User:Piotrus/Sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is my Sandbox page at Wikipedia. It is for various testing and occasional collaboraton projects. Free Orion stuff moved to Free Orion Wiki

Contents 1 Serfdom reading list 2 Dziadek 3 To FA 4 Fixing giant loopholes in Wikipedia:Survey guidelines 4.1 Proposal 4.2 Comments by john k 4.3 Comment by Weyes 4.4 Comments by llywrch 4.5 Comments by Irpen 4.6 Comments by Balcer 4.7 Comments by User:Tony Sidaway 4.8 Comments by User:Chris 73 5 Varia 6 Translation you requested 7 Varia 2 7.1 new 7.2 old 8 PLC 8.1 PLC: 163x 8.2 PLC: FPC 8.3 PLC: Reading list 9 Asians in Brazil reading list 10 Economics, Asian women, USA reading list 11 Change in Brazil: the move towards post-industrial society 12 Herby 13 Race in Another America 14 Notes 15 Dzikie Pola 16 pa 17 barry 18 MemoryWiki 19 GMF 20 RERC 21 Signature testing range 22 Poland new articles 23 Poetry 23.1 Yalta 23.2 Walls 23.3 About the etiquette at the table 23.4 Report 23.5 Clock 24 Major copyvio story 25 More reading list 26 Nifty 27 XMAS gift 28 tools 29 From userpage 30 letter 31 Jimbo on civility 32 Guide to Wikistats 33 Toys 34 Bowling 35 HoI 2 35.1 Ministers 35.2 Leaders 36 Read

[edit] Serfdom reading list

Age of the Democratic Revolution by R. R. Palmer [1]

The wages of war: battles, prints and entrepreneurs in late seventeenth-century Venice, Dooley, Brendan, Word & Image; Jan-Jun2001, Vol. 17 Issue 1/2, p7, 18p, ISSN: 0266-6286 Discusses how the growth of the market for information as well as a healthy dose of criticism had affected information sources and visual journalism in Venice, Italy in 17th century. Memorable prints and publications; Ephemeral themes; Advantages of visual presentation in conveying political messages; Images of war produced 17th century; Popularity of allusive cartoon type.

Poverty or Prosperity? Rural Society in Lowland Scotland in the Late Sixteenth and Early...

Agrarian Change in Seveteenth-Century England: The Economic Historian as Paleontologist

Grain Prices and Subsistence Crises in England and France, 1590-1740

Transactions Costs and Differential Growth in Seventeenth Century Western Europe

THE ECONOMY OF EXPANDING EUROPE IN THE 16TH AND 17TH CENTURIES: A REVIEW ESSAY

Background Notes on Countries of the World: Republic of Poland

Warsaw's Uprising

The 'First Ally' Under Siege

The Road to Serfdom

The economic world of the Bohemian serf: economic concepts, preferences, and constraints on the estate of Friedland, 1583-1692

Serfdom and Social Control in Russia (Book)

The Organization of Serfdom in Eastern Europe: A Comment

CHAPTER V: THE POSITION OF THE PEASANTS IN VARIOUS WESTERN COUNTRIES BEFORE THE ENTRANCE OF CAPITALISM

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SERFDOM IN EASTERN EUROPE AND RUSSIA

Notes on Serfdom in Western and Eastern Europe

The peasantries of Europe : from the fourteenth to the eighteenth centuries Tom Scott, London ; New York : Longman, 1998., ISBN 0582101328 ISBN 058210131X

Dallas, Gregor "The Peasantries of Europe: From the Fourteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries (review)" Journal of Social History - Volume 33, Number 3, Spring 2000, pp. 712-717

Werner Rösener Oxford, UK ; Cambridge, Mass. : Blackwell, 1994 ISBN 0631175032

William Nelson Parker; E L Jones Princeton, N.J. : Princeton University Press, ©1975

Peasants in history : essays in honour of Daniel Thorner E J Hobsbawm Calcutta : Published for Sameeksha Trust by Oxford University Press, 1980

[edit] Dziadek

Pamiętnik mojego dziadka.

• Bronisław Konieczny, Mój wrzesień 1939. Pamiętnik z kampanii wrześniowej spisany w obozie jenieckim, KSIĘGARNIA AKADEMICKA SP. Z O.O./Biblioteka Centrum Dokumentacji Czynu Niepodległościowego, ISBN 8371883285 [2] [3] [4]
• Moje życie w mundurze. Czasy narodzin i upadku II RP, KSIĘGARNIA AKADEMICKA SP. Z O.O., 2005 ISBN 8371886934 [5] [6]

[edit] To FA

• Wladyslaw Sikorski, died on 4 July 1943
• Battle of Warsaw (1920) - begun on 13 August

[edit] Fixing giant loopholes in Wikipedia:Survey guidelines

NOTE: now official proposal is at Wikipedia_talk:Survey_guidelines#Fixing_giant_loopholes

[edit] Proposal

To be moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) soon
Wikipedia:Survey guidelines, a guideline for all manners of surveys and votes on Wikipedia, is deeply flawed in its existing rules and fails to adress several important issues. A prime example is that in Gdansk/Vote it allows both sides of the dispute to claim they are immunie from 3RR rule, as well as disputing the very vote results. As there are proposals for new votes similar to the Gdansk/Vote, I feel we must fix the policy ASAp - otherwise, those votes will be nothing but a giant time loss for everybody involved, including poor participants of RfC, RfA and admins enforcing 3RR rule, who - judging on Gdansk/Vote results - will soon be asked to chose sides in various interpretations of the vote. I think the following changes have to be implemented:

