Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Łódź insurrection (1905)/1

Łódź insurrection (1905)

 * • Watch article reassessment page
 * Result: Delisted. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 06:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Criteria 3a: It is broad in its coverage. I really can't see that it fulfills that requirement. The "Uprising" and "Aftermath" sections in particular I think need expanding. Plus, of the 7 (!) references in the article, 5 are in Polish. And add on to that the fact that the two images do not have sources, and I would say this is worthy of a delist.


 * Keep   This article has much broader coverage than necessary if you take into account the relative importance of this event. Most English sources mention this event only in passing. This article is worthy of GA status as it shows how Wikipedia can have an excellent coverage of relatively minor past events. --Doopdoop (talk) 12:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Doopdoop. A more detailed coverage would be equal to a very specialist article/book on the subject. Probably could use expansion for FA, but certainly fulfills the GA requirements.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 14:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - the coverage is quite good for such a relatively obscure incident, and several editors knowledgeable in the field have made improvements over the last few days. Also, of course most sources are in Polish - English-language historiography just isn't that interested in this sort of thing. No reason to disqualify, though. Biruitorul (talk) 21:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delist. The article clearly fails criteria 1a and 1b. As an example, please see this paragraph from the article:

"Worsening economic conditions contributed to mounting tensions in Poland and Russia; economy of the Kingdom of Poland was being significantly hit by the aftershocks of the Russo-Japanese War; by late 1904 over 100,000 Polish workers have lost their jobs. News and attitudes of the 1905 Russian revolution quickly spread from Saint Petersburg (where demonstrators were massacred on January 22) across the Russian Empire and into Russian-controlled Poland. Łódź had in the 19th century been a major Polish industrial center, heavily urbanized and industrialized, and hence a stronghold of the socialist movement. Already before the January 22 workers in Łódź were striking, and on January 31 tsarist police reported they carried placards with slogans 'Down with the autocracy! Down with the war!'. This was capitalized on by factions in Russia and Poland that wanted more or less radical changes. Soon over 400,000 workers became involved in strikes in Poland."


 * The first sentence is a tedious collection of grammatically challenged phrases. Following the semicolon, "economy" should read "the economy". The term "was being significantly hit" is a verbose passive construction. The phrase "have lost their jobs" incorrectly uses the present tense rather than past tense.
 * That's just the first sentence in this paragraph. Read on and you'll find more issues. Sadly, other paragraphs aren't much better. Majoreditor (talk) 03:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delist. Phew, I see what you meant by the prose, Majoreditor, but I have tried to fix as much as I could: I hope I have improved it without introducing factual errors. In the process, I think I understood what the nominator is saying about broadness, but it may be easy to fix, in which case I will change my recommendation. The main problem, in my view, is the "uprising" section, most of which I wasn't able to copyedit because I didn't understand what actually happened. The uprising itself is suggested in the previous "background" section with the rather strong phrase "angry workers began assaulting police and military patrols, killing those who did not surrender". I'm assuming this is not background, but the start of the uprising itself. So why then does the uprising section begin with political considerations? Then it ends with the sentence beginning "The last of the barricades was captured by the Russian troops by 25 June". What barricades? There is no mention of barricades before this point. Some description of what actually happened during the uprising is needed: editors should not rely upon readers to know the kind of things that happen during civilian uprisings: they want to know what happened during this one! Geometry guy 19:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. Why aren't either Blobaum or Korzec cited?  Particularly the former, as it's an English-language source, and this is he English-language Wikipedia.  --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * And what makes this a reliable source: http://www.onet.pl/. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Late reply for future reviewers: they are not cited as I had no access to them; we are not citing onet.pl but the WIEM Encyklopedia hosted on it.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You know, I never understand why editors add books to "Further reading" sections without consulting them first. Well, I do know why: it pads the article at little cost.  But it's crazy to be recommending to other readers what the editor him or herself hasn't in fact read.  It's clear that Blobaum should be used for this article.  On the second point, if the WIEM Encyklopedia is hosted on onet.pl, then the reliability of onet.pl is at issue.  --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delist in its present form per the above concerns. After reading the article, I still don't feel as though I have a decent grasp of the events described; its coverage is not sufficiently broad, in my view, for GA. In addition, some of the references listed do not appear to have been used in the article (at least, they aren't cited in the text). EyeSerene talk 14:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I double-checked and the refs listed are cited.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delist. I think the article clearly fails the broadness criteria. There is almost nothing about what happened during the insurrection, or what the aftermath was. Was nobody arrested for instance? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Regarding broadness: I have included most of the details from the sources available to me. There simply isn't that much known or written about this event - or I couldn't find it.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)