Talk:Maus - Wikiwand
For faster navigation, this Iframe is preloading the Wikiwand page for Talk:Maus.

Talk:Maus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Maus is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 22, 2015.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 30, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
July 4, 2012Good article nomineeListed
October 2, 2012Featured article candidateNot promoted
January 17, 2013Featured article candidatePromoted
October 1, 2016Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article


External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Maus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Strange edits

Josve05a and Jasonanaggie, can you please explain why the two of you are repeatedly making edits like this and this to this article despite the obvious objection of other editors? It seems that you are running a script on the page which produces a misleading edit summary ("Tagging 3 dead links") when you are indeed doing more than tagging dead links. I don't even know why the script makes such edits, as it's taking a direct link and linking it to a redirect. --Laser brain (talk) 16:35, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

This is the result of the Disambiguation DABFix Program. If you try it out on the page you will see what happens when someone gets this article as a random page to fix. It is not really the fault of the editor as you cannot see the entire page in the script that fixes the pages.Jasonanaggie (talk) 19:03, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Since you are responsible for the edits made by the Jasonanaggie account, yes, it is the fault of the editor. For mindlessly running scripts.Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:07, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Please see my response here. (tJosve05a (c) 02:32, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Maus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:00, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Translation into French

Hello, fellow wikipedians !
I am working on a French translation from the featured article. Would you please be so kind as to help me with a phrase?
In the section "International publication", in Poland, the caption under Piotr Bikont reads : he set up a publishing house in 2001 to put out a Polish edition of Maus in the face of protest. The text reads: Piotr Bikont, a journalist for Gazeta Wyborcza, set up his own publishing house to publish Maus in Polish in 2001.
There are several meaning for "set up". Did Bikont trick the publisher to have them release Maus? Or am I totally wrong?
Regards, --Bédévore 20:59, 16 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bédévore (talkcontribs)

Hello,
I am currently working on the French side for the sections International publication & Reception & legacy.

  • Maybe you'd like to add in the article that, in March-May 2012, the Centre Georges Pompidou organized a retrospective about Maus and Art Spiegelman : « Art Spiegelman : CO-MIX - une rétrospective de bandes dessinées, graphisme et débris divers ». The library of the Museum ( fr:Bibliothèque publique d'information) offers a guide about it : Dossier pédagogique, mars 2012 - Lire en ligne (access date : 2018 january 25th).
  • There's an inaccurate piece of information in Awards ; the prize from "Témoignage chrétien" is awarded by a weekly newspaper. The prize is called "Prix Résistance TC" - and as far as I know, there's no such thing as "Angoulême International Comics Festival Religious award". Such awards are granted by religious associations or newspapers.

Regards, --Bédévore 10:21, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

  • I've removed "Category:Angoulême International Comics Festival Religious award"—I don't know where it came from. It's not mentioned in the article. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:14, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi again, on the French side extra information was added about reception in France. Among other things, maybe you'd like to know there was an exhibition in the French Mémorial de la Shoah about Shoah et Bande dessinée (Shoah and Comics) in January 2017 and it included works from Spiegelman. Should anyone be willing to translate it into the English article, here is the mention. About sources : Le Monde published several news items about Maus and it is considered as a reliable reference among French newspapers. Regards, --Bédévore [knock knock] 23:00, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

En janvier 2017, le Mémorial de la Shoah organise l'exposition Shoah et bande dessinée où figure, entre autres, le travail d'Art Spiegelman[1] · [2].

  1. ^ Mémorial de la Shoah : Shoah et bande dessinée, janvier 2017 Lire en ligne (consulté le 25 janvier 2018)
  2. ^ Le Monde, Frédéric Potet : Comment dessiner la Shoah ? 26 janvier 2017 Lire en ligne (consulté le 25 janvier 2018)

External links

Preserving here by providing this link. My rationale was: "Rm per wp:ext - one was not a link at all; unofficial study guides, etc." Please let me know if there are any concerns. --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

The view of Canadian Polish Congress

re: [1]. I can't say I am impressed by any organization who still uses docs (c'mon, it's 21st century already). Anyway, what we have here is a lengthy, ~90 pages long document by anonymous author, published by a small NGO, the Canadian Polish Congress. The question is - is it WP:Undue and WP:PRIMARY? Well, it is relevant - the article already has several paragraph on criticisms, and so one sentence that is clearly attributed to another critic doesn't seem that undue to me. I also do not think this is WP:PRIMARY; it is an analysis, so rather a SECONDARY type of a source. I don't see how it is different from some other sources already cited, for example [2] by American Council for Polish Culture (written by Peter Obst, an adjunct lecturer in Polish Cultural History and Foreign Literature at LaSalle University, except the ACPC entry is non-anonymous (and easier to access than the doc file...).

Considering this is FA, I'd rather keep the referencing standards high, so I'll also point out that we may want to discuss the reliability of this self-published essay from the homepage of Ian Johnston, a retired instructor (now a Research Associate) at Vancouver Island University . I am also unsure if Alondon is a reliable publisher, whatever it is ([3] seems rotten anyway...).

