Jump to content

Talk:Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articlePolish–Lithuanian Commonwealth is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 11, 2005.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 10, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
July 3, 2009Featured article reviewDemoted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 24, 2013, October 24, 2016, and October 24, 2021.
Current status: Former featured article

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2025

[edit]

I would like the state to be referred to as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth or Poland-Lithuania in all sentences of this article, rather than just 'Poland.' The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was a dual state, so disregarding one of its members—Lithuania—is both disrespectful and intolerant toward Lithuanians like myself. 78.56.98.211 (talk) 08:41, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 13:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there a redirect to the page titled Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth? Isn't that this page?

[edit]

Like really? Sanemero the Robot Prince (not really, it's a Gloryhammer reference) 16:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lithuanian Name

[edit]

I would like to request that the name should be listed in Lithuanian, alongside Polish and Latin, in the infobox. One of the realms of the entity was literally the "Grand Duchy of Lithuania", so I think it's distasteful that the name in Lithuanian is not included.

According to the Lithuanian Wikipedia, the name in Lithuanian (although the name to match the one the infobox in English uses) would be Lenkijos karalystė ir Lietuvos Didžioji Kunigaikštystė. StrawWord298944 (talk) 06:05, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@StrawWord298944: – I think the reason behind it is the fact that Lithuanian (spoken by a small minority then) did not have an official status in the Commonwealth after 1569, as per the first paragraph. Ruthenian, which was largely spoken in the Grand Duchy, didn't either after the 17th century. In any case, the modern Lithuanian name for the state is included in the footnote, in first sentence. Merangs (talk) 18:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

[edit]

The grammar in this article is pretty bad but it's locked to editing. Can a native English speaker please go over the article? 78.136.162.215 (talk) 19:06, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give some examples? It is quite a long article. Mellk (talk) 19:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old Warsaw as capital

[edit]

Hello. I'm wondering sometimes. From the early 15th century (around 1410s) to 1791, the city of Warsaw, technically did not exist in administrative sence. Instead, it was divided into towns of Old Warsaw (now Old Town), and New Warsaw (New Town), plus numerous suburbs. It was only incorporated into one large city in 1791 (and even then de facto enactment of the law was delayed to 1794). As such, I'm wondering, if maybe Infobox should list Old Warsaw as a capital from 1596 to 1791. Could I ask what all of you thing about it? Artemis Andromeda (talk) 02:46, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Artemis Andromeda: Personally, I would not since both Warsaw and Old Warsaw are correct, and interchangeable. Instead, I would mention this somewhere in the body of the page i.e. "the capital was moved to Warsaw, with Old Warsaw acting as the country's administrative centre" or something similar. Moreover, the Old Warsaw article is quite poor. This is my personal take on the matter. Merangs (talk) 12:44, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would keep it as it is TBH. You are correct, but since "Warsaw" isn't strictly incorrect as a label I would leave it, and follow the suggestion Merangs gave if such isn't already in the article's body. Ashoburn (talk) 19:38, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]