Talk:Bieliński Palace, Otwock Wielki

Copyedit
changed domense to home ... a guess. Noting here, in case Elinruby (talk) 10:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

I *think* the wilanowski palace may be this: Wilanów_Palace, which *does* have an english-language page, abeit a stub.... not sure enough to make the change. I picked this article up out of thinkgs to do and don't know a lot about Poland. Meanwhile am removing the red wikilink. No information is better than bad information. Elinruby (talk) 18:13, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for copyediting this. In the future, you may want to CC WP:POLAND, fortunately this page was on my watchlist and I saw your edits. Please note WP:RED - a red link is better than no link. I have redirected Wilanowski Palace to Wilanów_Palace, as there are no other entities that this name could apply to. I think the rough translation may be removed, this is mostly readable now. I am off to create the category structure for Category:Palaces in Poland by voivodeship. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:53, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


 * thank you for that guidance. I actually don't know how to do that. Use that ping template? I am actually going to as I asked him for help linking to Kazimierz Bielinski, who would seem potentially notable enough for his own page but does not have one on the English Wikipedia, and I refuse to machine translate the Polish one. I see the expand Polish template, but is there a list somewhere for pages that somebody somewhere might want to translate some day that don't even have stubs yet, do you know? And thanks again for the feedback. Elinruby (talk) 02:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


 * It's been a while since I wrote those kind of articles... good memories. Here you go: Kazimierz Ludwik Bieliński, clearly notable. The to-do lists exist (for example, at Requested articles) but few bother with them. Heck, look at my userpage - I have 100+ things on my own to-do, and I usually tackle less than few each year. In the future, the best place for requests would be WT:POLAND. Cheers, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:47, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. I don't actually wander into Poland much... I generally deal with high tech and French-language stuff, where I have some expertise that others don't. But I also fix grammar on pages I read, and one thing leads to another. I am sure I do not have to explain this to you ;) I think I wound up here from a medieval Tunisian aristicrat then the Ottoman empire, then Hungarian counts (very confusing, somebody seems to have mixed up some that have the same name), then I noticed this on the rough translation list. Anyway. Doing a little more copyediting, erring on the conservative side. Please feel free to correct any errors I nonetheless inadvertently insert. I don't have ego/authorship issues, especially not when fixing syntax. Laterz... Oh, by the way, it looks a *little* different than my machine translation of the polish page, but not much. Mainly Around the bibliography. Should I bother with the expand template? It occurs ot me that you may consider that one source not really reliable or something. Elinruby (talk) 03:11, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

A few questions and comments
First of all some truly fantastic work Mareklug! and thank you thank you thank you for the effort you have put into clarifying this thing. I have done some minor editing for English and typos since you but it is soooo much better than it was or than I could have made it ;) By the way, I had figured out that the one name was a county not a person, but faded away into real life before I got to it... I was also a bit nervous about wikilinking to the wrong county; I had gone through the article wikilinking everything that looked important enough to have its own page, only to discover that I was then saying that someone was governor of a town, and surely a governor must be of at least a county? I dislike guessing. And then there was Joe Fontana, the fictional American detective, definitely not the architect of a Polish palace, bah. On the other hand, you know, wedding carpets and windowbags aren't doing us any good either. SO. That web page I found is in Polish but the google translation is intelligible in places and I may add to the article a bit. A couple of my added facts from yesterday were from there and I will ref them before I go away today. But I have a firm grip on the fact that I am a well-meaning ignoramus blundering about in a topic in which I know nothing, so if I err do not feel shy about correcting the error, if you ever feel the impulse to return here. You did the article a lot of good. My agenda here is simply to make the article better. Also, one of the wikilinked articles for the geographic locations has a set of photographs that seem to be of this palace, fyi. I'll try to find and add them one of these times, or if someone else finds them first, fantastic. But I had questions for any Polish speakers or people who know about Poland that may happen by:


