- 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 97198 (talk) 12:54, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Wacław Kopisto
edit
- ... that the Silent Unseen Wacław Kopisto (pictured) was one of the 1943 rescuers of Armia Krajowa prisoners tortured at the Pinsk prison?
Created by Poeticbent (talk). Self nominated at 05:33, 22 April 2014 (UTC).
Touching article, Polish sources for article and hook accepted AGF from trusted user, pic good and licensed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
There is some very non-neutral language in the second "Recognition" paragraph—"Their story of resistance was stolen by writer Martin Gray"—and it's cited to a Google Books search page, not to any specific book. That sourcing is not adequate in any event—the specific work should be given—and especially as Gray is still alive and BLP issues come into play. It appears from the article on Gray's book that his co-author/ghostwriter (I'm not quite sure of the details) fabricated events and even whole chapters (i.e., Treblinka), but if this article is to mention his Pinsk claims, it will need reliable cited individual sources. Finally, I don't see any US copyright license for the photo which, since this is English Wikipedia and US-based servers, is a requirement. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:34, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- You are an experienced editor BlueMoonset and I'm sure you can help us phrase that paragraph safely and accurately. I totally understand your concerns but the facts are already there on the table. Martin Gray wrote that he took part in the Pinsk prison-raid. Please note, I did not read his book. I learned about it from the referenced article in Polish. Kopisto never knew, nor saw Gray in his life, according to his own interview. However, years earlier a documentary was made about him and so, his wartime story became famous in Poland. Gray, as a Polish-born writer, had ample opportunities to familiarize himself with that story. By design, writers are free to use poetic licence, and tell fantastic stories if they want to. Other writers did that too. An autobiography in not a court affidavit. Gray said in his book that he participated in that raid. He did not. Please tell, how would you phrase this sort of factual information using encyclopedic language? Thanks, Poeticbent talk 04:45, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- regarding the pic license, an admin on the Commons tells me: "The law of the country the photo is from applies." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:16, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm still looking for solutions. Dear BlueMoonset, you brought up one sentence beginning with: "Their story of resistance was stolen..." Would you like to have it replaced with "plagiarised"? By definition: "Plagiarism means presenting the words, phrases, ideas or work of another, including certain facts and statistics, as if they were your own."[1] The only problem is that the same definition of plagiarism is often narrowed to "The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own..." which is not the case here, because these were not ideas but facts.[2] Our own definition of Plagiarism in Wikipedia does use the word "stealing"... but I'm very much opened for suggestions. Poeticbent talk 16:13, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Done. Poeticbent talk 17:04, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- Poeticbent, as far as I can tell, the Gray book was published in 1971. The documentary cited in the Kopisto article appears to have been released in 1989. While it appears that Gray (or, more likely, his co-author Max Gallo) probably inserted Gray into historical events of the 1940s that he did not take part in, notably at Pinsk and Treblinka, I don't see how the documentary material could have been stolen or plagiarized, since the documentary antedates the book. Since you've asked how I'd phrase it, I'll take a crack at the section later today or tomorrow. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:20, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- I just realized. The actual documentary is irrelevant here. Please take a look at a selection of popular books on the subject just added (probably not all). Looking forward to your final edit. Thanks in advance, Poeticbent talk 01:05, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- Poeticbent, I've just completed my edits. I hope you like them. I opted for placing the Gray material in a new section, to just explain the Gray situation as directly as possible, but with as much emphasis on Kopisto as possible. What's troubling me most is the section header: this is the least unsatisfactory of the many variants I tried. I included the bit about him being made a Major posthumously, since it's apparently in his 2010 bio (that's the source given in the Silent Unseen article). I thought it was useful to explain why he's being called a captain elsewhere in the article, but a major in the biography's title. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:08, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks BlueMoonset. Great job. Everything looks fine. If you think that his posthumous promotion ought to be emphasized, we can put it up front. Major is in the title of the whole book about him.[3] Usually, when there is a controversy regarding facts mentioned in a bio, we name it "Controversy". In this particular instance I think, it would rather be "Disputations" because the "Cichociemni claims" (like you said) were not his claims but someone else's claims. We can also drop the section title, or maybe expand it even further into the "Retelling of the Cichociemni story" thus making it rather matter-of-factly without any qualifying words whatsoever. Poeticbent talk 01:11, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done. I just read it again afresh and changed the Captain to Major. As far as the rest, I like your revisions better, BlueMoonset. Let's leave it the way it is. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 13:36, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Poeticbent. All we need now is someone to check over my recent edits and do a final approval if all is well. Gerda Arendt, did you want to take a look? BlueMoonset (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
- I liked it before, and like it much more now, thank you both for your efforts. Don't you think someone new should have a look? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:57, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
- Like Gerda, I find this article reaches the DYK criteria, and accept the relevant Polish language sources in good faith. I think it would be best not to use the image as its copyright status in the US is unclear. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done. I added template {{PD-1996}} to image at Commons because the illustrated books about Cichociemni were published continuously in the Polish language since 1945, and therefore the public domain criteria applies in the United States also. Quote from template: first published outside the United States (and not published in the U.S. within 30 days) and it was first published before 1978 without complying with U.S. copyright formalities or after 1978 without copyright notice and it was in the public domain in its home country on the URAA date (January 1, 1996 for most countries). Thanks Cwmhiraeth for your help, much appreciated. Poeticbent talk 13:40, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
