachaise[edit]

Hi,

For information, there was an error in the article since 2006. He's not buried in Père-Lachaise cemetery but in Cimetière des Champeaux de Montmorency. Source : administration office of the Père-Lachaise. Pyb (talk) 15:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lithuanian origin of his name[edit]

The article currently states:


The surname "Norwid" is a Polish form of the Lithuanian two-syllable archaic (sur)name Norvydas — from noras a wish, a desire, a goal and (iš)vysti to see, literally one, who has a desire.[1][2]

References

  1. ^ According to the dictionary of Lithuanian surnames, surname Norvydas is widespread in Samogitia.
  2. ^ According to the statistics, in 1999-2018 there were 43 newborn boys, whose parents gave them a Lithuanian name - Norvydas

This seems ORish to me. Comments? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:05, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I've removed this likely OR from the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:51, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography[edit]

Have you seen these books? https://search.library.yale.edu/catalog?f%5Bformat%5D%5B%5D=Books&q=Cyprian_Norwid&search_field=all_fields

They are available in the Yale Library, where I have access. Jehochman Talk 02:11, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

Passed. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:51, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Cyprian Norwid/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs) 19:26, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


I'll take this one. Comments to follow in the subsequent days. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:26, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source comments, that I'm going to wait for a response on before continuing:
    Could you supply translated titles?
    Could you explain why Encyclopedia PWN is reliable?
    I don't like Wikisource as a source; it's user-generated content, just like us, and we're not a reliable source. I suggest reformatting as an interwiki link, or finding a template; I'm sure such exists.
    Could you explain why wolnelektury.pl is a reliable source?
    Similarly, mission.net?
    Similarly, polishlit.org?
    Other sources seem reliable on the face of it. Spotchecks to follow after these have been addressed.
  • I'm a little confused about the works/bibliography. It seems neither exhaustive, nor restricted to the highlights. His works in Polish are best known, surely; yet you list only two, and many more in English? Does a translation into Bengali really belong? Are you listing poems, collections, plays, something else? What role is the bibliography playing? If it's sources about him, they should be used, rather than listed? I think a little work is needed there.
  • @Piotrus: Vanamonde (Talk) 19:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vanamonde93 I'll work on those (translated titles) shortly. Encyklopedia PWN is effectively Polish equivalent of Britannica. The link to Fortepian Szopena on Wikisource is used not as much as a source, but as a link to the English version of the poem (and yes, I agree the entire works/bibliography is not ideal, maybe they should be split into another article, as they are indeed incomplete - mostly just stuff that existed here before my c/e of the article). wolnelektury is used in the same vein, just a link to the English text of the work. Ditto for mission.net.
    polishlit.org is used for bibliographical data. It is a personal project (website) of a reliable scholar: Constance J. Ostrowski, based on my search, seems to be a "Prof Emer Lit & Rhet." from Schenectady County Community College. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: English title added, works moved to ELs except the Bengali note which I've added to the body but am not opposed on removing it (almost trivia sourced to [1] which doesn't appear in-depth, publisher press release or no better). Kill it? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:37, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I suspect there is some promotionalism going on with the Bengali newspaper; and it doesn't appear to be a heavyweight paper. But it's a minor point, and I leave it to your judgement.
    Didn't catch this the first time, but this source both seems marginally reliable, and has wording that's far too close to our article.
    Copyvio spotchecks otherwise clear.
    At FAC, I might question the use of the primary journal website for Studia Norwidiana; here I think it's permissible, but only just, more from a due weight perspective than a reliability perspective.
  • Moving to spotchecks. Not going to attempt Polish spotchecks unless the English ones throw up issues.
    FN7a supports his self-learning, but not languages specifically; I assume the other source covers it.
    I've double checked and can confirm this is correct. The chapter is online ([2], link added); the source states authoritatively that he knew seven languages and then goes on to quote Norwid's own claim that he spoke twelve. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FN7b, similarly, supports half the sentence it's used for, I assume the other citation supports the rest.
    I think so too (same source as above; if you need a direct quote let me know, I know PDFs are not as friendly to MT as regular text). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FN7c checks out.
    FN7d checks out
    FN7e; source says passport, not citizenship; while they are frequently synonymous, they are not necessarily so. I suggest rewording or using a different source.
    I expanded and clarified this with a new source (English), and changed the word since you are correct, the sources do not clearly say he lost citizenship. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FN7f checks out.
