User talk:Ximar

 Hello Ximar, and Welcome to Wikipedia!  Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

--- Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:


 * Table of contents


 * Department directory

Need help?


 * Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
 * Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
 * Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations


 * Article wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles
 * The simplified ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
 * Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

How you can help:


 * Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.


 * Community portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...


 * Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The [[File:Button sig.png]] or [[File:Insert-signature.png]] button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.


 * If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Ximar, good luck, and have fun. --Hoary (talk) 23:49, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

But of course what's above is mere boilerplate. However, this is not. Thank you for your edit to Jan Bułhak. I've removed your link from "Vilnius" (so that "Vilnius" becomes "Vilnius") because there was a link to it shortly above and Wikipedia doesn't normally repeat internal links in this way. But this of course is a very small point. Bułhak is one of a great number of photographers from eastern (or central) Europe whose articles are disappointingly poor. If you can help a little more with this article, then I as a user of Wikipedia would be very grateful. (I infer that you can read Belarusian; you're very lucky -- I can't read Belarusian, Lithuanian, Polish or Russian.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:49, 22 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I can read Russian, Belarusian, and Polish a bit. Jan Bułhak is my countryman, we come from nearly the same parts. I have read other articles about him and found some of them a bit biased. I need some time to think it over, then will try to write. -- Ximar (talk) 15:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Jan Bułhak
Again, thank you for your good work on Jan Bułhak.

At a small number of points, I've added a "Vague" warning flag. Each has a normally hidden SGML comment after it so if you edit the article you'll see the comment. Each problem is easily fixed, I'd guess. If you can fix it, of course please remove the "Vague" warning flag and the comment.

Here's part of the article, with my underlining:


 * Two issues of the Berlin  Photographic News  in 1910 contained his pictures. Bułhak sent his pictures and news stories to the Warsaw magazine  Earth  as well as to the Polish Local Lore society . In 1911, he organized a photo-exhibition in Minsk, and began making his contributions to the  Wilno Daily  (up to 1939),  Warsaw Photographer , and  German Almanac .''

Each of the underlined titles/names is of something whose actual title was presumably in Polish or German. Could you please give the original name? Optionally, you could gloss it in English, e.g. Chasseur d'Images ("Hunter of Images").

Here's a footnote:


 * Venclova, Tomas. "Bułhak Jan", Vilniaus vardai. Vilnius: R. Paknio leidykla, 2006. С. 225. ISBN 9986-830-96-6

What is "C. 225"? Does this mean (A) that the article is on p.255, or (B) that the book has 225 pages? If (A), then "p.255"; if (B), then I'd skip this information.

Thank you for your trouble and I look forward to more developments! -- Hoary (talk) 00:07, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * For now I can't find the original title of the Berlin Photographic News magazine, but I will try to. -- Ximar (talk) 10:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Could it be a garbled version of Berliner Illustrirte Zeitung? -- Hoary (talk) 23:16, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I doubt: Bułhak was too young, the paper was very reputable, and no key word "Photographisch". I have looked through the categories of German specialized professional journals and Berlin Periodicals and suppose it could be Photographisches Wochenblatt: 1) specialized in photography; 2) publication history (1879-1918); 3) Berlin; 4) the key word "Photographisch"... 'Wochenblatt' means "weekly" and 'blatt' is akin to the word "news". -- Ximar (talk) 09:07, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Found it and entered. -- Ximar (talk) 17:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately there's a lot more to be done. Another section:


 * In 1944, after bombardments, Bułhak left Wilno. // After World War II, in 1945, he was expelled from his home [Where was this?] by the Soviets and resettled in Warsaw. // [...] In Warsaw, with the help from Stanisław Lorentz, the director of the National Museum, the first post-war exhibition by Jan Bułhak took place: Warsaw. 1945 in Jan Bułhak's Images. [What's the title of this? And was it in the "National Museum"? Which National Museum? (I'd guess that there was more than one.)] // In 1947, he became the founder of the revived Union of Polish Pictorialists (Związek Polskich Artystów Fotografików), the successor to the Polish Photoclub [Name in Polish of this?], and headed it until his death. [...] // Bułhak took part in more than 170 international exhibitions, and received a number of high awards. For his picture titled Joy of Life [Title in Polish?], which shows a shaded room with sun rays entering, he received an award at the International Photographic Show [Name in Polish?] in Warsaw in 1937.
 * Have a look at it now. Nearly all these drawbacks have been cleared. -- Ximar (talk) 17:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, where is all this from? Of course it's tedious to write that this comes from here and that comes from there, but this tedious work must be done. (See the article Johannes Pääsuke for a sufficiently "sourced" European example from around the same time.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Is this sufficient? What to do if in some cases source is Wikipedias in other languages (Belarusians (there are two versions of it), Russian, Polish)? -- Ximar (talk) 17:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, the article is improving a lot. Good! However, a source should never be Wikipedia, in any language. This is because common sense says that Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and Wikipedia's own policies and guidelines agree. For "chapter and verse", see this:
 * . . . self-published media&mdash;whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets&mdash;are largely not acceptable. This includes any website whose content is largely user-generated, including the Internet Movie Database (IMDB), Cracked.com, CBDB.com, collaboratively created websites such as wikis, and so forth, . . . (my emphasis)
 * and (from here):
 * Do not use articles from Wikipedia or from websites that mirror its content as sources, because this would amount to self-reference. Similarly, do not use sources that present material originating from Wikipedia to support that same material in Wikipedia, as this would create circular sourcing.
 * If an article in the Wikipedia of another language is good, then it will present its own sources. If the article claims that assertion X comes from source Y, then maybe it does and maybe (due to incompetence, stupidity, vandalism, etc) it does not. One has to look up source Y for oneself and check that it does indeed back up assertion X. IFF it does, then the material may be added. -- Hoary (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Questions
Again, thank you for your continuing additions and improvements.

