User talk:Piotrus/Archive 20
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
WW interviewee userbox
Hi there, I've been thinking about this for a bit and I think we've got it working. User:scartol has been kind enough to create a userbox for the interviewees of Wikipedia weekly so you can put it on your userpage if you wish. Just copy this code:
{{User:Scartol/ubx/WikWeekGuest|30|http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/09/20/wikipedia-weekly-29-userpiotrus/}}
Which should come out looking like this
| This user was a guest on Episode 30 of Wikipedia Weekly. You can listen here. |
Best, Witty Lama 00:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 33
Great news! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 33 has been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/10/26/wikipedia-weeekly-30/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP (?) 07:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
recruitment
Hi Piotrus
I'm trying to get the Wikipedia:WikiProject History on track and I need some competent support, so I'm trying to recruit some good editors. Greetings Wandalstouring 14:47, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Rodryg Dunin
An article that you have been involved in editing, Rodryg Dunin, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodryg Dunin (2nd Nomination). Thank you. Mindraker 11:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 43 | 22 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Anthony D. Williams, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://webnet.oecd.org/CommServerPers/blogs/participativeweb/archive/2007/09/30/anthony-d-williams.aspx. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 18:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Anthony D. Williams
A tag has been placed on Anthony D. Williams, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per speedy deletion criterion G11.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 18:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I am not certain, though I could make some guesses based on the info in my family tree about who the last known owner's son/grandson is:[1] I'll ask around and let you know if I can find anything. --Elonka 22:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Polish language request
Hello Piotr. I do not speak any Polish, and have just received a message on my talk page that I can't quite understand using machine translation. I think it comes from pl:Wikipedysta:Diabetes, and I think it is a request for an English translation of pl:Kościół z Bączala Dolnego, but I'm not certain. Whatever it is, would you mind replying to them on my behalf and pointing them in the right direction? Thanks a lot ×Meegs 06:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you, Piotr. By the way, I enjoyed your appearance on Wikipedia Weekly, hearing about your research and your use of Wikipedia in teaching. ×Meegs 09:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Moses the Hungarian
In case you're not watching the Hungarian noticeboard: here is a new stub for the title you requested. Cheers, KissL 11:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
lwow dialect
I commented. I think if a page is created on the Ukrainian dialect there should be some way to make it clear which is which. Cheers, Ostap 22:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
DYK October 29
|
On 29 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Little Treaty of Versailles, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Andrew c [talk] 22:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
|
|
On October 31, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Minority Treaties, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
|
|
Did you know? was updated. On October 31, 2007, a fact from the article Pogroms in Ukraine, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
|
|
On November 1, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article German Minority (political party), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Appeal for more updating admins!!Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 44 | 29 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
survey
Hey! I have created a seperate group because, it will be asking question which are different to the existing group. Also, sandy from the foundation said she wanted another group. I have kinda left the project a bit since I have been in the middle of exams but, would love it if you could help to get this cencus which will eventually be asked to all wikimedians rolling. !!!!
Hey! I have the software, all I need is someone with basic php knowlege and, we can get the program running. Once we have that, all you need to do is add the questions and send the survey out! One of the major choices we have to make is send the survey out by email (which will increase the credibility and prevent spamming and vandalism) or, make it open to everyone which will be easier but, will reduce the reliability and will not allow us to choose who answeers the survey. Thank (srry bout the spelling in a rush) cya x Talk to symode09's or How's my driving? 14:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Symode09 (talk • contribs)
re: census
That would be great! Is it possible :s If it is, that would be amazing! Do you know? thanks Talk to symode09's or How's my driving? 15:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
3RR report on you
Hey -- you seem to have inadvertently violated WP:3RR on Kiev Expedition (1018); there was a report on WP:AN3. Just a reminder that that policy covers all reverts in a 24 hour period, not just related ones; technically, your removal of the {{NPOV}} tag was a 4th revert. Anyway, try not to do that again. Mangojuicetalk 17:14, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Your DYK nomination for Dialects of the Polish language was successful
|
|
Did you know? was updated. On November 2, 2007, a fact from the article Dialects of the Polish language, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 00:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Your signature
I don't know if your signature is still the same as the one that you used to sign, for instance, this edit, but I think it is. Your signature is liable to cause massive problems when it is parsed inside templates, because it contains the raw character |. As it stands, it will corrupt any template it is parsed inside! Can I therefore humbly request, mostly for your own benefit, that you change your signature code from:
<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus| Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub>
to:
<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus| Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ]]{{!}}[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub>
You might not at first be able to spot the single change, so I've bolded it. By replacing the pipe character with its templated equivalent ({{!}} was created for precisely this purpose) the appearance of your signature is completely unchanged, but it will no longer corrupt templates wherever it is included. Many thanks, Happy‑melon 12:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)
 Issue XX (October 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
|
What is Tag & Assess MMVII? We'd better explain. A month or so back, we ran a script to list all the articles in categories related to military history. This gave us about 165,000 articles. Some of these are already tagged and assessed as military history; some are military history but not yet tagged and assessed; some are not military history articles at all. This huge project — working thorough 165,000 articles — is called Tag & Assess 2007. To make it manageable, the list has been broken down into 330 ranges each of 500 articles. This is where you can help. Just... adopt-a-range from the available worklists then keep track of your tally on participants' list. The tagging is easy, just follow the simple instructions. Afterwards, as our way of thanking you, you'll be presented with service awards and barnstars based on the number of articles you process. Remember... the ranges are broken down into sub-sections of ten articles, so you work through them at twenty or thirty articles a day if you wish. To make Tag & Assess 2007 a success, we need your help. Please sign up now. Thanks. | ||
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | ||
Delivered by grafikbot 15:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Massacre of Uman
Hi Piotrus: User TShilo12 (talk · contribs) asked me a question about Massacre of Uman and perhaps someone here can help him out. The qustion he asks is: "I just listened to a program of Gavriel Aryeh Sanders' (http://www.gavrielsanders/com/) on Uman, and went and looked up the city article, and found a link to this article, which seems to have no references and a lot of weaselwording. I don't know whose attention it would be best to bring this to, to effect some improvement, so I'm hoping that by bringing it to your attention, that you will know whom best to contact." Please contact User:TShilo12 if you are able to help him. Thank you, IZAK 05:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On November 6, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Osuchy, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
We need more updaters! Please help! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Re: Lithuanian vs. Polish names again
I beg your pardon? I've been patient and cooperative for ages. To no avail, Lokyz and M.K. still leave talk page discussions when it's their turn to provide sources. Time to use their ways. They want to add post-1918 names to people who died in 19th century - fine with me. However, let me have the liberty to add Polish names to articles on people who really used them. Especially that there's plenty of sources to support that. If M.K. and Lokyz still decide to revert sourced edits - it's their choice and their vandalism, not mine. I source my edits. //Halibutt 22:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nazi Lithuanian poster.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Nazi Lithuanian poster.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 34
zOMG! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 34 has been released, and it's the biggest panel in quite a while!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/11/03/wikipedia-weekly-34-aka-fundraiser/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 05:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
User page
Czesc Piotrus, jak sie masz? I made a little fix before noticing the note at the top of the page saying "please do not edit this page" - so I shall suggest it here as instructed. "In August '05 I begun studying for PhD at University of Pittsburgh, Department of Sociology, looking at the impact of changes in communication technology on evolution of political systems." should read "In August '05 I begun studying for a PhD at the University of Pittsburgh Department of Sociology, looking at the impact of changes in communication technology on the evolution of political systems.". If you're wondering, I was nosing at the talk pages of all the editors who have made lots of featured articles. Keep up the great work with those. Neil ☎ 14:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Za panskim pozwoleniem, mam sporzadzony ten zadanie (and how is my Polish? I'm trying to learn) Neil ☎ 18:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for the impressive expansion of the article. I would like to edit it slightly paying attention to transcription of several places and names. In particular, do you know the English or Russian for Bogowieszczeńsk? Could it be Blagoveshchensk? Goudzovski 16:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Franciszek Rychnowski
Hello, I came across pl:Franciszek Rychnowski, which has a huge number of interwiki links to practically blank pages. I know you do a lot of translations from Polish, and thought you might be able to do a translation of this to English, and also add any information to the many interwiki on any other languages you speak (they could probably all be speedy-deleted as they are). If it's interesting at all, or if he seems notable enough; I'm not sure why it was so widely linked. Rigadoun (talk) 20:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject:Pirates
If you have some time, it would be nice if you were to join WikiProject:Pirates CSG & PocketModels. I see that you have added an image to the Pirates of the Spanish Main page. Very few people edit on this page and its related pages, and I would like to get something done about it. Please reply and I'll give you the Project page, if you're interested. SpeedyReturn 14:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, well thanks anyway! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SpeedyReturn (talk • contribs) 14:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On November 9, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 10TP, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
|
|
On November 9, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jan Czerski, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? was updated. On 9 November, 2007, a fact from the article Bronze and Iron Age Poland, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Carabinieri 18:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Grigory Nikolayevich Potanin
Sorry, I have actually never heard of him., But knowing what we do about the Russian way of dealing with others ethnicities, it wouldn't surprise me if he was Ukrainian. I am learning about this phenomenon at the Anton Golovaty talk page. Ostap 19:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 35
Let us rejoyce! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 35 has been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/11/11/episode-35-secretly-famous/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 01:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 45 | 5 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 46 | 12 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? was updated. On 13 November, 2007, a fact from the article Bonawentura Niemojowski, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Józef Piłsudski
Hello Piotrus. I noted that you nominated the article Józef Piłsudski for Featured article. How can I nominate an article for FA status? You can reply on my talk page. Regards, Masterpiece2000 09:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply. Regards, Masterpiece2000 09:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Bohdan Urbankowski
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Bohdan Urbankowski, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Docg 13:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
OK
Done. Turgidson (talk) 05:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Coats of arms to be uploaded
Dear Piotr:
I just uploaded w:commons:Image:Coats of arms in Kurozweki palace.PNG using one of your pics. Nevertheless I believe this one is not one of your latest works. May you tell me about what castle/palace/museum was you talking about?
Thank you for always remember me.
--Gustavo (talk) 06:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Polish government-in-exile in London
Hi Piotrus. I've been writing an article on John Gouriet, a British anti-communist campaigner, which might benefit from a quick look. I have a source which says he received the Polish Gold Cross of Merit, and was the sole British Guard of Honour at the unveiling of the Katyn memorial in September 1976. I'm guessing that that both were the doing of the Polish Government-in-exile in London rather than the Communist government of Poland at the time. Do you know if present-day Poland recognises the awards given by the government-in-exile? The only Katyn memorial unveiled in 1976 was in Gunnersbury in west London, which would fit. Sam Blacketer (talk) 22:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? was updated. On 18 November, 2007, a fact from the article Salt Road, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Berlinka
Link do http://www.dk22.net jest jak najbardziej prawidłowy. Proszę wejść na teks stronie do zakładki "kilka słów wstępu". To powinno wyjaśnić sprawę. Malarz pl (talk) 22:35, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Костюхнівка?
