User talk:Piotrus/Archive 15
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This 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. |
Mala informacja
Witam tutaj Tymek 21:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Niedawno wpadla mi w rece ciekawa publikacja, Maly Rocznik Statystyczny Polski za rok 1939
Staram sie w oparciu o te ksiazke czyscic dane dotyczace przedwojennej Polski, dodawac nowe i poprawiac ewentualne bledy. Jezeli posiadasz wiedze na temat artykulow o przedwojennej Polsce, w których przydlaby sie jakas statystyczna korekta, napisz
pozdrawiam serdecznie Tymek 21:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Almost
Had a heart attack... I HATE SPIDERS. -- Hrödberäht 02:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 5 | 29 January 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 18:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus-Ghirla
This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.
Because Ghirlandajo, a main party to this case, has not edited since December 27, 2006, and because of an ongoing informal mediation attempt that occured prior to Ghirlandajo's absence, this case is temporarily dismissed. If and when Ghirlandajo returns, it would be best for him to resume productive mainspace editing, which it is hoped can take place without a recurrence of the disputes that led to this case. As appropriate, the mediation between Ghirlandajo and Piotrus can be resumed to seek resolution of any live disputes that might remain between them. Under the circumstances, the arbitration case is dismissed, without prejudice to a request by any party to reopen it in the future if necessary.
For the Arbitration Committee, – Chacor 01:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
DYK
 |
On 26 January 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Name of Poland, 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. |
--Yomanganitalk 08:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
|
On February 2, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Żarnowiec Nuclear Power Plant, 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. |
Many thanks again Piotrus. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Have you noticed this?
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Extreme_long-term_sockpuppetism
Due to the edit histories I'm giving you and Alex Bakharev the heads up. Looks like your neck of the woods. DurovaCharge! 19:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, so this is the author of all those Trubetskoy articles. Appleseed (Talk) 20:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Déja vu all over again
There's a near-cliché about being made to keep voting until the right result comes up. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm getting rather bored by having to revisit substantially the same question. The sort of compromise that resulted in the camel in place of the horse, that we don't need. Come up with a workable compromise (i.e. Latin name per Shilkanni), and you might get somewhere. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- So how about Jogaila (Władysław II Jagiełło) (Ягайла Ольгердович) (allowing for corrections to my non-existent language skillz)? I could live with Jagello (Shilkanni assures me that's the accurate Latin form), or Jagiello at a pinch, but byzantine confections are not what WP:NAME is supposed to produce. You should read that TV arbcom case, especially the bits about consensus building. Voting is evil, so I've heard. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- I must agree. Discussing the sources for Jagello vs. Jagiello would actually be interesting, however. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Can you do me a huge favour and add a note to the Polish and Lithuanian noticeboards about the Jogaila mediation sometime? And anywhere that seems reasonable to you. (I'll owe you a favour: perhaps I can add some more stuff to the Voisin 3 article since I heaps of it.) Thanks in advance. Dziynki! (Is that how it's written?) Dobra noc, Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- A quick and dirty article on Aeroplanes Voisin is done. Rather than Voisin series, I think I'll do something on the Salmson 2, a successful French design that served with US and Polish air forces too. Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
NewArtBot
Please check Portal_talk:Poland/New_article_announcements#User:AlexNewArtBot_-_New_Article_Bot and Portal:Poland/New_article_announcements#Possible Poland-related article found by bot . The idea is that the articles found there are processes by the portal participants Alex Bakharev 19:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your suggestions. The bot should eat every regular expression (see a cheat sheet). \W stands for any non-word character (outside A-Z and a-z range) I use it as a word boundary market. Sometimes it works incorrectly as the letters with diacritics are still match the patterns and seen by the bot as a word marker, that they are not.
- I am sort of reluctant to include rules polish and pole as the both words can mean something else. I have included polish with the markers on both sides /\Wpolish\W/ at least it will remove words like polished and polishing. I am very reluctant to include the rule pole as all the timber�ishing\etc. connotation would leave to massive false positive. Alex Bakharev 06:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)
--TomasBat (Talk) 22:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Interesting map template
Thanks, I'll see if I can make any improvements. Appleseed (Talk) 22:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Możliwy atak z polskojęzycznego
pl:Dyskusja:III Liceum Ogólnokształcące im. św. Jana Kantego w Poznaniu - ma konto na en: i grozi, że tu zacznie wypisywać głupoty. Prosiłbym Cię jako tutejszego admina o ew. interwencję. Pozdrawiam Radomil talk 00:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Volkslista
Hello Piotruś. Do you know somebody who would be interested in translating [1] Volkslista article from Polish Wiki? It is missing here, and only redirects to Volksdeutsche article. I think it is very important to have it here since it is crucial for understanding some issues of Upper Silesia and Silesia in general. - Darwinek 11:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Your DYK nomination for Mamert Stankiewicz was successful
|
Did you know? was updated. On February 2, 2007, a fact from the article Mamert Stankiewicz, which you recently nominated, has been 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 22:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Recent edit war at article Poles
You have participated in the recent edit war over the opening paragraph of the article Poles. The article has now been fully protected to prevent further edit warring. The only way to resolve this matter is for interested editors to discuss this matter. Please go to Talk:Poles#Continued_edit_war_over_opening_paragraph and express your opinion there. Please work with your fellow editors to reach a consensus wording that is properly cited and neutral. Thank you, Gwernol 12:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
A proposal
Please take an early look at a proposal I've been drafting. I'm not ready to post it to a noticeboard yet, but I'd definitely like your feedback. User:Durova/Community enforced mediation DurovaCharge! 23:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Article name
I nominated the article for selfish reasons, I admit. You and I are different types of Wikipedian: you do lots of things; I do one thing at a time, obsessively. And so I felt I had to get this one out of my system now before I move on to my next obsession (probably Anton Chekhov). I can't wait while the wheels of mediation, polls, the United Nations, or whatever tediously grind along.
I know I won't be able to commit to this article in the same way for a postponed FAC (at the moment the background reading is very fresh in my mind), but that's my issue, nobody else's. I'm actually quite enjoying the fight of trying to get the article to pass in the face of this rather large obstacle of the mediation; it's certainly more fun than giving up.
By the way, thanks for voting 'support' despite your dislike of the title: I hope your critics noticed that. Anyway, Wikipedia isn't life, and if the article fails, don't worry, I won't be throwing myself off the nearest cliff. All the best. qp10qp 16:58, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Your DYK nomination for Antoni Bohdziewicz was successful
|
Did you know? was updated. On February 4, 2007, a fact from the article Antoni Bohdziewicz, which you recently nominated, has been 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 14:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
|
Did you know? was updated. On February 6, 2007, a fact from the article Aeroplanes Voisin, which you recently nominated, has been 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. |
Keep up the great work Piotrus! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 6 | 5 February 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 05:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Is Poland in Central or Eastern Europe?