 * A lot of the geographical names are not capitalized. Is this the norm in Polish (in which case they should stay that way I think), or is this a typo?
 * addressed Elinruby (talk) 23:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't quite understand the following sentence, which I have reworked and Mareklug has as well, as the original wording was awkward, but did say essentially this:" General Wojciech Jaruzelski, which in contradistinction, cared little for its reputation or entertaining noble guests, but immediately went about improving the physical condition of the residence." Is this something that is very obvious to someone familiar with Polish history and the reason I don't understand it is that I am not? The reputation of the palace? What?
 * No no no, this is about the reputation of Jaruzelski himself. Perhaps the tongue should be taken out of the Polish cheek:  The passage basically says, that unlike his predecessors, the good General was not at all interested in hosting parties and foreign dignitaries -- he was very no-nonsense, but on the other hand, he immediately applied himself to fixing up the physical defects of the rundown palace. I think the "its" you see is a machine translation artefact and should have been "his". Sorry for ketting it slide by me. --Mareklug talk
 * Not a thing, not a thing. It's in large part due to your efforts that the article has gotten from gibberish to a something readable with a few slightly puzzling sentences....gonna go look and see if you edited for this Elinruby (talk)
 * doneElinruby (talk) 08:24, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

* In this sentence: "In 1918 the palace passed into possession of a descendant of Jacek Jezierski,[2] and would remain in that family's hands until the end of the war, the end of that era exactly coinciding with the communist takeover in post-World War II Poland, when those new authorithies rudely repurposed the Otwock Wielki palace as a reformatory home for girls, a kind of minimum security prison for troubled or orphaned teens" the words "the end of the war" refer to World War I or World War II? My limited knowledge wants to say WWII, isn't that when the Communist take over took place, but I think this should be clarified for clueless people like me, since the war mentioned at the beginning of the sentence is WWI.
 * addressed Elinruby (talk) 23:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


 * In the section about the architect, anyone know what this is about: "the Hermitage (in the "Baths")"?
 * addressed Elinruby (talk) 23:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh and thank you also Mareklug for deciphering the Classical Vilnius thing, which was puzzling me greatly. Elinruby (talk) 19:12, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


 * 1) in Polish many administrative units are not capitalized as they are adjectives: Say, by way of example, on the top level of province-like entities, we have województwo mazowieckie, or Mazovian Voivodeship. A level lower is powiat rawski but in English: Rawa County. And on one level lower we have a gmina or commune, which itself is also not capitalized but the proper name that goes with it is: gmina Sadkowice but Sadkowice Comune. Not sure how it came about, but the English wiki has imported gmina and I think it used to use powiat, too, but it has changed now to County.  I really don't know how and when or why these consensuses (consensi?) come about. The capitalization or lack of it reflects adjectival forms, sort of as if it were German. Polak, but język polski (A Pole, but Polish language).


 * OK well, I am not sure what Wikipedia policy is but if the way you have these is correct in Polish my inclination is to leave them alone. This is what I do with French titles, where the convention is to capitalize the first letter of the first word only. My thought would be, and I think this is what you have done, to use the Polish word, explain it the first time, then assume the reader is smart enough to remember the explanation. Otherwise if you start dumbing it down you have to standardize a way to dumb it down and you are off in the weeds. So. Somebody else can quarrel with that if they choose. Elinruby (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


 * 2) Yeah, the end-of-war phrase needs to be rewritten for clarity. The Chronology is this: in 1914, Austrian Archduke assassinated in Serbia: start of WW I. In 1918, Armistice, end of WW I is coincidental with resulting power vacuum allowing independence for Poland again, But 1939, Nazi Reich (German) invasion of Poland, and on the East, Russian/Soviet invasion of same (The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact), and this is taken to be start of WW II.  In 1945, end of WWII, and the imposition of Polish People's Republic on account of the country becoming part of Soviet Union's sphere of influence.  Actually, the formal Polish People's Republic came about  as a de jure state a wee later (1949?), but you get the idea. In 1989 it ceased to be, and we have had a democratic Republic of Poland since. Additionally, in 2004 Poland joins the European Union, but to this day it has not qualified to share the common Euro currency.  --Mareklug talk 19:45, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


 * K, I will fix that one, since I am obsessing over the article at the moment. Elinruby (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * fixed the sentence, leaving explanation in case it is useful to other newbies to Poland. Elinruby (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

3) The Hermitage is the famous Ermitraż (same word) museum in St. Petersburg (Leningrad), Russia. The Baths may refer to Łazienki in Warsaw, another palatial gem, this one in water/park setting. It translates as "baths".