[2] Ostap It is in Volyn oblast. (talk) 23:48, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
It will be Костюхновка (Kostyukhnovka) in Russian, Костюхнівка (Kostyukhnivka) in Ukrainian. See [3], [4] Alex Bakharev (talk) 00:35, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 19 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Philomathes, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Cheers, Daniel 11:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Kalera22
Hello Piotrus! Hope you are well. Can you do me a favour and leave a nice note in Polish on User:Kalera22's user page about image uploads? (S)he seems to have been having trouble figuring out what is and isn't acceptable, and I wonder if it's a language problem. Thanks a million! Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- A good question. Let's see if the welcome helps. If not, I'll put my thinking hat on. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Christopher Berwick
An article that you have been involved in editing, Christopher Berwick, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Berwick. Thank you. Joyous! | Talk 23:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 47 | 19 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Częstochowa
Hi, Piotrus. I've been wracking my brains in which place-of-birth category to put Michel Kervaire. I could not find Częstochowa in Category:People by city in Poland. But maybe this should be listed in Category:People from Silesia, or one of its subcats? Sorry, I'm a bit lost here, and I don't want to make a historical faux pas — could you please help? Thanks. Turgidson (talk) 19:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
red link
I would comment, but the link you left is bad. Ostap (talk) 05:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
bereza kartuska
Actually, concentration camp gets more google book results, for what its worth: 49 to 1. Ostap (talk) 05:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- This is a tough one. I suppose it depends on many factors, and obviously the definition of cc has changed. Nonetheless, the sources seem to use it. I will defer the desicion to pursue name change to Bandurist. Ostap (talk) 06:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Pomoc
Czy mógłbyś mi pomóc w tłumaczeniu biografii Lucjana Malinowskiego z polskiego na angielski? Byłbym bardzo wzdzięczny. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavl6 (talk • contribs) 12:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Bereza
I translated some material and posted it in the talk page of Bereza for your purousal and comments Bandurist (talk) 14:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
OK, thanks for the informations! See you! FabioXIV (talk) 21:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Arbitration
Dzien dobry, Piotr,
I figure as a veteran of these types of battles you would be the one to ask: how long until we know if they've opened the arbitration case on Anonimu? And how long will the proceedings (er, "lengthy litigation") probably last? I'm eager to get the whole thing over with...K. Lásztocskatalk 17:28, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 22 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Berlinka, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Your questions
... You asked a few questions at my candidates page. I'll try to wrap these up tomorrow, but likely they might need an extra few hours beyond that to do them justice and give good consideration. I thought I'd drop you a courtesy note "in case" so you'd know :)
Best,
FT2 (Talk | email) 06:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I was just wondering if you had time to take another look at pre-dreadnought battleship and see if we have addressed the comments you made in the featured article discussion. Thanks! The Land (talk) 21:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Polish POV moves again
In 2005, User:Lysy had moved articles created under English names to Polish ones, claiming diacritics now possible [5] [6] [7]. At Talk:Swantipolk II of Pomerania, I questioned this, then later researched and added sources, and moved back to the original English names. Yet, you moved them to Mściwój I of Gdańsk (a new version), Mściwój II of Pomerania, Świętopełk II of Pomerania, using your trademark taunt try WP:RM first [8]
PP, it's you who has to try to find some English sources to back up a WP:RM to Polish spellings first - after you duly moved back the articles and fixed all links, e.g. at Sambor II of Tczew. -- Matthead DisOuß 10:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Translation of Ukrainian article
День па́м'яті же́ртв голодомо́ру та політи́чних репре́сій — національний захід, що відбувається четвертої суботи листопада.
The day of memory of the victims of the Holodomor and political repressions - a national measure which is marked on the fourth Saturday of November.
Запроваджено Президентом України Леонідом Кучмою (Указ № 1310/98 від 26 листопада 1998 року; Указом № 1181/2000 від 31 жовтня 2000 року до Указу внесено зміни).
Introduced by the president of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma (Order # 1310/98 of November 26, 1998; Directive #1181/2000 of October 31, 2000 to the decree. were introduced changes
В Указі сказано: «На підтримку ініціативи громадських організацій, Міністерства культури і мистецтв України, Державного комітету України у справах релігій, Державного комітету інформаційної політики, телебачення і радіомовлення України постановляю: установити в Україні День пам'яті жертв голодомору та політичних репресій, який відзначати щорічно у четверту суботу листопада».
The decree states: "In order to support the initiative of community organizations, the Ministry of Culture and Arts of Ukraine, the State committee of Ukraine regarding religious matters, the State committee of informational politics, television and radio of Ukraine have postulated: to establish in Ukraine a day of memory of the victims of the Holodomor and political repression, which will be marked yearly on the fourth Saturday of November.
Протягом усієї історії радянської України від штучних голодів і репресій, метою яких було зламання національного руху, загинуло за різними оцінками 10—20 мільйонів людей. Throughout the whole history of Soviet Ukraine from artificial famines and repressions, the aim of which was to break the national movement, have died according to different calculations 10-20 million people.
Bandurist (talk) 23:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
siberian
Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Aleksandr Herzen Zemlya i Volya. Yes I remember 'zbiegostwo'. I know serfs were running away from Russia around the whole periphery. Unfortunately I have little interest in reading/writing historical articles now. `'Míkka>t 02:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Серно-Соловьевич, Николай Александрович Nikolai Serno-Solovyevich, Мишиха Mishikha `'Míkka>t 21:45, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Witcher
ISBN of the upcoming American edition is 978-0316029186. ISBN of the UK edition is 978-0575082441 (paperback) and 978-0575077836 (hardcover). As for copying from the Witcher Wiki to Wikipedia - sure, why not. Ausir (talk) 03:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 25 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ostrów Agreement, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Balloonman (talk) 03:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Masterpiece2000
Hello Piotrus. I looked at your contributions and I must say, you have done a great job for Wikipedia. Wikipedia needs contributors like you. I agree that Wikipedia is still very incomplete. I joined Wikipedia on October 1, 2007. I have made over 2000 edits and created 50 articles. However, I still find so many missing articles. Can you explain to me about Polski Słownik Biograficzny? I also saw User:Piotrus/List of Poles. Are they renowned people? Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 12:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Matthead's comment
I am unsure of policy. Going over WP:NPA I see
"stating "Your statement is a personal attack..." is not itself a personal attack."
My comment was off-topic, thankyou for responding on my talk page.
The commenter in question ( User:Matthead ) has already been warned in another episode on making personal attacks. -does his claim that Józef Piłsudski article has NPOV-problems have any bearing at all?
--Keerllston 13:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Witam serdecznie, Czy chciałbyś może i mógłbyś sprawdzić czy w artykule o Iłłakowiczowej nie popełniłam błędów językowych? Artykuł jest dość obszerny... Starałam się pisać poprawnie, ale na pewno coś napisałam niezgodnie z gramatyką. To jest tłumaczenie z pl:Irena Iłłakowiczowa. Czy mógłbyś to zrobić? Pozdrawiam, Zulanka (talk) 15:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for the information about Polish Biographical Dictionary. I didn't know about it. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 02:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Louis de funes les grandes vacances poster.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Louis de funes les grandes vacances poster.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ikit (talk) 11:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Those links might help
Catalog of Pictures of Polish art collections looted by Germany( located on Wikicommons): [11]
Overall the scale of German destruction and looting of Polish culture and art is immense, far beyond the ability of a single editor to document. It would require a huge project on Wikiscale to describe. --Molobo (talk) 23:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Could you please be a bit more explicit in what 'odd sentences' are unreferenced, and what you mean about the paragraphs. Other than that, I think I have undertaken the changes you have required. Thanks.--Bulleid Pacific (talk) 00:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Please see the improvements made as per suggestions. Cheers, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 13:41, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 48 | 26 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Have you re-reviewed the article? Please remember that it is important to revisit articles commented upon in order to ascertain whether or not changes noted have been implemented. Otherwise, is there anything else that needs doing? Thanks. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 23:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
New triple crown edition
I've got a spiffy new deluxe triple crown and would love to give some copies out. You probably qualify for this if you feel like it. Just write up your nomination; I've been waiting for months. :) Best, DurovaCharge! 00:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Actually I meant the new Napoleonic crown: 5 or more entries in each category. You're one of the few editors who probably qualifies. :) DurovaCharge! 00:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Imperial Napoleonic triple crown
Your Imperial Napoleonic Majesty, how do you find time for it all? DurovaCharge! 04:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus. I did some minor copyedit to the article by adding commas after dates. I believe these were all appropriate but please review. Wishing you well with FA quest. Rosiestephenson (talk) 06:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Your input appreciated
Can you help out in dealing with this? [12] (→[13] [14]) Clearly intended as WP:POINT with only the edit war in mind. --Poeticbent talk 16:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)→
Something to aim for
The Alexander the Great edition triple laurel crown. You and Awadewit are the closest to earning it. Threshold is 15 standard crowns. :) Happy editing! DurovaCharge! 21:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Gdansk-Vote-Notice
What do you think of my edits to {{Gdansk-Vote-Notice}}?—Random832 21:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'll do that a bit later - i'm leaving work now - or you could do it.—Random832 22:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 28 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Uprising of Polish political exiles in Siberia, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Royalbroil 22:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
GA
Hi, could you please take a look on this Adolf Opálka can this be a good article (after copy-edit and some minor cleanup) or it needs more expansion? ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 23:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC) "I nominated it for GA, so I will see what happens. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 11:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Piłsudski
Hi. I noticed the article is up for review (I'm really in no position to comment if it's up to standards, but it is surely a magnificent work). However, I remember that two issue I raised is still unanswered - namely, his meeting with Constantin Stere and his presence in Stere's novel. I would include a summary of this in the article (with the cited reference), since it is a relevant detail of his years as a deportee, if you tell me it is okay. But, tell me, have you considered a separate article on his cultural legacy, where such info could be collected separately and perhaps detailed? Something to ponder. Best, Dahn (talk) 20:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Allow me to expand on my suggestion. What I had in mind was a very brief mention in the main article: them meeting could go into the bio section (basically, as: "where he met the Bessarabian-born Narodnik activist Constantin Stere"), and the rest in the "Legacy" section ("He is a character in Stere's novel etc." - no more than a short phrase). I believe him being a character in a book is a pretty important detail (I'll leave aside the info about the two of them meeting in Bucharest during the 1930s). If need be, I can expand on this if and when a separate "Legacy" article will be created - for which there is not much more I could contribute myself :). What do you think?
