Talk:Robinson Crusoes of Warsaw

Calel Perechodnik

This Polish Jewish Ghetto policeman is not mentioned here. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 04:08, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, good point. I was actually going to include him somewhere but then it slipped through. I plan on adding a list of all the known people to the article and he'll be there, but it'll take me couple of days since the weekend is busy.Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:33, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Cool then! :-) Interesting article by the way. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 04:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

B-class review passed

Reviewing this for WP:POLAND, I think this article matches B-class criteria. Good job, and please consider a WP:GA nomination. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Possible additions

Is it worth mentioning The Island on Bird Street and/or Uri Orlev? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I think that if we could find a source which says that the Robinsons were the inspiration for the book, or directly connects the author/book to this (rather than just a loose association/similarity) then it could definitely be included.

I also have this vague notion that there was a Marvel Comics character that was loosely based on the Ares of this article but I can't find anything about it and maybe I'm confusing things.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:01, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

It turns out that Orlev can't technically be one of the Crusoes of Warsaw, because although he was in the Warsaw Ghetto, he was in Bergen-Belsen by 1943. However, the book (and the film based on it) mention Robinson Crusoe repeatedly, and I think quote from it. Plenty of sources say so, and some of them also say the book is set in the ruins of the Warsaw ghetto. I've not been able to find anything that specifically says the book was inspired by the events of 1944, although given its widespread acclaim, I'm surprised that none of the more recent sources on the subject mention it. (Variety (magazine) has a piece on the film, but it doesn't say anything very useful about the background.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 07:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Cool, I'll add this info in. Volunteer Marek (talk) 00:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Robinson Crusoes of Warsaw/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sp33dyphil (talk · contribs) 06:24, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

So... where is the review? I understand taking a few minutes, or hours, but days...? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 19:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

• Can the lead be lengthened?
• Access dates missing from five links.
• Add alt text to images (strongly recommended).
• "who, after the end" "by Nazi Germany, decided to stay" note the commas
• Why isn't "Armia Krajowa" italicised?
• What does "SS", as in "SS Brigadeführer", mean?
• No need to add Ltd to publishers.
• Location of publishers?
• Where are the sources for the notes?
• There shouldn't be an image aligned to the left right under "Number and demographics".
• Stuffed-up reference formatting before "by Szymon Rogoźinski".

---

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I think I addressed most of these, except for the expansion of the lede. For access dates, it is my understanding that these are not necessary, particularly in the case where a source is offline or a book on google books. Generally I only put those in when I use websites or stuff on websites on sources (sometimes with automated edits, these fields get put into the template even though they're not relevant/necessary). I added alt text to most of the images and will add it to the other one or two in a sec. I have to think about how to expand the lede since it already summarizes the article pretty well. Volunteer Marek  03:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Expanded the lede a bit. Let me know if it's sufficient. Generally I think the purpose of the lede is to summarize and draw the reader in, not repeat all the details of the main text, so I tend to go with a short "Abstract". Volunteer Marek  17:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

In case there are any issues that need urgent fixing, I'll watchlist the nomination and try to help with it as well. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 18:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

• No need to add Ltd to publishers. - the singular instance of this removed. ???
• Location of publishers? - These are not required even for FAs. There was one instance where location was listed.
• Where are the sources for the notes? - In the sentence which the notes refer to. I didn't double-cite the individual notes and the text itself, but I can if this is desired.
• There shouldn't be an image aligned to the left right under "Number and demographics". - Fixed (though I generally disagree with this style suggestion, here and elsewhere)
• Stuffed-up reference formatting before "by Szymon Rogoźinski". - good catch. Fixed.

 Volunteer Marek  02:36, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

A week is about to pass. So, pass? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 02:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC)