Talk:Wawelberg Group

NPOV

This article is a barely concealed praise of Polish terrorist acts in Weimar Germany. It does not call a spade a spade. -- Matthead  Discuß   18:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

If you have any NPOV spades to add, add them. Nihil novi (talk) 22:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please do. You're going to have to be more specific with your concerns, if you want to justify keeping the POV tag in the article.--Carabinieri (talk) 10:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I've got better things to do than fix this. Why not keep it as is? It serves as an example. -- Matthead  Discuß   23:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Matthead, please add information about this group seen from German perspective. And please tag the article about the Brandenburgers. Tymek (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Terrorists ? Then we should name Poznan Uprising, AK, terrorist too using that logic. Don't see any sources using that terminology to national liberation movement of Polish people to free themselfs from opressive German rule that discriminated them(remember that in WW1 German Empire planned to ethnicly cleanse at least 2 milion Poles and use famine to reduce Polish population, so its no wonder Poles wanted to free themselfs). Unless serious sources are shown that claim terrorism for this movement I will remove the template.--Molobo (talk) 19:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

= dirty Polish agitprop, merci cherie. :-)

Merge with Silesian Uprisings

Why the separate article in the first place? Silesian Uprisings is only 28kb and this should be merged within that article with appropriate sources. As it is, the only references cited here are Polish, which is unsuitable for English Wikipedia and therefore this article does not meet WP:V. JGHowes ^talk - 18:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Support. -- Matthead  Discuß   21:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. It is a substantial topic on its own and needs its own article. You are free to add non-Polish sources (if any exist). Nihil novi (talk) 22:23, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. This seems to be a significant unit involved in a conflict and, thus, should have its own article. Manxruler (talk) 02:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment: WP:V does not state that only English-language sources may be used. And non-English-language source material can certainly be translated and verified. Moreover, there is now an English-language source cited. Nihil novi (talk)

Comments relating to an article's DYK nom should best be made in connection with the article's discussion at Template talk:Did you know. Manxruler (talk) 08:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't know this article had been nominated for DYK; I was responding to the comments above. Thanks for bringing the nomination to my attention. Nihil novi (talk) 08:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. This is a notable topic as far as I can tell. Merging this article with Silesian Uprisings would either force us to either remove content or have undue weight in the Uprisings article.--Carabinieri (talk) 15:30, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

• The merge proposal should be considered on its own merits, even if the verifiability concern is resolved (WP:VUE, by the way, does specifically state that English translations for non-English citations should be provided for statements likely to be challenged). Putting that issue aside, the merge is not a matter of notability, but rather the necessity or desirability of forking this article from the Silesian Uprising of which it was a part. By having two articles with this much overlap, you make the reader go to both articles to have a full understanding of context. As stated at WP:MERGE, these are good reasons for merging the content, unless article length is a problem — which is obviously not the case here. JGHowes ^talk - 18:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

• I agree, but I feel like merging those two articles would create an undue weight in the Uprising article. There is enough material in this article to justify the fork.--Carabinieri (talk) 19:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. This group is notable as a separate unit. You could as well merge Adolf Hitler into World War II, for example.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

No, you couldn't, because of WP:LENGTH. To restate once again, notability is not in dispute, so that's a straw man. The central question is, does this article fall under #4 of WP:MERGE: Context - If a short article requires the background material or context from a broader article in order for readers to understand it. Nobody has yet addressed that or explained why a <5kb article overlapping a ~28kb article covering the same subject needs to be forked. JGHowes ^talk -

Length is a prime consideration arguing against merging "Wawelberg Group" into the "Third Silesian Uprising" section of "Silesian Uprisings": the two are about the same length, and so a huge disproportion would obtain. The Wawelberg Group and its activities are mentioned in "Third Silesian Uprising," and the interested reader can find out more in detail in the appropriate independent article, "Wawelberg Group." It makes perfect sense, and is perfectly in accord with usual Wikipedia practice. Nihil novi (talk) 00:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Well said. The only thing that should be done - if it hasn't been done already - is to mention the Wawelberg Group in the Silesian Uprisings article(s).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 11:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. Otherwise, we would have to merge all WW2 special forces articles with the WW2 main article. And a comment to JGHowes. Feel free to expand the Silesian Uprisings article if you think it is too short. That would be the best solution Tymek (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. Notable as a separate article. Visor (talk) 11:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose per Tymek. Szopen (talk) 11:09, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment on sources. I tried to find English-language sources while writing the article, but as everyone sees, it was not easy. This topic is unknown to majority of Poles, not mentioning foreigners. Tymek (talk) 17:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

B-class review

This article is currently at start/C class, but could be improved to B-class if it had more (inline) citations. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 22:13, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

"imported" terrorism

They were just classic terrorists - see for example the foreign "green men" from Russia in Ukraine (2013-14). And have to be called exactly so ! They weren´t Silesians, they were Poles from Poland, from abroad.