1. This is supposedly an official guideline, but it states first: These guidelines provide a framework that may be followed when creating a new survey. These are not binding in any way. It would be funny if it wasn't sad. What's the point of official unbidning guidlines, especially when they are used to change/counteract official policies (like 3RR)? We need to make some of them obligatory for carrying all votes on Wikipedia, or at least those that affect official policies. I definetly think that each survey must follow points 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
2. Points 1 and 3 are 'good wishes', and should be moved to the introduction section of the guideline
3. Point 9 is too general: Where there is a sign of activities intended to frustrate the intent of the survey, those who can opine may be restricted. A lack of restrictions is usually best, so this may be invoked after the polling has started. We need to specify what are the 'acitivies intended to frustrate the intent of the survey' and how 'those who can opine may be restricted'. In current form those rules allow for, for example, for a restriction of vote to 'Yes' only.
4. Point 10 is even worse: If the majority of opinion is in one direction, but a significant minority of people oppose it, work to find a solution that can be accepted by as many people as possible. It can easly be used to dispute almost any vote after the voting has ended. It should either be deleted, or we need to define significant majority *gasp* with clear qunatiative percents - and make it clear to the voters (by adding the relevant requirement to step 2 of 'creating a new survey section') that they know that the vote needs more then normal majority (50%+1) to pass. Otherwise any user can claim that anything is a 'significant majority' and the vote is unbinding. I'd suggest that a Wikipedia vote must require at least a 75% majority to be binding, otherwise it can be only a guideline.
5. Further, we need to add to that section an obligatory information on who can vote, preferably make this a rule in survey creation instead of leaving it to arbitrary decision of not always impartial vote creators. I.e. make a rule that only users who have at least x major edits and registered y time periods before voting can vote. I'd suggest 100 edits and a week. Note that such a rule applies to current meta:Election_candidates_2005.
6. If a vote would influence and official policy (like the 3RR) then information about the vote should be added to the relevant policy discussion/talk page. Similarly, if a vote would influence mainspace articles, note on the vote should be added to them as well (as was done in Gdansk/Vote example).
7. We need to add an information what is the minimal numbers of voters that makes the vote valid (for example, a vote with 1-2 users is not very useful). I suggest at least 10 voters for a valid vote.
8. We need to decide whether and if so, under what rules can a vote/survey be repeated. I think a vote can be repeated until a binding desision is reached. If a vote has passed a decision, a new vote should not bring the issue again until at least a year have passed since the last one or there is an Arb Com agreement to start a new vote. And if a vote is repeated, all past votes on the issue should be copied and included in a new vote unless the vote owner changes decision.
9. We need to make clear if the current changes apply (or can apply) to old votes (I think that at least Gdansk/Vote must be repeated under the new rules, or it will continue to plague us for ever *shivers*).
10. We need to make a rule about vote enforcement. What's the use of a vote if those who don't like the result can ignore it? If a vote is binding, that all edits contraty to the vote decision should be reverted and not count toward 3RR rule.

Well, that's all I can think of now. What do you think? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:00, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by john k

A couple of points:

1. All guidelines are non-binding, I'm not sure this is such a problem. I agree it shouldn't go to much trouble to say it's non-binding
2. Yes, I agree.
3. I basically agree with you - this is way too vague. I think what it should say is that if it appears that a lot of very new users of en are creating accounts just to vote in the survey, those votes can be discounted.
4. In terms of this point, I think that some marker should be set at the beginning. For some things, a simple majority makes sense, especially very zero sum things, like naming. For other things, you should definitely have a supermajority of some sort. But I think the key is that this should be set at the beginning of the survey, and that everybody participating should agree.
5. I fully agree.
6. Surely notice of the vote should be added to the talk page, not to the articles themselves?
7. I largely agree
8. This mostly makes sense, although I'd like to think about it for a while. I think an exception can be made for instances where it is quickly discovered that the wording has been too vague, and that some sort of vote is necessary to make it clearer what is intended, as for the current issue with cross-naming of Polish (and German) cities. john k 20:21, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
9. For Gdansk vote, I would mostly oppose a new vote, except on the specific cross-naming issue, which I think has gotten out of control. I think that for most of the votes, the outcome was quite clear, and that for 1466-1793 it is very difficult to see "Gdansk" winning in a new vote. I would be willing to do another vote on that part, as well, if it becomes necessary. But not a redo of the whole vote.
10. Not sure about this - this can be abused easily (look at what Halibutt's been doing, for instance). If there really is a consensus that the vote is valid, there should be a lot of people reverting, so it shouldn't really be a 3RR issue. john k 20:21, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comment by Weyes

I had a point by point response interleaved, and then John turned up and ever so callously edit-conflicted me, while making most of the points I wanted to make. I would warn of increasing formalism though: The more rigid and formal the system, the easier it is to game. The same goes for making majority-rules sufficient for certain cases. With reasonable editors, any proper compromise should be able to get something close to consensus: If editors aren't reasonable (which I suspect may be the problem in the polish naming issue), this isn't something we can solve with surveys anyway, and the more editor-oriented methods of problem solving should be used. --W(t) 20:30, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by llywrch

I stumbled across this by accident & not by invite, so I hope you don't mind if I add my say to this. (If not, well at least consider what I have written.)

1. The Wiki-EN mailing list has a few emails discussing voting in the last few days, so you may want to look there for some ideas or feedback.
2. As for a quorum (i.e. minimum number for a valid vote), I've always pushed for 3% of the active Wikipedians -- or to use even more precise terms (although I believe "active Wikipedians" is defined somewhere as those who make 10 edits or more a month), 3% of the total number of contributors to Wikipedia who made 10 edits or more the previous month. (I pick the number "3%" because that was the quorum of the whole membership required to do business at meetings for a union I once belonged to 15 years ago.) The last time I calculated this for Wikipedia, 3% of 2000-3000, this would be 60-90 people; if you can get 45-75 Wikipedians to agree on anything, it's a minor miracle. Then again, if you get that many to agree with you, but almost that many disagree with you (for example, the recent AD/CE debate), then it's a clear sign that there is no consensus yet.
3. An unsuccessful vote should not be repeated any sooner than 3-6 months afterwards. I agree that a successful vote should not be repeated any sooner than 1 year after -- & hopefully even longer.
4. I don't think there is a need to enforce the results; it should be covered by WP:POINT.

Thanks for listening to me. -- llywrch 23:21, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Irpen

1. I agree, we have a problem here. However, I am not sure I understand your solution. This guideline suggests how to create a survey. Enforcing the results is a separate issue. As for enforcement, yes I agree. We have to devise a procedure of enforcement.
2-5. I agree.
6. I think if a vote would influence the article, the note should be added to talk of these articles. It's true that many readers don't read talk pages. However, a see talk edit summary supplied with reversion would point the attention there anyway.
7. Agree, except for the obscure topics that generate little interest. A couple of times I voted for the page to be moved (and it was moved) with only two support votes and zero oppose votes. For topics that would generate little interest, setting a minimum isn't necessary. However, such issues would probably not reach the stage of surveys to be taken. So, I agree with you.
8. I agree
9. I didn't follow the details of Gdansk vote, so I neither support nor oppose its repeating.
10. Agree, we need a rule. I think a milder version than complete abandoning of 3RR would suffice. For example, reverts of WP:Point edits, or edits taken against the survey would not count towards 3RR if the offending edit was allowed to stay in an article for 1 hour or more (or 1/2 an hour). And I do think that WP:Point edits should be governed by the same rule (it is probably a separate policy issue). In recent Kijow->Kiev edit war, I was very tempted to revert Space Cadet and Witkacy (no offence to them) at once every time. I had to constrain myself and make an effort on trying to convince. Other more short-tempered editors, may rush into immediate reversions, allowed if we through out a 3RR rule and the edit history will multiply in no time. Some short time delay in this frame would help cool off some heads and allow other users to intervene and revert.

Generally, I fully support the overhaul you suggest. Regards, -Irpen 02:23, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Balcer

I fully support this overhaul as well. Most of the proposal seems very reasonable. If I can pick a point I am not comfortable with, I would say the quorum of 10 voters for a valid survey is too low. If there is some controversy and only 10 people are interested in it, they should be able to reach some kind of compromise among themselves (maybe even hold an informal vote of their own). Balcer 06:54, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by User:Tony Sidaway

Wikipedia's attitude to rules and guidelines is ambivalent, and we like it that way. We prefer flexible, fuzzy guidelines for surveys because surveys and polls aren't the method by which Wikipedia makes decisions. We do that by discussion and reaching a consensus--a compromise we're all reasonably happy (or not unreasonably unhappy) with. The best a survey can do is to reveal an underlying consensus, and at worst (and indeed, usually) a survey simply polarises views and makes consensus more difficult to find.