Hi, seeing as you seem to be the wiki-authority on all things Polish I present to you the above mentioned question pertaining to the main article on Poland. There has been a number of edits in this article with regards to this geographical location. The current version states that Poland is in Central or Eastern Europe. I believe this should be corrected for the following reasons: the articles on Poland's neighbors all state their location as Central, not Western or Eastern; geographically Poland does not lie east of the geographical divisor of the European continent; culturally Catholic Poland has always been far closer to any western state than eastern one. There is no more Eastern Bloc and an article on present day Poland should not be swayed by past assumptions. Poland does not meet either of the two criteria presented in the "Eastern Europe" article and is already in the "Central Europe." I would appreciate your comments on this issue. Many thanks! JRWalko 03:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)JRWalko
- It's in Central Europe. It was in Eastern Europe only in the abstract sense, as part of the Eastern Bloc. Appleseed (Talk) 03:18, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sources are not clear on this, and both variants should stay, preferably with a footnote explaining the various points of view.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 04:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Poland is in fact one of a number of claimants for the title, "Geographical Center of Europe." By all rights, in this view, the capital of the European Union should one day find its home in the broad suburbs of Warsaw.
- The custom of calling Poland a part of "Eastern Europe" was the product of several decades' bipolar division of Europe and the world, and of ignorance. logologist|Talk 06:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- mogl bys powrocic do wersji ze geograficznie Polska nalezy do centralnej europy? przez wandalizm znowu jest wschodnie. Pozdrawiam--Maciek 18:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- moglbys tez zniemic odrazu w Poles? Tam tez toczyl sie wandalizm. Teraz Bez zameldowania nie mozna edytowac... Pozdrawiam--Maciek 18:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Wiec wypadaloby sie zameldowac... -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 18:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- moglbys tez zniemic odrazu w Poles? Tam tez toczyl sie wandalizm. Teraz Bez zameldowania nie mozna edytowac... Pozdrawiam--Maciek 18:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- mogl bys powrocic do wersji ze geograficznie Polska nalezy do centralnej europy? przez wandalizm znowu jest wschodnie. Pozdrawiam--Maciek 18:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Block
Can you please block User:209.242.43.98. This user's most recent vandalism was to Culture of Poland. Appleseed (Talk) 18:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Done. 48h. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- This user was blocked several times, including once for 40 days, and still doesn't get the message. Maybe something longer than two days is required? Appleseed (Talk) 19:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Three months from User:Infrogmation. Appleseed (Talk) 21:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- This user was blocked several times, including once for 40 days, and still doesn't get the message. Maybe something longer than two days is required? Appleseed (Talk) 19:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
My monobook
- I have spent 3 hours the last time trying to fix my monobook. I won't touch because I am scared of ruing the code and don't know what to do. If you are an authetic administrator, then you have my permission to remove the category from my monobook. Please, make sure not to remove other stuff.--Patchouli 22:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Monobook
Ooops!!! I removed the only category reference I could find in there, didn't mean to put my own (rather hacked together) Monobook in the category! Thanks for the heads-up - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 00:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Couple of DYK noms
|
Did you know? was updated. On 7 February 2007, a fact from the article Lublin Castle, which you recently nominated, has been 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. |
|
Did you know? was updated. On 7 February 2007, a fact from the article Salmson 2, which you recently nominated, has been 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. |
--Yomanganitalk 10:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Social Darwinism
At 05:15 on 26 January 2007, as your edit summary states, you moved Social Darwinism to Social darwinism: no need to capitalize. This move appears to have been made without first placing move or merge tags on the article, and the talk page has not been moved, causing some confusion. All the references I've checked use the capitalised form, which is consistently used in the article: going through the first 100 in a google search, the uncapitalised varsion is used by one "History 203 lecture list" with a generally eccentric approach to capitals, Evowiki which dispenses with the capital in the title but uses it in the article, and two chat type pages [2] [3]. Doesn't seem to me like much usage, and the page is now inconsistent. Any evidence that we shouldn't move the title back? .. dave souza, talk 10:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, your willingness to have it changed back is appreciated. Sorry I missed the earlier discussion, and I must admit to having reverted some vandalism on the page without noticing that the title had changed. Anyway, though it's not obvious, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters)#Religions, deities, philosophies, doctrines and their adherents section concludes that "Philosophies, theories, doctrines, and systems of thought do not begin with a capital letter, unless the name derives from a proper noun:", and so Darwinism as deriving from the proper noun "Darwin" always begins with a capital letter, even when preceded by "social". I've changed back a page move in the past, but don't have much experience of it: is this something you'd prefer to do yourself? Thanks for your helpfulness, .. dave souza, talk 20:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Re:My monobook.js
Thanks for the note. I wasn't aware of the category problem (and it looks like I'm not the only one). I believe I fixed it (don't see my page in the category anymore), but if you see any problems, don't hesitiate to tell me. Gavia immer (u|t) 17:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
mono
Done. I didn't notice that. Thanks. lijealso 10:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Request for Mediation
 |
A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Jogaila.
|
Spellings
You're quite right. I can't tell you how unintuitive such names are to me (after being a good speller all my life, I now turn out to be dyslexic in Polish!). I have been making offline changes to the map already, actually (I somehow left out Kaunas altogether), but it will be one of the last things I add, in case some more blunders reveal themselves in the meantime. For the N place, MK suggested Navahrudak; Calgacus suggested Novogrudok. I presume the first is Belarusian and the second Russian. Which of those two do you think would be more appropriate? (I made an innocent mistake in using the Polish version and was suspected of Polish POV! Me, who can't even spell Dobrzyń!) qp10qp 20:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Władysław Wejtko, was selected for DYK!
|
On February 8, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Władysław Wejtko, 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 22:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Re:
Honestly, I am not interested in this and to be honest with you, when you hear "Czech legion" or something like this, think about several dozen of people :), not thousands. ;) Cz historiography very like exaggerating such things. - Darwinek 21:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Wow! Wyjątki się zdarzają :). Gdybyś kiedy wybierał się na Zaolzie, to daj wiedzieć, tak na marginesie. - Darwinek 21:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Thingummyjig
Either Jagello or Jagiello would be fine, although if you were aiming for a vote, I suspect that Jagiello would get the "use English" votes. I'm not sure any of the other ones fill me with boundless enthusiasm. The two you mention have the advantage that they should both be recognisable to anyone whose national mythology the subject forms part of, without actually using a myth-specific name. Thanks for submitting Salmson 2 and Aeroplanes Voisin for T:DYK. I decided to submit a couple of "articles for creation" ones I'd seen and some other odds and ends. We can't have the DYK bit entirely filled with Central/East European stuff written by you, Irpen, and Halibutt... As for whether Poland is in Central or Eastern Europe, the answer is "Yes, it is". Hope that helps! Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- I would accept either, and would be interested to see Shilkanni's evidence that Jagello is better Latin. As Angus predicts, I would prefer Jagiello, because it seems to be more common in English; but I was thinking of proposing Jagello myself, because it's somebody else's first choice. It also has the advantage of giving everybody (but Shilkanni) something to gain from Mediation, which may mean that the next attempt won't be torpedoed. (And if that doesn't work, how about a move to "What-his-name"? ;-> "Thingummyjig" is just so British.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- Other names would be at best marginally acceptable, and I forget where I drew the line; there was an approval poll one or two WP:RM's back. I am willing to tolerate Jogaila, but I don't like it; I might feel the same about Ladislaus or Wladyslaw. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Polish First Army
Unit InfoBox added! W. B. Wilson 08:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Jarosław Kaczyński
I have reverted your edit to the talk page of this article, and I must say your edit summary was rather misleading. you said "rm {{LGBTProject|class=start}} per talk and article content (nothing to support it". I see nothing in the talk to indicate consensus was achieved regarding the tagging of this article, only the placement of the subject in the LGBT category, which is an entirely different matter. He clearly falls within the scope of our project due to the irrational, homophobic statements he has made--statements which were removed from the article in the last whitewash, but which I have reinserted. I would ask that sourced statements not be removed from articles, so as not to create a POV article, which is what was happening on this one. Jeffpw 08:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Ciao
If I asked you some translation from Polish (don't know when or what, simply I wrote some articles on Polish rulers, from... French. Can't imagine the fatigue!!) wikipedia, can you help me? Bye and good work. --Attilios 10:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Expandable toolbox buttons?