- If I get the time and snap out of my usual articles, I'll look into the article some more and perhaps comment on the FAC. For now, it looks quite intimidating: the entire internal political life of interwar Poland is rather mysterious to me, so I could never actually tell if the article is complete (unless I start researching the period). But, if something should catch my eye, I'll add my input. Dahn (talk) 20:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Piotrus, they met as young people and were in exile together - I would picture such meetings, with Stere and others, should get a brief mention in a complete article. I can accept the "many novels" argument, but not listing at least some of the authors (and perhaps novels) in the article is below the "comprehensive" aspect of FAC requirements. One could easily conceive of a short paragraph with "He was a character in novels by x, y, z, Stere etc.", and I would picture it would be easily to expand from there in the separate article I proposed. Now, note that I am not pushing this particular info: I am asking that for the article to grow to the point where it at least mentions the aspects, Stere or no Stere. When I added to Christian Rakovsky, I took the article to the point where all such issues are covered, instead of artificially reducing it to include only the very basic info. Wouldn't this info also be relevant enough for an article that is not actually that big? Dahn (talk) 20:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- I was pointing to a larger problem: the pats that I can add to such subjects is quite limited. If I accept your argument that there are other things just as relevant (and I do accept it), then it means that: a. preferably, such aspects should make it into the article (summarized there, and perhaps expanded in "daughter" articles) - and, in any case, that there are valid concerns about the article meeting FA criteria when it does not at least touch them; b. one would have to look into all similar info that is currently missing in the article.
- So, I have the info about Stere to contribute. In the usual case, I could already glue it to something existing in the article - i.e. the article should already name people he was in touch with as a young man, the article should already mention, in passing, films, books, whatnots in which he was a character. To match the relevancy of the info on Stere, and not just drop it in there, I would have to search and research each and every one of those aspects, an intricate process which, I believe, should already have been dealt with before this was up for FA status. This is what I proposed in my earliest intervention on the talk page there, and the article has not moved much in that sense...
- Considering that his legacy is bound to be immense, I proposed a separate article on it, where the missing info would be detailed without space concerns. Although this also implies that it should be summarized in the main article - because related articles should not be understood as independent ones, but should detail what is already touched in the main text. this also means that it would not actually be a split - the legacy section would not be moved, just linked to a main article.
- IMO, it would be a shame for the article to pass FAC in a rush, and considered superior when it is not actually complete. I don't want to take too much of your time, and I understand that you have many other things on your mind - we can pick this up at some other point, regardless of the FAC result, and hopefully work on improving the article together. Dahn (talk) 21:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- I cannot possibly create an article for one piece of info... On the other hand, consider that you yourself told me "He was a character of many, many novels and short stories, particularly in Poland." Shouldn't this info, and at least a short mention of some of the most important authors of such pieces, make it into the main article? Sure, subarticles are okay, but they expand and detail info present in the main article, they don't just come out of nowhere.
- Let me show you what I mean. I'm currently working on expanding the Ion Luca Caragiale article - see my sandbox, and note the last section and the red link to the main article. The section is some paragraphs longs, and the text simply lists some of the more important aspects - since Piłsudski, unlike Caragiale, was not an author (and therefore the whole part about influence on literary styles does not apply), I would picture that a similar section in his article would perhaps not much longer than it is currently. The main article linked in my sandbox is here - it expands the info in the other sandbox, deatils it, places it in context, and provides additional details.
- I agree that wikipedia is not a book (though I also agree that it is not paper...). This, to me, means that it should not constitute a text detailing everything; but it should be a text mentioning on all important aspects, regardless of whether they are or aren't discussed in a biography. Dahn (talk) 21:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Certainly, the subarticle doesn't need to be created, but the more relevant details need to be summarized in the article. As I have said, I cannot picture a brief overview of these issues taking more than a few paragraphs. On the other hand, I always thought that articles on the basis of Early life of Józef Piłsudski are a very bad idea - since they work on the utopian idea that one could separate part of one's life from the rest (and, in any case, very little, if anything, should be left to subjective interpretations of what belongs in the article and what in the subarticle - this is bound to be left unsolved the "Early life..." pattern of articles, which also have the risk of turning into unencyclopedic quagmires). Dahn (talk) 22:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
What I keep suggesting above is that some of the most important portrayals, if not some of their most important authors, need to be referred to in a short section in the text (in the "legacy" section methinks). Not illustrated with images in the article (I never suggested that), and certainly not listing the likes of photos and postcards. A possible subarticle would expand and reference in detail, not take the reader out of the blue. It could have images of the paintings themselves (and postcards, if we need to). This should also imply that specific references are added for this part of JP's legacy. Nobody has to (could?) list all portrayals, but there are presumably ones by major artists/writers that would deserve a mention.
It would seem like descriptions of him as "fascist", "semi-fascist" or "pre-fascist" are widespread in mainstream literature. (Plus, even if when that literature is a Marxist POV (Gramsci etc.), it would still be relevant enough.) This should gain at least a brief mention somewhere in the text, and not be moved to some other place entirely - merely expanded there, if need be. Not only because it is something important about JP, but also because the articles should not contradict each other, and should complete each other. Dahn (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- And I disagree: a mention of this aspect could easily form a paragraph in the article, with arguments for and con. Not because it is true, but because it is relevant: there is nothing preventing you from sourcing assessments that debunk this notion, and, indeed, expanding on the whole issue somewhere else. You could in fact also mention that this was the preferred definition in Marxist (and especially Leninist) circles - a google books reference (International Trotskyism, 1929-1985: A Documented Analysis of the Movement) indicates that this was Totsky's vocal take on the matter. As I have said before: I don't think that this take on the matter is true. Not only do I not find JP a fascist, I also entertain no notion that he was "detestable". But it does seem to be a very important viewpoint on JP. In fact, the entire argument you make makes me wish even more that this were at least referred to in the article. Dahn (talk) 01:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Newspapers?
Have you read no newspapers since before 1945? How can the partition of Germany after its defeat in WWII be considered the result of internal factional differences with no involvement of the four major powers that invaded and occupied all of Germany in that year as part of the most violent war that ever happened? Michael Hardy (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK (Irena Iłłakowicz)
|
|
On 29 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Irena Iłłakowicz, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Spebi 08:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Re: GA nominee Adolf Opalka
Thanks for the review. I withdrawn the nomination until I expand the article, there is a plenty of information that can be in the out distance and in the last battle including background. No, as far as I know, Out Distance was a pure SOE action without the czech translation, or I don't know about it. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 22:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Copyright question
Hi, I am trying to determine a copyright for this image [15] it's little bit difficult. It was drawn by a boy who died in 1944 in the concentration camp. It was published in the magazine Vedem and the original of the painting is in the Yadvashem museum in the Israel. Could you please help me with that ? Thanks. (Please respond here [16]. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 15:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
![[15]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Petr-Ginz-drawing.jpg){kind=link}
- I wouldn't to mind it at all but this image is supposed to be deleted. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 19:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- I read it some time ago, very good article, I voted definitely for support. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 20:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- I wanted to sort it out so that picture could be a featured on the main page. Or maybe featured. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 13:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
JP
I've read it, and I must congratulate you for all the effort and energy you've put into it. I don't feel I can review it because it would take me simply ages to look up all the English sources, which is the only way to do the job properly. I hope the hostility of a minority of reviewers towards you and the article does not distract Raul from the large number of supports you have. If you ignore their off-topic embroideries and address what you can of any substantive points raised, you will have done your job as nominator and main editor.
I notice that a certain dear old king is on the front page today and am delighted to see that so far the article remains largely intact. Wonders will never cease! What an incredibly tricky article it was to work on!
qp10qp 16:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Polish occupation
Hi Piotrus, my vote concerned only that redirect. I am quite liberal regarding redirects in general and do not see much harm in their titles. On the other hand, any use of the term "Polish occupation" in the actual text of articles should be made NPOV and referenced. Tankred 19:40, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
re: Administrative division of Polish territories after partitions#Russian partition
What sort of stubs are you talking about? I will try to help if I can. Ostap 20:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 36
Hey! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 36 has been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/11/30/wikipedia-weekly-36/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 04:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
Re:
Yes, nobody here consider it as an occupation. It seems it is an effort to lower the significance of one party and spread it to others too. See this [17], it is an undiscussed move without any rationale. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 12:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 20:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)
|
Issue XXI (November 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New featured lists: New featured portals: New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | ||
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 04:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
FAC template edits
Doesn't look as though it's going to pass this time, anyway. Tony (talk) 13:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
ArbCom
Hi Piotrus, I noticed that you opposed my arbitration candidacy on the basis that I had "avoided most questions". I'm just a bit confused - are you sure you've got the right person? I'd answered all questions by the time voting started, although two new ones have come in overnight. Rebecca 22:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
WTF!
Where'd this go!?? The deletionists also merged 1632 Tech Manual into the series article last month sans notice, as normal. I figure that needs appealed, but was going away on vaction... good thing I waited too... my internet availability was essentially nil... interestingly much-frustrated withdrawal symptoms, I can tell you! <G> // FrankB 08:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC) re:this answer Was deleted (11:42, January 31, 2007 Radiant! (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Baen's Bar" (online community with severe lack of google hits (not to mention sources), hence A7)) and than the content was saved by yours truly by adding it to Baen Books, from which it appears it was removed later in September when about half of the content was deleted!. Will you restore it? I have enough trouble dealing with trolls elsewhere... I'd be happy to support you on talk page, of course.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Both these illustrate that the web notability guideline is being applied far too strictly... both are used to unclutter "side" matters that are otherwise important in the body of encyclopedia articles. I think it should be fought out as a double appeal on the afds... That damn process (with it's lack of notification to interested editors) makes me want to Bust some people and raises my blood pressure like nothing else around here! Infantile in a word... and yes I appreciate the desire to get rid of junk articles ASAP, but there needs to be a time threshold where a different process gets invoked... including sucking in people working the pages that reference the page in a link. The current process doesn't track THAT aspect at all, and putting the 1632 Tech Manual in the series article has really complicated fixing up that page... which should now, imho, be expanded as a general synopsis of the plotlines (ala Horatio Hornblower), not cluttered with something that had sufficient material as a seperate page in the first place, and wasn't written as a webpage article in the second place.