In short: the survey guidelines aren't broken, they're intended to be fuzzy. Surveys aren't binding, they only serve to demonstrate a consensus when one exists. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:59, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agree with Tony Sidaway here. I've had quite some trouble dealing with this in the past. Let's just say that voting is bad. Surveys to figure out where the consensus lies are often useful, but can easily be misconstrued as votes. If anything, the survey guidelines should stress this more, not less. :-) Kim Bruning 19:58, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by User:Chris 73

I agree with the proposal, and also feel the need to have a rule /guideline implemented. As for the specific points:

1. Agree, rephrase that the guidelines are to be followed, unless there is an agreed on reason not to before the vote begins. (this allows for some flexibility)
2. Absolutely. Move to intro section
3. Agree, this is too vague. However, i am somewhat unsure what to replace it with. Just removing it would be not good. John's approach looks reasonable, but may need some more discussion
4. Agree with John here, issues like double naming: You either have it or you don't. Rule changes may need a larger majority. Adminship is given with ~80%, but this is pretty much unachieveable on controversial issues. I think this depends, and should be stated before the vote begins
5. Agree, this is desperately needed, although i prefer slightly different numbers of 200 edits and 1 month activity before the vote starts. (i.e. German wiki requires 200 edits, I just turned eligible for voting)
6. Agree, (on Talk pages)
7. 10 voters should be obtainable, 3% (i.e. 60 people) is very tough. Deviations from this guideline may be possible.
8. Tricky one. I.e., I do not want to repeat the Gdansk vote every year, which would surely happen until some people like the outcome.
9. Agree with john. The double naming may need a brief update on where it is applicable (history only or general). I am also happy to recount the votes with a new edit count requirement.
10. Agree with Piotrus, disagree with John. Some enforcement is needed, otherwise non-consensus editors just ignore any vote. And a few non-consensus editors can be much more stubborn than a large majority of consensus voters. I also think the recent trouble on Gdansk comes because the Gdansk vote is the first content vote I know that gives more power to the consensus.(by excluding reverts to consensus from the 3RR and even allowing for blocks in extreme cases, hence upsetting users that did not like the outcome of the vote.) I would strongly urge to include something like this in the proposal!

Overall, the proposal from Piotrus is useful and needed. What are the next steps? We would need to prepare something to vote on. The above points are not yet structured for an easy to do vote. Piotrus, what's your plan? -- Chris 73 Talk 06:07, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Well, as I have incorporated almost all of yours (i.e. everybody who posted here) comments into proposal now at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Fixing_giant_loopholes_in_Wikipedia:Survey_guidelines, I think it is time you voiced your opinion there. Hopefully this will also bring more people into the the dicussion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 08:51, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The updated proposal was moved to Wikipedia talk:Survey guidelines#Fixing giant loopholes. I will be applying the changes soon, as there have been no objections. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 13:40, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Varia

• First Monday [7]
• Sarmatian Review [8]
• Alma Mater [9]
• Lituanus [10]

Joanne Nichol

[edit] Translation you requested

Hi Piotrus, this below is a quick translation from Ukrainian of the review you asked for from "Nasze Słowo", wydawany w języku ukraińskim tygodnik mniejszości ukraińskiej w Polsce, located at http://free.ngo.pl/nslowo/vydavnycha_vitryna/ukrajinci_pid_wawelem.htm . This variant is quick and unpolished but you will get an idea. It was kinda interesting for me since it is written in diaspora Ukrainian and the choice of words sometimes seems unusual. I might have misspelled some names in reverse transliteration back from Ukrainian. The translation is below. --Irpen 08:12, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

In the Krakow "Library of the St. Vladimir Foundation" series a new book appeared in 2004, "U stop krolewskiego Wawelu. Spolecznosc ukrainska w Krakowie w latach 1918-1939" by Tadeusz Filar. This may be the first attempt to analyze the Ukrainian community in the interwar period of the last century. It should be noted that it is a supplemented Ph.D. work defended at the Dept of History of the Jagiellonian University;.

Ukrainian community (article uses "khutir") in Krakow had its own civilian institutions, that supported the national identity of Ukrainians in Polish environment. Spiritual and religious dimensions of the community life was organized by Krakow Greek-Catholic parish founded as ealry as 1794.

After 1918 the spirit of the community was also supported by the Orthodox garrison church.

The Jagiellonian U.had a huge impact on the life of Ukrainian Krakow. Many of the Ukrainian youth from Halicia studied there, and there were several Ukrainians with great scientific achievements and academic authority among the instructors.

In the first part (there are 5 of them) the author attempts to show the genesis of Ukrainian community in Krakow to show subsequently the problem of the minority in the context of political, social and economical situation on Poland of 1918-39, taking into account the attitude of the 2nd PR toward the Ukrainian question.

The second part describes the period of the return of the Polish Independence in 1918, that brought the liquidation of "Prosvita". The attempts of renaissance of cultural Ukrainian organizations were just made in the period of the general stabilization of the Polish state after 1924.

The best years of development of Ukrainian institutions in the city are described in the third part of the book. At the time, in academic community an "old" Ukrainian emigration from Halicia appeared (B. Lepky in Jag. U. and I. Feshchenko-Cholivsky in Mining Academy). This emigration provided assistance (including financial) to the former military men of the Ukr. People's Republic to join the student community (e.g. L. Hets). Ukrainian students of Jag. U. created their own organization - Ukrainian Student Union, and then started to work with legal and underground Ukrainian political parties (UVO and OUN), and also with Polish Socialist party, which after the May coup of 1926 resulted in Police surveillance of the Ukrainian community activists. Most organization, including the Union of Ukrainian women were under the threat of liquidation which is described in the following chapters.

The author got the information for some chapters from the state archive of the Jag. U., and from the district court where the notes are preserved about "інвіґіляція" (I do not know this word) of OUN members, which resulted in an increase of arrests, especially after the murder of the Minister of internal Affairs B. Piracky. This even resulted in the closure of Krakiv chapter of OUN.

The author, when describing the Ukrainian community of Krakow, used extensively the archives of the Jag. U., where the works of Prof. Bogdan Lepky are deposited. The archive of Rakovicky cemetery helped to collect the materials about the camp of the interned in Dombju. The author also used the materials from Ministry of internal affairs and PZPR, Ukrainian press of the interwar period: "Краківські вісті" weekly, which appeared in 1940-56. Nashe Slovo, Nasha Kultura and Ukrainian calendars and emigration printed editions were also helpful.

It's worth noting that the book is valuable not only as the source of deep information about Krakow Ukrainian community, but also the graphics of the cover was made by Ukrainian artist Igor Kusyk from Krakow, and for the computer layout we should thank Oleg Aleksijchuk from St. Vladmir's foundation.