    FN7g partially supports the sentence it follows. Suggestion, not required at the GA level; when using two or more source to construct a sentence, use them as needed in the middle of a sentence, so only a single source is used for a given fragment of text. I know this isn't always possible (I'm often unable to do so), but it sometimes is, and aids verifiability
    Good idea, but I thought this is frawned upon by MoS? I guess I was mistaken? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Possibly? I'm not a MOS fanatic, lord knows. And I don't require it by any means, but I've been given a difficult time over this at FAC. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FN7n checks out
    FN7o checks out
    FN7s checks out
    FN13: not sure what this source supports besides deafness, which is covered elsewhere?
    Sometimes I add extra sources if they are relevant, in case one is easier to verify by the reader than the other... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FN16 checks out, though I note it's the same source as FN11; could be combined, though not a GA-level issue.
    It's not? Fixed anyway :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not strictly speaking, though I would try to fix it in any of my submissions, and I think most folks would appreciate it being pointed out; as I understand it the GA criteria require a source to be unambiguously identifiable, nothing more. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FN22a: not sure where this supports "graphics firm" specifically, rest checks out.
    I've added a new dedicated ref which I think supports this in more detail - pleaes double check ([3]). On a side note, I am increasingly amazed how well studied Norwid's life is (also, in English!) compared to many other literary figures I am worked on. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FN22b checks out.
    FN22c checks out.
    FN56 checks out
    FN57 checks out.
    FN58 checks out
  • Moving to prose, as other issues are not fatal to the nomination. I'll make copyedits as I go, feel free to revert and discuss as needed.
    The lead feels a little short, and choppy. The first three paragraphs are of one, two, and one sentence; the last, which is the only biographical paragraph, is of three. I would suggest fleshing it out a little more, in particular with a couple more sentences about his life.
    I've expanded and c/e-ed lead. What do you think? Feel fee to adjust further, I feel it is still not ideal but can't put my finger on what's missing. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Much better, I've made two minor copyedits. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In a similar vein, I suggest putting legacy/reappraisal after biography, but that is not mandatory.
    "His incomplete formal education ... despite his lack of much formal education ..." in the same sentence; could you condense?
    Done. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Maria Kalergis, née Nesselrode" this is confusing; was he courting a married woman, or a divorced one? Otherwise, I assume Kalergis is her later married name, and I suggest rephrasing this "Maria Nesselrode (later known by her married name, Maria Kalergis) or equivalent.
    Married but separated. Her husband died in 1863. See her bio for details (an interesting case of a pre-20th century notable women whose first husband does not seem to be notable, as far as I can tell...). Perhaps we can remove "née Nesselrode" as unnecessary (confusing?) detail? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I think so; if she is known both now and at the time of her appearance in this story by "Kalergis", the maiden name is unnecessary. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Suggest linking drama, as these days readers are apt to think of it as a genre rather than a literary form.
    Done. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you supply translated titles for Polish works? Bema pamięci rapsod żałobny is what stood out to me, but there's a couple more.
    Done. Note A Funeral Rhapsody in Memory of General Bem. Was linked and translated on the second mentioned - reworded. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ps. Remaining untranslated names are given names that I don't think can be translated. And Vademecum (disambiguation) is well Latin? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:26, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you supply a brief gloss for Wladyslaw Zamoyski?
    Done. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not strictly a GA-level issue, but I saw material in the sources about how his journey to the US was harrowing and long; I suggest fleshing that out a little bit.
    For now, added "was harrowing". Not long since arguably all such voyages back then had similar lenght. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "With his artistic work revived" we haven't got a sense for why this happened; I can understand that the sources are likely patchy, but this feels jarring.
    Simplified for now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "He lived in England with Krasiński's help he was finally able to return to Paris" this is ambiguous: could mean "He lived in England and with Krasiński's help he was finally able to return to Paris.." or "He lived in England with Krasiński's help. He was finally able to return to Paris..."
    Oopsie, 'and' added. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:48, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Suggest supplying some context for what the January uprising was and how Norwid hoped to be influential.
    Done. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:48, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Norwid continued writing, but with little recognition." this seems at odds with much of the previous paragraph
