Talk:Witold Pilecki/GA1

See MOS:LEAD for help in addressing the following comments:

• I see no reason why there should be so many paragraphs. The article has less than 22,000 characters, which means the lead should be no more than three paragraphs long (MOS:LEADLENGTH)   Done
• The lead section needs to be “a summary of its most important contents”, but it is not. For instance, nothing is included of Pilecki’s life before World War II;   Done
• Much of the content in the last two paragraphs is excessively detailed for a lead section, and these paragraphs include “significant information... not covered in the remainder of the article”   Done
• The information in the lead does not need to cited (except any quote you choose to keep in, see MOS:LEADCITE)
  • It does not but it can be, and this article has been a subject of some edit warring and other editorial disputes in the past. Hence the high density of citations in the lead (particularly relevant to the term volunteer, but some folks have also disputed other statements). I'll see if I can remove some redundant duplicate+ footnotes from it as I address your various points. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:42, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Understood. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:32, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• There are redundant citations (e.g. following In 1940 Pilecki volunteered and new communist authorities.) All the references can be moved to the main article (if they are not there already), as the information in the lead is not controversial
  

Also,

• Link cavalry (in the lead and the infobox); intelligence agent (Espionage); resistance leader (Polish resistance movement in World War II); Poland's Chief Rabbi (List of Chief Rabbis of Poland); captain (in the infobox); 41st Infantry Division (41st Infantry Division (Poland)) (in the infobox)
  • Done, although the cavalry masterin the infobox was weird, instead, I've added and linked rotmistrz. I linked resistance to a more general term as the specific Polish resistance link was added to the lead in the expanded early life.
• Unlink Polish; Poland( in the infobox) (MOS:OL);
  • Polish is not linked in the infobox? Poland was unlike, how about Russian Empire?

Happy for these links, but any links to modern Poland are misleading, considering the changes that have occurred during its history. AM

• Link Warszawianka Company (Kompania NSZ „Warszawianka in the Polish Wikipedia) in the infobox, using {{Template:Ill}}
• Done, and I've added that detail to the body (where it can be verified with the existing refs used there).
• Polish Government-in-Exile – small e in exile   Done
• Fighting Auschwitz: The Resistance Movement in the Concentration Camp should linked in its entirety  Done
• It might be worth placing the codenames in a separate note (see MOS:FIRST);  N

More comments to follow. Please indicate where you have addressed any issues using   Done. I will cross out comments I think are sorted, and add a small red cross ( N) if more needs to be done to address a comment. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:39, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Amitchell125: Lead part is mostly addressed, what do you think? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:42, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, it looks better. AM

• Consider putting szlachta in italics and amending to {{lang|pl|szlachta}} to indicate it is a Polish word. Unless you tell me you don't want me to, I'll be bold and put similar 'lang' templates in as I meet them.
  • Technical query: I don't mind the italics if MoS mandates it, but the word is used in English without italics too. Also, how do we include a wikilnk in that template? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:39, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

If the word is used in English, I think it can be left as it is. AM

• had been deported to Russia – I would include that the family originated from Lithuania, according to Ref 7 (Cuber-Strutyńska)   Done
• The Polish Wikipedia article (and Cuber-Strutyńska as well) gives more details about Pilecki's background and early years. Could these not be included?
  • Pl wiki may not always cite references, but if there is something pertinent in C-S source, like the Lithuanian detail, please mention it here and I'll add it. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:39, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

See C-S pp. 282/283 (details of the estate he settled in during the 1920s); other useful sources used by the Polish Wikipedia seem to be self-published, e.g. this. AM

• Amend ZHP to ‘Związek Harcerstwa Polskiego (ZHP)’   Done

I looked again and didn't see anything I found interesting, maybe the tidbit that the estate was "dowered by his great-grandmother"? But it seems trivial to me. Do let me know if you disagree or if I missed something else. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Happy to move on then. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Consider unlinking World War I (MOS:OL)
  • I'd rather keep it, for educational reasons (kids reading this article, etc.). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:46, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Understood, but I disagree. Where do you stop with providing links for younger readers? MOS:OL asks editors to consider whether "reading the article you're about to link to would help someone understand the article you are linking from". As World War I, covers every aspect of the war, every theatre, and every period, I would not send a reader to the article. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Errr, is your last sentence was intended? I do think that linking WWI helps a younger reader. Shall we call a WP:3O? I don't have strong feelings, but I'd rather keep the link if it's the same to you. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