[edit] Varia 2

[edit] new

[edit] old

---

The paperless library. Scientific publishing.

http://info-poland.buffalo.edu/student/pitt.html

http://polish.slavic.pitt.edu/

[11]

[edit] PLC

[edit] PLC: 163x

moved to User:Piotrus/Sandbox/163x

[edit] PLC: FPC

To FPC: Image:Modlitwa na stepie.jpg, Image:Potega Rzeczypospolitej u zenitu Zlota wolnosc Elekcja 1573.JPG, Image:Powrot Kozakow.jpg, Image:Powrot z Wiednia.jpg, Image:Skladanie sztandarow.jpg, Image:Wesele Kozackie.jpg, Image:Alchemik Sedziwoj Matejko.JPG

[edit] PLC: Reading list

Slavic Review

• How Firm was the Polish-Lithuanian Federation? federalism lead to unanimity which lead to liberum veto; argues that union was not strong and liberum veto usage by GDL represantatives is an example of opposition; danger from Muscovy was main reason for the union and stronger Poland forced GDL into significant concessions; interestingly argues that counter-reformation strenghtned the union (unlike Jasienica), praises Poniatowski

Books

• Aleksander Gella, Development of Class Structure in Eastern Europe: Poland and Her Southern Neighbors, SUNY Press, 1988, ISBN 0887068332 - on equality of titles (p.92,93), high class mobility (p.90,92), development of eastern magnates 'krolewieta' and the rise of aristocracy in Poland, (p.93), 'they had changed republican model to oligarchy, undermined it (p.94). ToC Google Print
• Maciej Janowski, Polish Liberal Thought, Central European University Press, 2001, Based on solid research, this erudite study is a first attempt at presenting a comprehensive analysis of nineteenth-century Polish liberalism. Polish liberal tradition has generally been considered weak or even nonexistent. Janowski, on the other hand, argues that nineteenth-century Poland inherited a strong protoliberal tradition from the nobility-based democracy, and that in the mid-nineteenth century, liberalism was a dominant trend in Polish intellectual life, even if it rarely appeared in its pure form and did not create political movements separating liberal aims from patriotic ones. Janowski sees his subject in a broad comparative perspective, taking into account the historical experience of other nations of Central Europe. Google Print
• William John Rose, The rise of Polish Democracy, London, G.Bell & Sons. Ltd, 1944. Mentions Joachim Lelewel, Stanislaw Staszic, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski, Piotr Skarga, Szymon Starowolski, Stefan Garczyński, Stanisław Leszczyński as promintent thinkers before the time of Partitions. Disusses changes in Polish politics until the Second World War. Quite impressive, if somewhat outdated.
• Jerzy Lukowski, Liberty's Folly: The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the eighteen century, 1697-1795, Routledge, 1991, ISBN 0415033288. Any work about "Poland"'s past is bound to ruffle some deeply held feelings. The inverted commas around the first mention of Poland [...] are a gesture towards the nationalisms which stand as an immovable barrier between the eighteen-century Commonwealth and its twentieth-century successor states. Different cultures and languages rolled back the old Polish supremacy in a large area of eastern Europe, causing, at the very least, immense problems of terminology and nomenclature for any scrupulously minded historian. Unless otherwise specified, "Poland" as used in the text should be taken to mean the old Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in its entirety. I have abandoned all attempts at consistency in the rendering of place and personal names as leading to unmitigated absurdity. Most sensitively, Gdańsk, Toruń and Elbląg have been rendered Danzig, Thorn and Elbling, not in recognition of any grossdeutsch pretensions, but to signal that their patriciates and a good half of their population spoke German as their first language. I have never regarded the mutliethnic, multilingual and multidenominational nature of the old Commonwealth as anything to be glossed over. As regards personal names, I have followed my instincts and in most cases, unless there is an extremely close English equivalent, I have kept to the Polish form. I refuse to render Stanisław as anything other then Stanisław.
• Tadeusz Konwicki, The Polish Complex, 1977. What is it that we should be ashemed of? A fondness for freedom? Even thought it was a foolish, mad, total, anarchistic, provincial freedom, the freedom which leads to ruin? - beautiful quote

[edit] Asians in Brazil reading list

edited out, no longer relevant (click edit to read/restore)

[edit] Economics, Asian women, USA reading list

edited out, no longer relevant (click edit to read/restore)

[edit] Change in Brazil: the move towards post-industrial society

edited out, no longer relevant (click edit to read/restore)

[edit] Herby

2-4, 9-10

[edit] Race in Another America

edited out, no longer relevant (click edit to read/restore)

[edit] Notes

• User:Piotrus/Sandbox/Notes

[edit] Dzikie Pola

• See User:Piotrus/Sandbox/Dzikie Pola

[edit] pa

[12]

Internal Revenue Service Center Philadelphia, PA 19255

[edit] barry

[13]

[edit] MemoryWiki

User:Piotrus/Sandbox/MemoryWiki

[14]

[edit] GMF

[15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]

[edit] RERC

• Linda van Roosmalen, 9 May
• John Durrant 8 May
• J. Scott Yaruss 7 May
• Richard Simpson (academic) 6 May
• Katherine D. Seelman 6 May
• Ashli Molinero 5 May
• David M. Brienza 5 May
• Clifford E. Brubaker 5 May
• Ellen Cohn 4 May
• Bambang Parmanto 4 May
• University of Pittsburgh School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences 4 May

[edit] Signature testing range

1) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk

2)  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk 

3)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk} 

4)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk} 

5)  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk 

6)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk} 

6a)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 

6b)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk} 

6c)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 

6d)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 

6e)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 

6f)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 

6g)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 

6h)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 

6i) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}

6j) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus} | ^talk

6k)  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 

6l)  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 

6m)  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 

7) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus  talk}

8) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrustalk}

9) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus^talk}

10) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrustalk}

11) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus}^Talk

12) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus}^Talk

13) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus^Talk

[edit] Poland new articles

• [23]

[edit] Poetry

[edit] Yalta

Translation of [24]

Like new tsars' residence,
Servants know their duties,
Far were the Tatars resettled,
From where the world is judged.

Widows now see, the walls listen
How coughs with his cigar the Lion,
How squeks the wheelchair pushed
with broken Democrat inside.

But nobody sees and nobody hears,
Highlander's doings in the Crimean night,
When with faithful comrades gesture
He speaks with his legandary power.

Don't blame Stalin,
He was not pulling the strings,
It was not his fault,
That Rooslvelt in Jałta had no strenght.
When the triumvirate together formed
the history of the world,
- It's obvious who played the Cezar's role
and such is the truth behind Jałta.

In the weak light of cigar's butt
Floated the face of Albion's lion:
Let's not talk about the Baltic,
Why would Europe need so many states?

Poles? - after all there is just the matter
that they have to live somewhere...
Poland, it was always trouble...
The Cripple cares and shakes.