I'll look at Baen Books again, but I think you'll find I already put much of that back, albeit in different context, when I edited the page about a month ago. But yeah, I'll take it on and look over things again— but later... RL is demanding my next 5-6 hours. Cheers! // FrankB 18:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Both these illustrate that the web notability guideline is being applied far too strictly... both are used to unclutter "side" matters that are otherwise important in the body of encyclopedia articles. I think it should be fought out as a double appeal on the afds... That damn process (with it's lack of notification to interested editors) makes me want to Bust some people and raises my blood pressure like nothing else around here! Infantile in a word... and yes I appreciate the desire to get rid of junk articles ASAP, but there needs to be a time threshold where a different process gets invoked... including sucking in people working the pages that reference the page in a link. The current process doesn't track THAT aspect at all, and putting the 1632 Tech Manual in the series article has really complicated fixing up that page... which should now, imho, be expanded as a general synopsis of the plotlines (ala Horatio Hornblower), not cluttered with something that had sufficient material as a seperate page in the first place, and wasn't written as a webpage article in the second place.
- On further mature reflection...
-
- If it won't create political problems, suggest relinking the history of the deleted page to the current redirect, or...
- Can you grab the pre-delete content of Baen's Bar and put it here or here so I can see what's going on, before and after. [maybe I should stand for admin! Like I don't have enough trouble keeping up and donating time!]
- Should help build any appeal too. At least I can access the Tech Manual stuff, as it was just made into an redirect.
- In the meantime, I'll have a stiff drink later and wade back into the morass of wikipedia guidelines for a refresher— the deletionists do love their "A7"'s and such—
don't their black disrespectful-of-other-peoples-interests-and-time-spent-hearts, even though I'm likely to puke from the ordeal. Thanks! // FrankB 18:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Update, FYI
re: Baen Books, et al.
Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 49 | 3 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 4 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kazimierz Pużak, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Carabinieri 13:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Re:Congratulations on your legislative honors
Thank you for your message. To tell you the truth, it was a total surprise. I thought that I would be talking to Senator McClintock about some Medal of Honor recommendations so, I went dressed as usual and without my family. I don't think that I deserve such an honor, but I am happy that I can share it with the community. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I've started a discussion there. I've very confused by your responses so far to my removal of what are clearly spammed links, where there's a clear conflict of interest. Even if these links were not spammed with a coi, they still are pretty far from anything that meets WP:EL. --Ronz 19:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I'm assuming by your responses that you still don't understand what I mean by "spam", and I've said as much to Stustu12 in User_talk:Stustu12#.22Controversy.22. --Ronz (talk) 04:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Please take your BITE and AGF accusations to a proper forum, such as WP:WQA. I've started a discussion on the COI issues at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:Stustu12. --Ronz (talk) 23:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Could you ask
User:Gene Nygaard to be more civil? I asked him to stop using my name in incivil edit summaries (like this one, or this one, or this one), but in his reply he threatened me: If you continue to deliberately missort items, corrective action will have to be pursued. Since I see you were involved a month ago with trying to teach him civility, I'd appreciate if you could look into this. We must maintain WP:CIV across the project, or it will go down in flames as the Usenet did. Thanks, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Piotr,
- Thanks for your note. I agree that using you name in edit summaries like that isn't very nice. However, my question is: why are you sorting like that? It's just going to make native English-speakers confused when they can't find the person they are looking for on the category page. I understand why it would be sorted differently in a different language edition, but this is English Wikipedia, and we only have the 26 letters. People aren't going to look for accented letters further down the category page: they won't even think of it.
- Gene has had some civility issues in the past, and I agree his note is curt. That said, Gene's already been warned about his civility, and I'm not sure a note reminding him of civility (again) will help in this case. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Regardless of what I think about the sorting, you're a good user and you don't deserve incivility for politely asking that your name not be used in edit summaries like that. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- No matter on what Gene thinks, Piotrus made his edits in good faith and this threats [18] are highly uncivil. Mentioning his name in summaries is clear personal attack. Imagine that everyone would do that Fixing deliberate Firsfron of Ronchester's typo. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 10:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Intelligence (and special operations)
I'd be delighted to have some cooperation. See my response on the Military History project talk page, and then look at the structure on my userpage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hcberkowitz (talk • contribs) 02:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
An exchange of help
Greetings Piotrus
You left some comments on my user page (Morels) that if I needed help with anything to get in contact. About a year and a bit later, I'm asking. I'm a frequent Wikipedia visitor and reader. Very central to my research needs.
Last night while reading a book I checked out Wikipedia, found no listing. In fact, no listing on Google either and realized I had in my hand a perfect Wikipedia entry (although a short one). However I couldn't remember how to start a page. So followed various help links and ended up at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Your_first_article.
The essence of its instructions is to search Wikipedia first (very wise) and on the "no page found" page there's a link to start a page. However, when clicking it I found it did no such thing. Instead it caused a PHP file to be downloaded. Opening it up, it seemed to be a sensible piece of computer code, but I'm not a PHP user, don't know how to make use of this object.
So I then looked to the discussion page of "Your_first_article". However, I found I wasn't the first to discover the non-functionality. So last night I added my own comment. This morning I dug around a bit more and re-discovered the user page you had created for me more than a year ago and your offer of help.
Wait, there's more. When I went to your user page I found some oddity to its display. It probably displays just fine with Internet Explorer on a Windows PC, but I'm using Safari, the default browser on this Mac. There's obviously something very wrong with your page coding when displayed on a Mac. I can send you screenshots if you like.
If you care to contact me by eMail I can be reached at <morley@boxbe.com>. A note about Boxbe if you've not heard of it. It's a service that allows me to publish an eMail address out in the open without fear of becoming spammed. I'll get a message from Boxbe that I have a message in quarantine. If I release it we can exchange eMails from this point forward without concern.
Kind regards,
Morley Chalmers (talk) 16:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
To download a php page you must have somehow gone for some 'save this page/link/etc.' option from your browser (usually available through right click or some key shortcut). What you should do is - aftr searching for a page - to left-click on the red link (like this), which will take you to an empty page with that title, which you can fill with text (note: creating new pages is disabled for non-logged in editors). Personally I find Wikipedia:Tutorial a useful tool for starting one's adventure with editing Wikipedia - you may want to try that, too. As for my userpage, it looks fine in Mozilla series of browsers, I am suprised it doesn't work with Safari.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. I've since discovered the download happens whenever I click on a red link. The "create a page" link is indeed red. I've just now retraced my steps and repeated my search and found the Search Results page has changed, this time without a "create a page" link at all. Also loaded up Firefox and found that one is similar but even more condensed. Have grabbed screenshots if you want them. Will explore Wikipedia:Tutorial tonight.
Meanwhile I've used Firefox to go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus. One problem is solved, but the other remains. Let me know if you want to follow up on this.
Kind regards, Morley Chalmers (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps you have some download manager that confuses something within red link treating them as download request? I have never heard of a similar problem before.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
The only thing I can think of is PithHelmet, an advertising blocker. However there's red links in Firefox which doesn't work with PithHelmet. I'll disable PithHelmet tonight and test again. I also have the Camino, Flock and Internet Explorer browsers and will test with them. This is a very simple standalone setup, a home computer networked to nothing other than the Internet.
Kind regards, Morley Chalmers (talk) 21:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Insight on Warsaw Uprising
Piotrus, I posted some comments here; perhaps you can offer insight. I have posted the same inquiries to the other users involved. Thanks, --Daysleeper47 (talk) 21:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Categories
You are welcome. By the way neostalinist User:Soman wants to delete category:Stalinism in Poland. Is English Wikipedia refered to a US code law, wchich prohibits to propagate totalitarian ideologies like nazism and communism? Mathiasrex (talk) 19:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Clan Wolf
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Clan Wolf, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Clan Wolf. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Once again, I wish to highlight the fact that your suggestions as per November 27 have been undertaken. Please return to the article and re-review it: "Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed". Thank you. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 02:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
"Perfection" protection
Thanks for your generous help. Nihil novi (talk) 05:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Nomination
No, I did not find your nomination improper; I found his usage of the reasoning that multiple nominations are improper as invalid itself. My exception was because that objection (POV) was the only one that had anything to do with an article, instead of abstract issues. I do see how it could have come across as the opposite, though, so I'll clarify that. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 06:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Twin projects
Hi, I was thinking about the idea of twin projects, something like twin cities, it might look like this [19] on the project's page, as a symbolic support. What do you think about that ? ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 23:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey Piotrus, what did you think of this edit? I saw that there were reverts, and tried to help clarify that it is one guys opinion. And that reason just makes me laugh: "seems too high ". Ha! Thats what you call scholarly! Ostap (talk) 06:36, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Dziekuje za zaproszenie bracie Polaku, Wielka Polska na wieki ;) ! / Thank you for invitation Polish brother, Great Poland for ever ;) !
--Greetings [[User:Krzyzowiec|Krzyzowiec]] (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I've noticed there were some problems with the copyright of the image and it's still using the Non-free film screenshot tag even though according to Copyright_law_of_the_European_Union The rights of film producers last for fifty years after the communication of the film to the public and The rights of broadcasting organisations last for fifty years after the first transmission of a broadcast. Therefore the claim over there by Alex Spade: copyright may be claimed by Transit Film GmbH in Germany dosn't have any basis whatsoever. Another thing is that: what would be the appropriate tag for cases like that , "PD-EU-brodcasting-film-50"...I think it would be important to sort this thing out and appropriate PD license tag should be created in case one doesn't exist for cases like that. Since you have much more experience on WP and you are the uploader of the image, if yu could look into this and help sorting it out would be greatly appreciated. The bottom line, there are so many images that this would cover and could be used on WP without any free use rationale since evrything related is in pubic domain in EU currently up to 1957. thanks.--Termer (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
PS. it would be also important to point out that "the rights of authors" lasting 70 years after the death of the author or 70 years after publication in case anonymous work doesn't mean that an image is copyrighted and not in PD. "The rights of authors" do not ever limit the distribution of work unless the author owns the copyright to the work. It is common practice that work created under employment, the authors do not hold the copyright. Instead "the rights of authors" cover the right to be listed as the original author of the work etc. at the time when copyright holder has the rights for distribution. Since the distribution rights of Transit Film GmbH in Germany for the image under discussion expired in 1989 (1939+50), the image is in PD. The only thing needed is the appropriate PD tag to cover it. --Termer (talk) 22:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Skąd Litwini wracali itp.
Szablon odzwierciedla tylko bardzo szczególną wizję historii przedstawianą tutaj przez Litwinów. Co do sejmów RON to trzeba stworzyć osobny szablon...Mathiasrex (talk) 02:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 10 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Żeligowski's Mutiny, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Royalbroil 04:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Off topic ?
