Talk:Poland

Poland - system of government.

Is Poland a parliamentary, or semi-presidential republic? This Wikipedia article simply does not currently state what most reliable sources say.
I'm not going to get into speculations about why it could or could not be classified as semi-presidential. that would be original research

Significant sources clearly state Poland is a parliamentary republic examples:
https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/eu-countries/poland_en
https://portal.cor.europa.eu/divisionpowers/Pages/Poland.aspx
https://www.gov.pl/web/civilservice/basic-information-about-poland
https://web.archive.org/web/20260118165010/https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/poland/#government
https://ec-europa-eu.libguides.com/country-knowledge-poland/introduction
https://www.welmec.org/legal-metrology-information/country-information/country/poland
https://civitas.org.uk/content/files/MS.10.Poland.pdf

And the Constitution of Poland itself

Wikipedia's core principle is verifiability, so some speculative arguments that Poland potentially could be considered a semi-presidential republic are irrelevant, as that would constitute original research. Information about the fact that Poland's form of government does indeed hold some semi-presidential characteristics should be delegated to an appropriate section of the article, certainly not to the info-box and the introduction section of the article.

The currently cited sources clearly are not the consensus, they are uncommon, opinions, or just wrong. One that I just removed (CIA Factbook) was outright contradicting the claim the article currently makes, another was the Polish Constitution which also didn't make claim in support of the statement.

Some of the pages affected:
Poland, List of countries by system of government(+pages that excerpt it), Politics of Poland, commons:File:Forms_of_government.svg, and probably a few more.

I propose that the statement in the article is corrected to say "parliamentary republic", and move the speculations to an appropriate section of the article that talks about the forms of government and describes eg. the presidential veto powers.
--wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 00:55, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Considering that the majority of sources, including Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej (which is probably the most relevant source for the system of government in Poland), the article should definitely put main emphasis on Poland being a parliamentary republic.

It is stated thrice throughout the article that Poland is a semi-presidential republic, including the table at the top. Due to the clear picture given by the sources, the table should obviously say "parliamentary republic". The body of the article needs correction, too, although mentions of an opposing viewpoint should be left in, because they clearly hold some weight due to the current sources claiming Poland to be a semi-presidential republic. See: WP:WEIGHT. Casual board gamer (talk) 06:48, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

It is possible that Poland's constitution uses the words "parliamentary republic" to describe something that nobody now really calls by those words (except that constitution). If we look at how other countries are described, Wikipedia does not privilege what a country says about itself - otherwise, every country with a dictator would be called a democracy! Unlike the dictators, Poland is an honest country with a legitimate constitution, but that doesn't mean we can just uncritically copy what a country's constitution says. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:04, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, however most sources do indeed call it "parliamentary republic". You'd really need to go out of your way to find anyone attempting to call it a semi-presidential republic.

Showing these theories front-and-centre would be undue weight --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 16:44, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@Svito3, you have reverted my edits and accused me of POV-pushing. I would like you to participate in this discussion especially since It seems you're the one who is pushing the "semi-presidential" version of the article. --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 18:35, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Most reliable sources are already used on the page that precisely go into which systems are presidential, semi-presidential, and parliamentary in detail. None of sources you provided do that.

There were plenty of exactly this discussion by Polish users that WP:BRIGADE this topic. Please check previous discussions before starting same one with same arguments. Svito3 (talk) 18:37, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

That's not true, the references in favour of "semi-presidential" are very clearly WP:UNDUE and speculative. They don't reflect the majority sources.

In fact some of the sources in the original version of the article outright contradict the previous statement in the article.

I also do not appreciate your accusations of brigading --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 18:54, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@Svito3: What exactly do you oppose in the edit that you reverted? Your arguments don't seem to be backed in any of Wikipedia's policies. The version of the article you reverted to places undue weight on a fringe view not shared by the majority of the sources. It's not relevant that my sources don't go super deep into detail, they don't need to. The point of view of the sources that are used to support the "semi-presidential" classification are not shared by most sources, and should not be used to completely disregard the primary source that is the Polish Constitution and the majority of secondary sources. --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 23:51, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Polish constitution isn't a source for the claim itself that "Poland is parliamentary republic" because such text is simply not in the text of the constitution. To make such claim based on Polish constitution text is original research as you have to cross-check Polish constitution with definition of "semi-presidential system" or "parliamentary system" found in another reliable secondary source(s).

