Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Bogdan


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. czar ⨹   15:33, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Jan Bogdan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The only source for the existence of this "Jan Bogdan" is the purported "Memoirs of a Mercantilist" (Polish, Pamiętnik handlowca), which Barbour and Pula have shown to be most likely a hoax by Arthur L. Waldo. From the discussion on the article's talk page, it appears that the OA is in agreement with this proposal. J. D. Crutchfield &#124; Talk 18:14, 19 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Yes - as OA of the Jan Bogdan article - I *entirely* agree with the comments made above by User:Jdcrutch re deletion of the article - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:52, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk to me  19:08, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovakia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 21 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 20:02, 26 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Looking at the history of the article, the !vote by User:Drbogdan above seems to make this a very strong candidate for WP:CSD G7. However, I would like one point answered before this is done - as I am not registered for JSTOR, I can't see the papers from which the nominator, and now the article creator, have concluded that all the sources on which the article is based seem to derive from a probable hoax (Pamiętnik handlowca) first known from 1947. GBooks does, however, produce one apparent source from 1944 - this one by . This is, of course, certainly not inconsistent with Pamiętnik handlowca being a hoax - it might already have been in existence, and known to Wachtl, in 1944; or the hoaxer might actually have used Wachtl's book for historical background (or, indeed, just as a source of names - all the GBooks snippet shows is that Jamestown and Jan Bogdan are mentioned on the same page of the book). But does anyone know what Wachtl said and what sources (if any) he gave? PWilkinson (talk) 13:53, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
 * - Thank you *very much* for your comments - yes - new information(s) - and/or - new (and better?) ways of interpreting earlier materials are *always* welcome of course - if interested - seems the full text of "Jamestown pioneers from Poland", that seems to mention Jan Bogdan four times, and seems to refer to materials from the 1920s/1930s (and/or much earlier?), may be at the following url => http://archive.org/stream/jamestownpioneer00poli/jamestownpioneer00poli_djvu.txt - one instance in the text mentions Jan Bogdan as follows => "...[Dr. Karol] Wachtl, quoting Wiesci Polskie, published in London in 1831 [sic - "1631" instead?], lists the following Polish pioneers, who arrived in Jamestown in October, 1608: — Michal Lowicki, Zbigniew Stefanski, Jan Mata, Stanislaw Sadowski, Karol Zrenica and Jan Bogdan. The evidence, supporting this list, however, appears to be of a presumptive type and is not yet based on ascertained facts. More research in this field is needed." - there are three other instances in the same text mentioning Jan Bogdan - ALSO - the text mentions the following => "Dr. Karol Wachtl, well known journalist, poet and historian, who, in his "Polonia w Ameryce", gave the names and. places of origin of the first Polish pioneers in Jamestown." - ALSO - "Robertson's Book of Firsts: Who Did What for the First Time" mentions => "Karl Wachtl, in "Polonia w Ameryce" (1927), purports to give their full names, as Zbigniew Stafanski, Jan Mata, Stanislav Sadowski, Karol Zrenica, and Jan Bogdan citing as his source a broadside "Wiesci Polski" ("Polish News") he states was published in London in 1631, No trace of this fugitive document has been found." -  RE: JSTOR => FREE ACCESS on a limited basis is available - after gaining such access, there are several relevant JSTOR refs as follows: 1) Barbour and 2) Pula - these refs are also noted in more detail in the References section of the Jan Bogdan article - hope this all helps in some way - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 22:06, 29 November 2014 (UTC)