I know you like replies on your talk page (the "new messages" comment at the top tells me that). But just putting the reply here always feels a little odd and stops the conversation flow. So I've done the next best thing and added a message to tell you that a reply can be found next to your query on my talk page. If you'd like be to always put the full reply here let me know. --MarkS (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have added a reply to your original question on my talk page. I have now created a version of XEB for testing (ie. I won't keep changing it) which (I believe) covers your request. This Test version is available for you to have a look at if you wish. More details on my talk page. --MarkS (talk) 22:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Sci-fi
Niestety, nie przypominam sobie takiego filmu/serialu. Jestem jeszcze stosunkowo młody a takie kawałki były wyświetlane niemal tylko za komuny. Teraz ludzie patrzą na to jako na śmieszne socjalistyczne eksperymenty, więc nie ma ich w telewizji. Przypominam sobie tylko jeden słynny sci-fi film, gdzie bohaterzy przenoszą się w przeszłość, żeby zatrzymać Hitlera. To chyba jedyny taki czeski kawałek wyświetlany w obecnych czasach w TV. - Darwinek 10:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- Afaik that movie is "Zitra rano vstanu a oparim se cajem" ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 22:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
RE: Dziwne pytanie :) (Darwinek's page)
I think it should be a series "Navstevnici" (Visitors), check this site [4]. But they are visitors from the future not from the space. And that paste seems to be "Amarouny" - you put that to the dish to a couple of tablets and it will create some kind of gelatine. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 11:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- You should have it :) See Návštěvníci (TV series) (redirect Navstevnici and other official names). I am a fan of the old TV series. Including polish two - Czterej pancerni i pies and Stawka wieksza niz zycie and the greatest movie ever - Seksmisja :-D ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 08:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Cheers
Thanks for your note, Piotrus. I've still a bit to do at Jagiello, chasing up the remaining points raised at FAC. I fear that only medieval, preferably late medieval, topics float my boat when it comes to history, though I did help copy-edit Finnish Civil War. To be honest, I'm so atrociously slow that I'm not looking beyond my interrupted project Anton Chekhov, which I'll move back to after finishing up at Jg.
I must say, your Witold Pilecki is a wonderful article: what a guy! Keep up your good work. qp10qp 01:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
An article which you started, or significantly expanded, H. Cegielski - Poznań S.A., was selected for DYK!
|
On February 12, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article H. Cegielski - Poznań S.A., 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 03:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Rejs
Greetings, Proconsol. I have a request: please check out a raging debate over at the Rejs talk page regarding the proper reference for the name of the article on Poland's greatest work of cinematography. Oh, and I enjoyed the Witold Pilecki article as well - what a story! Many thanks, Benzamin 17:15, 12 February 2007 UTC
Your DYK nomination for Włodzimierz Steyer was successful
|
Did you know? was updated. On February 12, 2007, a fact from the article Włodzimierz Steyer, which you recently nominated, has been 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 23:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
|
On February 13, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stanislav Poplavsky, 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 again Piotrus. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 7 | 12 February 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 05:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Translation request
Hiya, I'm currently working on the Knights Templar article, trying to get it to GA status, and I'd like to use an image from the Polish Wikipedia. Could you please translate its description for me? Thanks, Elonka 09:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Zamówienie na szablon
Done, but I'm beginning to wonder if we need all these templates that simply mirror categories. I'm not sure if the little extra information they contain, such as chronology, is worth the effort of creating and maintaining them. I find it more useful when templates present an interesting theme or category subset (e.g. Template:Polish statehood). I think some serious pruning is in order. Appleseed (Talk) 15:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Polish obscenity?
I gather from the dictionary that this edit contains a slightly denatured obscene insult in Polish. The poster has denied this on my Talk page, so I am wondering if there is some slang usage unknown to me which would make this civil discourse. If so, what does it mean?
If there isn't, would you be willing to co-sign an RfC? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- It is possible that the misspelling was part of the point; he insists on "official" names, which is why he was on Talk:Tenedos in the first place/ Leaving off the slash may be irony about the spellings preferred in English, like Wladislaw. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Hungary 1848
Dzien dobry, Piotrus, and dziekuje for posting on the Hungarian noticeboard about 1848! You're absolutely right that we need an article on that event--it was a momentous event in Hungary's history and one of the most significant (certainly the fiercest) revolutions of 1848. I'm still technically on wikibreak, but I was planning to start a 48 article as soon as I return (in 2 weeks, or thereabouts.)
It reminds me, a couple months back I bounced some ideas around with Alensha about trying to set up some sort of informal "alliance" (oh, all right, a cabal) :) of Polish and Hungarian Wikipedians, sort of like a wikiproject but not as organized. :) I just figured that since Poland and Hungary have traditionally been friends and so much of Central-Eastern European history involves both, there could be potential for a very fruitful collaboration here. What do you think?
Polak, Węgier, dwa bratanki, i do szabli, i do szklanki! :) K. Lásztocska 03:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Waldemar Matuska Tag
Hi, could you please check this [5] Consensus was already set but some disputors ignore that and keep adding accuracy tag on the page. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 08:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Stop right now
Do not come back at me and warn me for something that was discussed and taken care of in the past. Should you try to push this issue, you will be reported. Your call. You state that my words were only 'partially correct' and you also state that you are not involved in this matter. Next time do your research, and find out that this issue was already handled. Therefore, you cannot come back and issue out late warnings as you did. As far as translation for confirmation, the translation is incorrect because there was not a proper usage of terminology. The irony is that Pmanderson can do all the intelligent insults and slandering without warning. An admin - Newyorkbrad - has informed both myself and Pmanderson to cease and move on. I have done so, it seems that Pmanderson will not. I will not stand for being slandered, nor will I accept accusations. Pmanderson needs to back down and move on to better edits, as I chose to do. Rarelibra 14:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Pay attention, I will only inform you once:
FYI - It's a common misconception that it's appropriate to try to force users to keep some kind of brand of shame on their pages. Please see "User space harassment" in Wikipedia:Harassment, and several threads currently on WP:ANI, e. g. this and this. The templates about not removing warnings, and the block threats, are for anonymous vandals, not for cases like this. I have a right to remove anything I like from my userpage(s).