Traditionally, we don't enforce our own remedies (and try to stay out of the enforcement process). I'd suggest that leaving a note on WP:AN asking for more eyes on that discussion would be the better approach here. Kirill 04:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Your assistance would be appreciated
May I ask you to please take a look at a contentious issue regarding the name of the article here, which has been lingering for months. I thought the general policy is “the simpler, the better”, without fuelling controversy just for the sake of edit warring. --Poeticbent talk 17:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with your reasoning. What do you think about this? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. The above POV is unverifiable without English translation. --Poeticbent talk 19:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Another useful link
(You wrote)
A discussion about an editor you should be pretty familiar with (Cracow) issue: here.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, I'd like to express my opinion in this regard following ArbCom ruling listed under Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Piotrus#Parties_reminded. I'll do it soon. --Poeticbent talk 19:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Do note that I've linked this point at the very top of my complain there.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I see it now. --Poeticbent talk 19:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Do note that I've linked this point at the very top of my complain there.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Mercenaries (BattleTech)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Mercenaries (BattleTech), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Mercenaries (BattleTech). Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Free Worlds League
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Free Worlds League, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Free Worlds League. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
POV
Ciekawe dlaczego artykul o Grabskim i Narodowej Demokracji wyglada zupelnie inaczej niz na Polskiej Wikipedii...
--Greetings [[User:Krzyzowiec|Krzyzowiec]] (talk) 04:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
You involvement with my edits is very appreciated but thank you for not stalking me in future. [20] [21] [22] M0RD00R (talk) 09:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
![[20]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Antisemitic-church-fresco.jpg&curid=14651296&diff=177160507&oldid=177103436){kind=link}
![[21]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Burning_of_Jewish_books.jpg&curid=14651135&diff=177160564&oldid=177101570){kind=link}
![[22]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Santa_nazi_salute.jpg&curid=14649569&diff=177160751&oldid=177082066){kind=link}
Interesting essay
(You wrote)
On your userpage. You may consider categorizing that page with Category:Wikipedia essays. A comment: "by design, our community is forced to accept otherwise unacceptable revisionist viewpoints (providing that they're verifiable)" - we have WP:UNDUE and WP:FRINGE to fight them. Of course, too often what's undue and fringe is in the eye of the beholder - but there's hope yet. Imagine what we could do if we had a few reliable scholars - Polish, German, English - available to stomp down on those trolls with their authority... -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
An article to work on
What about History of Kraków? We have the main section in a pretty good shape from the main article. Some expansion, and we can try to turn this into a GA/FA. What do you think? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback, Piotr. Much appreciated. Good tip about the Category Essays. I’m not sure about the chances of History of Kraków, though. I can almost feel the new, unreasonable requests springing up like mushrooms, demanding that everything be accounted for from the libraries of Vatican, Moscow, Berlin, London, Vilnius, Kiev, Washington and Jerusalem. A lost cause, considering my own limitations and the attitudes of all. --Poeticbent talk 19:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Wikipedia:General sanctions
I doubt that putting the Gdansk matter into the same pile as the more recent ArbCom stuff will really be helpful. It's not a Committee sanction, for one; and I haven't seen it (or at least the sanction-like parts of it) being used in practice within the reasonably recent past. It seems more applicable as an example of how our wiki-constitutional system developed than as something admins need to be aware of at this point. Kirill 20:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Fort Billingsport
I was inspired this morning to whip up the stub from the article in the Inky. While I would like to see Fort Billingsport make DYK, I don't think I have the time this week. --evrik (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and there's this one as well, Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route. --evrik (talk) 22:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok
Ciekawy artykul, gratuluje checi i zaparcia. Sprawa wyglada tak ze w Polsce wszyscy przypisuja Ruchowi Narodowemu tylko antysemityzm a teraz dzieki propagandzie bezmozgich lewakow takze nazizm, faszyzm i Bog wie co jeszcze. Nie mozna powiedziec ze Roman Dmowski nie byl antysemita bo byl ale uwazam ze artykul o nim na Angielskiej Wikipedii zionie lewicowa propaganda gdzie kompletnie zapomina sie o dokonaniach tego czlowieka a zrobil dla Polski nie mniej niz Pilsudski (dla mnie wiecej). To samo z ONR itp. zobacz sobie jak wygladaja artykuly, jak ulotki propagandowe ZSRR z okresu wojny... Moj Angielski nie jest az tak dobry aby przelozyc polska wersje artykulu o Dmowskim ale mysle ze wspolnymi silami dalibysmy rade bo narazie jest to jeden wielki propagandowy tekst... P.S. Jakie masz przekonania polityczne ;)...?! Serdecznie pozdrawiam brata Polaka !
--Greetings [[User:Krzyzowiec|Krzyzowiec]] (talk) 20:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Oczywiscie ze ponad podzialami, nie przyszedlem tu aby pluc na Ciebie bo jestes Pilsudczykiem wiec w zadnym wypadku nie odbieraj tego jako ataki osobiste, tak z ciekawosci spytalem. Co do mnie to Narodowym Radykalizm ktory zrodzil sie po czesci z lona Endecji, uwazam ze narod ponad wszystko itp. domyslasz sie jaki mam stosunek do lewej strony mocy ;)... Co do Pilsudskiego, moge sie odplacic tym ze np.
Piłsudski, podobnie jak Lenin, został przywieziony do Warszawy specjalnym pociągiem przez Niemców z niemiecką asystą bynajmniej nie w roli wieznia politycznego i nie po to, żeby wspomagać Dmowskiego, ale przeciw niemu.
Piłsudski stawiał na Niemcy i to Niemcy pokojem brzeskim pokazały jaką "Polskę" chcą widzieć - sobie podległą, okrojoną na rzecz Litw, Ukrain i Białorusi, bez dostępu do morza.
Są dowody na to że Piłsudski podczas bitwy warszawskiej 1920r był razem z żoną 350 km od Warszawy : Dowód nr1 Pamietniki żony w których to wspomina Dowód nr2 Jest chyba z 5 wersji gdzie był Piłsudski czyli nikt go nie widział! Plan wiadomo -Rozwadowski
To tylko krople w morzu bo nie chce sie tu rozpisywac, dysponujesz moze komunikatorem GG ? Zechcialbys podyskutowac ?
Serdecznie pozdrawiam,
--Greetings [[User:Krzyzowiec|Krzyzowiec]] (talk) 05:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Chaos March
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Chaos March, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Chaos March. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Re:Hindu-German Conspiracy FAC
Hello, I have left some replies to your comments at the Hindu German Conspiracy FAC Please have a look.Rueben lys (talk) 12:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
bundled AFDs
When you're removing an AFD tag, please make sure that it is truly a mistake. This and the related ones I've reverted are correct. Pagrashtak 21:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Signature again
I've had to change your signature again on a LOCE subpage: it seems to cause rather a lot of problems. Of course I can't force you to change your sig, or even say that the formatting you use is not a good idea - in most cases it seems to work fine. But when it goes wrong it seems to do so in spectacular style, throwing green borders around all the nearby text it can reach. Just thought you'd like to know. Happy‑melon 14:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I said, it only very rarely seems to cause problems, and I can't for the life of me work out why it should do so more on LOCE pages or even why it's impossible to fix once it happens. Just something we'll have to live with
:D. The sig you're currently using, though (here, for instance) I can predict will cause the same problem in templates that I mentioned to you before - you'd be wise to change the | character to{{!}}. Happy‑melon 11:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
BattleTech Periphery
Thanks for helping to preserve the Periphery article! I checked the page just now and it appears to have been restored, so that buys me a little time to get it finished. :-) Huwmanbeing ★ 01:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Periphery (BattleTech) (2nd nomination)
I have restored the article. If you want to take it to a new AfD then do that, as i believe that is the correct thing to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Placebo Effect (talk • contribs) 01:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
WP:NCGN
Hi Piotrus, I hope this finds you well. If you have time, I would greatly appreciate your input on application of WP:NCGN at [23]. Thanks. Tankred (talk) 02:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Czerwone Gitary, was selected for DYK!
|
|
On December 13, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Czerwone Gitary, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
BattleTech merger proposals
They look good I think! We should start the BattleTech planets article and the others to consolidate the topic and keep it from being wiped out. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
My welcome
Thanks for give me a warm welcome although I'm not a very active user on this wiki :) Cheer up with the BT subject! Greetings. --Bedwyr (talk) 23:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
==Re:Hindu-German Conspiracy FAC==
Hello,I have provided the citations you requested in the Hindu-German conspiracy FAC. Could you please revisit the nomination page to revisit the improvements?Rueben lys (talk) 19:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 15 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Otto Magnus von Stackelberg (ambassador), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Royalbroil 14:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Pilsudski carricature by Szwajcer.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Pilsudski carricature by Szwajcer.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Pilsudski carricature by Szwajcer.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Pilsudski carricature by Szwajcer.PNG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Advertising campaign for League of Copy-Editors
Your suggestion was in line with a discussion that was already in progress at the League here. A mass-mailing is about to go out, as described here. We hope it is productive in recruiting new copy-editors and in encouraging existing members to become more active. Ten or twelve users cannot copy-edit two million articles :)
One thing that would help is if editors requested copy-editing only when an article has reached a consensus on a stable version. I understand that you were not principal on Krakow, but if I may use it as an example of the problem: It has been almost a month since it was copy-edited, there are still extensive arguments going on and frequent revisions, the spelling still has not been standardized, and in response to one of my questions ( Royal salt mines), another user just points me to a new source. That user should have added the source to the article himself. It is not the copy-editor's job to find sources for unsourced statements. This type of occurrence causes copy-editors to become discouraged from working again with the same editors, and eventually to quit copy-editing altogether.
In contrast, if you care to look at the talk page of Massospondylus and follow the discussion there, you will see that the involved editors responded promptly to all questions and concerns, all items were completed, the copy-edit was finished, and the article passed its GA nomination easily. It is now being readied for FA. The editors have asked me to assist them in this, and of course I will be happy to do so. This is the ideal way that these things should happen.
I have observed the vast amount that you have contributed to Wikipedia. I and all others thank you for your massive efforts. You can help ensure high-quality articles by encouraging all involved editors to achieve a stable, neutral, well-sourced, agreed-upon version of the article before requesting copy-edit, at which point copy-editors, as fast as the massive work load permits, will be very happy to polish up the article's English, grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. as they are supposed to do.
