Talk:Battle of Radzymin (1920)

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2012/January; 2012/February; 2012/December; 2016/October; 2017/May; 2017/September;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Radzymin (1920) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Battle of Radzymin (1920) 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.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 11, 2012.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 14, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
December 31, 2011	WikiProject A-class review	Not approved
February 3, 2012	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
February 26, 2012	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 28, 2012	Featured article candidate	Promoted
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 16, 2020.
Current status: Featured article

Military history: European / Polish / Russian & Soviet / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	Polish military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War I task force

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

Poland Mid‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Soviet Union: Military Mid‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Radzymin (1920)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Harrison49 (talk · contribs) 22:17, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
Prose is good throughout.

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Layout and all the rest is good and consistent. There are six links to disambiguation pages which need changing according to the tool.
Half done I've fixed ~~two~~ three of these, so there are now ~~four~~ three requiring attention according to the tool~~, of which Dybów seems to be already correct so I don't understand why the tool is listing it as needing fixing.~~ --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:40, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing that. It might be that Dybów is linked to elsewhere in the article. Harrison49 (talk) 20:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done, 3 remaining names disambiguated. //Halibu tt 21:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Sections are all backed by references. One web link for Szczepański (2002) no longer works and needs to be changed or removed.
Done I've fixed this by replacing it with a link to an earlier version of the same article on the Wayback Machine. Incidentally, I've had to change it from {{cite journal}} to {{cite study}} in order to do so, but the display seems unaffected. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 14:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
References are reliable and well placed.

C. No original research:
See above.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
The article covers the major aspects and remains focused.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
The article maintains a neutral point of view.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
The article does not appear to be subject to any edit warring.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
All images are either within the public domain or published under Creative Commons licensing.

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Captions are informative and well used.
Overall: ~~Once the change to an external link and links to disambiguation pages are made, I will be able to pass this article. Harrison49 (talk) 13:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)~~[reply]
Pass or Fail:
A very good article. Good luck with the A-class review. Harrison49 (talk) 19:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

It is generally accepted by western historians that the battle of Warsaw was a draw. Both the Poles (who had seen their invasion of Russia all the way to Kiev reversed) and the Russians were totally exhausted, the Russians also having outrun their supply lines. All talk of "decisive victory" by the Poles is pure nationalist propaganda. 2A00:23C4:B617:7D01:2CC0:9BBF:990F:17CF (talk) 07:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]