If you persist, you will be reported. Thank you. Rarelibra 15:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Removing warnings
Piotrus, Rarelibra has appealed to me to intervene, since he knows how I feel about re-inserting warnings which the user has removed. (In fact I notice he's largely quoting me above. :-) ) I don't have much of a way of forming an opinion about the conflict itself, but I do ask you not to restore anything he removes from his page. There is some disagreement on this score, see here, but every time it's brought up on ANI, as far as I've seen, it returns a consensus that users can remove any messages they want, and that putting them back is harrassment. (The discussions Rarelibra links you to aren't "current" any more, but the principle has remained the same.) Why put them back, anyway? They're not supposed to sit there as a badge of shame, they're for the user to read, right? Well, and for admins to be aware of in case of future problems, but provided you use a telling edit summary (ahem), they're very easily recoverable from the History. Removing them is proof that he has read them. Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 16:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC).
- So in your opinion reinserting a warning about obscene behavior is worse than the behavior itself? Interesting. Space Cadet 18:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- No, as stated above in his opinion a user can read and acknowledge something on his/her user page and then either choose to archive it (best solution) or delete it (still in the history). It is worse to continually revert and attempt to force shame if, in fact, the user acknowledges and accepts. In your case, by reading your talk page, I see you also have several issues to deal with - especially when you are borderline threatening wikistalking to me. Rarelibra 19:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes I have been accused of crap, been misunderstood and finally (YES!) rightfully reprimanded. Only I never remove justifiable warnings (that's why you can read them, duh), but instead I learn from them. Watch, you'll thank Piotruś and me one day. Space Cadet 19:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus. Not Piotruś. I even explain it on my mainpage :) Now, please stop this min flaminging on my talk page, both of you.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- No flaming on my end. Simple clarification - you have the right to remove what you want. Period. Please deal with this accordingly. Thank you and happy editing. Rarelibra 19:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Positive note
Now, on a more positive end, could you assist me with providing the name of the powiat that is direct East of the Warszawski Zachodni powiat? Thank you. Rarelibra 19:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Pruszkowski. Space Cadet 21:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- That would be the Pruszków County then, I guess...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Antinaturalism
The Antinaturalism article has been split according to your recommendation. --Loremaster 22:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Webscriptions
It is blatant because it seems to want to sell the reader on the company. No outside sources are given to establish notability and the entire article serves no information as to why an encyclopedia would care about this company. Submitted for AFD. - Ocatecir 04:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
DYK
 |
On 15 February 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polish Second Army, 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. |
--Yomanganitalk 09:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Deprodding
Hi. I've deprodded Katarzyna Kozyra, which was easy to get up to a decent stub, and Jacek Yerka. The second of those is still weak against the normal tests of multiple/independent/reliable text sources, but his art is out there being sold on commercial websites and being talked about by fans, so IMO it would deserve the AFD route. --Mereda 16:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think the point about Kozyra's exhibitions is that the multiple sources have depth, there's text about the work and some bio details. I've added a bit more that was easy to find about her. Where I'd agree with with you that hanging a few pictures=trivial is where the sources lack depth. --Mereda 18:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
HMS Hood
Witam Czy mógłbyś przenieść hasło HMS Hood (disambiguation) w miejsce redirektu HMS Hood ? Ono było tam wczesniej ale któryś z wikipedystów przeniósł to do disamblinga argumentując to tym, że większość linków dotyczy krążownika liniowego, na który teraz pokazuje redirekt HMS Hood.
Zasadą na wiki (nie tylko angielskiej, ale tutaj przed wszystkim) jest umieszczanie haseł opisujących kilka okrętów noszących tą samą nazwę pod hasłem HMS XXX, albo USS XXX. Przykładowo: jeżeli było kilka(naście) okrętów noszących nazwę HMS Enterprise to główne hasło jest spisem tych okrętów a hasła konkretnych okrętów są inaczej nazwane. W przypadku amerykańskich okrętów List of United States Navy ships, A jest to ładnie pokazane - w głównym haśle jest krótki opis - a w bocznych konkretny okręt. I nikogo nie interesuje które jest bardziej popularne a które nie.
W związku z tym napisał bym ten tekst po angielski - ale poprzednia próba moim zdaniem nie była udana, a tym razem chcę żeby to było zrobione. Swoją drogą - są jasno określone reguły nazywania, a ludzie i tak przenoszą według swojego widzimisię. Czasem się dziwie. Jeszcze. --Pmgpmg 17:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Acha jeszcze jedna sprawa USS Tennessee (BB-43) - pierwszy raz taki podział widzę na części. Widzę że to jest stary tekst - ale czy tak powinno być ?--Pmgpmg 19:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Your removal of information
Probably you "missed" it, but the word, which you and your close ally user:Lysy, trying to remove [6] [7] is directly referenced by English sources. M.K. 13:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- So, may question - why are you deleting referenced formulation? M.K. 13:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Can you explain how third party English source can be not neutral? And how did you come to this conclusion? And such formulation, which was removed, is not limited with one EN source. BTW, i can't asses you link because it shows only summary. M.K. 10:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I still waiting for answers. M.K. 09:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- No, I did not found any answers concurring your motives removing referenced information, quite contrary provided policy suggest that it should be included. So I am waiting for more specific answers from your. And another question, after this brilliant expansion of sentence by you {which saw the previous 18 years as Polish occupation of its capital}, which had same referenced formulation around one week later you identified part of it as POV pushing, but it was perfectly fine formulation when you expanded the sentence. Is it not strange that after week formulation became POV? M.K. 11:39, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
-
Invitation
Thank you for the invitation. What do I do now? :) Pan Piotr Glownia 22:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts
I suggest you post to the above as a central notice board and watchlist it. Tyrenius 01:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
The Turk FAC
Not sure if you've kept it watchlisted, but I had a question regarding the comment you left there, and I was hoping for some clarification if possible. Thanks for your input! --badlydrawnjeff talk 04:39, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Przetłumaczenie
W takim razie proszę o przetłumaczenie (dokładne, nie unikając oskarżeń - bo wiem że zawsze nie dokładnie tłumaczyłeś moje teksty :): "User:R9tgokunks (User:Hrödberäht) od dłuższego czasu ciągle mnie gnębi. Mieliśmy oboje konflikt, a że mam słabą znajomość języka angielskiego to R9tgokunks znalazł sobie ofiarę, która ma małą możliwość obrony. Użytkownik ten najpierw stworzył stronę: User:R9tgokunks\User:LUCPOL którą następnie skopiował na RFI. Na RFI z pomocą tłumaczy udało mi się te sprawy wyjaśnić, administratorzy zamknęli te RFI a User:R9tgokunks teraz gdzie tylko może opiera się na stronie User:R9tgokunks\User:LUCPOL bez uwzględnienia mojej obrony na RFI. To jest trolling i manipulacja. Po za tym on ciągle próbuje przekonać innych do moich (rzekomo) wandalizmów, ciągle powiela te same stare i wyjaśnione już sprawy, ciągle sprawdza moje edycje i edytuje artykuły o których nie ma pojęcia, ale które ja edytowałem. Ciągle mnie inwigiluje. Zakłada kategorie [8] dla IP, które rzekomo są pacynkami. Każdy z nas ma IP i u nikogo nie pisze nic o pacynkach. Ten użytkownik mnie gnębi, przez niego nie potrafię normalnie edytować wikipedii. Użytkownik ten nie jest świętoszkiem jakiego udaje, oprócz banów za 3RR ma również na koncie wiele!!! wojen edycyjnych z ostatnich kilku tygodni co mogę udowodnić (ale tylko w języku polskim). Proszę zatem o pomoc, bowiem User:R9tgokunks ciągle mnie gnębi". LUCPOL 19:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
I would not support and stick up for Lucpol, on his arbcom case there are 26 diffs supporting our case on his disruption. Plus he is currently creating false sockpuppet categories to potray other uses, and he is costantly trolling and disrupting userpages. Please see the list of diffs on the arbcom case. Retiono Virginian 19:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