Because (i) it seems you're still editing the article vigorously, and (ii) it's unlikely to be a popular article (Wikipedia readers are less interested in Jan Bułhak than in, say, Kim Kardashian), I've continued doing something that is usually a bad practice: inserting questions intended for you. If you edit the page as a whole, you'll find them all -- and don't worry, there aren't many of them -- by searching for "&lt;!--".

The alternative is to use this talk page of yours, or Talk:Jan Bułhak, to ask questions. But either alternative would be slightly more awkward for both of us.

Please don't similarly put questions and comments into other articles; doing so is likely to make you unpopular! -- Hoary (talk) 01:39, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

. . . But here's an additional question anyway:
 * Vilnius pictorialists practically entirely adopted his views on art

Guesses: Thank you for your trouble. -- Hoary (talk) 07:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Almost all of Vilnius's pictorialists adopted his views on art.
 * Almost all of Vilnius's pictorialists adopted his views on art in their entirety.
 * The first one ("Practically all Vilnius' pictorialists adopted his views on art"). -- Ximar (talk) 07:55, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed! -- Hoary (talk) 08:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

And here's another. In a note:
 * Grażyna Dreścik, curator, the Walery Rzewuski Museum of History of Photography in Krakow, Poland (Polish: Muzeum historii fotografii im. Walerego Rzewuskiego w Krakowie). Jan Bułhak. Kraków, 2008

Does this mean a book titled Jan Bułhak by Grażyna Dreścik? If so, page numbers should be used (and it would be good to have the publisher and ISBN too). -- Hoary (talk) 07:24, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * An MS Word file. Can be taken here: http://www.ahice.net/view.php?katid=ex&id=3507 (click on Jan_Bulhak_in_English.doc in the center of the page). -- Ximar (talk) 07:55, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Fixed! -- Hoary (talk) 08:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Toponyms
Which language, do you think, is most suitable for the romanization of (some) geographical names (those of villages and towns) in this article?

Let's take Navahrudak as an example (in all, there are four versions of the toponym):

1) language officially used nowadays in the present-day country (both are used: Novogrudok / Navahrudak (the last is preferred due to some reasons))

2) officially used those days (Novogrudok, then Nowogródek)

3) used in Wikipedia as article heading (Navahrudak)

4) historically used by previous authorities (Nowogródek)

5) historically used by the local people (Navahradak)

The matter is that this area once was an independent land (the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, official language: Old Belarusian), wherein Belarusians and Lithuanians lived, then it became united with Poland (official language: Polish), later (1795) became part of the Russian Empire, further, short periods of German / Belarusian independent / Russian history (around WWI), then (1921) again Poland, after that (1939), USSR, and at last (since 1991) Belarus. Czarist Russia partially forbade using Lithuanian and completely, Belarusian, allowed using Polish in local publications.

Sooner or later, other users can start "correcting" some names saying this or that version is wrong or less known (popular).

We can now came to a conclusion and correct some toponyms ourselves.

Some information:

Voroncha / Pereseka or Pieriesieka - this Russian version was used then by Russian authorities; now one of official versions

Varoncha / Piaresieka - this Belarusian version was used by the local people, who made the majority of the villagers; now one of official versions (in particular, preferred on maps)

Worończa / Peresieka - this Polish version was used by Polish people who some time before came there to rule and make business

Ostashin - Russian version (supposedly) used then by Russian authorities; now one of widespread unofficial versions

Astashin - now one of official versions, corresponds to Russian

Astashyn - now one of official versions, corresponds to Belarusian

Ostaszyn - Polish version used by Polish people

Wilno - widespread Polish version

Vilna - Russian version used by Russian authorities till 1918

Vilnius - generally recognized version since 1939

Vozera Svitsi︠a︡zʹ - this transliteration is made with the use of ALA-LC system which looks terrible and has problems with correct display in some browsers and search. May be it would be better to apply less unusual BGN/PCGN (ISO 9:1995) system: Vozera Svitsiaz'?