I will remove the comments on the Copy-Edit Request page. Thank you again for your contributions to WP and your interest in the League of Copy-Editors. Unimaginative Username (talk) 04:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Demarcation
Please see Talk:Demarcation for comments regarding my reversion of your recent edits. SlackerMom (talk) 13:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comments on User talk:Jimbo Wales
You seemed to refer to me as a "non-scholar" - this is both inaccurate, considering I'm a full-time University student, and could be interpreted as offensive and classist. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean anything about their education. -Halo (talk) 16:17, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- There's more than one meaning to the term "scholar" - perhaps you should use a less ambiguous word. And, for the record, I don't find statistics evil (what sort of mathematician finds statistics evil?!?) and I'd appreciate it if you didn't make ad hominem attacks or straw man arguments of those sort since they really do not add anything to the debate. My own personal belief is that someone should conduct their own research rather than annoying people, relying on charitable organisations and donated developer time. -Halo (talk) 18:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episodes 37 and 38
Well, gee whiz! I don't check WP:WEEKLY for a few days and look what happens: I miss two new episodes. Nonetheless, Wikipedia Weekly Episode 37 and Episode 38 have been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/12/10/wikipedia-weekly-37-rundown/ and http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/12/14/episode-38-interview-wbrianna-laugher/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 02:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
Vasa (ship) at FAC
Since you've shown interest or made some contributions to Vasa (ship), I'd like to notify you that it has been nominated as an FAC. Your insights and comments would be much appreciated there.
Peter Isotalo 14:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Your comments / opposition have been addressed. — Blue。 15:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Your comments / opposition have been addressed. — Blue。 10:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just another update; Blue has tried to address some more points of your opposition. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 39
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 39 has been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/12/18/episode-39-knol-pointer/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 06:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
re:Yefremov
Good call. A quick search discovered much information about him in books, encyclopedia of Ukraine, and on ua wiki. I will work on writing a draft. Its hard to believe his article doesn't already exist. Ostap 18:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: looking for an article
- Hey. I didn't have electronic access, and my library carries the serial, but from 1983 onwards. What I did do is place an interlibrary loan request. The thing is, the library here goes into christmas vacation starting saturday. There is a chance that I'll get the article before saturday (most of the time, they send a scan by e-mail), but it's a close call. I'll let you know. Otherwise it'll arrive in Januari, if you can wait that long... Key to the city (talk) 08:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- I am sorry, I don't have access to the article too. My library only has a subscription from 1990 until now. Regards, Tirkfltalk 08:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
I've got your article! Now I need your e-mail address. So please e-mail the address with the 'E-mail this user' option on my userpage. Key to the city (talk) 12:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA
Thanks. :) I'm taking things slowly right now (especially because of all the off-wiki distractions during the holiday season), but I'm looking forward to trying out the new tools! Also, regarding the resource, no, I don't have access to that database. Did you try books.google.com , to see where are the nearest libraries that have the Historian? --Elonka 10:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 20 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Suwałki Agreement, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--EncycloPetey (talk) 14:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Wesołych Świąt
Cześć Piotruś! Życzę wesołych Świąt Bożego Narodzenia i wszystkiego najlepszego w Nowym Roku. - Darwinek (talk) 11:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Malincuore
The meaning of the world malincuore (ahimè) is alas. This word isn't english; it is Italian (like my nationality!). PS My current vote is weak-support :) Cześć (ciao)! --Brískelly[citazione necessaria] 16:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Malin is negative; the word male (bad) is negative... And citazione necessaria is citation needed! --Brískelly[citazione necessaria] 16:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Notability -- Radwan Dąbrowski-Żądło Family
Piotrus, are you back again tagging this article with Notability concerns yet again? The names are in multiple historical sources all referenced, your first attempt to subject this article to deletion failed, but you try again.
In my opinion, smells like personal jealousy to me if it's indeed you doing this, as I can't imagine anyone else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Exxess (talk • contribs) 19:36, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
And let me further add this, be careful these Notability "concerns" of yours do not become construed as simple harassment, motivated by personal jealousy, because that's the opinion I'm of, at least until you contribute something constructive for the historical record. -- Exxess (talk) 19:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Happy Christmas
Well, I am just getting fed up with the way this is dragging on, so I have spent the afternoon reading the subject up (and will continue to do so). And I find you are mostly spot on. I don't mind fielding the objections while you are away: all Raul needs is to see that they are being patiently addressed and I am sure the article will get there before long. I will try to weed the substantive objections out of the other stuff. I am away for a few days myself but will hold the fort. Best wishes. And never let the personal stuff here get you down. To me, it's like water off a duck's back. qp10qp (talk) 20:27, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- On that last question, I see nothing in the sources you directed me to that is not kept in the paragraph; in fact, I even added that Pisudski resisted calls for antisemitic measures. But what I was doing was balancing the information to take account of the opposite view, which is even referred to in some of the sources you linked me to. I am trying to look into sources not written by Poles, and Leslie says categorically that relations with the minorities were bad and goes into detail. However, my edits blame this on the depression and on foreign policy issues,, as does Leslie. It is not a slight on Pilsudski to acknowledge that this period of history saw problems with the minorities. The Germans were actively destabilising the Ukrainian and German minorities in Poland, for example. qp10qp (talk) 20:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Academic institution
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Academic institution, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Academic institution. Avruchtalk 22:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus. Would you agree that this article is not really necessary as a standalone, permanent stub? How would you approach expanding it into a comprehensive article? Theoretically, you could detail all the various types of academic institutions (parochial, private, public, primary, secondary, advanced, technical, vocational/trade etc.). Is this what you had intended? Avruchtalk 22:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Any better now? See here. Avruchtalk 00:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:1660 Polish Russian War.PNG
Thanks for uploading Image:1660 Polish Russian War.PNG. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Polish_2nd_Army_on_the_Eastern_Front.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Polish_2nd_Army_on_the_Eastern_Front.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Jusjih (talk) 04:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
re:Poland-academic-bio-stub
I have created the category for this stub. Usually stub templates with fewer than 60 articles are left upmerged to the parent category but i feel that given the polish historian stubs category is a subcat it should be ok. Waacstats (talk) 09:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
I wish you a Merry Christmas and happy New Year ! ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 12:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
All the best
Short one, for now
I'm afraid I did not have the time to answer in depth, but here is something I should not forget for now: Merry Christmas. I'll be around soon with actual comments on the issues you raised. Dahn (talk) 08:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Season's greetings
Thanks for hanging in there. You are a great asset to this place. Happy Christmas and a merry new year. qp10qp (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Xmas
Thank you for the greetings, I am also wishing you Merry Christmas and all the best in the new year. Thank you again Tymek (talk) 13:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, and best wishes to you as well! Kirill 17:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
Blessed Festum Christi Natalis and Vesper Sanctum. Mathiasrex (talk) 14:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
A Christmas carol
Piotrus — thanks for the wishes. In turn, permit me to sing (figuratively speaking), a Christmas carol:
Raduj się, świecie, przyszedł Pan!
Niech zabrzmi zgodny chór.
Niech każde serce Mu zrobi miejsce,
Niech śpiewa wszelki twór,
Niech śpiewa wszelki twór,
Niech śpiewa, niech śpiewa wszelki twór.
Have a Merry Christmas! Turgidson (talk) 14:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Xmas
I wish you a very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! --R O A M A T A A | msg 17:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Seconded - wishing you a relaxing Christmas and another productive year to come:)--Kotniski (talk) 19:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thirded - many thanks, Merry Christmas, and let's hope for the best! Biruitorul (talk) 21:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Pan Piotrus,
The original article said that the battle was a Russian victory, yet then went on to say that the Russians were routed by the Poles; that sounds like a Polish victory to me. Consequently I changed the page to reflect that - was I right, or did I miss something? 'Fraid I don't speak Polish, so I can't check to see what the original source said. --User:AlbertHerring Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla! 18:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, glad to be of assistance, and Merry Christmas to you, too!--User:AlbertHerring Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla! 18:19, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Solar Eclipse images
Just thought I'd respond here to your NASA image copyright question. At the bottom of that solar eclipse list it states: "Permission is freely granted to reproduce this data when accompanied by an acknowledgment: "Eclipse Predictions by Fred Espenak and Jean Meeus (NASA's GSFC)"" so it seems to be fair game. -- MacAddct 1984 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
Thank you very much Piotrus. I hope you have a wonderful Christmas and a happy new year. Ostap 05:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Międzymorze
- In your historic researches, what variants have you encountered for the name, "Międzymorze"? I have seen "Intermarum" and "Intermarium." Are there others? And do any of them have any claim on legitimacy by right of etymology or usage?
- I believe in using authentic names wherever possible. Nevertheless, if there were a justifiable alternative to "Międzymorze," I would not be averse to considering its use as a convenience to non-Polish-speakers and thus to those wishing to educate them on the subject.
- Happy Holidays! Nihil novi (talk) 08:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
New low
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Claiming that I "don't write articles"[24] is an outrageous nonsense and you know it. What next should I expect? I've been accused of xenophobia by you and your friends and all sorts of sins. But this is something I have never seen. Have you got any shame at all? --Irpen 19:37, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- What have you written recently? In any case, I don't claim that you don't write articles, I claim that if you have time to comment on my articles, perhaps you should spend that time writing new content instead. I don't recall myself commenting on the talk pages of your articles, or your DYK or FA submission... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:49, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've written enough to not owe you any explanations. And since you check my edits anyway, you know that. And I never engage in "your" articles unless they relate to Russia and Ukraine except the Polish article to which I invested enough effort in the past before being ejected from that set of topic by you. --Irpen 20:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Again, how did you stumble upon this particular Ukraine related article I've just created? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've written enough to not owe you any explanations. And since you check my edits anyway, you know that. And I never engage in "your" articles unless they relate to Russia and Ukraine except the Polish article to which I invested enough effort in the past before being ejected from that set of topic by you. --Irpen 20:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I found this article, when this edit popped up in my watchlist. Despite you watch my edits, I don't give you a reciprocity on this. I have enough stress from what I see on my watchlist. You can find more details in a more detailed explanation I gave here. --Irpen 20:14, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining that. Now, please, show me several articles you have created in the past month or two, and I will gladly refactor and/or apologize for my comment about the need for you to create some. Otherwise, please apologize for accusing me of "new low". Have you, or haven't you created several new articles recently? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I have written enough content including recently to take pride of my contributions and I don't owe you any explanations. You owe me a bigger apology for routinely following me (and others) and keeping a black book, something you see nothing wrong with. --Irpen 20:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Claims, claims. Show us those recent articles of yours that you created and take pride at, and I will apologize. Show me my recent black book whose content annoys you, and I will apologize. The truth always speaks for itself.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Let's get this straight Piotrus and let "TRUTH" in public. Are you saying that you no longer maintain the log on me, Lokyz, M.K., Dr Dan, and whoever else? Yes or no? --Irpen 20:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Changing topics is great, Irpen, but let's try to answer the questions in chronological order. First item on agenda are your recent articles from the past two or three months. Show a few of them, I'll apologize and we will move on the the next item on agenda. Or don't show them and apologize to me for the "new law" and "unfounded accusation" that you have not written any. Or we end this topic.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:53, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Let's get this straight Piotrus and let "TRUTH" in public. Are you saying that you no longer maintain the log on me, Lokyz, M.K., Dr Dan, and whoever else? Yes or no? --Irpen 20:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I am not sure how many new articles I created, maybe even none, but I added content to existing ones. You are welcome to study yourself and if you find that I should have written more, well, so be it. Now, how about the log you used to keep on Polish wiki? Did you stop keeping it after you blanked the page or do you continue it elsewhere? Please answer honestly. --Irpen 20:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- So you admit that you have created "maybe no new articles" recently, yet you have the gall to accuse me on article's talk and here of "new low" and "unfounded accusations" when I suggest this may be the case? What am I missing here, I wonder? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
I wrote content, Piotrus. And I am a wrong target for that kind of stuff. Any chance to know whether the log is being updated as we speak? --Irpen 21:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why don't you ask me about lynching Negroes, too? Enough flaming; I have better things to do - like content creation - than discussing your behavior. EOT, etc.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:45, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Please be honest: yes or no?