He has violated 3RR on User:R9tgokunks userpage in the last half hour with constant personal attacks. Also mass reverting the fake sockpuppet categories, he is lying to you. Retiono Virginian 19:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Do przetłumaczenia odnośnie tekstu User:Retiono Virginian [9]: "Te IP mają podobny styl co User:R9 oraz te IP kłóciło się tak samo jak R9 w tych samych artykułach. User:Retiono Virginian rewertuje moje edycje co do suckpuppet R9 co jest czystym wandalizmem. Podejrzane jest też, że mimo manipulacji R9 ciągle mnie atakujesz i bronisz R9. Nawet kasujesz moje wypowiedzi: [10], [11], [12], [13]". LUCPOL 19:54, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Maybe I am an ignorant fool, but it's impossible for me to have made personal attacks within the time period today..I am not even aware of such an incident, let alone i haven't even tried to attack him personally. Since you accuse me of it, show me those instances. -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 21:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Per my previous comments, please take the matter to WP:MEDIATION.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 21:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
On 18 February 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kazimierz Pelczar, 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 00:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
On 18 February 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ponary massacre, 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 07:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Intelligent Design FA
I'm not aware that there is particular spread of Intelligent design (as opposed to creationism) much beyond the US, UK, or Australia. Am I wrong here? I know there was a Polish creationist in Nature (or was it Science?) recently, but I wasn't aware he was part of the ID movement, which is narrower.Adam Cuerden talk 22:19, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've made a start. I suspect there's more to say, but it at least hints at a worldwide view - my personal suspicion is that as ID is largely a way of getting around American restrictions on teaching of religion, it's been either hit by antipathy for creationism in the more liberal countries, or the necessary refusal to look at who the designer might be has demoted it to arguements to prop up creationism with in more religious countries. There's probably something in there of interest, but it's OR. Adam Cuerden talk 05:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- The trouble with Maciej Giertych is that, while clearly a creationist, Intelligent Design is a small subset of creationism. Of course there have been creationism debates in most countries, but unless someone says the words Intelligent Design, it's probably best to put it in the Creationism article instead.
- (Also, I only speak English, though I can just about read Spanish and German, and basic Norwegian - I'm useless at French and Polish, so it may be I'm missing something in those particular links. If so, forgive me.) Adam Cuerden talk 06:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've dug a bit further: If he's saying that dinosaurs and man co-existed, we should probably count him as a Young-earth creationist - right nutter, sounds like, but possibly not suited for this article. Adam Cuerden talk 06:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Right. I've done some digging - there have been definite evidence of Creationism throughout Europe, but I'm not finding anything else on Intelligent Design. Best new material I've found since my last revision is this - which is awfully weak. Adam Cuerden talk 17:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
On your removal of tags
Please stop removing tags as you did many times such as [14],[15] you have been warned by different contributors and mediators do not do this. Please stop. M.K. 10:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Stop this outrages accusation! Your accusation as “nobody but you supported and without explaining the reasons for them on talk pages” is ends only looking on these different edits [16] [17] . Different contributors suggested to stop your one sided actions [18] as well as [19] it is clear disruption of wikipedia and as you say if you continue such behavior you may find your behavior reported and yourself blocked. Removal of valid information and classify as POV pushing even then sources are provided is not tolerated. Your tactics nobody supports, only user: Darwinek reverted by hiding under mirror edit with summary “format” [20]. While my statements were presented on talk with refs [21] you failed to produce any refs which could denounce presented claims; instead of finding them you started to deleting info which you do not like [22], even more you managed to “accidentally” misinterpreted your own source in your language calming about Polish POW`s [23], while in reality were was no such , even more started see it as personal - "especially for Dr. Dan." I regard you answer, left on my talk, as continues mocking and disruption; stop such behavior and start improving your image until is not too late. M.K. 13:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Image:FX-05.jpg
Cześć. Wczoraj przerzuciłem na commons ta grafikę, ale po pewnym czasie zaświtało mi że chyba gdzieś już ją widziałem. No i faktycznie jest na 21 stronie dwumiesięcznika "Broń i amunicja 06/2006" . Jako autor jest podany Cesar Corranza. Więc albo user:Shdowcrwler to Corranza, albo jest to NPA (przepraszam że zawracam Ci głowę, ale mój angielski to raczej en-01 niż en-1 ;)). Nemo5576 12:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Nie wiem jakie na en macie procedury :) W końcu to Ty tutaj jesteś adminem ;) Wysonduje gościa, daj znać komuś kto tu się zajmuje NPA. Nemo5576 16:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Vandal
I have been accused of being a vandal on User:LUCPOL/Vandal:R9tgokunks due to past editing disputes with yourself, or other being involved in ways with yourself. Since you have been mentioned, i'd like to ask if you could please comment on the mentioned report, Thanks much. -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 15:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
History of Minnesota
I, and a few other editors, have made some changes to History of Minnesota based on your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Minnesota. In particular, I added and revised citations to the TimePieces articles on the Minnesota Historical Society web site, and Susanlesch contributed a new, more concise introduction. However, the discussion at the FAC page seems to be against including Glacial history of Minnesota in this article. If you get a chance, please review the changes and let us know if you have any other suggestions. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 17:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Andrzej Rychard deletion
Thank you for nominating Andrzej Rychard. Could you do a Polish-language Google search to see if you can find any media coverage of this person that might indicate that he is notable? If you can't find anything, then I would support the deletion. As well, there is another person named Andrzej Rychard who is a sociologist with the Polish Academy of Sciences, and perhaps there should be an article on him. I can't read the article in the Polish Wikipedia at pl:Andrzej Rychard, but it might have some useful information with which you could expand the article – or perhaps it too should be nominated for deletion. --Eastmain 04:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 8 | 19 February 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 07:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Silesia
Cześć. Wikiprojekt dotyczący Górnośląskiego Zagłębia Węglowego zmieniłem na Wikipedia:WikiProject Silesia. Śląsk obejmując większy zakres obsługiwanych artykułów ma większą szansę na kooperację. Powiadomiłem już 6 najbardziej (choć i tam mało) aktywnych osób ze Śląska edytujących na en.wikipedii: Lajsikonik, Pilecka, Marek013, MCiura, Nemo5576, Przykuta. Mam nadzieję że się wpiszesz na listę użytkowników i coś czasem poedytujesz związanego z naszym Śląskiem :) Pozdrawiam. LUCPOL 22:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- PS. Jak wiesz komu jeszcze (jakiemu aktywnemu na en.wiki użytkownikowi) można polecić ten wikiprojekt to napisz, napiszę mu zaproszenie. LUCPOL 22:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
Did you know? was updated. On 21 February 2007, a fact from the article Battle of Koziatyn, which you recently nominated, has been 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. |
--Yomanganitalk 13:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Max Weber and numismatics
- I don't think there is any connection :). It existed there before I added it, under the project banners (multiple projects); so I think I just cut and pasted it to the top. Anyways I removed it now. :). --Parker007 15:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Civilian (street artist) AfD
Hi, I've added a couple of references to this page and hope you do reconsider your Delete as you mention. There are many articles attached to this AfD and several are now much better than the 'Civilian' article they are listed to be deleted with. Kind regards, --Greatwalk 05:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
Did you know? was updated. On 22 February 2007, a fact from the article Józef Łukaszewicz, which you recently nominated, has been 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. |
--Mgm|(talk) 10:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
?