Contention is in which sources are reliable, per WP:SOURCE. Sources claiming Poland is parliamentary republic are exclusively "basic country information pages", not scientific papers on governing systems (which is the subject of this discussion), how they differ and which countries belong to which system. Svito3 (talk) 11:04, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

@Svito3: Published scientific papers on governing systems that share this view do indeed exist, for example:
Rationalized parliamentarism a là polonaise – a reflection from the perspective of twenty years of the Constitution of 1997 - (2017) Patyra Sławomir

The author outright states that 2 competing ideas were proposed, a French-style semi-presidential model and a parliamentary one with German-style chancellor-y elements, with the latter one eventually being chosen.

W projektach konstytucji, skierowanych do Komisji Konstytucyjnej Zgromadzenia Narodowego w latach 1993–1994 zderzyły się dwie, odmienne koncepcje modelu egzekutywy: jedna, oparta na idei budowania relacji pomiędzy prezydentem a rządem w oparciu o wzorce modelu semiprezydenckiego, druga zaś nawiązująca do rozwiązań charakterystycznych dla modelu kanclerskiego. Ostatecznie, Komisja Konstytucyjna, a w ślad za nią Zgromadzenie Narodowe przesądziły o przyjęciu w Konstytucji z 2 kwietnia 1997 r. modelu dualistycznej egzekutywy, charakterystycznej dla systemu rządów parlamentarnych, jednakże z przewagą konstrukcji typowych dla niemieckiego kancleryzmu. Znalazło to szczególny wyraz w odniesieniu do wyeksponowania roli rządu w zakresie prowadzenia polityki państwa i parlamentarnej odpowiedzialności Rady Ministrów za jej prowadzenie.

So what I'm saying, it's not true that only Sources claiming Poland is parliamentary republic are exclusively "basic country information pages" --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 17:49, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

"dualistycznej egzekutywy" translates to dual executive system, which is another term for semi-presidential system. Follow wikilink and see for yourself. -- Svito3 (talk) 18:48, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

No. The text clearly clarifies right after that the executive system in Poland is found in parliamentary systems and gravitates towards the German one:

[. . .] dualistycznej egzekutywy, charakterystycznej dla systemu rządów parlamentarnych, jednakże z przewagą konstrukcji typowych dla niemieckiego kancleryzmu.

 

In my opinion, enough arguments for Poland being a parliamentary republic were given to include that in the article and give it due weight. It is probably the best to mention both systems, since there is currently no consensus strong enough to leave just one, no matter which one would it be. Casual board gamer (talk) 19:25, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

@Svito3: "dualistyczna egzekutywa" doesn't exactly translate to English "dual executive system".

In how this term is understood in Polish, it refers to a parliamentary-cabinet system^{(pl.wikipedia)} which is not a semi-presidential system

Clearly this is the meaning that the author intended as directly after "modelu dualistycznej egzekutywy" he continued after a comma "charakterystycznej dla systemu rządów parlamentarnych" --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 19:28, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't think it's clear at all. Polish terms seem original and classification system seems different from what is used on English Wikipedia. -- Svito3 (talk) 20:25, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure how feasible this is, but could it be a potential solution to write something along the lines of: "Poland is a de jure parliamentary republic, but de facto functions like a semi-presidential republic, and is identified as one by some scholars"? Kinda like how we currently handle Austria. I think we did something like this before for Poland, but it was eventually removed. LVDP01 (talk) 07:38, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

I would oppose such classification due to WP:UNDUE and WP:EXCEPTIONAL --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 19:37, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Though it could be appropriate to mention lower in the article somewhere that "under some definitions Poland might be classified as semi-presidential due to having a president elected directly by the population rather than by parliament". --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 13:08, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Something to add - Note that researchers don't exactly agree on the definition of what "semi-presidential system" even means.