Anyway, I don't see why the reference to CPS should be that problematic - it is no worse then several others that are already present here. Through in the spirit of keeping standards at FA-levels, and because the CPS entry doesn't seem to really add anything new, the best outcome would be to remove the low quality reference to Johnson and close the matter at that? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:49, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

The group is best known (at least to me, via Wikipedia) for publishing the works by the fringe author "Mark Paul", which appears to be a nom de plume since nothing is known about him. KPK is an undue, primary source. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:53, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
They KPK has protested against portrayals of the infamous Kielce pogrom in theater, asserting lack of Polish involvement in this and other massacres (counter to established historical sources), and advocated stressing incidents of "Jews killing Poles". According to Piotr Wróbel (chair of Polish studies at UToronto) they are "aggressively right-wing".[1] The following appears in one of their documents on their website:

While the gathering of accounts is still in its infancy, like many aspects of wartime Polish-Jewish relations, a fairly clear outline emerges of some sordid and shameful aspects of the conduct of Jews vis-à-vis their Polish neighbours under Soviet rule. It is an immensely important story that has never before been told and one that redefines the history of wartime Polish-Jewish relations. There is overwhelming evidence that Jews played an important, at times pivotal role, in arresting hundreds of Polish officers and officials in the aftermath of the September 1939 campaign and in deporting thousands of Poles to the Gulag. Collaboration in the destruction of the Polish state, and in the killing of its officials and military, constituted de facto collaboration with Nazi Germany, with which the Soviet Union shared a common, criminal purpose and agenda in 1939–1945.[2]

Asserting Jewish collaboration with the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany who themselves (according to the KPK) were allies in 1939-1945 (our World War II and Holocaust articles would seem to differ with this account). This is a WP:FRINGE organization - particularly the Toronto wing of the KPK (from which the document on Maus was taken) - and it should not be tolerated here in Wikipedia. Icewhiz (talk) 06:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Levin, Laura, Belarie Zatzman, and Joel Greenberg. "Studio 180’s Political Engagements: Finding the Jewish Soul in Canadian Theatre." Canadian Theatre Review 153 (2013): 50-55.
  2. ^ Neighboours On the Eve of the Holocaust, Mark Paul, page 14
Could you provide a verifiable (hyperlinked) source for claiming that Canadian Polish Congress is " According to Piotr Wróbel (chair of Polish studies at UToronto) they are "aggressively right-wing""? Or is CPC-Toronto different from CPC? A splinter organization, perhaps? CPC itself doesn't seem to raise any red flags in my research, at least so far. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:17, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
The citation I provided is fully verifiable. However - here is a - link - it is behind an academic paywall. The KPK Toronto wing is more aggressive than the rest of the organization (however, I'll note that many of the regional chapters seem fairly defunct - the Toronto branch is fairly active) - they have an independent website and they seem to promote their own agenda (e.g. Paul is only hosted on KPK Toronto). Icewhiz (talk) 06:54, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
I've removed Johnston 2001; replaced it in one instance, and simply removed the cited statement in another.
So much has been written about Maus that it can be hard to decide what's due weight in many cases. If CPC is DUE, then aren't any of the thousands of other commentaries? What makes the CPC source particularly notable? Does it say something particularly new and substantial? Do other sources cite it? Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 06:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I think I agree. While I think CPC is reliable (for a mid-sized NGO, there is no rule we can't cite right-wing anti-communist organizations, and those seem to be in-passing descriptions anyway) I don't think that the source raises to the level of quality for other sources here. For example, ACPC source is at least attributable to a minor academic, but CPC source is anonymous, and that is a bit of a red flag. Who wrote it? If they chose not to attribute it, it doesn't bode well. And the source doesn't say anything we don't say already, after all (that portrayal of Poles as pigs is seen as offensive - yep, we say this with better refs). So personally I have no desire right now to restore that ref, through truth be told, I would expect we could beef that paragraph with more sources - at the very least I would expect that a number of articles in Polish mainstream press would say something similar, and we do already cite a lot of news articles.
PS. What about that Alondon ref? Can it be rescued? Seems like it is non-English anyway... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:44, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
The Alondon source is Hebrew? What was it about, and why would we want to include it? Honestly, the article could use a couple of spinoffs—one on critical analysis, another on controversies, and another on international reception. A lot of stuff that would be way out of scope here would be just at home in such sub-articles. I'm not volunteering to start them, though. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Ping User:Icewhiz: Could you comment on reliability of Alondon, and check if this links still works (appears rotten) and can the link be rescued, assuming the source is reliable and valuable? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:04, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
I rescued the link, and added a cn. Alondon is an ex-pat Israel magazine/website in London. The citation doesn't support the first sentence (1990 publishing by Kinneret) - though the sentence is correct. It does support the second sentence (lack of success, only first book went out) - which is also probably correct. Tzdaka himself is a somewhat established writer - he wrote for Yedioth Ahronoth from London. Icewhiz (talk) 05:59, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Poles

The book is good but it is a pity that Spiegelman portrayed Poles as pigs. Germans were real pigs for what they did during the war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.192.209.227 (talk) 03:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

{{bottomLinkPreText}} {{bottomLinkText}}
Talk:Maus
Listen to this article