Why do you think that Citizendium wiki is a waste of time? Do you know something specific or you just refer to its chances of success? Some ideas look interesting, some our friends got interested in it too. So just wondering. --Beaumont (@) 13:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
PS. As far as I can tell, you might be interested in Sanger's recent essay "The Future of Education in the Internet Age" (offline, though) or "Humanity's Coming Enlightenment", see [24]
Thanks very much! I do not intend to disturb you (so this is probably last message about it), but it looks like: ...it is no longer a fork and probably going to be 'anti-fork'; ...with GFDL your're right, but they'll probably adopt a GFDL-incompatible licence for the very reason;[25] ...there is _no_ analogy with Nupedia, CZ does work and produces FA content before public launch (no google references yet!); ...they aim at changing the _culture_ of the project and in view of some my/our headaches that's probably the most interesting point; I think that most of what I find really discouraging here, there would be cut off by definition of the system; trolls like Halibutt would have a difficult live (and your own highly disruptive behavior would be in danger there as well ;-) ) ...reliability can make snowball on their side in not so distant future, one never knows. Anyway, I'm thinking about it (or about just registering to take a closer look) --Beaumont (@) 14:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Of course, you're right -- shit happens everywhere; the way it is handled might make a difference, however. Anyway, it looks like an interesting experiment and we'll see it's outcome, if any. Nice proverb, BTW :-) --Beaumont (@) 15:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
ca y est
... at least partially.[26] If you have other (preferably not too difficult) suggestions of this kind, do not hesitate to contact me :) --Beaumont (@) 13:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- thanks! As you may have noticed, I advance slowly but steadily. So you may keep it in mind for future reference (other than French-related topics are welcome as well). --Beaumont (@) 17:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Polonization
On this edit, please do not confuse the Polonization article with the Russification. As explained elsewhere, it is important to keep stuff within their respective articles rather than Molobizing the articles at random by pasting the same grievances everywhere. Please reconsider your edit and, at least rephrase it so that it does not look so out of place. --Irpen 19:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Question
Dear Piotrus,
You left a comment on my talk page more than a month regarding the Ohio Wesleyan University. The article has gone through a PR process and is in pretty good shape. I was wondering if you would be willing to support it if I nominate in the FAC process? Thank you for your time! LaSaltarella 02:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Belarus and Good Article status
I am not sure how, but someone from the countries wikiproject made the article rated "Good Article." Honestly, I am still a bit confused by the GA stauts and I need to see if others want to look at it and see if it actually is GA worthty (or an honest typo). But thanks for taking a peek anyways. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I took your suggestion and sent the article to Good Article Review. I will see what happens after that, but I honestly believe that if it is not ready for FA, then it is pretty close. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I will look in the history section and see if I can get some better references. Also, feel free to put {{fact}} next to anything you feel like needs a citation. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- The last FA you did was pretty amazing. From looking at the article, I might need to incoporate some audio into the Belarus article, mainly how to pronounce the name of the country. I checked with the CIA and most of the population data is correct. I am not sure if Belarus had any border issues with Poland, but that could be worth mentioning. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- You wrote "perhaps sb at the board would now better." Who is the user that you are refering to? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- The last FA you did was pretty amazing. From looking at the article, I might need to incoporate some audio into the Belarus article, mainly how to pronounce the name of the country. I checked with the CIA and most of the population data is correct. I am not sure if Belarus had any border issues with Poland, but that could be worth mentioning. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I will look in the history section and see if I can get some better references. Also, feel free to put {{fact}} next to anything you feel like needs a citation. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
No archive signal
I added Werdnabot's no archive signal at the beginning of your footer. This should prevent the last section of talk (including the footer) from ever being archived. JRSpriggs 06:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Extermination camps
Ave, Piotrus! I'm glad you saw some value to my answer on the extermination camp question on the Humanities RD. You are welcome to use any of this information in any way you see fit. However, I took the decision soon after I joined Wikipedia that I could be of greater use to the community as an oracle, so to speak, rather than a mainpage editor, principally because I quickly became aware of the deleterious effect of edit creep and ideological warfare in many of the articles. I would, nevertheless, be pleased to assist you with any additional information or help that you may need on this matter. Best wishes. Clio the Muse 06:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Your "new section" message
This message and the previous one I left were put in by clicking on your "new section" button. If they went to the wrong place, it is not my fault. You should change your code. JRSpriggs 11:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
Did you know? was updated. On 24 February 2007, a fact from the article King Jagiello Monument in Central Park, which you recently nominated, has been 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 20:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Minnesota
About a week ago, you voiced an objection at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Minnesota saying that the article had several unreferenced paragraphs and an introduction that was too long. I've done some cleanup of the references, so all of the sections in the article should now be properly referenced. In addition, Susanlesch contributed a new, more brief introduction. When you get a chance, please review these changes and let us know how we did at the FAC review page. There's still an "Oppose" on record there, and I'd hate to see the article miss FA status based on an objection that's been addressed. Thanks. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 03:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Iława Jazz festival
Hello Piotrus! Would you mind taking a look at Iława? A jazz festival was recently added there, but I'm not sure if it should be integrated into the text or should be removed outright. Olessi 04:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Fab. Starachowice ODP.