My typo. We can agree to keep it. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:37, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Comma after Białystok   Done
• szeregowy - as there is an article in the Polish Wikipedia, consider amending szeregowy (private) to ' Szeregowy [pl] (private)'
  • Since interwiki treat them as the same, and I concur it makes sense, I don't think it is necessary? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:46, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Probably not. AM

• volunteer army should be in capitals   Done
• defending the city of Grodno – as the city was not in Belarus (as it is today), perhaps it could be clarified that at the time it was a Polish city   Done as "then-Polish"
• Consider adding this map to the subsection to help clarify the text.   Done but I am not sure it is for the best, we may have now some image-infobox text sandwiching, and is that map really particularly helpful? We also mention other cities, why the special treatment for that one? We could add map of the Polish-Soviet war, but again, that seems not super relevant IMHO, readers can visit articles about cities/wars to see more context and maps and such. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:46, 12 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Understood. AM

• non-commissioned officer is unnecessarily linked twice in the same paragraph   Done + removed a bunch more duplicate links I noticed with this pass of a highlight dupe links gadget. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• Andrzej (16 January 1932) and Zofia (14 March 1933) – the dates of birth of non-notable people are unneeded here   Done and added a pl wiki link to Zofia as she has a bio on pl wiki. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• I’m unclear what the significance of the chairman of a dairy is   In progress Indeed that sounds out of place. It's from Ewa Cuber-Strutyńska's article where she writes "As a founder of a farmers’ association and chairman of a dairy he established himself, Pilecki was active also in his local community.". Any ideas on how we can rewrite it elegantly here without too close paraphrasing? This also could help address the issue below. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

see comment below. AM

• I would move Pilecki was active in the local community, he was the chairman of a dairy and founded a farmer's association. He was also an amateur poet and painter. to a separate paragraph, as it is not related to his military activism during this period. - Right, but a) it would create a short paragraph and b) ECS mixes this info into other stuff, just we do. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I suspect he did a great deal for others. How about amending Pilecki was active in the local community, he was the chairman of a dairy and founded a farmer's association. to something like 'Pilecki actively supported the local farming community.' I'm not too concerned about the paragraph-splitting, it was a consideration. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Amitchell125 I am fine with shortening it like this, those details do seem mostly trivial.   Done _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Unlink Polish in Polish Army Prusy   Done
• was mobilized as – aren’t whole forces and supplies mobilized, not individuals? I'm unsure here... If true, amend to ‘became’ -> A curosy google books/scholar check does confirm the use of "he was mobilized" in this context... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• I would include a brief introduction about the events leading up to the German invasion of Poland to explain why Pilecki had to join the 19th Infantry -> Errr, which events? Like, why did the Germans invade? I've added the "With Polish-German tensions growing in mid-1939," to the opening of this paragraph, I think this should be sufficient for the context? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Looks sorted now. AM

• A minor point, but imo the sidebar should be moved down to this subsection   Done, but plz double check if we don't have sandwitching images now with File:Witold Pilecki KL Auschwitz.jpg which was pushed down and so I moved it to the left. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's fine. AM

• A new sentence starting from from August 1940?   Done
• his ideology – I would amend this to ‘official TAP ideology’ or ‘Włodarkiewicz’s own ideology’ for the sake of clarity   Done Should it be TAP or TAP's? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

'TAP' looks OK to me. AM

• Link ideological; Znak ({{ill|Znak {publication)|lt=Znak|pl|Znak (pismo konspiracyjne}}'); Nazi Germany; internment; death camp (Extermination camp)   Done note I linked Christian values instead of generic ideology, also linked puppet government. And right-wing populism. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• the Union of Armed Struggle (ZWZ) – include the Polish name along with the abbreviation ZWZ, for the sake of consistency   Done
• Unlink anti-Semitic in the quote (MOS:LWQ)   In progress Hmmm, but the concept of anti-semitism is quite relevant to the context of this article. Any idea where we could move it instead? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:41, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I would replace ...Pilecki saw that Włodarkiewicz was "flirting with anti-Semitic views" and had... with the more direct '...Pilecki saw that Włodarkiewicz's views had become more anti-semitic, and that he had...'. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:00, 13 February 2022 (UTC)   DoneReply