The most broad definition is as broad as qualifying all parliamentary republics with a directly elected president as being semi-presidential.
This definition classifies even a country such as Ireland as semi-presidential (!!!) (and indeed, for example researcher Robert Elgie who uses this classification does qualify them this way [ page 16])

But clearly this view is not one used by Wikipedia in articles such as List of countries by system of government or Semi-presidential system, a narrower definition is used instead. wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 02:32, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

For more about this see: Talk:Semi-presidential_system#definition_of_semi-presidential_used_for_this_and_related_articles,_and_country_pages_infobox_classification wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 02:33, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Another good source on the topic: Ustrój polityczny Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej

p.278

Przyjęty w Konstytucji z 1997 r. system rządów (podobnie jak stosowany w latach 1918–1935) określa się powszechnie w polskiej literaturze jako system parlamentarny.

p.211 [below part is about 1997 constitution, Mk = Mała konstytycja (1992)]

znikają z Konstytucji bezpowrotnie rozwiązania mogące świadczyć niegdyś w Mk o zbliżaniu się jej w jakimś stopniu do modelu semiprezydenckiego (z wyjątkiem może powszechnego sposobu wyboru Prezydenta), o czym będzie jeszcze mowa. To równocześnie pozwala na stwierdzenie odrzucenia przez ustrojodawcę dopuszczalności oscylowania w praktyce nowego ustroju ku jakimś formom systemu półprezydenckiego.

---

Also @Svito3 this source backs up what I said earlier about "dualistyczna egzekutywa" not being synonymous with semi-presidential system, instead being part of what could be defined as parliamentary-cabinet system.
p.210 "To oznacza, że wprawdzie Prezydent sytuowany jest w Konstytucji z 1997 r. jako nadal element dualistycznej egzekutywy (wraz z Radą Ministrów)," [...] p.211 "I tak należy sądzić, że promuje ona rozwiązania właściwe bardziej systemowi parlamentarnemu z ciążeniem ku systemowi parlamentarno-gabinetowemu"
--wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 22:01, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Critique of current sources for the semi-presidential claim

I would like to add some critique to the current sources listed in the article:

1. "Semi-Presidentialism-Duverger's Concept — A New Political System Model"
   This source predates the current Polish constitution, it's astounding that it's even being used as a reference.
2. "Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive and Mixed Authority Patterns"
   Author of this source is not even so confident about their claim, he offhandedly mentions Poland, Mongolia, and Senegal as semi-presidential due to a presidential veto, but in citation ²⁵ he says "Some parliamentary systems, such as in the Czech Republic and Greece, provide similar vetoes to their unelected presidents." without drawing any reason for the difference in his classification, and then admits "The study of presidents in parliamentary systems has been relatively neglected".
3. "Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive And Mixed Authority Patterns"
   This one is just a different release of the exact same paper - again astounding that it's used as a citation when it's basically just a duplicate. The part mentioning Poland is the exact same except due to changes earlier in the paper, the above-mentioned citation ²⁵ is now citation ²³.
4. "Semi-Presidentialism and Democratisation in Poland"
   (better link) The author in this work seems to classify any country with a directly elected president as semi-presidential. They even explicitly mention that "The 1997 constitution reduced the president’s power to the benefit of the prime minister".

--wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 19:36, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

What about the following sources, which also support a semi-presidential system in Poland? Could they be used instead, or are they similarly flawed?

• Determinants of the Presidential Veto in a Semi-presidential System: Empirical Insights from Poland, by Anna Lewczuk of the University of Warsaw
• POLAND PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 2019 – ODIHR NEEDS ASSESSMENT MISSION REPORT, by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
• Local and regional democracy in Poland, by the Council of Europe
• A Primer on the Government and Politics of Poland, by Richard J. Hunter Jr. of Seton Hall University
• The role and power of the Polish president, by TVP World
• A Constitutional Settlement Is Poland’s Only Hope, by Maciej Kisilowski (Central European University in Vienna) and Anna Wojciuk (University of Warsaw)

LVDP01 (talk) 19:51, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

A lot of these only mention it in passing and are not going in depth about it, Svito3 in the section above argues that per WP:SOURCE for this claim you need "scientific papers on governing systems". Also some here you linked I believe simply quoted Wikipedia --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 20:08, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

1. I don't see problem with it predating Polish constitution. It's best source we have on governing systems.

2. I don't see how that's relevant considering semi-presidential system is defined on (page 2) by three features:

• A president who is popularly elected;
• The president has considerable constitutional authority;
• There exists also a prime minister and cabinet, subject to the confidence of the assembly majority.

3. I removed duplicate from the page as well as CIA source previously, but it was reverted by another user, and I didn't want to escalate.

