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

Articles for creation This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC This article was accepted from this draft on 23 September 2024 by reviewer SafariScribe (talk · contribs). Intertranswiki/OKA This article has been created, improved, or expanded by a translator from the Open Knowledge Association. See the OKA task force page of WikiProject Intertranswiki.Intertranswiki/OKAWikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki/OKATemplate:WikiProject Intertranswiki/OKAOKA Novels Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women writers Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Poland 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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Rjjiii talk 16:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that a modern Polish fairy tale, written during the time of martial law in Poland in the 1980s, mixes the themes of real-world environmental protection and fantasy-like gnomes? Source: Kowalczykówna (1989) cited in the article
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/History of education in Wales before 1701

Created by Piotrus (talk) and Oliwiasocz (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 527 past nominations.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: New enough, long enough. Hook fact is interesting and cited in the article - AGF on offline Polish sources. No online sources to check for paraphrasing except a Polish book only available in snippet view, so AGF there. Good to go.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Korzeniacy, czyli Jesień wsamrazków/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Piotrus (talk · contribs) 12:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Benji man (talk · contribs) 12:05, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   Most sources are hard to access, but seem reliable.

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   It may be good to expand the plot summary a bit.

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Congratulations!

@Piotrus: Is there any way the lead of the article can be expanded? It's particularly short for a Good Article, and leaves out a fair amount of interesting and notable details from the plot and reception sections described in the body. Cheers! Johnson524 23:05, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnson524 Sure. I've expanded it with some plot summary. Anything from reception you'd like to see mentioned that isn't already? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:14, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: There really should be a mention about why this book has lasting impact/is notable. Something which tells the reader why this book in particular deserves to be on Wikipedia, not just a plot synopsis and theme. Everything else is a major improvement though and thank you! Cheers from North Carolina 🙂 Johnson524 05:11, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnson524 Well, in all honesty - and per sources cited -this book did not have a lasting impact. It is notable by the virtue of having been reviewed, mostly around the time it was published, but it is, well, reasonably forgotten otherwise. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:33, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]