• The hatnote should be omitted, see Template:Main for why it is incorrectly placed here   Done
• Dupicate link - Auschwitz concentration camp (amend to ‘Auschwitz’ as its nature has already been explained)   Done
• See MOS:IMGSIZE for the correct way to enlarge the image   In progress can you be more precise which image and what code is wrong? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

According to WP:IMAGESIZE "Except with very good reason, do not use px (e.g. |thumb|300px), which forces a fixed image width measured in pixels, disregarding the user's image size preference setting." Apologies if I've misunderstood this statement. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, interesting. I count 5 images outside the infobox which use px parameter, should be remove it from all and see what happens? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:43, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I would amend the image in this subsection to upright=1.5. and not enlarge the others—when i checked, that seemed to work. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:58, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

By all means, do implement that code - I am not very familiar with it. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:39, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• , and, along with – the sentence needs to be split here, as it currently reads as if Pilecki's journey to the camp and arrival there are all part of the the second backstory
• In autumn 1941 he was promoted to porucznik (first lieutenant) - it's perhaps not clear to readers how a man can be promoted when an inmate at Auschwitz.   In progress Hmm, the source doesn't clarify, but I think it's not that confusing. He was promoted outside the camp by his superiors, not sure when he learned about it but presumably that's the date on the documents. I am not sure how to clarify this in the absence of sources discussing this in more detail? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

How about something like '..he learnt that "“far away in the outside world in Warsaw" he had been promoted to porucznik... ' (C-S p.288)? Amitchell125 (talk) 14:43, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Isn't that language a bit unencyclopedic? But maybe I misunderstood something - would you mind tweaking the sentence first, and then I'll see how it looks? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:44, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Done—the words in quotes are Pilecki's. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:07, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm assuming you're OK with my edit—please feel free to adjust it as needed. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:06, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Correct In autumn to 'In the autumn of’   In progress Grammarly insists that 'the' is wrong and added a comma... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• Link back-stories (Backstory)   Done and removed the hyphen
• Include the full Polish name of the ZOW where it is introduced   Done
• to better inmate morale – ‘to improve the morale of the inmates’ sounds better   Done
• from outside -’from outside the camp’   Done
• For the sake of consistency, ZOW should be italics throughout   Done
• kommandos – shouldn't this German term be in italics and with a capital letter?   In progress Italics, perhaps, capital, probably not, see also Kommando. I've added italics for now. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• While at Auschwitz is redundant -   Done changed to "As part of his duties," since I felt the paragraph needs some opening
• I would add more details (using Cuber-Strutyńska, p295) to explain at the beginning of the subsection how Pilecki’s reports reached Home Army headquarters, (incorporating Further dispatches of Pilecki's were likewise smuggled out by individuals who managed to escape from Auschwitz.)   Done
• a Home Army report on "The Terror and Lawlessness of the Occupiers - ‘a Home Army report, "The terror and lawlessness of the occupiers”’ (note the lack of capitals)   Done - but it's a translation anyway... should we add the title of the Polish original? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Errr, I would say keep it in correct English (or Polish or both). AM

• was also broadcasting details – ‘was using a home-made radio transmitter to broadcast details’ improves the prose   Done
• The secret radio station – The ‘transmitter’? This text begins an overlong sentence that should be split   Done
• it was broadcasting – ‘it broadcasted’   Done
• These reports were a principal source – it should be made clear whether These reports here were the ones smuggled out of the camp, or the ones that were broadcasted.   In progress I think the written ones were more important, also, the radio ones were written down, I doubt the radio in the camp had much range. However, the wording in the sources is not very precise when it comes to distinguishing them. See also Witold's Report, the terminology is inconsistent, as in - the reports were plural, obviously, but they are also lumped together into one "work" called a singular report... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

How about amending These reports (specific) to something along the lines of 'The information provided by Pilecki' (non-specific)? Amitchell125 (talk) 14:56, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sounds good.   Done _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:48, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• I would combine the first (very short) paragraph with the second one, as they are connected   Done
• The image would be better placed alongside the relevant text, i.e. higher up   In progress It looks fine to me but if you think a tweak would help, would you mind moving it to where you think is best? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Already done? AM

• Meanwhile – has little meaning here, as events are not being described in this paragraph   In progress I rearranged the paragraphs instead?