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
New section, per request. this analogy you brought invoking lynching does not really apply. I am not asking you about your involvement in lynching because there was never ever any sign that you have anything to do with extremist racism or violence. Neither there were any past instances discovered of your adherence to such repugnant views.
However, the fact that you maintained the black book on other contributors leaked to public due to your oversight is indisputable. So, I would like to reiterate to make sure you and all your content opponents are clear on this. The question is crystal clear:
- Do you continue to maintain a log file where you keep the diffs or any other info that may be possibly used against your content opponents at the opportune time or did you stop doing it as requested?
This is a very important question on the issue that in fact took place in the past and on the issue that would largely define the interaction between the editors on this site. Please do not try to avoid giving a straight answer under some dubious pretenses. The question is perfectly straightforward and there are only two pays to answer that. Yes or no. Either way, most appreciated would be this yes/no being honest. Thank you. --Irpen 18:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- It took me a while, but I have discovered how to deal with your attacks on my pages. Please don't waste yours or mine with any further ones. Thank you, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:54, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
What attacks? What waste of time? This is the most important issue that stays in the way of the harmonious editing. However, now your refusal to answer this question is crystal clear.
Note that my only wish is to put this behind, be relieved with the assurance that the repugnant stalking and recording stopped and resume editing in peace. I am really sorry that you don't see it this way and, as it seems, continue the past activity and see it a legitimate tool in winning content disputes.
I just wanted to leave this note for the record that my intentions about asking this and requesting that this is stopped is not misconstrued. This was not intended as an attack. This was an attempt to put this matter behind. Unfortunately, it seems that you insist on continuing with black books. Very well, I will not be repeating this question any more. I can only hope that one day you would come to realize how this looks to the editors you choose as your targets, how it hampers their ability to edit with you and how it hampers the content in the end of the day because this is all that ultimately matters. --Irpen 19:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- For the record, I am not replying to this or any other attack posts on my page, but I don't have the habit of removing stuff from my archive.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Wesołych Świąt!
Thank you! Wszystkiego Dobrego i Wesołych Świąt! Visor (talk) 22:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello and happy new year
Hello :-) I'm the guy who clames Siemienowicz is Ruthenian. You said you have the book written by Nowak. I saw it there that he was born in Vitebsk, but right now i cant take it again because the Israeli Universities are on strike now. Since you have it, could you please open chapter one and see whats written their? It's written their that he was born and Vitebsk, and could you give the quote on the talk page of the man? This is trhe only think that could bring the argument to the end. Tou are right. Ruthenian and Beloirusian are different things. BUT, if he was born in Vitebsk (and he was), even if Belarus didnt exist back then, he could be in the Belarusian categories. Just like for example a Russian scientist, wheather if he'a Russian ethnicity or not, born on the territory which is today Ukraine during the Russian Empire (and Ukraine havent existed back then) still enters the "Ukrainian scientists" category. 79.182.108.96 (talk) 17:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- I read the book and there is nothing about Vitebsk in it. If you can give me page number, I'll double check it. You or I can scan it for proof if need but I cannot find in my copy that info. It's possible I have missed it, but I don't have time to read it again.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- I dont remember the exect page but i think iut was 7. Not shure thought. It was at the start of the first chapter. Can you scan thru it's first pages please? it's when Nowak tells he was born in Vitebsk to a nobility. I'm not asking you to check it right now, but in the following days if possible. Again, i cant check the exect page because the Universities in Israel are on strike right now. 79.182.108.96 (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Look, the book is novelized. It has conversations and so on. I don't see anything about Witebsk, and biography at the end has no mention of it. No hurry, you will go to the library in a few days, check it and we will fix it.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- I dont remember the exect page but i think iut was 7. Not shure thought. It was at the start of the first chapter. Can you scan thru it's first pages please? it's when Nowak tells he was born in Vitebsk to a nobility. I'm not asking you to check it right now, but in the following days if possible. Again, i cant check the exect page because the Universities in Israel are on strike right now. 79.182.108.96 (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK: Battle of Chudniv
|
|
On 26 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Chudniv, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Happy Boxing Day! --PFHLai (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Great triple crown race of 2008
As a Napoleonic crown recipient you might be interested in this. Cheers and happy editing! DurovaCharge! 20:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou for your support and contribution towards the FAC for the above article, it has now passed. Your attention here was gratefully recieved. Regards.--Jackyd101 (talk) 11:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Wigilijne śniadanie z kiełbachą? :-) Co spowodowało, że akurat tak zakwalifikowałeś ten rysunek? Mamy jakieś specjalne tradycje co do śniadania w Wigilię? Pilecka (dyskusja) 21:55, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- To w takim razie jest to OR lub POV. Poza tym nazwa pliku to wigilijne śniadanie, podczas gdy w podpisie mówisz o christmas breakfest. Już samo to jest nieścisłością. W Polsce nie ma tradycji związanych ze śniadaniem wigilijnym, a jeśli już to akurat wędlina do niedawna do takiego śniadania się nie zaliczała. Chociaż obowiązkowy post zniesiono już ponad dwadzieścia lat temu, to w Polsce obowiązywał on do 2003 roku, a obecnie jest on zalecany i w wielu domach wciąż przestrzegany. Umieszczanie zatem takiego śniadania pod nazwą śniadanie wigilijne i przy takiej kategoryzacji jest przegięciem w drugą stronę, bo sugeruje, że jest to element jakiejś tradycji, a tak nie jest. Ta ilustracja przedstawia moim zdaniem wyłącznie śniadanie, dlatego pozostałe kategorie bym wywaliła. A opłatek zdekategoryzowałam, bo kategorie w nim się dublowały. IMO christmas food powinno być podkategorią christams traditions (tak zresztą jest na en), ale co do tego akurat nie ma zgody. Jeżeli tak pozostanie (dyskusja jest w trakcie), to tę jedną kategorią christmas traditions bym przywróciła. Jeśli nie to christmas food będzie podkategorią chrismas traditions, więc nie ma potrzeby tych kategorii dublować. Pozdrawiam. Pilecka (dyskusja) 22:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- No to już trochę inna sprawa :-) Nadal jednak uważam, że to zdjęcie nie ukazuje żadnych tradycji (jeśli w ogóle takowe istnieją), które wyróżniałyby bożonarodzeniowe śniadanie spośród innych, świątecznych. Właściwie tradycja, konkretne potrawy, wiążą się tylko ze śniadaniem wielkanocnym. Dlatego nazwałabym plik po prostu "holiday breakfast" i nie umieszczała w christmasowych kategoriach. Gdyby jeszcze na stole była jakaś bożonarodzeniowa dekoracja, jakieś pierniczki z lukrem, coś co wskazywałoby, że to właśnie ten okres, a tak jest to po prostu zwykłe świąteczne śniadanie, nie poparte tradycją (chyba że rodzinną) i trudno stawiać to za przykład polskiej kuchni czy polskiego jedzenia bożonarodzeniowego. Mam nadzieję że się ze mną zgodzisz w tej kwestii, że jednak nie tylko o nazwę tu chodzi. Co powiesz zatem na umieszczenie pliku pod inną nazwą i niewiązanie go z tymi kategoriami? Pozdrawiam. Ludmiła (dyskusja) 23:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilecka (talk • contribs)
- Proponuję zatem, abyś ponownie załadował ten plik pod nazwą breakfast lub holiday breakfast, a wtedy wigilijne śniadanie będzie można usunąć. Mogłabym to zrobić sama, zachowując wszelkie informacje związane z licencją, ale wtedy nie miałbyś obrazka w swojej galerii zauploadowanych grafik, a może ma to akurat dla Ciebie jakieś znaczenie. Dlatego proszę daj znać, czy zrobisz to sam, czy też ja mam to zrobić. Pozdrawiam Pilecka (dyskusja) 10:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- No to już trochę inna sprawa :-) Nadal jednak uważam, że to zdjęcie nie ukazuje żadnych tradycji (jeśli w ogóle takowe istnieją), które wyróżniałyby bożonarodzeniowe śniadanie spośród innych, świątecznych. Właściwie tradycja, konkretne potrawy, wiążą się tylko ze śniadaniem wielkanocnym. Dlatego nazwałabym plik po prostu "holiday breakfast" i nie umieszczała w christmasowych kategoriach. Gdyby jeszcze na stole była jakaś bożonarodzeniowa dekoracja, jakieś pierniczki z lukrem, coś co wskazywałoby, że to właśnie ten okres, a tak jest to po prostu zwykłe świąteczne śniadanie, nie poparte tradycją (chyba że rodzinną) i trudno stawiać to za przykład polskiej kuchni czy polskiego jedzenia bożonarodzeniowego. Mam nadzieję że się ze mną zgodzisz w tej kwestii, że jednak nie tylko o nazwę tu chodzi. Co powiesz zatem na umieszczenie pliku pod inną nazwą i niewiązanie go z tymi kategoriami? Pozdrawiam. Ludmiła (dyskusja) 23:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilecka (talk • contribs)
DYK: Battle of Lubar
|
|
On 27 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Lubar, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--PFHLai (talk) 00:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Possibly unfree Image:PPTParadigmShiftsFrr15Events.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:PPTParadigmShiftsFrr15Events.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. →AzaToth 04:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC) --→AzaToth 04:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Explanation of my a bit disruptive edits to the Józef Piłsudski article
There we go:
On November 5, 1916, the Central Powers proclaimed the "independence" of Poland, hoping[citation needed] to increase the number of Polish troops that could be sent to the eastern front against Russia, thereby relieving German forces to bolster the western front.
I'd like to see a reference citing any of the officers of the Central Powers' countries stating that they hoped to increase the number of Polish troops so they could be sent to the eastern front in order to fight against Russia. I am going to look for one, but if you'll find it faster than me, please cite it in the article.