 * So it's saying the architect was involved with those? I can probably find the right pages to wikilink, but the very obscure original makes it look like they are the same thing. Maybe I should take a look at the page for the architect. Elinruby (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


 * got this one Elinruby (talk)


 * New question -- this very famous Marconi architect -- there seem to be wikipedia pages for Enrico/Henryk, Leonard, and Leandro, all plausible for the mid-19th century at a fast glance, Don't sweat it if you don't know, but that's a question, if anyone knows the answer or wants to look this up. Elinruby (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


 * they were all related it seems, Henryk being the father, Leandro the son, and Leonard the nephew. But on examination I find that Leonard was more of a sculptor and Leandro did a lot more palaces than his father, so I am going with him, pretty sure that's right, though really, the statement as it stands is an opinion IMHO an still needs to be addressed -- prolly came out of some guidebook somewhere. As always pls feel free to revert first and consult me later if I am definitely wrong, thanks Elinruby (talk) 23:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I am less sure of this than I was since I found a reference to the father restoring a palace. Therefore I am removing the strikeover; this is probably an open issue. And by the way, if you go look at the articles about Polish architects neither one is mentioned, so maybe we should lose that opinion about the most famous architect of the period....seems like it would be easier to tell who he was if that were true (?) Elinruby (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Mareklug talk
 * Another new question -- the shape of the building has not changed: do they mean the condition of the building, or more literally the footprint? Elinruby (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The interiors definitely have changed six ways to Kansas, therefore the condition of the building as well. However, the main erection and its later added-on wings and towers are intact from the original construction. -~
 * Anyone know what "amphiladic" means? It's not a word in English. Neither is risalit, actually, but I was able to figure that one out. I think it may means something about angels holding up cartouches or something -- that would be my guess -- but see, above about hating to guess. Elinruby (talk) 22:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)÷
 * Machine translator from Polish pl:amfilada. Lucky for us we do have an English interwiki: Enfilade (architecture). It's useful to share how I uncovered this:  I switched out "ph" for "f" and googled "amfilada".  Sure enuf. ;) --Mareklug talk 04:50, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * this is done Elinruby (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

It was probably the architecture of splendid residences the leitmotif for the creation of a new Bieliński's Palace.
Does that actually mean anything or add anything to the article? Elinruby (talk) 23:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Missing phrase alert: "that provided the" before leitmotif". I can rephrase it so you can grok the sense, but I leave it up to you as to how useful it is, and if it adds anything or not:
 * Other, similar in opulence residences of the nobles sprung up at the same time all over Poland, and probably catalyzed the building of this particular one.
 * [alternative no. 2] A leitmotif is a "stylistic inspiration" or "leading thought", or perhaps an "archetype", and taken either of those three ways, all those other palatial residences being built at the time probably egged on the wealthy Bielińscy family to put up one of their own -- this very one -- and to hire the peiple to design it and built it, what with the oxbow lake location being a prime spot for making an artifical island in the main river to park it on.
 * --Mareklug talk 05:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

360cities.net Suggestion
I have asked that they review the spam classification for that page at least, if they have had some problems with the site. We'll see what that does. Elinruby (talk) 19:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

asked around about our missing pages
help desk suggests using this template which will leave read wikilinks but still link to the foreign wikipedia page:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Interlanguage_link spent too much time on this article so I don't have time to experiemnt, but it may be a good idea. Leaving this as a note, possible solution, whatever Elinruby (talk) 19:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)