No it was redundant, apologies for not being clearer. Word now removed, please revert if I have altered the meaning. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• personally and After that are redundant   In progress I concur with the first, but the second seems to fit well, I replaced it with a shorter 'Later'. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• outside the camp perimeter – but they are not outside the fence already? Perhaps this detail can be omitted   In progress Perhaps the perimeter is used here in the sense of nearby area within the range of searchlight, etc.? That's my impression. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Understood. AM

• They headed east – the text from here onwards should be in the next paragraph   In progress Is it really necessary? The paragraph doesn't seem to long, and it would mean copying the reference footnotes... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Understood. AM

• Military Organization is not in capitals   In progress I cannot find the relevant text to fix? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

See the second paragraph ("While in various slave labor kommandos and surviving pneumonia at Auschwitz, Pilecki organized an underground Military Organization). Amitchell125 (talk) 15:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've added the missing word Union. Not sure if this is what you were asking? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Now it makes sense. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:10, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

More to follow. it is starting to look as if the article needs quite a lot of work before it can be promoted. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Dupicate link - Home Army; ZOW (in coordinating ZOW)   Done during an earlier pass.
• an initial report – I would omit initial, as it seems to contradict the idea that reports had already come out of Auschwitz   Done
• focused – 'which focused'   Done
• I would simplify rejected this proposal, since the camp's resistance was judged to lack sufficient strength to provide noticeable assistance during such an operation to ‘judged such an attack would fail’   Done
• for rescued inmates – ‘for the rescued inmates’   Done
• Unlink Soviet in Soviet Red Army   Done
• Kedyw is in italics   Done As in, it should be in ialics, I assume.
• Roman Jezierski is in italics? (as in the lead)   Done Changed to italics.  Done
• Later – if there is no date available, this should be omitted (MOS:RELTIME)   Done
• providing what limited support he could to ZOW - ‘providing ZOW with what limited support he could’ sounds better IMO   Done
• NIE should be introduced using the full term.   In progress This is not an acronym, as far as I can tell, this is the name of the organization. It means NO in Polish and unofficially it has been explained as a short from the Polish word for independence ("niepodległość") as well as affirmation of the rejection of communism. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:57, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Understood. AM

• Comma after Polish resistance   Done

• Dupicate links - Warsaw Uprising; Kedyw   Done earlier
• city center – is the article written in British English (as in autumn, above), or in American English (as here)?   In progress I have no preference, but as an ESLer, I do tend to mix them occasionally. Whichever ones requires less rewriting is the one I'd chose :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:47, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

OK, I think BE requires less work, so I've added the template to the talk page and tweaked center. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:37, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• After the fall of the uprising – a date would be useful here   Done
• He survived until liberation in 1945 at Oflag VII-A, in Murnau, Bavaria - seems in need of copy editing to improve the prose. Something like 'He was sent to Oflag VII-A, a prison-of-war camp for Polish officers located north of Murnau, Bavaria, where he remained until the prisoners were liberated in 1945.' And added a date for the camp liberation, with a ref.   Done

• General Władysław Anders – should only be linked once in this section, and his name changed to 'Anders' after the first mention.   Done unless you meant we should also remove General? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• In this section and the next one, there is no need for the images to be enlarged   In progress I assume this is related to what we discuss above, and hopefully fixed by now? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• Pilecki left Murnau – seems to say he remained in the town once he was released, which I am assuming is incorrect   In progress I am not sure I follow. But since the previous section says he remained in Murnay until liberation, I just removed the 'left Murnau' entirely as superficial/redundant. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• Lt. Colonel should be unabbreviated   Done and linked the lt col article
• he arrived – he had arrived   Done
• Unlink Italy   Done
• Link show trial   Done
• with the mission of gathering intelligence for II Corps duplicates what has already been said in the paragraph   Done
• He would work – ‘He worked’   Done
• written to Cyrankiewicz among others is redundant imo   In progress The controversy about Cyrankiewicz, a fellow inmate, turning his back on him, is something that some sources discuss in more detail. So I think this can stay. In fact, I wonder if this shouldn't be expanded into a dedicated sentence at least. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Expanding this is a good idea. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:43, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I expended the relevant content a bit. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:49, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• received death sentence - ‘received death sentences’   Done