Z tego co wiem fabryka uzbrojenia była jedynie częścią działalności "Starachowickich Zakładów Górniczych" . Prawdopodobnie chodzi tu Panu o Zakłady Mechaniczne (produkcja obejmowała m.in. uzbrojenie). W skład Zakładów Górniczych wchodził też Wydział Amunicji produkujący pociski. Posiadał on własną elaborację do napełniania pocisków ładunkiem wybuchowym.
Pozdrawiam Cell —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.139.8.35 (talk) 08:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC).
reply to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Go board
- I uploaded the original file at commons:Image:Go Board, Hoge Rielen, Belgium.jpg, feel free to adapt. --Donar Reiskoffer 09:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 9 | 26 February 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 08:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
KV
You should be interested in this [27], please take a look there ! Same as Danzig/Gdansk. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 22:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- He is also pushing this [28]. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 23:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Portal:Silesia
Chciałbym Cię powiadomić, że uruchomiono Portal:Silesia. LUCPOL 22:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Visual arts-related AfDs
Here's a template to use in an AfD, when it has been listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts (please do list appropriate AfDs there). I think it should go under the article details and above the nom statement, as it is a formal notice and not part of the debate. It will sign your name with date stamp automatically. Please pass on to others.
Mnemonic: List of Visual arts-related Deletions.
Template to use:
- {{subst:LVD}}
Result:
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. Tyrenius 00:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Tyrenius 00:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Awards
There are three proposals which need some comments. Please weigh in:
Two of the three are sensitive, and thuglas is taking the whole process personally. Finally, there has never been a standard for how much support is needed for the creation of a barnstar. The LGBT star went up with seven votes, and thuglas is threatening to post his star when he gets ten supportive votes. Thoughts? --evrik (talk)
Barnstar]]
Two of the three are sensitive, and thuglas is taking the whole process personally. Finally, there has never been a standard for how much support is needed for the creation of a barnstar. The LGBT star went up with seven votes, and thuglas is threatening to post his star when he gets ten supportive votes. Thoughts? --evrik (talk)
- Once again, someone disagrees with my interpretation of our very loose guidelines. Now I don't mind when two users like WJBscribe and Kathryn_NicDh%C3%A0na, but they've taken the disagreement and posted negative comments over at that RFC.
- So ... could you please weigh in one last time ... new barnstar or a wikiproject award Wikipedia:Barnstar_and_award_proposals/New_Proposals#The_Copyeditor.27s_Award. Thanks. --evrik (talk) 23:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
BS
Dziekuje. --evrik (talk) 18:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Canvassing
I happened to notice your message at Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board#Wikipedia:Deletion review/Daniel Brandt. While there's nothing wroing with alerting people to a poll, survey, etc, it's inappropriate to request that people vote a certain way, per Wikipedia:Canvassing. We all have issues we care about, but if everybody put up messages requesting certain outcomes then Wikipedia would be overwhelmed by internal spam. -Will Beback · † · 22:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Question re Józef Łukaszewicz
I have a question for you at Talk:Józef Łukaszewicz. Novickas 23:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
polish mafia
I do not apreciate you calling the polish mafia nonsencewhen you obiouisly know nothing about it. I'm sure you think you know everything but you don't, you can't prove to me or anyone else that there's not a polish mafia or that it wasn't formed the way that I explained it in my article unless you are a part of it (which I'm not but it made a good story). I took time out of my day to write that story and there are many people that would enjoy reading it but now they don't have the chance to read it because you who obiously know everything deleted it. By the way since you know everything you spelled nonsence, nonesence on the deletion page, GENIOUS. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Virgilv (talk • contribs) 03:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC).
your page
I would like for you to provide a source for your page or it is classified as nonsence and should be deleted —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Virgilv (talk • contribs) 03:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC).
DYK
|
On March 1, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Leon Wasilewski, 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 March 1, 2007, a fact from the article Lithuanization, which you recently nominated, has been 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 very much Piotrus for all your work. Hope all is well!Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Tag removal
I was a little surprised by your reason for removing the tag I placed on the stub, Mikhail Kovalov. The only intent was to flag a stub in order to encourage editor(s) to improve the article. An external link probably could have been provided in the time it took to remove the tag. Happy editing! --Stormbay 21:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Your point is well taken! I often tag and watch the article when it is a subject that catches my interest, (as this one did). I often return to work on these articles myself at a later date. I hope that my note above did not sound snippy as I was genuinely curious as to why the tag was removed. Cheers! and thanks for your prompt reply. --Stormbay 21:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: Template spam
Ah, there's about three or four different versions of banner-collapsing templates floating around at this point, with people fighting over which one is better, and whether we should be using them at all. ;-)
(Frankly, I'm beginning to think that the templates are a symptom of a deeper issue rather than the problem in of themselves; c.f. Wikipedia:WikiProject reform.) Kirill Lokshin 00:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Go board image: FPC
here's an edit. I didn't upload it onto the FPC because I figured its a bit late in the voting. If you want to put it on there feel free.
I saw the request for a edit of: Image:Go Board, Hoge Rielen, Belgium.jpg. I cut out the background, added some slight color effects to the black pieces and adjusted the color balance. It retains the high resolution of the origenal without the background. A few things to note:
- Instead of croping out the shadow on the lower left of the board I clone stamped over it so the croping is somewhat different.
- The background cutout has no errors or faults that I can see as oposed to the other edit.
- I didn't adjust the color as drasticly as the other for verious reasons but I would be happy to do so if you want.
