Talk:Pishchalauski Castle

This article was nominated for deletion on 28 April 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Historic sites This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Belarus This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belarus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belarus on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelarusWikipedia:WikiProject BelarusTemplate:WikiProject BelarusBelarus articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

It sure looked like a prison in use when I passed by it now in July 2009. I'm pretty sure it's still in use, but can anyone confirm and change the text? Närking (talk) 19:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This previous edit was unjustified (no explanation, no edit summary) and IMO in parts highly destructive. I have kept the constructive parts, but restored the wrongly removed or modified parts.

Current events, i.e. Putin's invasion of Ukraine with Lukashenko's backing and the continued repression in Belarus, make this an important topic and article, prone to be targeted by regime employees. Even perfectly good-faith, but mislead changes need to be monitored more carefully.

• A structure which follows logical and common encyclopedic principles is useful both to the user and to the editors.
• Current usage comes first, as we're giving here info for today's users.
• Section headings must reflect the content ("Information" means nothing, everything here is information; "History" was used as an umbrella word with no specific meaning).
• Deletion of lists of notable inmates (all Russian Empire-period ones and most Lukashenko opponents) is utterly unacceptable.
• Separation into former & current Lukashenko prisoners (all arrested in 2020) is impractical: as of when? Who checks & updates constantly?
• A chronological, rather than alphabetical order, is better suited for lists of people connected to historical periods stretching over decades.
• Details of (deleted & reinstated) Lukashenko opponents: Viasna has data on most (search on https://spring96.org/en/), but the search is difficult due to very different transliteration (spelling) of names between other sources and Viasna website. I have done some, leaving more to others.

Cheers, Arminden (talk) 09:40, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]