Talk:Dumitru Petrescu

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cielquiparle (talk) 15:20, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Petrescu in military uniform

• ... that Romanian communist leader Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej resented Dumitru Petrescu (pictured), who was "seen as more deserving than Dej, when it came to the international communist movement"? Source: Lavinia Betea, "Al. Bîrlădeanu, despre Dej, Ceaușescu și Iliescu", in Adevărul, 18 June 1997, p. 5
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Momentum Party

Created by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 11:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC).

Propaganda poster aimed at Romanian soldiers, 1946

• ALT: ... that Soviet-trained commissar Dumitru Petrescu supervised propaganda (example pictured) aimed at purging a "nest of reactionaries" out of the Romanian Army? Florin Șperlea, "Din Atelierele CFR la Comitetul Politic Executiv. Dumitru Petrescu sau drumul sinuos către nomenclatură", in Dosarele Istoriei, Vol. I, Issue 4, 1996, pp. 27–28 Dahn (talk) 11:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Dahn: Good article. AGF on Romanian sources. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Death place

The parameter in the infobox should provide information about the place of death and its affiliation to the country, not detailed information about the division of the country and its political status. See how it's done elsewhere, e.g. famous personalities of Czech history: Václav Havel, Karel Čapek, Klement Gottwald, Jaroslav Heyrovský...

@FromCzech: In this case, you are pushing a disparity with the place of origin, which is indicated under the polity/regime that Romania was at the time, asking that we do not do the same for the place of death. Moreover, your examples seem to be entirely selected from Czechoslovakia (you probably edited them yourself in that manner, or in any case stand by them as an concocted rule), when in fact infoboxes outside that context use all sorts of geographical and political detail: George S. Patton, as a random example, is a Featured Article with such very precise detail in the infobox (December 21, 1945 (aged 60) Heidelberg, Allied-occupied Germany); as another random example, I may add Otto Roth, which uses very precise detail: Nagy-Mutnik, Austria-Hungary (today Mâtnicu Mare, Romania) and Timișoara, Romanian People's Republic. Do note: though I edited the latter article, I did not add in this form -- and I can only assume the user who added it was working for some consensus. In short: the rule you claim exists does not exist, and your contribution to the infobox pushes an anomaly. Dahn (talk) 09:05, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

My examples refer to Czechoslovakia, because we are talking about how Czechoslovakia is usually handled, not other countries. I don't understand the comment that I edited it myself, it can be easily verified and it's probably just a provocation. It is the usual notation and it should be consistent. Btw Patton is OK, there is no unnecessary detail; Roth is broken down in unnecessary detail for infobox purposes, but I don't understand Romanian naming conventions, so I won't discuss it. FromCzech (talk) 09:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

There is no special rule for Czechoslovakia and no special rule for Romania (though, incidentally, if there had been any, this would fall under Romania -- the man just happened to die, rather randomly, in Karlovy Vary). Moving on: can you see how the Patton infobox refers to a very specific moment in German history, rather than "Germany"? This is on par with the link here using "Socialist Czechoslovakia" rather than "Czechoslovakia". If you're not satisfied with that example, nor with Roth, let's continue with Edvard August Vainio ("Grand Duchy of Finland" is the same level of supposedly unnecessary detail as "Czech Socialist Republic"), Eduard Fraenkel (ditto with "Prussia" -- note how it pipes to this specific article), Peter Martyr Vermigli, Francis Walsingham, Antiochus XI Epiphanes, Guy Fawkes, and so on. Dahn (talk) 11:39, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

So that the selection of people is not random, here are the most visited pages of personalities born or died in Czechoslovakia according to the top100 Wikipedia:WikiProject Czech Republic/Popular pages. They all have it written in the same format: Paulina Porizkova, Jaromír Jágr, Martina Navratilova, Petr Čech, Madeleine Albright, Pavel Nedvěd, Tom Stoppard, Václav Havel, Miloš Forman, Antonín Panenka, Milan Baroš, Milan Kundera. And we can continue behind the top100. It may not be a "rule", but it is a convention. The link to the Czech Socialist Republic is completely redundant. The link to Czechoslovak Socialist Republic remained after my edit, it was just changed to a piped link with the most common and the most easily identifiable name of the country, both then and now. FromCzech (talk) 12:57, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Please contemplate the relevant portion of template:Infobox_person#Parameters. — Biruitorul ^Talk 13:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