4. You intentionally cut off second part of same sentence from your quote:

• The 1997 constitution reduced the president’s power to the benefit of the prime minister but most importantly it confirmed the semi-presidential system in Poland.

Svito3 (talk) 20:16, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

@Svito3:

1. How can the source speak about the Polish Constitution if it predates that very constitution? unless you are claiming that it's a WP:SYNTH?

2. You can't WP:SYNTH and WP:OR like that.

4. I didn't mean to mislead, I did state that the author classified Poland as a semi-presidential republic, but they seem to state any country with a directly elected president as such.

--wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 20:29, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

1. It explains classification system, but it can be removed as there is better source indeed.

2. Document is about semi-presidential systems. I don't see fault in not going in detail about every parliamentary system. Without reading definition of semi-presidential system you can't understand that semi-presidential systems by definition have popularly elected president.

4. I don't see where it says so. It's probably not there. Svito3 (talk) 21:18, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

@Svito3:

1. & 2. That's still WP:COMBINE & WP:SYNTH and cannot be used as a reference to the claim in this article.

4. That was to my understanding the primary reason for this classification for that author; Quote: "One method of democratising the presidency would be direct election, thereby establishing semi-presidentialism. Democratisation could also have proceeded by simply democratising the parliament, which could then provide democratic legitimacy for a new president elected by its members. Another option would have been to simply abolish the presidency."

This to my understanding means that the author believes Poland to be semi-presidental because of the direct election of the president, therefore (according to him) it wouldn't be so if it was the members of the parliament who elected him instead (or if the office was removed completely)

and going back to my argument, that's a rather strange way of categorising it, since the exact same thing happens in Czechia, Slovakia, Moldova, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, etc. yet these countries are (rightfully) not classified as semi-presidential

--wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 21:47, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Democratizing powerful presidency would make system semi-presidential. Svito3 (talk) 23:05, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

the "would" in your claim is not true; it could potentially, or could've turned into it something else. A whole new constitution was introduced in 1997. --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 00:56, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

If you read whole source or even first few pages it's clear it's about Poland specifically, it even says so in the title. It doesn't make any such claim:

• "The author in this work seems to classify any country with a directly elected president as semi-presidential."

As for 1997 constitution, of course source has information about that too, but you haven't even skimmed the article to know what information it contains.

If you don't have time or mental capacity to read the source, maybe reconsider going on offensive against sources you haven't read and don't understand even parts that you quote. Svito3 (talk) 03:15, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

@Svito3 I know the text is about Poland, i never claimed it's not. Im saying your previous reply is false.
I also don't appreciate your rude accusation of me "not having the mental capacity to read the source".

The author clearly uses the definition that if the president is directly elected, and otherwise the system is parliamentary, then the system is semi-presidential. It's obviously clear from the text, such as how they talk about a situation when the president is not elected directly (following round table talk agreements), but by the Zgromadzenie Narodowe (Sejm+Senate):

"The agreement created a potentially powerful presidency to be elected by a joint sitting of the houses of parliament (Salmonowicz 1989, pp. 10-11). Thus, the deal established a dual executive, rather than semi-presidentialism." (quote about 1989 presidential election under a different system from today)

(which also pointing out according to this author, semi-presidentialism is different from a dual executive, unlike what you said earlier. That's because the only criteria this author uses for considering a country as having a semi-presidential system is a directly elected president, with an otherwise parliamentary system.)

Another proof of this is the works he cited, that being Robert Elgie's Semipresidentialism in Europe, who proposes the criterium for semi-presidentialism as "A semi-presidential regime may be defined as the situation where a popularly-elected fixed-term president exists alongside a prime minister and cabinet who are responsible to parliament."

