Talk:Bolesławiec pottery

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Bolesławiec pottery. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110121201606/http://adamsimports1.com:80/Video.html to http://www.adamsimports1.com/Video.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110122204043/http://adamsimports1.com:80/links/potteryhistory.html to http://www.adamsimports1.com/links/potteryhistory.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:54, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Advert Like Content
"Polish Pottery is hand crafted with pride" - This reads like an advert, which is inappropriate in Wikipedia. This article has probably been written or edited by someone from the Boleslawiec company or with a financian interst in it. It needs to be rewritten by an independent source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:C435:EE00:29FE:F5C:53DB:F72F (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Polish POV
this article has a biased rather PR-like view on the subject. Bolesławiec pottery is a Polish continuation of the German Bunzlau pottery which was continued despite the expulsions and destruction of German heritage. Even Polish authors (Anna Kurpiel and Katarzyna Maniak: "Ceramika z Bolesławca — dziedzictwo w tranzycie") observe the discrepancy between the modern view of these ceramics and their social and historical biography, i.e. the German histroy. So: --Tino Cannst (talk) 09:52, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * statements of modern PR terming them cultural symbols of Poland must be qualified
 * Silesia (i.e. Bunzlau's Lower Silesia) was NOT a distputed region - it was not claimed by the Polish until 1945 and it was FULLY German-settled
 * German tradition must be referred to as prior (maybe prior to this some medieval Slavic pottery, if proven)
 * Strange and rather irrelevant observation. What does "Slavic" have to do with this? Are you mixing pottery with language groups now? By saying "fully German" you are obviously presenting a POV/opinion and the 'Polish continuation' is what's known by all today. Oliszydlowski (talk) 12:45, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly, what does "Slavic" have to do with it? It seems a PR invention and politically biased because of claiming the expelled German craftmen's as Slavic
 * I would include "fully German" in the article here, so no worry on POV.
 * As for that the 'Polish continuation' is what's known by all today please consult the web on "Bunzlauer Keramik" and note the google translate of the DE version - this is what at least Germans take as the pottery and keep making, so EN wikipedia must reflect this. --Tino Cannst (talk) 19:57, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * "Fully German" easily makes you biased and even to some extent prejudiced. Silesia as a whole, whilst then German-speaking, always maintained its own distinct identity so I do not see how 'fully' applies here. Total POV. Not my problem that Bunzlau/Bolesławiec became the centrepiece of 'Polish' pottery in post-war years. Moreover, I do not see how 'German' tradition here is undernourished. I have added some German names from the period for clarification and removed the claim about the 'disputed region' you pointed out. And no Silesia was not 'fully German settled'. I will go over this article and reference it properly in the upcoming month. Merangs (talk) 07:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Merci! --Tino Cannst (talk) 18:38, 31 July 2021 (UTC)