John Adams, Andrew Jackson, Alexander Hamilton, Patrick Henry. — Biruitorul ^Talk 12:10, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@FromCzech: Note how I have presented examples from featured articles (i.e. articles that have passed a test of quality), and not "the most popular pages" on whatever topic -- an absolutely irrelevant standard, if I ever saw one. As for the rest, Biruitorul sends you directly to the relevant standard. Granted, it may be superfluous to add the federal component for Petrescu's place of death, but I think it falls within the policy and precedent of mentioning the first-level division of that particular time, for cities that are not national capitals (Patton with California, Fraenkel with Prussia, Vainio with the Grand Duchy etc.); I could perhaps be persuaded to remove it, but certainly not because a pick of "popular" articles on Czech topics don't use it -- if anything, those sloppy articles need to be updated to what is, in fact, standard usage. Dahn (talk) 18:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

The only featured biography article related to Czechoslovakia is Dominik Hašek, the good articles are Vladimír Remek, Milan Baroš, Pavel Nedvěd, Vojtěch Jarník, Patrik Berger, Tomáš Rosický, Libor Michálek and Antonín Kinský; and I didn't find any exception to what I wrote before. IMHO the relevant standard also think supports it. Obviously there is no way to convince you no matter how many examples I give, so I started the discussion on Template talk:Infobox person#Death place detail. FromCzech (talk) 19:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@FromCzech: Hašek was born before the nominal partition into a Czech and Slovak socialist republics, so the example is irrelevant. I also note that you are now trying to move back to where we would simply say Czechoslovakia, but Kingdom of Romania/People's Republic of Romania, though you were previously claiming that you had changed your mind on this issue. I will not participate in, not follow, chaff debates meant to canvass -- we can keep it all here, and anyone can add their input, if they have any. Dahn (talk) 19:37, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

• @Neveselbert: Would it be possible that you please refrain from rationalizing your aesthetic preferences? Dahn (talk) 21:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

  Why should both larger units be linked, why can't just one link suffice? ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 21:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

  • If both are present, both should be linked -- as they are both historical entities, terms of art (rather than immediately recognizable terms such as Australia), and because the reader is inherently assisted by being able to clink on them there. You may claim that one should not be present -- however, if you care to glance above, you will note that FAs have a well-established tradition of mentioning both the nation-state/empire and the first-rate administrative unit, particularly where the entities are federal. The Czech Socialist Republic is the practical equivalent of California, but quite unfamiliar to readers (unlike California). Dahn (talk) 21:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

    Per {{Infobox person#birth place}}: Omit unnecessary or redundant details. For example, it is not necessary to state: New York City, New York, United States when New York City, U.S. conveys essentially the same information more concisely. Therefore, Czech Socialist Republic is redundant to Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, especially since they contain all but six of the same letters. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 21:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

    • But should New York be included in "Albany, New York"? Dahn (talk) 12:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

      Unless New York state renames itself Albany, yes. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

      Time you applied that input to the Czech Socialist Republic as a subdivision of the Czechoslovak Federal Socialist Republic and to a rather small city on their territory. "They share many letters" doesn't count to either removing or unlinking the first-level division (just like a town in Western Australia would also be in Australia). Dahn (talk) 21:45, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

      No, adding "Australia" after "Western Australia" would be similarly redundant. The title of the article is Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, which makes "Czech Socialist Republic" redundant. Either one or the other will do, if you prefer the latter I would be OK with that. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 21:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

      Why? And how is Czechoslovak Socialist Republic redundant to its component Czech Socialist Republic (do click and read the two links)? Dahn (talk) 21:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

      Because it contains all of the same letters, with the exception of "slovak". ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 21:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

      That is a ridiculously contrived criterion that is of no service to the reader. Dahn (talk) 22:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

      No, it isn't, what's ridiculous is your refusal to accept the guidance of {{Infobox person#birth place}}. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

• • Now you: On what do you base the claim that both should not be linked, and how did you come to that particular selection of which shouldn't be linked? Dahn (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

    Now me: well, now I think more about it, I think only one of the two should be included at all; see my reply above. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 21:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)