Talk:Żeligowski's Mutiny

Name

I wonder if Żeligowski's Mutiny wouldn't be more appopriate?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a big differnce as for me - it is rather emotional "tone" aspect, rather than changing something factual. Zeligowski's invasion would be more accurate, especialy as we knot, that mutinity was staged.--Lokyz 19:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

The sources I have refer to it as a mutiny (of course, staged). Mutiny is a subset of rebellion, so it would seem more accurate. Unless you can show that invasion is more prelevant in the context, I think a mutiny would be better (and the article of course mentions in lead it was staged).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Just kidding:) I've already told, both names suit me.--Lokyz 20:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok. In that case, there is only a technical issue: should we use 's or not? I.e. Żeligowski's Mutiny or Żeligowski Mutiny?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

It is my hope that this article can be a starting point for some cooperation and scholarly input between certain editors who (myself included) had difficulty doing so in the past. Avoiding the "three-ringed circus" that developed out of "Operation Wilno" would be a wonderful thing. Personally I do not care for "rebellion" or "mutiny" as they have a peculiar meaning in English that does not completely correlate with the events as they unraveled in the article's time frame. Who did LG actually "rebell" or "mutiny" against? To avoid the issue of WP:OR, I'm sure there is something that is a better choice in English. Or am I mistaken? Dr. Dan 22:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Officially, Żeligowski has mutinied and rebelled against his superiors in the Polish army.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Officially or supposedly, yes, but the reality of what really was happening might be a better title. How do your English sources name the event? Dr. Dan 00:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Greimas

While secondary citations are acceptable on Wikipedia, I am more then happy to provide interesting readers with primary refs (unfortunatly I cannot verify them, as they are in Lithuanian). Bojtár is citining the following work: A. J. Greimas, Antanas Smetona ir kas toliau (Antanas Smetona and what is next), Naujoji Viltis, Chicago, 1988/21, 32-40.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure Andrzej Sapkowski did also write about Zeligowski's grand son in his novel - a sure funny one to read. As for the Greimas text i do have it, will provide it as it was written. Sorry, but I had to correct your typoses, because you do not seem to be familiar with Lithuanian spelling. I might send you a few books o help you solve that problem, if you'd provide me with your address.--Lokyz 18:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

"Bo widzicie, to było tak. Krótko po podpisaniu traktatu z Bundesrepubliką i utworzeniu nowego landu ze stolicą w Allensteinie doszło do plebiscytu wśród ludności gmin Gołdap, Dubeninki, Wiżajny, Giby, Puńsk i Sejny. Wyniki plebiscytu, jak to zwykle bywa, okazały się dziwaczne i niczego nie mówiły, bo też i co najmniej osiemdziesiąt procent uprawnionych nie poszło do urn, rozumując słusznie, że lepiej pójść do knajpy. Nie było zatem wiadomym, czy i jaki odsetek ludności ma się za Wschodnich Prusaków, Północnych Polaków, Lewobrzeżnych Żmudzinów czy innych Jaćwingów. Tak czy inaczej, w niecały miesiąc po plebiscycie granicę przekroczył litewski korpus w składzie dwóch dywizji: regularnej "Gedyminas" i ochotniczej "Plechavicius". Korpusem dowodził generał Stasys Zeligauskas. Litwini zajęli niezdecydowane gminy prawie bez oporu, bo większa część naszej armii była właśnie w Iraku, gdzie spłacała polski dług wobec Wolnego Świata. Mniejsza część naszej armii też była zajęta, bo dokonywała demonstracji siły na Śląsku Cieszyńskim." Just a simple citation to improwe your mind.--Lokyz 18:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Sigh. Lokyz, if you are not serious about improving the article and plan to reply to my academic citations with novels, may I remind you Wikipedia is not a discussion forum?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:55, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Nope - justa another citation to make you understand better what do internationay recognised Polish intelectuals think about rewriting history by google generation - "Rząd polski zareagował serią not i wystosował oficjalny protest do ONZ, na co rząd litewski odpowiedział, że o niczym nie wie. Zeligauskas - oświadczył litewski ambasador - działa bez rozkazu i na własną rękę, bo cała rodzina Zeligauskasów to z dziada pradziada zapalczywcy i gorące głowy, nie znające pojęcia "subordynacja".--Lokyz 19:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)P.S. as for academic sources in my eyes you did spoil Wikipedia by introducing tygodniks as a source. Best wishes.

Lokyz, by failing to recognize the diffrence between fiction and academic works, as well as the genre of political satire, you only further show that you misunderstand the purpose of this project. In any case, it's EOT for me.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

By failing to understand the ironic position of the Polish prominent writers towards this quite clear issue of international law violation and even failing to present a proper name of publication you were referring to. Ah whatewer. Failure after failure inspite of Polish Imperial Ncylopedia.--Lokyz 19:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Polish prominent writers :D Sure, Sapkowski is indeed an example of modern mainstream political thought. The way he described the nuances of the Orkish-Elven relations is truly excellent. //Halibutt 20:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

No This one wasn't about Wiedzmin. And you've just violated two of WP: policies. One question - is it full moon when you return from your "stop to be wikipedian" or Piotrus personal phone call?--Lokyz 20:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)