Clearly this is not the definition used on Wikipedia, as Elgie also classifies Ireland, Croatia, Moldova, North Macedonia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Armenia, etc. as semi-presidential (even directly listing them as examples), this is also not a common view, and not the one used so far by Wikipedia. See more about the multiple definitions

--wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 11:08, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

@Svito3 Do you still object to me making the change in the article? As I cannot really see any good argument for keeping the current version. --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 23:05, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm gonna make the changes then, as the only person objecting seems to no longer reply, and I do believe I 'advertised' the change sufficiently on various noticeboards for anyone else wishing to object to do so. --wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 08:29, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 April 2026

The article has contained an incorrect population figure for some time. The latest estimate from Eurostat for 2025 is 36,497,495. (not 37,893,970 as currently stated in the infobox)

Source: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tps00001/default/table?lang=en&category=t_demo.t_demo_pop

Someone has already added the Eurostat source to the infobox, but the figure hasn't been updated. Please update it. ~2026-21262-11 (talk) 18:10, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Not done for now: The source you have provided states that that number is an estimate – LuniZunie_(talk) 16:18, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Neutrality, verifiability

Personally attacking heading replaced. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:14, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

(Personal attack removed) For example bloating the lede with "extremely effective cavalry called hussars." You'd be hard-pressed to find another country with stuff like this in their ledes. Does the lede in the Turkey article mention the janissaries? No. Likewise, why the insecure edit about Poland joining the Western civilizationTM and therefore being WesternTM? Since it's an obvious fact, why underline it? (Personal attack removed) Maxbeirut (talk) 17:59, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

The Polish Hussars are the most effective military formation in human history, so information about them is inevitable. Ninety percent of the world WRONGLY identifies Poland as an Eastern civilization, so this information is entirely justified. Polska-PL (talk) 18:55, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Source? Maxbeirut (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

What source? Polska-PL (talk) 19:03, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Bold statements on Wikipedia require references (citations) to back them up. Such as "Ninety percent of the world identifies Poland as an Eastern civilization" or "The Polish Hussars are the most effective military formation in human history" Maxbeirut (talk) 20:14, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Pop stats revert war

+134/-134. What's up with this revert war. What are the rules about pop stats in the infobox? --Altenmann >talk

OK. {{Infobox Country}} allows both options:

|population_estimate =

|population_estimate_year =

|population_census =

|population_census_year =

It even has an example:

{{Infobox country

|conventional_long_name = Republic of Cameroon

|population_estimate = 20,129,878

|population_estimate_rank = 58th

|population_estimate_year = July 2012

|population_census = 17,463,836

|population_census_year = 2005

So merge instead ow revert war. --Altenmann >talk 20:53, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

I suggest we stick to the census figure as it's more reliable than a flash estimate based on partial data (iirc the estimate before the 2022 census was lower than the eventual census figure, too) -nonInscritSupporter (talk) 22:18, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hmm… censuses only happen about every ten years in Poland. Are you saying we should not update Poland's population until 2032? Every other country article I have looked at includes a recent estimate in the infobox. And this article did too for a long time until it was removed by someone a short while ago.. Silverberge (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm aware of a problem with Statistics Poland, it's unique for only counting citizens registered in the country as population. In 2022, I think it was the World Bank, that bumped up Poland's population estimate to 41.7 million temporarily, owing to the refugees and what not. Now there's fewer refugees than in 2022 but it's still around 1 million. And that's just the refugees, there's also 1 million Ukrainian economic migrants and at least 0.5 million and up to 1 million other migrants. Now, there's the problem that not all citizens registered within Poland are actually residing here. I remember seeing a statistic that the actual number of Polish citizens residing in Poland is 36 million at any given time. Adding the refugees and immigrants to this figure, we end up with between 38.5 million and 39 million people actually living in Poland. This is why the flash estimates are double unreliable in Poland's case. Agreed that for other countries estimates are used but this is not a rule, when I've just shown the peculiarity of this case, an exception should apply. The census figure is at least in line with the real number of people living in Poland, which is "over 38 million people." -nonInscritSupporter (talk) 22:17, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

"Nitpicking"

This is a cosmetic remark but I've noticed something strange. In the infobox, in the | government_type parameter, it breaks Unitary parliamentary republic into 3 lines, whereas in all other articles such as Slovakia or Czech Republic it's contained in 2 lines. I haven't noticed any differences between the infoboxes, {{Infobox country has uniform width across all articles it seems, however one thing I noticed is that in other articles text within the infoboxes formats differently with less empty space, allowing for more text in fewer lines. How to fix this? I tried adding parameters that these other articles have that this one doesn't, such as | coa_size = 70 or | map_width = 250px, unfortunately to no avail, the | government_type parameter here keeps breaking the text across 3 lines. It's a small thing but it really irks me as I seek consistency Maxbeirut (talk) 22:02, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

This is because of the map images on the article.

on this article on the infobox click the radio button "Show map of Europe", and you will see the infobox expand and the text you mentioned will only break into 2 lines.
on the Slovakia article the map of Europe view is the default (though even switching to globe view, that image is sufficiently large to have the infobox wide enough to keep 'Unitary parliamentary republic' in 2 lines.