But sooths them master of the house,
Stroking his yellowish moustache:
My country will lend them a helping hand,
Later they can do what they want.

Don't blame Churchill,
He was not pulling the strings,
After all, the triumvirate was only there
So Stalin would get what he wanted.
Who values peace,
Will always back out of the fight - 
Win will the one who fears not the wars
And such is the truth behind Jałta.

The palace's walls strain to hear
When to the Cripple speaks the Lion -
- I believe in Stalin's thruthful words
He seems to care for Soviet's blood.

And so the Cripple nods to that,
Undounted guardian of democracy
Stalin, he's the man of the century
The men of state, the leader!
 
As alliance of great ones, it's not a cabal
It's the world's future - freedom, order - 
With them, the weak will survuve,
And receive his share... of losses.

Don't blame Roosvelt,
Think what he had to endure!
Pipe, cigar's smoke and bottle,
Churchill, who cared not for alliances.
After all, three empires talked
about the borders, unclear ones:
- and in the detail, Beria lied,
And such is the truth behind Jałta. 

So delegations flew away,
Quiet became the tsar's Crimean castle.
And when the West was loud with guns,
Humans like cattle were hearded East. 

The free world later celebrated freedom,
The fronts suddenly became empty - 
Flowers fell on the president's grave,
And there were transports, so many transports. 

The red dawn follows the night
The voters voted, and Churchill left!
And there the transports of live people,
And there the camps of long death.

So don't blame the Trinity,
History's judgement was behind it
Designed in every detail - 
Each of them protected, what they had.
They could have erred, in the moment -
He was not a Pole, not a Balt...
Only the victims are always right!
And such is the truth behind Jałta.

[edit] Walls

From [25]

He had youth and vision, they were legion
He aided them with the song, singing of near dawn.
They lit a thousand candles for him, their heads in smoke,
He sang that it is time for the wall to fall,
They sang together with him:

Pull the bars from the walls!
Loose the chains, break the whip!
And the walls will fall, fall fall!
And bury the old world!

Soon they knew the song by heart and the melody itself
Carried the old words, shivers of heart and heads.
So they sung, the clapped in the rythm, like shots,
And the chain was a burden, delayed was the dawn...
And he still sung and played:

Pull the bars from the walls!
Loose the chains, break the whip!
And the walls will fall, fall fall!
And bury the old world!

And they saw their numbers, they felt the strenght and time,
And with the song that the dawn is near, they marched in the streets;
They fell the monuments and cried out - He is with us! He is against us!
Who's alone he is our worst enemy!
And the singer was also alone.

He looked at the steadily marching crowds,
In silence he listed to the thunder of their steps,
And the walls grew, grew, grew
The chain moved at their feet...

[edit] About the etiquette at the table

From [26]. Polish table prepared. On the tablecoth of standards Amidst sweat, honey, blood - millenia old pattern shines. On it dined the king, chancellor, priest, peasant and hussar, Threads come from the Ottomans, Germans added the skills. Lithuanian sew stubborness into Poles carelessness. Wild emotions of heart the Cossack brought, sadness - the Jew. Italian latin sentences braided in the patient material, Esthetical conflict causing with the cyrillic.

Penelope of the nations - what she weaved she undued, Greed of the suitors sealed her fate; Until the work was taken by cold Deianira Weaving funeral clothes for doomed armies of Herculeses. On tragicomedic brocade we dine, When from straw in the boots we take out our spoons! Maybe not like we used too, not richer, not wealthier But - on ours we reach for the bowls and chalices!

Great hunger is caused by lords' fresh pâté, Strong cordial of ciuta throws a spark into the dry souls! We bite into the bloody meat And for holidays - we savour the holy bread. For delicate stomachs this is to serious a meal, The heads filled with thought have no room for more! Bodies shiver amids the golden crockery,

I gave up on that one...

[edit] Report

From [27]

In the quarries my people are fast and precise,
We can see enthusiasm and honest engagement
Every day everybody reports for work nobody is slacking off nobody steals
All chains and tools are always in perfect condition

Work goes according to plan local marble is of the highest class
Death rate is low physical condition is monitored
Efficiency of work constantly rises and is independent of race
Although on all fronts of work most endurance have the Germanics tribesman

We all realize how important is our toil for the state,
Because of it buildings will raise that will amaze the world
Squares streets straight roads triumphal arcs for the emperors
Ports temples monuments inns and brothels

In them our part pride that will last centuries
And so from that we draw strength even if we are forgotten
Loyal and trustworthy till the end we will mine the marble
That is the report like all the previous ones of older slave
Spartacus the Thracian

[edit] Clock

From [28]

Those who cry "Freedom" - tighten ropes
Those who cry "Bravery" - shake with fear
He who cries "Memory" - forgot
Those who cry "Mercy" - dream of executions
"Widsom" - repeats the fool
"Honesty" - applauds lier
For peace pleads the berseker
For vegetarianism - the cannibal.

In the clock that is winded every days
Arrows have fallen long ago
And the weights of unknown events
Predict two directions of the pendulum...

Those who cry "Strenght" - their voice falters
Those who cry "Loyalty" - betrayed
Those who cry "Greatness" - so little
"Transparency" - declares a hidden voice
Demand the rules of the game - cheaters
For death vote the defenders of life
Who calls to believe - doesn't.

In the clock that is winded every days
Arrows have fallen long ago
And the weights of unknown events
Predict two directions of the pendulum...

For recongition calls the belittled
For piety - pride in chasuble
For quiet - the bell ringer
For honor - bulletproof head
"I" - squeks one in the crowd
"We" - who is afraid to act alone
He who values love - unloved
Who has hope - measures the ropes.

In the clock that is winded every days
Arrows have fallen long ago
And the weights of unknown events
Predict two directions of the pendulum...
When the thread of time goes back -
It will sound again...

[edit] Major copyvio story

Copied to Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems.

[edit] More reading list

• Merton, R.K. Dilemmas of Democracy in the Voluntary Associations. American Journal of Nursing 1966,
• Archon Fung, ASSOCIATIONS AND DEMOCRACY: Between Theories, Hopes, and Realities Annual Review of Sociology. Volume 29, Page 515-539, Aug 2003

[edit] Nifty

Barnometer™
	n00b	involved	been around	veteran	seen it all	older than the Cabal itself

XMAS Gift

[edit] XMAS gift

Lots of good intentions flying around, but not much in the way of useful stuff. Here is a nice template I found to organize your ever-growing collections of awards :) -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 14:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Salad'o'meter™
	put barnstars here (no thumb or direction)
	n00b	involved	been around	veteran	seen it all	older than the Cabal itself

[edit] tools

• Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits: Ranked by total edits, updated every few months.
• User Edit Counter: Total edits, User groups, Image uploads, Distinct pages edited, Edits/page (avg), Avg edits/day, First edit, Edits by namespace
• User Contribution Tree (requires the user to agree to it first)
• Countervandalism Edit Counter (very basic)
• Kate Wannabe user edit counter. Note: stops at 45000 contribs and thus may not be accurate for top contributors. Total edits, First edit, Edits by namespace, Edits by month, Top 10 articles edit in every namespace
• TDS' Article Contribution Counter: Editors by number of contribution to given article. Anonymous lumped together.