• Duplicate link - Powązki Cemetery   Done during an earlier pass
• The upper image shows very little of the monument and a lot of background, consider replacing it with something like this one   Done
• Amend the fall of communism and Pilecki's rehabilitation to something like ‘the fall of communism in Poland and Pilecki's subsequent rehabilitation’   Done
• From the 1990s, following the fall of communism and Pilecki's rehabilitation is redundant here   In progress Didn't you mean the repetition about the fall of communism following this sentence? (Which I removed) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes. AM

• he has been a subject – ‘Pilecki has been a subject’   In progress Are you sure? It would repeat his name twice in a short sentence. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

You're correct. AM

• Link monograph; communism; martyrology   Done Although note I linked the word earlier (as well as in lead, also linked to anti-communism). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• After the fall of communism, a cenotaph to him was erected – the cenotaph might have been erected years afterward, is there a citation for this statement?   In progress I can find sources that a symbolic grave, aka cenotaph, is there (ex. [1]), but not for when it was erected. It existed at least as far back as 2002 when his wife was buried there [2]. For now, I removed the mention of it as it doesn't seem particularly important. Also, there my be more than one symbolic grave for him, I found references to at least two or three such locations. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• I would use an English translation for a museum, Dom Rodziny Pileckich e.g.. 'The Pilecki Family House Museum'   Done Note I retained the Polish name, as I cannot locate the official English translation. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
• (though, as of 2020, it had not yet been fully opened to the public) – looks like the text here needs updating (see here)   In progress Grrr. This October 2020 article states that the museum building is still waiting to be officially opened, but This article, from February 2020, states that the official opening ceremony took place in October 2019. The Museum abut page is useless, just states that the governing body (bodies) were elected in 2020 and 2021. This architectural magazine notes the Museum building was finished in 2020. It's possible the museum was partially or temporarily opened in 2019, but became fully operational in 2020. Oh, and here, it says that the permanent exhibition is planned to be opened in 2022... so I guess it is still not opened yet? Fully, at least? Aargh. How do you want to handle this? I did try to update this myself for now. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think you've done as much as you can, the picture will be clearer in future months, and can perhaps be updated then. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Final comments to follow. AM

@Piotrus: Whilst I'm checking the references, I'll be amending them (adding links etc.). As a reviewer, I know it's a good idea for me not to get too involved with editing, but tweaking the references won't alter the text of the article - I'll that side to you. Please revert/ping me if I've made an error in good faith. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Looking again at this section, there appear to be a number of different styles of formatting used throughout the article – see MOS:NOTES (“Editors may use any citation method they choose, but it should be consistent within an article.”) Amitchell125 (talk) 12:55, 5 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Good point. My current preferred style is as seen in Witold_Pilecki#cite_note-:1-15 (Wysocki). One reference per book with {{rp}} used for page numbers in the article's body (the template is not needed for non-books as I think we don't cite specific pages for articles?). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:03, 5 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your reply, I'm of course happy with any one style (yours included). Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 16:07, 5 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Amitchell125 How is your reference cleanup? I noticed Wysocki reference still uses the rp template, while other books had their page ranges moved to the footnotes? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:26, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Done by the end of this afternoon. AM

...and done. I've left a few 'page needed' tags in the article for you to pick up. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:15, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

* Ref 4 (Patricelli), do we have a page number for 4b? The text is being quoted. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:24, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Amitchell125 I believe this was added by User:Volunteer Marek, whom I'll ping - hopefully they have access to the source. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:27, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Do we have a page number for Ref 5 (Szumilo), or did you want to cite the whole chapter? Amitchell125 (talk) 13:37, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Refs 8 and 21 (Fleming) appear to be identical.  Done
• Ref 45 (Ministerstwo Kultury) does not verify the text   Done - rotted, removed as unnecessary
• Ditto ref 33 (The Times) - this can be derotted with https://web.archive.org/web/20110510023152/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5891132.ece but I don't think it's necessary, and can be removed. Other references cited provide more detail (this one however is in English and easily accessible after fixing). I've derotted it in body, but maybe we can remove it? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:55, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I would. AM   Done

• Consider adding this link   Done
• Consider separating the sources used for citations from the those considered to be for further reading   Done