I don't have any opinion of what (if anything) should be done about this, this just seems to be the reason.

-wojtekpolska^{₁₀₁₃ [talk page]} 21:47, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Lead changes

@Shoshin000: - the lead summary at present is optimal and of the ideal weight/size. No need to list names of a monarch if other significant people are not summarised in the intro. Secondly, Poland's borders have changed so many times in history that mentioning only post WW2 changes is not truly encyclopedic, and there is no need for redundant detail. I suggest that after the word "millions of Polish casualties" we add "and extensive border changes" as a solution. No need to mention so early in the article who took what and whether it was westward. It is explained in detail in the history section. I'd also like to point out that only writing on post WW2 border changes would falsely suggest or hint that the current lands in Silesia and elsewhere were never part of Poland, and that the most recent shifts in the country's boundaries are contentious and subject to discussion. Merangs (talk) 11:12, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate you opening a thread to discuss with a "new user" wielding a 2 year old account carrying 1000+ edits.

Your point of view is now clearer to me.

I'm not sure that my version ever implied that these lands weren't ever part of Poland; I just stated objective facts without trying to twist it into this or that narrative.

Your proposal nevertheless doesn't sound bad, can you give a preview of it? The massive population changes should be mentioned however. Poland shifted westwards for the first time in – I believe – over 600 years, and switched almost overnight from multiculturalism to an ethnostate, with sensitive pre-war existential questions accordingly "solved": Hitler got rid of the Jews, Stalin got rid of the Germans, Ukrainians, Belarusians and Lithuanians.

I also see you restored that one Gary Cooper poster further down, that I had replaced by a map detailing territorial changes, which certainly carries more historical weight, don't you think? Shoshin000 (talk) 12:53, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, and apologies for the epithet; I have limited visibility over user activity. Regarding content, I actually do think it would send across the wrong message, especially for first time readers that would think contemporary Poland's borders are a matter of controversy. I would suggest altering the sentence to "In September 1939, the invasion of Poland by Germany and the Soviet Union marked the beginning of World War II, which resulted in the Holocaust, millions of Polish casualties, extensive border changes and cultural homogeneity [or we can say homogenisation]." Alternatively, "In September 1939, the invasion of Poland by Germany and the Soviet Union marked the beginning of World War II, which resulted in the Holocaust, millions of Polish casualties as well as extensive border and population changes." I'd like to point out that other country articles, for instance Germany, do not mention border shifts.

On the Gary Cooper poster, it represents the free elections and the end of communism. It is an icon. I agree that a map of border changes could be included, but the section is simply too small. Isn't there one in the History of Poland article? Merangs (talk) 19:32, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

regarding the map of border changes, you can check my earlier version for the way i did it before you blanket reverted.

cultural homogeneity is perhaps an interesting topic of discussion on a talk page, but too vague for an encyclopedic lede; i prefer to talk about demographic changes. which remains perhaps quite euphemistic, as many would see all these population transfers in central europe for what they really are. (though, admittedly, this lede is not the place for such debates) Shoshin000 (talk) 21:40, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

"In September 1939, the invasion of Poland by Germany and the Soviet Union marked the beginning of World War II, which resulted in the Holocaust, millions of Polish casualties as well as extensive border and demographic changes."Merangs (talk) 22:34, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

sounds ok. also make sure to check my revision regarding the border map Shoshin000 (talk) 12:58, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

I did see that revision; but the Gary Cooper poster was deleted also? Do we really need such detailed maps in the main Poland article? For example, the previous map about Holocaust locations; I thought just to limit the picture to the most infamous (Auschwitz) that could represent all the death camps, but that necessitates a separate discussion. Morever, the map of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is barely readable/legible due to small text and uniform colouring. Merangs (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

If anything the map of Poland's territorial changes is more relevant than the Holocaust one; even though they are both more important than some Gary Cooper poster raising awareness for some internal political issue. Shoshin000 (talk) 10:23, 29 May 2026 (UTC)