[edit] From userpage

Edit summaries:

Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world
this article is {{unreferenced}}. Please help fix this and [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check|Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world]]

[[Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Formatter|format]]

[edit] letter

Subject: Developer help needed for General User Survey

Hello guys,

The General User Survey project (survey of Wikipedia users, see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/General_User_Survey) is in dire need of somebody who would help us with the coding part - the questions for the survey have been mostly ready for months, but we cannot implement the survey with our (lack of) technical skills.

It was suggested (at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Researching_Wikipedia) that our close-to-2-years (!) delay in getting General User Survey project up and running is due to researchers discussing the issue among themselves on a forum nobody else reads (i.e. Wiki-research-l) - so I am bringing the issue here.

Finishing the GUS project would give us not only a better theoretical understanding of ourselves (demographics, motivations, etc.) but also generate reliable practical information on how Wikimedia software and procedures are valued by the users.

Thank you for your help,

PS. I've tried sending this message to the list few days ago but I am pretty sure it got eaten by some net bug along the way, so I am trying it again. I apologize if it anybody receives it the second time.

PS2. Just recently another interesting research project did cross a milestone: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiXRay

-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus

[edit] Jimbo on civility

• [29]

[edit] Guide to Wikistats

User:Piotrus/Guide to researching Wikipedia

[edit] Toys

• User:Dschwen/WikiMiniAtlas [30]
• User:Misza13/Scripts/Watchlist sorter/Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Watchfilter
• User:Zocky/Auto Complete User:Zocky/Search Box

[edit] Bowling

• p.169 - The speed of diffusion of the Internet has been substantialy greater than that of any other commercial technology, save for the television.
• p.170 - once we control for higher education, the net users are indistinguishable from the rest in civic engagement
• p.171 - Peter Kollock and Marc Smith: "To date, most communities have the structure of either anarchy (if unmoderated) or dicatorship (if moderated)."Communities in Cyberspace"
• p.177 - The bandwith requirements necessary for even poor-quality video are so high that it is unlikely to be commonly and cheeply available for at least a decade or more
• p.217 - table

Technological invention	Household penetration (1 %)	Years to reach 75% of American Households
Telephone	1890	67
Automobile	1908	52
Vacuum cleaner	1913	48
Air conditioner	1952	48
Refrigerator	1925	23
Radio	1923	14
VCR	1980	12
Television	1948	7

[edit] HoI 2

[edit] Ministers

POL Head of State Ignacy Moscicki 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of Government Marian Zyndram-Koscialkowski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Foreign Minister Józef Beck 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Armament Tadeusz Kasprzycki 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Security Wladyslaw Raczkiewicz 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of Military Intelligence Tadeusz Pełczyński-Grzegorz 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Chief of Staff Edward Rydz-Smigly 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Chief of Army Edward Rydz-Smigly 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Chief of Navy Jerzy Swirski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Chief of Air Force Jozef Zajac 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of State Kazimierz Sosnkowski 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Head of State Boleslaw Bierut 1945 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Head of State Boleslaw Bierut 1947 ST Stalinist

POL Head of State Boleslaw Wieniawa-Dlugoszowski 1939 SL Social Liberal

POL Head of State Ignacy Jan Paderewski 1936 SC Social Conservative

POL Head of State Wladyslaw Raczkiewicz 1939 ML Market Liberal

POL Head of State Wanda Wasilewska 1937 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Head of State Wladyslaw Gomulka 1942 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Head of State Walery Slawek 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of Government Felicjan Slawoj-Skladkowski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of Government Wojciech Korfanty 1936 SL Social Liberal

POL Head of Government Wladyslaw Sikorski 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Head of Government Stanislas A. Neyman 1939 SD Social Democrat

POL Head of Government Mieczyslaw Michalowicz 1942 SD Social Democrat

POL Head of Government Stanislaw Mikolajczyk 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Head of Government Tomasz Arciszewski 1944 SL Social Liberal

POL Head of Government Edward Osobka-Morawski 1945 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Head of Government Jozef Cyrenkiewicz 1947 ST Stalinist (misplelled, should be Józef Cyrankiewicz)

POL Head of Government Roman Dmowski 1936 FA Fascist

POL Head of Government Tadeusz Bielecki 1936 NS National Socialist

POL Head of Government Eugeniusz Kwiatkowski 1937 SL Social Liberal

POL Head of Government Marceli Nowotko 1941 ST Stalinist

POL Head of Government Jan Kwapinski 1944 SC Social Conservative

POL Head of Government Stanislaw Osiecki 1936 SD Social Democrat

POL Head of Government Boleslaw Drobner 1943 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Foreign Minister August Zaleski 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Foreign Minister Edward Raczynski 1941 SC Social Conservative

POL Foreign Minister Tadeusz Romer 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Foreign Minister Adam Tarnowski 1944 SL Social Liberal

POL Foreign Minister Edward Osobka-Morawski 1945 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Foreign Minister Wincenty Rzymowski 1945 SD Social Democrat

POL Foreign Minister Zygmunt Modzelewski 1947 ST Stalinist

POL Foreign Minister Jan Piekalkiewicz 1939 SD Social Democrat

POL Foreign Minister Henryk Leon Strasburger 1938 SL Social Liberal

POL Foreign Minister Jedrzej Giertych 1936 FA Fascist

POL Foreign Minister Ignacy Jan Paderewski 1936 SD Social Democrat

POL Foreign Minister Boleslaw Drobner 1943 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Foreign Minister Adam Próchnik 1945 SD Social Democrat

POL Foreign Minister Norbert Barlicki 1943 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Minister of Armament Eugeniusz Kwiatkowski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Armament Casimir Ehrenberg 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Minister of Armament Bronislaw Regulski 1941 SC Social Conservative

POL Minister of Armament Ludwik W. Rajchmann 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Minister of Armament Wojciech Korfanty 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Minister of Armament Stanislas A. Neyman 1944 SL Social Liberal

POL Minister of Armament Herman Liebermann 1945 SD Social Democrat

POL Minister of Armament Hilary Minc 1947 ST Stalinist

POL Minister of Armament Leon Kozlowski 1937 NS National Socialist

POL Minister of Armament Henryk Leon Strasburger 1937 SD Social Democrat

POL Minister of Armament Adam Koc 1936 SL Social Liberal

POL Minister of Armament Stanislaw Glabinski 1936 FA Fascist

POL Minister of Armament Jan Stefan Haneman 1944 ST Stalinist

POL Minister of Armament Józef Niecko 1936 SD Social Democrat

POL Minister of Armament Michael Rola-Zymierski 1944 ST Stalinist

POL Minister of Armament Józef Haller 1936 SL Social Liberal

POL Minister of Armament Tadeusz Lychowski 1939 SD Social Democrat

POL Minister of Security Felicjan Slawoj-Skladkowski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Security Adam Rose 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Minister of Security Eugeniusz Kwiatkowski 1940 SC Social Conservative