 * QUESTION - would adding a new section/paragraph to the "Jan Bogdan" article describing the currently unclear historical basis for the existence of "Jan Bogdan", based on the claims made by Pula and Barbour as well as those made by Dr. Karol Wachtl, be sufficient to rescue (so-to-speak) the Jan Bogdan article from deletion? - in any regards - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 10:52, 30 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, at least on current evidence, with thanks and (I suspect) apologies to User:Drbogdan. The quotation he gave from the Jamestown Pioneers from Poland reference certainly goes some way to answering my question about what Wachtl said, and would seem to be reliable on that point. However, all its other mentions of Jan Bogdan occur in articles reprinted from other sources, which are basically popular accounts whose level of fact-checking would almost certainly not have reached the point of questioning an authentic-looking (though apparently not actually authentic) source like Pamiętnik handlowca. And Robertson's Book of Firsts looks slightly less reliable still - the quote you give from it gives the publication date of Wachtl's Polonia w Ameryce as 1927 rather than (as both GScholar and the Polish Wikipedia article on Wachtl make clear) 1944, which Jamestown Pioneers from Poland gives as the date of a very similarly named publication by another author, two sentences away from a mention of Wachtl's book. Which leaves us with what we know of Wachtl and his source, Wiesci Polskie (for which 1831 to me looks like a more likely date than 1631 - let's just say that 1631 would a distinctly early date for a newsheet, and even more so for a Polish one published in London). Unfortunately, Google searches for Wiesci Polskie overwhelmingly produce results for a newspaper published between about 1940 and 1943, and even if I include one of the two earlier dates, the results show almost no evidence of an earlier publication of the same name (instead, one tends to end up with lists of publications which include both the 1940s newspaper and something from 1831 with quite a different title). And the only results which do clearly mention an 1831 or 1631 Wiesci Polskie are about Poles in early Virginia and, directly or indirectly, seem to refer back to Wachtl - and the only one of these that seems to add anything to this discussion is this one from a Polish museum. Unfortunately, what it does add is that the 1831 Wiesci Polskie "has eluded researchers", mention of a Polish scholar who produced a quite different (unsourced) list of names of Jamestown Poles, and a conclusion that "without having the original writings available, serious historians are unable to confirm that these were in fact the names of the Poles who came to Jamestown in 1608." With which I am regretfully forced to agree. (Having said all that, I would regard Pamiętnik handlowca as notable, even as a hoax, and would not disagree with having this title redirecting there.) PWilkinson (talk) 18:06, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * - Thank you *very much* for your comments - and for your time and effort re the Jan Bogdan article - no problem whatsoever - yes - unless better historical evidence re the presently purported 1608 Jan Bogdan becomes available, your suggestion of redirecting the current Jan Bogdan article to the "Pamiętnik handlowca" article seems *entirely* ok with me at the moment as well - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - they're *very much* appreciated - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:52, 30 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment  and others without JSTOR subscriptions may be interested to know that they can get free access to the Pula and Barbour articles, simply by creating a free account on JSTOR and jumping through some easy hoops.  Just click on the links provided by DrBogdan and follow the directions for free access.  Meanwhile, as PWilkinson has discovered by another route, Wachtl's alleged source is doubtful at best, and is not in any case a primary source.  Pula writes,
 * Wachtl, a Polish-born journalist, playwright, and chronicler, identified Wiesci Polskie as a periodical published in London in 1831. He claims that this source lists by name six initial Polish settlers in Jamestown,along with their cities of origin.[fn. omitted] To unravel the mystery, then, we should begin by looking at Wachtl's source. The first observation that can be made is that the publication date of 1831 is some 223 years after the events in question; thus, it is not a primary source at all. Nevertheless, finding it might at least lead to evidence of some earlier source. A consultation of Stanislaw Zielinski's Bibliografia czasopism polskich zagranica 1830-1943 [Bibliography of Polish Periodicals Abroad, 1830-1943], the authoritative reference source for periodicals published outside Poland, fails to reveal any such publication. Furthermore, Sigmund Uminski, who undertook research in various libraries and archives in England and Poland in search of a copy of Wachtl's source, was unable to locate any trace of the publication, nor even a single reference in any of the available bibliographies of early nineteenth century publications.[fn. om.]  Similarly interested in the source for a biography of Captain John Smith that he was writing, in 1963 Philip L. Barbour contacted Mrs. M. L. Danilewicz, librarian at the Polish Library in London, who informed him that she and two Polish scholars had all looked for the source and were unable to find any mention of it. After being informed that Barbour had been unable to locate any reference to Wiesci Polskie, Wachtl asserted that it was really not a periodical publication but a special broadside (jednodniowka), thus explaining its absence from the standard bibliographies.[fn. om.]   Whatever the truth of the matter regarding the mysterious Wiesci Polskie, if it did exist it was clearly not a primary source.


 * Pula 2008, pp. 480-81. Clearly, Wachtl had the opportunity to produce his source, when he heard of Barbour's inquiries, but for some reason he only offered an excuse for its absence from the standard bibliographies.  I suspect that was because his source did not exist; but even giving Wachtl the benefit of the doubt, his Wiesci Polskie is not a reliable source, and neither, consequently, is Wachtl.


 * Because the Pamiętnik handlowca is probably a fraud, I would oppose any effort to rescue Jan Bogdan by redirecting to that article. The Pamiętnik handlowca article needs to be rewritten from the POV of the most current scholarship&mdash;i.e., as the story of a probable forgery or fraud&mdash;or else to be deleted.  No Wikipedia article should lend the Pamiętnik handlowca credibility, as a redirect from this article would do.    J. D. Crutchfield &#124; Talk 17:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * & & others => FWIW - Comments by User:Jdcrutch above seem very impressive - and persuasive - to me at this time - unless a better historical basis for the purported 1608 Jan Bogdan than that which seems to be currently known in WP:Reliable Sources is uncovered, deletion of the Jan Bogdan article seems even more supported I would think - ALSO - I would not object to excluding a WP:Redirect to the "Pamiętnik handlowca" article as well - hope this helps in some way - in any regards - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 19:55, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.