    I'd appreciate suggestions on now to reword this. When I started improving this, my first impression was that most of Norwid's work were not published during his lifetime. Now it seems correct to say that most of longer works were unpublished, and he failed to publish most anthologies, but many of his shorter pieces did get a single edition that however went mostly unnoticed during his lifetime (i.e. one could desribe him, during his lifetime, as a struggling writer, reminiscent IMHO to Van Gogh being a struggling painter during his lifteime, etc.). See for example the cited source (the very bottom right of the page; which however quotes is frutration expressed in the 1858 poem in the context of him being unable to publish his 1866 work, sigh). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:11, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    On re-reading, this doesn't seem like an issue any more; the minor tweaks above have taken care of it, I think. I take your point that an absence of information is difficult to convey. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't explain the alternate middle name anywhere that I can see?
    Ah, Konsanty vs Kamil? No I did not because I did not think about it. Thank you for drawing my attention to this. Fixed - by removing what could be a possible hoax, sigh (I could not find any off wiki soruces for Konstanty). 17 years old hoax? Probably worth adding to the WP:HOAXLIST. I'll add his correct middle name(s) with a note per pl wiki and source I found. Nice catch! (Side note: do you know a better way to do notes than what I am doing with the old, old code here?). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:11, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Fascinating. Glad I saw it, but I don't blame you, names and infobox trivia are something a lot of us learn to ignore...Vanamonde (Talk) 15:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "compared to then-prevailing themes (romanticism and positivism) works were also not aligned with the political views of the emigre Poles" I cannot follow this fragment; also suggest breaking into more than one sentence, as there are multiple ideas there.
    C/ed. How does it sound now? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:11, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Better but "and their subjects were also not aligned" is still ambiguous; whose subjects? And how would subjects be aligned with political views? It would also be nice if you could saw how they weren't aligned, but that's not mandatory. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A new paragraph should typically refer to its subject by name rather than pronoun; I fixed a couple, check for examples throughout.
    Hmm. Fixed one "his". Left "In 1877 his cousin" and "the poet". Feel free to change if it irks you. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:11, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Gloss Czesław Miłosz
    If by gloss you mean explain who he is in text, done. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:11, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    See above comments about the paragraph about the urn.
  • @Piotrus: That's all I have; ping me when you're done? Vanamonde (Talk) 00:00, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vanamonde93 Thank you. I'll try to address all of this in the near future, hopefully within few days. Do note that chronologically I need to address issues at Talk:Jan Kochanowski/GA1, and despite few month separating GA noms, it so happens that I received the two reviews on the same day. These days I am also a bit busy - apologies in advance for any delays. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vanamonde93 Replied to sources, will look at the prose part shortly. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks: seems to be one comment, about phrase similarity, that you've missed? Otherwise looks good, other spot checks were clear so I see no need for you to send me pdfs. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:31, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vanamonde93 Ah, right. I don't think the user (@Brisvegas) who added that part is active enough for us to expect them to help. Do you think we need to rewrite that? For now I've added two refs to Polish news stories from that period, the facts all check out. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:08, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    PS. I compared the texts and removed / rewrote some most eggregious copyvio (let's call spade a spade, this was pretty much a 100% copypaste from the source, sigh). Also added iwiki link to Crypts of the Bards [pl] Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you: yes, it was necessary, I think. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Piotrus, how are things looking here? Please take more time if you need it, but as far as I can tell there's only a handful of points remaining. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vanamonde93 If stars align, I hope to tackle this tomorrow. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vanamonde93 See now? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:11, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Piotrus: All looks good, two minor prose replies above but I'm comfortable leaving those in your hands and passing this. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Vaticidalprophet talk 21:20, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Cyprian Norwid in 1871
Cyprian Norwid in 1871

Improved to Good Article status by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 04:34, 13 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Cyprian Norwid; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Piotrus: Good article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:45, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cyprian_Norwid&oldid=1216945301"