POL Minister of Security Marjan Rudzinski 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Minister of Security Antoni Roman 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Minister of Security Wincenty Witos 1944 SL Social Liberal

POL Minister of Security Mieczyslaw Niedzialkowski 1945 SD Social Democrat

POL Minister of Security Jakub Berman 1947 ST Stalinist

POL Minister of Security Stanislaw Mikolajczyk 1939 SD Social Democrat

POL Minister of Security Karol Popiel 1936 SL Social Liberal

POL Minister of Security Aleksander Zawadzki 1943 ST Stalinist

POL Minister of Security Waclaw Mohl 1940 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Security Mieczyslaw Trajdos 1938 FA Fascist

POL Minister of Security Kazimierz Switalski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Security Witold Grabowski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Security Janusz Radziwill 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Security Kazimierz Bartel 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of Military Intelligence Adam Tarnowski 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Head of Military Intelligence Feliks Koneczny 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Head of Military Intelligence Alfred Leon Konopka 1944 SL Social Liberal

POL Head of Military Intelligence Mieczyslaw Sokolowski 1945 SD Social Democrat

POL Head of Military Intelligence Stanislaw Dubois 1945 ST Stalinist

POL Head of Military Intelligence Ignacy Matuszewski 1937 SC Social Conservative

POL Head of Military Intelligence Jan Kowalewski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of Military Intelligence Wieslaw Domaniewski 1938 SL Social Liberal

POL Chief of Staff Waclaw Stachiewicz 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Chief of Staff Wladyslaw Sikorski 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Chief of Staff Michael Karaszewicz-Tokarzewski 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Chief of Staff Stefan Rowecki 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Chief of Staff Tadeusz Bor-Komorowski 1943 SL Social Liberal

POL Chief of Staff Stanislaw Kopanski 1944 SL Social Liberal

POL Chief of Staff Leopold Okulicki 1945 SD Social Democrat

POL Chief of Staff Michal Rola-Zymierski 1944 ST Stalinist

POL Chief of Army Wladyslaw Sikorski 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Chief of Army Wladyslaw Anders 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Chief of Army Tadeusz Bor-Komorowski 1944 SL Social Liberal

POL Chief of Army Michal Rola-Zymierski 1945 ST Stalinist

POL Chief of Army Wladyslaw Grabsky 1945 SD Social Democrat

POL Chief of Army Jan Kowalewski 1937 FA Fascist

POL Chief of Navy Jozef Unrug 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Chief of Navy Francois Sokal 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Chief of Navy Leon Chajn 1943 ML Market Liberal

POL Chief of Navy Adam Rapacki 1945 LE Leninist

POL Chief of Air Force Ludomil Rayski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Chief of Air Force Stanislaw Pawluc 1939 SC Social Conservative

POL Chief of Air Force Wladyslaw Kalkus 1943 SL Social Liberal

POL Chief of Air Force Czeslaw Bieszczad 1945 ST Stalinist

POL Head of State Boleslaw Piasecki 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of Government August Zaleski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Foreign Minister Jan Szembek 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Minister of Armament Jerzy Zdziechowski 1936 NS National Socialist

POL Minister of Security Leon Joseph Baranski 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Head of Military Intelligence Janusz Zoltowski 1936 FA Fascist

POL Chief of Staff Wladyslaw Moczar 1936 FA Fascist

POL Chief of Army Tomislaw Lupaszko 1936 PA Paternal Autocrat

POL Chief of Navy Jan Kiwerski 1936 FA Fascist

POL Chief of Air Force Alfred Chlapowski 1936 FA Fascist

POL Head of State Norbert Barlicki 1936 ST Stalinist

POL Head of Government Edward Osobka-Morawski 1936 ST Stalinist

POL Foreign Minister Pawel Finder 1936 LE Leninist

POL Minister of Armament Zygmunt Berling 1936 ST Stalinist

POL Minister of Security Stanislaw Radkiewicz 1936 ST Stalinist

POL Chief of Staff Herman Liebermann 1936 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Chief of Army Karol Swierczewski 1936 ST Stalinist

POL Chief of Air Force Ludwik Grosfeld 1936 LWR Left wing Radical

POL Head of Government Boleslaw Bierut 1952 ST Stalinist

POL Foreign Minister Stanislaw Skrzeszewski 1951 ST Stalinist

POL Minister of Armament Konstanty Dabrowski 1945 ST Stalinist

POL Head of Military Intelligence Henryk Swiatkowski 1947 ST Stalinist

[edit] Leaders

1930 1960 Roman Abraham

1930 1945 Franciszek Alter

1937 1960 Władysław Anders

1930 1938 Leon Berbecki

1940 1960 Zygmunt Berling

1930 1960 Ludwik Bittner

1930 1940 Mikołaj Bołtuć

1930 1939 Władysław Bończa-Uzdowski

1930 1960 Władysław Bortnowski

1930 1960 Mieczysław Boruta-Spiechowicz

1930 1960 Tadeusz Bór-Komorowski

1938 1960 Adam Brzechwa-Ajdukiewicz

1937 1941 Ottokar Brzoza-Brzezina

1930 1942 Stanisław Burhardt-Bukacki

1937 1960 Leopold Cehak

1941 1960 Heliodor Cepa

1940 1960 Antoni Chruściel

1938 1960 Jan Chmurowicz

1930 1960 Walerian Czuma

1938 1960 Ludwik Czyżewski

1930 1960 Stefan Dąb-Biernacki

1937 1960 Stanisław Dąbek

1930 1946 Mieczysław Dąbkowski

1930 1939 Stefan Dembiński

1930 1960 Franciszek Dindorf-Ankowicz

1930 1938 Henryk Dobrzański

1930 1960 Juliusz Drapella

1930 1960 Rudolf Dreszer

1937 1960 Konstanty Drucki-Lubecki

1938 1960 Bolesław Bronisław Duch

1937 1960 Kazimierz Dworak

1930 1960 Leopold Engel-Ragis

1938 1940 Adam Epler

1930 1960 Kazimierz Fabrycy

1939 1960 August Emil Fieldorf

1930 1941 Julian Filipowicz

1938 1960 Janusz Gaładyk

1938 1960 Janusz Gąsiorowski

1939 1960 Janusz Gąsiorowski

1942 1960 Józef Giza

1938 1960 Kazimierz Glabisz

1938 1960 Janusz Głuchowski

1937 1944 Stefan Grot-Rowecki

1930 1960 Stanisław Grzmot-Skotnicki

1930 1943 Stanisław Haller de Hallenburg

1930 1938 Józef Haller von Hallenburg

1930 1938 Stefan Hanka-Kulesza

1930 1938 Hutten-Chapski ?

