Jump to content

Talk:Vasil Levski

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleVasil Levski has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 21, 2008Good article nomineeListed
January 24, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
April 3, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 18, 2011, February 18, 2013, February 18, 2015, February 18, 2018, and February 18, 2020.
Current status: Good article

GA

[edit]

This article provides a balanced account of Vasil Levsky. The prose is very clear, succint, and academic. The facts and details are accurate. The photos are very useful and provide and even more well-rounded portrayal of Levski. Where this article particularly achieves good article status is in its non-biased viewpoint. The article remains neutral throughout, free of either excessively nationalistic or slandering viewpoints. The fact that the author of this article uses a non-Bulgarian source helps to rid the article of any potencial nationalistic bias that would potencially arise from using certain Bulgarian resources. However, the fact that the author uses only one, non-Bulgarian source, is also a slight flaw of the article. To improve this article, more sources need to be used, preferably a mixture of Bulgarian and non-Bulgarian sources. Although, as mentioned before, the use of Bulgarian sources may allow for some bias, they still need to be used, as the amount of contextual information about Levski as well as what Vasil Levski means to the people of Bulgaria cannot be explained as well by non-Bulgarian sources. Overall however, this is a good article (GA). "Passed"Vasil Levski"" Ezekilov

I've stricken this, and left a note on the user's talk page. Users cannot review their own nominations. -- how do you turn this on 19:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's a lot more like a GA now :) I've rewritten it and nominated it again. Todor→Bozhinov 20:19, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Vasil Levski/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll be reviewing your article. Thanks, KensplanetTalkContributions

Check out the Good article criteria here:

(1). Well written:
1 (a). the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
1 (b). it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.

(2). Factually accurate and verifiable:
2 (a). it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;
2 (b). at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons; and
2 (c). it contains no original research.

(3). Broad in its coverage:
3 (a). it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
3 (b). it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail

(4). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

(5). Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

(6). Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6 (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
6 (b). images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

  • This is one of the best articles I have ever seen. Tremendous details on Levski. I have no issues with anything. I have been reading this article for the past 2 days. Some very minor issues may be present but not a barrier towards GA status. Most sources are in Bulgarian language. But we care only about accuracy, not the language. Even that's fine. My only issue is that the References are written in Cyrillic Script and Bulgarian language. Don't you think English translation of the titles should be done. Although not a GA criterion, but please check it if you intend to submit this article at WP:FAC.

This article satisfies Good article criteria. I'll gradly promote it. Wikipedia is in dire need of such well written biographies. Hope to see this article at WP:FAC soon. Thanks, KensplanetTalkContributions 11:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weasel words

[edit]

I've recently made stylistic edits to this article, but I left the weasel words intact. Below I'll list the weasel words I found and specify the measures we can take to remove them:

  • "According to some researchers, it was at this time that Levski established the earliest of his secret committees" Change "some researchers" to the name of at least one researcher. This text cites the Bakalov source, which I don't possess. Can someone consult it and then make this change?
As far as I can remember (I don't have currently access to Bakalov), I was citing the source as an example of this POV, while the government website was the one used to reference the entire sentence. And sure enough, [1] says just "some researchers". Todor→Bozhinov 12:02, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "According to some scholars, his capture was facilitated by treason, the priest Krastyo Nikiforov cited as the traitor." I can improve this sentence if I know which scholars have made this assertation. I read the cited link, but I didn't find any names of scholars who support the Krastyo hypothesis. Also, is there a better Bulgarian source for this controversy? The cited link is biased and comes off as emotional, referring to the former communist government as totalitarianism and calling the Krastyo hypothesis a lie. Mind you, I'm not a native Bulgarian speaker.;)
There can be a better source indeed: this one is enough to prove that the controversy exists and the Krastyo hypothesis is there, but nothing more than that. Todor→Bozhinov 12:02, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Some accounts claim he was reburied in the Church of St Petka of the Saddlers." Read the cited link and let me know if it's accurate if I edit as such: "Accounts published in the newspapers Mir and Puls assert that he was buried in the Church of St Petka of the Saddler."
This is accurate, though you might add the Sofia magazine to that list (same link). Todor→Bozhinov 12:02, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "some have expressed the opinion that while Levski's post-monastical life was one of a martyr" Let's state who has expressed this opinion.
The same source has been used for the entire paragraph, and the exact quote from Chureshki is: "Животът му е живот на страдалец, на мъченик." If we're to insert Chureshki's name, we should make it clear it's the same study as the one referenced farther below in the same paragraph. Todor→Bozhinov 12:02, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Raskovnik (talk) 23:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's something wrong with one of the new citations. You've written the author as "Hrissimova, Ognyanova", but neither of those is a first name. Can you look into it, please? :) Todor→Bozhinov 19:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! It's fixed now. The citation templates are great but give me a headache. I'll test them in my sandbox more often. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raskovnik (talk • contribs) 20:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and don't worry about it :) Have you tried the refTools gadget? You can enable it in My Preferences → Gadgets. Might save you some time and effort, I find it very handy. Todor→Bozhinov 20:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And thank you for the tip! This will help me out loads once I'm ready to add a few more citations.Raskovnik (talk) 20:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is more of an observation rather than a "weasel word." In Levski's physical description, the article notes that his height was either "medium" or "tall." I have determined it by using the rifled musket as a dimensional reference in the "Standard Bearer" photo. If it is assumed that the average European soldier of the time was about the same size as an American soldier, then the interface of the rifle to the soldier should be about the same for either group. While the bore, length of the barrel, and many other dimensions will vary for different style rifles, the distance between where the shoulder of soldier contacts the butt of the rifle and where his finger touches the trigger is about the same. As I have no information on the rifle in the picture I used a Springfield Model 1861 and determined this distance was about 15"(38 cm). I then created a scale based on this distance and measured Levski's height. Allowing for the fact that he is not standing straight up, this turns out to be about 5'10" (178 cm). In the modern sense, this normally isn’t thought of as being “tall” but it may have been considered so then.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vasil Levski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:51, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vasil Levski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:18, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Vasil Levski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:05, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Vasil Levski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:38, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blood tax, forced conversion and Levski.

[edit]

Sentence claiming the Blood tax, forced conversion and other hardships against the Bulgarian people motivated Levski to form the Internal Revolutionary Organization. No source was provided supporting this claim driven most probably by pseudo-patriotism and modern anti-Turkish sentiments. During the second half of the 19th century, when Levski was active, there was neither Blood tax, nor forced conversion on the Balkans. Atrocities against Bulgarians in 1876 followed his dead and are irrelevant. All this is biased POV, original research, forum-like stories etc. Please, stop with this fictional claims or provide academic, neutral, reliable sources. Jingiby (talk) 15:14, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Levski was influenced by the ideas of European Enlightenment , Italian Carbonari, rise of nationalism in the Ottoman Empire and Bulgarian National Revival, that emerged during the 19th century. All those ideas were not directly related to the Ottoman Blood tax and to the forced conversion to Islam which disappeared during the 18th century, but to the 19th century decline of the Ottoman Empire. Jingiby (talk) 08:38, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vasil_Levski&oldid=1208158675"