The first part of it is pretty well known - Regency Kingdom was created with hopes to increase recruitment of Polish soldiers (refs for that are plentiful: [25], [26], [27]).The second is less easy to confirm, but since Piłsudski opposed fighting the West, I find it quite plausible; that said I would not oppose simply removing the discussion of where the soldiers where to be sent - it is a detail of little relevance to the article.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)Already done. 83.12.248.26 (talk) 07:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
In the wake of the Russian Revolution and in view of the worsening situation of the Central Powers, Piłsudski took[citation needed] an increasingly uncompromising stance, insisting that his men not be treated as "German colonial troops" and only be used to fight Russia.
The same situation: a source stating that Piłsudski took such stance would be needed in here.
- I'd suggest reviewing the article's history to see when that sentence was first added. I am not sure about the 'colonial troop' quote; but refs for Piłsudski wanting to fight only Russia, not Entente, are plentiful again, and several are linked in the article (See for example the following sentence).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
This was necessary to avoid major unrest. However, Piłsudski believed that as head of state he must be above political parties.
This is the sentence I have removed two or three times, and you have put it back to the article. I think it's a clear POV: who knows what was necessery in the 1920s? A reference would be useful.
- 99% that it is from Urbankowski, cited after the next sentence, I will have access to him again in two weeks and will verify this.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
He also set about organizing a Polish army out of Polish veterans of the German, Russian and Austrian armies[citation needed]
Oh, really, did he? I haven't heard anything about that (probably because I lack very much in history, but never mind that).
- Ok, that's one of those 'obvious' things. One of the main activities of Piłsudski was creating a new army, of course it would consist of veterans of those armies, as well as of new recruits. For example, Paderewski mentions this ([28]);. here Piłsudski's role in reestabilishing the Army is also stated, and so on. After all, Piłsudski was first a soldier, second a politician, it is no suprise as a naczelnik he was more of a "commander-in-chief" than a president.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Piłsudski and the first Polish government were distrusted[citation needed] in the West because Piłsudski had cooperated with the Central Powers in 1914–17 and because the governments of Daszyński and Jędrzej Moraczewski were primarily socialist.
Are there any Western politicians from the 1920s saying they didn't trust the Polish government? If not, why does Wikipedia say so? If so, I'd like to see a reference.
- This refers to Daszyński and Moraczewski's govs in 1918/1919, not the 1920s. It's referenced in the next sentence to Cienncienala ([29]), please try to verify if sentence A is not referenced with following sentence B before slapping a tag, will you? Also, I am pretty sure Urbanowski mentions this, too.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
In the chaotic aftermath of World War I, there was unrest on all Polish borders.
"Chaotic" is a POVed adjective. Many [yes, {{cn}}] think that the aftermath of World War I wasn't chaotic.
Ok, I don't care about it either way, it's removed now.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)Out of date, the adjective in question has been removed from the article. 83.12.248.26 (talk) 07:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
However, while Ukrainians were the first clear enemy, it soon became apparent that the various Ukrainian factions were not the real power in that region.
- Yes, this could use a citation, although again it's one of those 'obvious' facts. Ukraine never threatened central Poland and split Ukrainian factions were was easily defeated in 1918; Soviets proved a much more dangerous nut to crack. Feel free to provide a ref for this if you find it, but as I said, referencing obvious things should not require a citation tag.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Soon is needless here because it provokes a question: how soon? It will be better to remove this word (and so I have been doing), I think. If not, then, of course, a source would be useful.
The National Democrats, however, contended that the string of Bolshevik victories had been Piłsudski's fault[1] and demanded that he resign; some even accused him of treason[citation needed].
You probably very good know that some is a weasel word. It's why I have tagged that part of the last sentence with the cn tag—now I know I should have used {{who}}. I see you have already given a source for that. 83.12.248.26 (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Piłsudski's plan called for Polish forces to withdraw across the Vistula River and defend the bridgeheads at Warsaw and on the Wieprz River, while some 25% of available divisions concentrated to the south for a strategic counter-offensive[citation needed]. The plan next required two armies under General Józef Haller, facing Soviet frontal attack on Warsaw from the east, to hold their entrenched positions at all costs[citation needed]. At the same time, an army under General Władysław Sikorski was to strike north from outside Warsaw, cutting off Soviet forces that sought to envelope the Polish capital from that direction[citation needed]. The most important[citation needed] role, however, was assigned to a relatively small, approximately 20,000-man, newly assembled "Reserve Army" (also known as the "Strike Group," "Grupa Uderzeniowa"), comprising the most determined[citation needed], battle-hardened Polish units and commanded personally by Piłsudski. Their task was to spearhead a lightning northward offensive, from the Vistula-Wieprz triangle south of Warsaw, through a weak spot identified by Polish intelligence between the Soviet Western and Southwestern Fronts[citation needed]. That offensive would separate the Soviet Western Front from its reserves and disorganize its movements[citation needed].
This paragraph contains some POVed phrases, such as the most important and most determined, which should be immediately deleted, or—even better—given a reference. The paragraph states there was a plan of Piłsudski's, so I'd like to see a copy, or a source giving the plan's details.
- This and all others points about battle of Warsaw (1920): briefly, look for refs at the end a paragraph or in that article (which is Featured but could use an update and more inline citations). I am pretty sure authorship of the plan is discussed there or at Rozwadowski's article, this has came up earlier and in any case the authorship is discussed and referenced a little later.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
At the time, Piłsudski's plan was strongly criticized[citation needed], and only the desperate situation of the Polish forces persuaded other commanders to go along with it[citation needed].
Was Piłsudski's plan strongly criticized? By whom? And who says that only the desperate situation of the Polish forces persuaded other commanders to go along with it? Maybe there were other reasons? If so, the sentence should be removed or re-written; if not, a source should be provided.
- For details see Davies WERS, I am 99% sure he goes into details there. Will try to look it up in a few days, but if you can do it sooner, please do so. Btw, we may need to rewrite the relevant paras a little, based on our discussion I see some illogical order and repeated claims.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Stroński's phrase was adopted as praise for Piłsudski by some patriotically or piously minded Poles[citation needed], who were unaware of Stroński's ironic intent[citation needed].
By some? By whom, exactly? And who says they were unaware of Stroński's ironic intent? A reference, please.
- There is an original article, but 99% that Urbankowski discussed this in detail, give me a few weeks or check it yourself (try index for Stronkowski, he is not on that many pages, if I had the book I could've added it in few minutes).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
After General Stanisław Szeptycki proposed that the military should be more closely supervised by civilian authorities, Piłsudski criticized[citation needed] this as an attempt to politicize the army, and on June 28 he resigned his last political appointment.
Did Piłsudski criticize Szeptycki's plan? I'd like to see a source saying so.
- The sentence is cited to Urbankowski, yes? Read the book for more details.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Piłsudski went into retirement in Sulejówek, outside Warsaw, at his modest country house which had been presented to him by his former soldiers[citation needed].
I have read a lot of books saying the house in Sulejówek was presented to Piłsudski by his soldiers, but maybe the other readers—I mean not the Polish ones—don't know? And for that one, too. 83.12.248.26 (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
In internal politics, Piłsudski's coup entailed sweeping limitations on parliamentary government, as his Sanation regime (1926–1939)—at times employing authoritarian methods—sought to "restore public life to moral health."[citation needed]
Quotation marks have been used in this paragraph, so the phrase between them probably comes from a book/essay etc. Could we know its name?
- Seems like a style issue for me, try to check article's history when the quotation marks were added.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Piłsudski's regime began a period of national stabilization and improvements in the situation of ethnic minorities, which formed almost a third of the Second Republic's population[citation needed].
A reference stating ethnic minorities in the Polish Second Republic were almost a third of its whole population? Not 25%, and not over 30%, but almost a third
Davies, Davies, Davies :) Try historical demographics of Poland, I am sure I referenced it there when I was writing that article and move the ref to JP article.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)- I've added a reference for that number. 83.12.248.26 (talk) 07:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC) Oh, by the way, I've found a great source, namely a 1921 demographic census of Poland: have a look. The problem is, gaining access requires payment. 83.12.248.26 (talk) 10:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Tension also arose between the government and the German minority, particularly in Upper Silesia[citation needed].
"Particularly in Upper Silesia"... Who says so? A reference, please.
- Not added by me, I believe. Probably referenced with the surce that follows in a sentence or two.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I know the article is currently under critical review—I have seen its FA nomination—and that's why I'm putting those damn cn templates to the article—in order to make it better. According to a wise man, The more sources, the better. And thanks for mentioning the 3RR rule: I forgot about that. I'm gonna have a shower and then start looking for the sources. Have a good day, 83.12.248.26 (talk) 22:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I appreciate your efforts, it's just that several editors tried to do everything possible to damage this article and make it fail FA, and the 'spam cn templates' tactics is one of those I have seen employed in similar cases, and I am a bit tired of dealing with their bizarre complains (See talk or read FAC for some examples). Honestly, in this situation seeing an anonimous editor using something that looked lie 'cn spam' tactics raised a red flag that we are dealing with a registered editor who is using sockpuppetry to make the FA fail. I am not convinced you are not such an editor, and you want to help us, but registering an accoung and having a history of useful edits would prevent such an occurence in the future (your IP will change, sooner or later). I certainly agree more sources will make the article better, but please in the future take your time and try to verify if the fact you want to tag isn't referenced by a citation at the end of a sentence, following sentence or two or a paragraph; I'd estimate about half of your tags has been addressed that way. Now, it is useful to add citations to such places, but taking a little more effort to verify stuff and add a citation instead of just tagging will be much appreciated. Take care, and please register :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus, thank you for the notification. A sort of bizarre article, though well intended. The article has a rambling sort of intro on Anglicization and doesn't really introduce much that isn't already at List of Swedish monarchs. I am going to nominate it for deletion and suggest that it be moved to the user space as it *may* be of use to the user if he wishes to expand other Swedish royalty related articles. Charles 04:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Hello,
Thank you very much for nominating Holodomor Denial for a dyk.
You see that there is still much healing that needs to be done on this topic.
Thanks again, Horlo (talk) 08:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Lwow edits
Piotrus, a certain user (Jotel) is actively participating in eliminating what he perceives to be as my "political correctness" regarding murder of Jews during WWII. He does this on the city's entry by writing under the religion section that Nazi's and Ukrainian collaborators murdered the Jews in the city - which is not untrue, but I do not think that this is the section or for that matter the entry where this is discussed in such a manner. Now, my response to these actions is to use his own medicine, but that is not something I wish to do since it takes away from the entry's quality. If you have a minute, do take a look.--Riurik(discuss) 19:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- ^ Suleja, op.cit., p. 265