Talk:Chancellor of Poland

Chancellor of Poland was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 17, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

Lithuania Mid‑importance

	Lithuania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania 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.LithuaniaWikipedia:WikiProject LithuaniaTemplate:WikiProject LithuaniaLithuania articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Mid‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

To translate when I have more time: [1] - about chancellors juridical courts. I am still looking for information about history and competences of Deputy Chancellors (podkanclerze) - help appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 13:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Move

To Chancellor (Poland)? What do you think?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete templates

It would apprear that the 'Deputy Chancellors' Templates are missing quite a few people.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 02:58, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA status

im sorry, but this article doesn't meet GA standards; it is not well referenced. I can't even read the single reference provided. The only note doesn't have a citation, how is a reader supposed to know if that's truthful or not? I'm not saying the article is lying because there's not much verifiability, I mean the material sounds plausible, but sounding plausible isn't quite enough for GA status :/. Homestarmy 01:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The entire article is based on the reference (external link) listed in reference section. It was some months ago but I believe I used that Polish article as the basis for most of the information in this article. So the article is referenced.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:26, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but the criteria is "well-referenced", not just "referenced". I admit, that's a slightly ambiguous criteria, but one reference just doesn't seem like it will do an article of this nature justice. Plus, it's still in Polish, I doubt that most readers of this here english Wikipedia will be able to read it :/. If you feel that strongly though, you can bring this to the Wikipedia:Good articles/Disputes page as a dispute, but I don't think any of the people there know how to read Polish either. It's not that I hate Polish or anything, but if it can't be read, then I don't see how most readers can confirm the information. Homestarmy 04:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to agree on that one. While browsing the googlebooks for more English references might be tiresome, it would certainly look better. Besides, above you've posted yet another reference. Why not use it here? There's three more mentioned at Offices in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth ready to be incorporated here... //Halibu tt 07:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I find an English language source discussing Polish chancellors, it will be a first. This is a very obscure subject, and there are very few references. I know some other Polish ones, offline, some online may reveal more, but the one that is used now is rather comprehensive. And I don't think that there is anything in Offices... article about chancellors that is not here?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:26, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the more refs, the merrier. Just in case you could add those here. This wouldn't harm anyone I guess - yet would satisfy the needs of those who like every single statement easy to be cross-checked. //Halibu tt 19:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

B-class review

Needs inline cites. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:42, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Name change

Is it possible to change the article name from Kanclerz to Chancellor of Poland? There is no such position or post these days (in the third republic - III Rzeczpospolita) therefore it would be very hard to confuse the title with other positions like the President or Prime Minister. Main reason for the change would be that this is English Wikipedia and the title itself may be hard to pronounce and difficult to understand.

THANKS ;) User:Oliszydlowski (TALK) 8:24pm, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I think our naming convention would rather suggest Chancellor (Poland), but I don't have strong feelings here. @Nihil novi:. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:08, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Polish "kanclerz" and the English "chancellor" are cognate terms. Thus nothing is lost, and clarity is gained, by rendering the Polish term here by the English one.

"Chancellor (Poland)" does indeed seem the proper title for the article, as the name of the office was not actually worded "Chancellor of Poland".

Nihil novi (talk) 06:40, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]