1938 1960 Jan Jagmin-Sadowski

1938 1960 Józef Jaklicz

1930 1960 Stanisław Kalabiński

1930 1960 Tadeusz Kalina-Zieleniewski

1930 1960 Michał Tokarzewski-Karaszewicz

1938 1943 Jan Karcz

1930 1960 Tadeusz Kasprzycki

1942 1960 Jan Wojciech Kiwerski

1930 1939 płk. Wacław Klaczyński

1930 1941 Franciszek Kleeberg

1938 1960 Tadeusz Klimecki or Stefan Klimecki

1938 1960 Ludwik Kmicic-Skrzyński

1930 1960 Edmund Knoll-Kownacki

1938 1960 Stanisław Kopański

1938 1960 Tadeusz Kossakowski

1941 1960 Stefan Kossecki

1930 1960 Wincenty Kowalski

1930 1960 Kozicki ?

1930 1960 Jan Kruszewski

1930 1960 Aleksander Krzyżanowski

1930 1960 Marian Kukiel

1938 1940 Józef Kustroń

1930 1960 Tadeusz Kutrzeba

1938 1960 Władysław Langner

1937 1960 Levitt ?

1938 1960 Wilhelm Liszka-Lawicz

1930 1960 Mackiewicz ?

1937 1960 Stanisław Maczek

1937 1960 Mieczysław Makary-Smorawiński

1930 1960 Tadeusz Malinowski

1930 1944 Czesław Młot-Fijałkowski

1937 1940 Bernard Mond

1939 1960 Stefan Mossor

1938 1960 Mieczysław Mozdyniewicz

1930 1960 Aleksander Narbutt-Łuczyński

1930 1960 Mieczysław Norwid-Neugebauer

1939 1960 Roman Odzierzyński

1930 1946 Leopold Okulicki-Niedzwiadek

1930 1960 Brunon Olbrycht

1930 1960 Józef Olszyna-Wilczyński

1930 1960 Gustaw Orlicz-Dreszer

1930 1960 Kazimierz Orlik-Łukoski

1930 1960 Wilhelm Orlik-Rückemann

1930 1939 Aleksander Osiński

1930 1939 Ostrowski ?

1930 1942 Ignacy Oziewicz

1930 1960 Gustaw Paszkiewicz

1938 1960 Tadeusz Pełczyński-Grzegorz

1930 1960 Bolesław Piasecki

1937 1960 Wacław Piekarski

1930 1960 Tadeusz Piskor

1930 1939 Konstanty Plisowski

1930 1946 Zygmunt Podhorski

1930 1941 Bolesław Popowicz

1939 1960 Marian Porwit

1938 1960 Władysław Paweł Powierza

1930 1960 Aleksander Pragłowski

1930 1939 Rudolf Prich

1930 1960 Bronisław Prugar-Ketling

1930 1960 Emil Przedrzymirski-Krukowicz (Emil Krukowicz-Przedrzymirski, Emil Karol Przedrzymirski de Krukowicz)

1942 1960 Marian Przewłocki

1930 1939 Wacław Przeździecki

1937 1960 Zdzisław Wincenty Przyjałkowski

1942 1960 Bronisław Rakowski

1942 1960 Stanisław Rola-Arciszewski

1930 1960 Michał Rola-Żymierski

1930 1938 Jan Romer (d.1934!)

1930 1960 Juliusz Rómmel

1930 1960 Stanisław Rostworowski

1939 1960 Klemens Rudnicki

1937 1960 Mieczysław Ryś-Trojanowski (double entry, also under Trojanowski)

1937 1960 Kazimierz Sawicki

1930 1941 Wacław Scewola-Wieczorkiewicz

1930 1960 Kazimierz Schally

1930 1960 Franciszek Sikorski

1930 1960 Władysław Sikorski

1930 1941 Leonard Skierski

1930 1960 Piotr Skuratowicz

1930 1960 Stanisław Skwarczyński

1930 1960 Felicjan Sławoj Składkowski

1930 1960 Edward Śmigły-Rydz (more commonly known as Edward Rydz-Śmigły)

1939 1960 Marian Smoleński

1930 1960 Mieczysław Smorawiński

1939 1960 Stanisław Sosabowski

1930 1960 Kazimierz Sosnkowski

1937 1960 Marian Spychalski

1930 1960 Wacław Stachiewicz

1939 1960 Antoni Staich

1930 1960 płk. Leon Strzelecki

1938 1960 Nikodem Sulik

1938 1960 Karol Świerczewski

1937 1960 Jarosław Szafran

1930 1960 Antoni Szylling

1937 1960 Władysław Szyszko-Bohusz

1930 1939 Stanisław Taczak

1942 1960 Stanisław Tatar

1930 1960 Wiktor Thommée

1937 1960 Tadeusz Tomaszewski

1937 1960 Trojanowski see Mieczysław Ryś-Trojanowski (double entry)

1938 1945 Marian Turkowski

1930 1943 Wachnowski - nickname of Karol Ziemski

1930 1960 Józef Werobej

1930 1938 Bolesław Wieniawa-Długoszowski

1930 1960 Alojzy Wir-Konas

1941 1960 Kazimierz Wiśniowski

1930 1939 Franciszek Wład

1930 1945 Jerzy Wołkowicki

1938 1941 Sergiusz Zahorski

1939 1960 płk. Adam Zakrzewski

1930 1939 Mariusz Zaruski

1930 1960 Marian Żegota-Januszajtis

1930 1960 Lucjan Żeligowski

1937 1960 Karol Ziemski

1937 1960 Tadeusz Kalina-Zieleniewski

1930 1939 Eugeniusz Żongołłowicz

1938 1960 Władysław Zubosz-Kaliński

1930 1943 Juliusz Zulauf

1930 1960 Xawery Czernicki

1930 1941 Stefan Frankowski

1937 1942 Henryk Grudziński

1939 1960 Wacław Kłoczkowski

1939 1945 Andrzej Kłopotowski

1938 1960 Karol Korytowski

1930 1960 Bolesław Romanowski

1938 1960 Włodzimierz Steyer

1930 1960 Jerzy Świrski

1939 1943 Szystowski

1930 1960 Józef Unrug

1937 1960 Wronski

1938 1960 Breda

1939 1960 Chalupa

1930 1960 Heller

1937 1960 Wacław Iwaszkiewicz

1930 1960 Jarina

1930 1941 Władysław Kalkus

1930 1960 Edward Karaś

1940 1960 Karpinski

1930 1960 Kowalczyk

1939 1960 Eugeniusz Krasnodębski

1938 1946 Stanisław Kuźmiński

1930 1944 Henryk Lewandowski

1938 1960 Stanisław Nazarkiewicz

1937 1960 Stefan Pawlikowski

1930 1960 Stanisław Pawluć

1930 1960 Tadeusz Prauss

1930 1960 Ludomił Rayski

1938 1941 Bolesław Stachoń

1938 1960 Olgierd Tuskiewicz

1930 1941 Józef Zając

1938 1960 Nikodem Sulik

1930 1942 Skoryna

[edit] Read

[31] [32] [33] [34]

pol [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46]

lith [47] [48]

[49]