Shall Cyrillic version be mentioned at this?

What can you say to that? -- Ximar (talk) 10:56, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Um . . . my first reaction is: This is toward the end of a longish day and I'm sleepy, so I wish you hadn't asked these questions!


 * I think that only two names are important for a place: (i) the name that English-language-Wikipedia (en-WP) gives to the place, and (ii) the name that was used, or would have been used, at that time within educated English for the place.


 * Complications arise when (ii) could imply two or more names. (As an example, there have been times during which Bratislava was called two or even three of Bratislava, Pressburg, and Poszony within English text.)


 * I'll write more tomorrow, when I'm less sleepy. But in the meantime:


 * Vozera Svitsi︠a︡zʹ - this transliteration is made with the use of ALA-LC system which looks terrible and has problems with correct display in some browsers and search. May be it would be better to apply less unusual BGN/PCGN (ISO 9:1995) system: Vozera Svitsiaz'?


 * Yes, good idea.


 * Shall Cyrillic version be mentioned at this?


 * Yes, please add it. -- Hoary (talk) 13:27, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I changed the above toponyms in "my" way. Please have a look at them and correct if necessary.

I guess, the major part of work on the article is over for my part. -- Ximar (talk) 21:34, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * As far as I am qualified to say (a very short distance indeed) and as far as I notice (and I'm still sleepy), they're well done. Thank you for your good work.


 * Was one writer really called Juliusz Wilno Kłos, or has something gone wrong here?


 * That's my fault. I didn't check it after its insertion. Now, I have corrected it in the article. — Ximar (talk) 09:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll try to work a little on the article; so please stick around, even if it's just to correct my stupid mistakes.


 * OK. I'll be notified via email as soon as you write something here. — Ximar (talk) 09:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Lithuania is a land of excellent photobooks at palatable prices. So in Vilnius last year, when I noticed a major new publication of/about Bułhak, I tried not to look. (After all, I didn't want to have to carry it home and then pile it on the floor.) But as I vaguely remember, it's scholarly, is in at least three volumes (I think arranged thematically rather than chronologically) and is in one or both of Lithuanian and Polish, as well as English. Does this sound familiar? -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't. But I looked up in the Internet. Maybe, you saw this: "Jan Bułhak. Vilnius. III knyga: Įvykiai ir žmonės. Apylinkės. Vilnius, 2011. Lietuvos fotografijos istorija – 6, 478 p., lietuvių k., santr. anglų k., ISSN 1392-9003; ISBN 978-609-8039-11-5." (http://www.lnm.lt/leidiniai/prekyboje.html) Click on the book cover to see others. — Ximar (talk) 09:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think I did see that. (If I'd seen one that was specifically about Vilnius, I might well have bought it. I remember that at least one of the volumes had a lot of studio portraits or similar that looked very competent but that [sorry] didn't inspire me.) &para; There's a lot on that one page, isn't there? / Bułhak J. Šviesos estetika. Fotografikos pagrindai. Vilnius, 2008. 248 p., lietuvių k., ISBN 978-9955-415-76-3. / Vilniaus fotografai. Tarptautinė Lietuvos fotografijos istorijos konferencija. Vilnius, 2005. Lietuvos nacionalinio muziejaus biblioteka – 14, 316 p., lietuvių k., ISBN 9955-415-45-2. / (I'm not going to add any mention of them, because I can only guess what they are.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:16, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The last is about an international conference on the history of Lithuanian photography; the latter is "Aesthetics of Light". — Ximar (talk) 09:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * If I knew of an intelligently written history of Lithuanian photography I might well buy it. But unfortunately it would have to be in English (or, a lot less likely for Lithuania, French or Japanese). This page says In the beginning of 2012, a huge amount of publications related to photography as a medium were published in Lithuania. Sounds good! But no, I already have piles of books on the floor; no space for more.


 * I've cited a book by Venclova (a compact encyclopedia of Vilnius) that I'd guess is just the English-language version of the one (Vilniaus vardai) that you cited. IFF so, then we can delete your citation. (I also have another book by Venclova but it doesn't really add anything.)
 * Yes. I suppose Venclova's "Vilnius: A Guide to Its Names and People" and "Vilniaus vardai" ("Vilnius Names") (http://dvh.bookmaps.org/v/i/vil_36.html) must be the same book in English and Lithuanian. — Ximar (talk) 07:25, 12 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The book by Briedis has a wonderful quotation by Bułhak, but I can't yet decide whether or how to work it into the article. -- Hoary (talk) 00:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Yesterday I found a PDF version of a publication by Hrodna Unoversity on the International Scientific Conference "The Culture of the Western Belarusian Region from the End of the 19th Century to WWII" devoted to the pictorialist Jan Bułhak, Nov. 2007, (in Belarusian, ISBN 978-985-515-140-2, 135 copies). When I find time to look thru it and if I find anything interesting, I'll tell you here. — Ximar (talk) 07:25, 12 September 2012 (UTC)