-Fcb981 06:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: Empty images
I didn't realize what I had done until I had finished categorizing them. I'll tag them when I get a chance. Appleseed (Talk) 16:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: Umedard templates
What crimes have I committed to deserve this request? :-) I tried before to clean up his contributions but I can't keep up, and it gets old after a while. Appleseed (Talk) 16:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I have. He responded on my talk page, but I haven't noticed much improvement. Appleseed (Talk) 17:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Your DYK nomination for Holy Cross Church, Warsaw was successful
|
Did you know? was updated. On March 2, 2007, a fact from the article Holy Cross Church, Warsaw, which you recently nominated, has been 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 22:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Copy-edit
I'll give it a light copy-edit ("light" copy-edits aren't really my style, but I'm up to my neck in researching an article at the moment, and I mustn't let myself get distracted). I'll report back once I've done something. (By the way, I'm staggered at how well you and other non-native speakers do in the English language: I have three foreign languages, but I wouldn't have the confidence to write articles on their wikis. Fist of respect.) qp10qp 23:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick response. Reading through my comments with horror, I feel as if I suddenly turned into Prosecutor Porfiry from Crime and Punishment there: sorry! But I really enjoyed the article: it filled me in on an area of history I'm not at all familiar with. I'm going to disengage myself from it now; but best of luck! Knowing you, I'm sure you'll wrestle it to FA standard. qp10qp 01:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
"Revisionist POV-pusher"
I would like to state that I consider being called a Revisionist POV-pusher extremely offensive; especially considering that I consider you and various other persons to be just that, and feel that I am only correcting POV. Antman -- chat 00:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- On someone's talk page, you referred to the people who are trying to change the article Karlovy Vary to Carlsbad as 'Revisionist POV-pushers'. As I voted for, and support the change, that must imply that I am one as well. Antman -- chat 17:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Please refrain from personal attacks. [[29]] Antman -- chat 18:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Accusations go where they belong. Refrain or I will submit a formal request. Antman -- chat 18:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Antman, describing obvious situation is not a personal attack. Report whatever you want, but remember that nobody likes nationalistic POV pushers. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 20:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
:-)
Dear Piotrus,
Thank you for the comments back in January for the Ohio Wesleyan University article. I just nominated it in the FAC process. Thanks you once again!!! LaSaltarella 19:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Rospuda
Witam. W artykule o rospudzie znajduje się wiele niedopowiedzeń. Niewątpliwie "zieloni" autorzy artykułu zapomnieli w nim dopisać wiadomności na temat protestów ludności Augustowa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wypisali natomiast wszystkie możliwe bzdury na temat polskiego rządu i informację o nieobiektywnej księdze na GWnie(internetowej oczywiście. Wiadomo przecież, że jak wystawie się jakąś księgę na portalu internetowym, o wiadomych ukierunkowaniach politycznych(tj. Zieloni 2000 czy jakoś tak, to z przekroczeniem 100000 wpisów nie ma żadnego problemu ). Nie są tam także umnieszczone informacje na temat sondaży opini publicznej. Artykuł jest zatem NPOV!!!!!!! Proszę o pomoc, ponieważ tak nieobiektywna wikipedia być poprostu nie może. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Umedard (talk • contribs) 22:31, 3 March 2007 (UTC). --Umedard Talk 22:31, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
EN nomenclature
Huh, this one is good [30]. He will push his POV all over the wikipedia.
- And in case of lack arguments he starts doing this [31] and this [32]. Oh man, some people are so rude. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 14:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Odzyskiwane terytoria
Czują wolny pozwalać mnie poznają jeżeli wy potrzebujecie pomocy z powraca (3RR). ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 15:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Don't worry about writing essays
thanks for adding stuff to Wikipedia:Don't worry about writing essays. Good to have people reading stuff I make. --Montchav 19:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- And this page is really annoying. I would tell you to change it, but you seem to be in a higher position in the Wikipedia hierarcy than me! --Montchav 19:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- But anyway, your annoying flashin message inspired me to put an annoying message atop my talk page. --Montchav 19:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards Coordinator referendum
There has been some conflict at Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards. Please vote on the Coordinator referendum. --South Philly 20:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Belarus again
Well, I took your suggestion and sent the Belarus article to GA. I found out today it has passed, so we are only inches away from it being FA. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- I took the article to peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Belarus. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thanks
Thanks for trying to have me blocked, it is nice to see that when someone can't cooperate or compromise they resort to trying to have me blocked. makes me feel so important when people would rather slander/libel me or misrepresent my actions than talk to me.
--Jadger 01:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
MTR FAR
MTR has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 02:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Tak sobie
witam tutaj Tymek 03:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC) Tak obserwuje czasami Twoje wysilki na rzecz popularyzacji Polski i wszystkiego co z nasza ojczyzna jest zwiazane. Jestem pelen podziwu, doprawdy robisz bardzo dobra robote, za co naleza Ci sie brawa. Ja sam niestety pozostawilem moja biblioteke w Polsce (teraz los mnie rzucil do USA), wiec pozbawiony zrodel nie jestem w stanie robic tego wszystkiego co planuje. Jeszcze raz pisze - szacunek dla Ciebie, a gdybys pytal dlaczego to w ogole pisze? Otoz nie mam pojecia. pozdro
DYK
|
On 5 March 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Silesia Stadium, 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. |
--ALoan (Talk) 17:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Wesele
May I ask you to move The Wedding (1972 film) to Wesele for the sake of simplicity? There’s no article on the play by Wyspiański and yet, the spoiler for the film reveals its entire plot with ending details. “Wesele” is the original title of the 1901 play by Wyspiański on which movie by Wajda (1972) was based. In case of a naming conflict, the title can be expanded in future articles on the same subject, which is unlikely considering, that the story line is already explained. One good example of a similar simplification is Being There with two paralel meanings. Is a well known movie based on a well known book, combined into one article. Both are closely related.
-
- BTW - The Wedding (2004 film) made by Smarzowski is a modern comedy that has nothing to do with "Wesele" by Wyspiański and the Young Poland movement, or Wajda. It does not have to be disambiguated at par. For example, at the Internet Movie Database it goes by the title "Wesele (2004)" and that's the way it could also be named in Wikipedia. [33] Thanks for the understanding. --Poeticbent talk 23:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Lists of Poles
Since discussion isn't getting us anywhere, I'm going to go through these lists and move any name of someone not born in Poland (or living a significant portion of their lives in Poland) and move them to the talk page with a notice that they can be reinserted only if a good source is found describing the person in question as Polish. It's possible I will be met with resistance on several lists. Users have lately been stuffing lists like List of Ukrainians with questionable additions and User:Beaumont has been dealing with that. LeszekB 01:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Rawa River on DYK for 6 March 2007
|
On 6 March 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rawa River, which you substantially expanded and nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
Thank you for expanding the article and for the nomination! — ERcheck (talk) 02:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Nombre
Just a comment. Prokonsul Piotr Konieczny, isn't that Polish for Praefect Peter ______(Konieczny-"King_something_" or something similar?-- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 04:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 10 | 5 March 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 06:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Extra Edit Buttons
This is a message to a number of Wikipedians. If you wish to reply to this message please do so on my talk page.
Extra edit buttons has received a significant update today. The most significant change is the introduction of popups for some of these buttons. These are small dialog forms which float over the web page. They allow the user to specify the details of the markup code they want added to the page. For example the popup for the table button allows the user to specify things such as the number of the rows and columns in a table and whether or not there should be a header row. As well as the popups there are some extra buttons and other changes to the way the code works. The documentation for XEB will be updated over the next few days.
This new version also includes an extra button, as requested by yourself, to insert warning templates into a uesr's talk page. The documentation will be updated to cover this button in the next few days
If you have any problems with the new version, or suggestions for XEB then please contact me via my talk page. -- MarkS (talk) 10:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Some interesting stuff about Piłsudski
Hi, Piotrus, and sorry for not picking up on previous issues (I'm caught up in some other stuff). Since you seem the Polish contributor most interested in Romanian-Polish connections, and since you have contributed to expanding information about the period I'll be referring to, I thought you would be most capable of evaluating whether this info is noteworthy and where it should fit in articles (if at all).
While I was researching the article on Constantin Stere (I'm only halfway through), I came accross an intersting tidbit on Józef Piłsudski. Presumably, this could be included in the article on the man as well. This is it, in my phrasing:
In 1889, while in Krasnoyarsk, Piłsudski shared his exile with Constantin Stere, a Bessarabia-n born Romanian author and politician. The two remained friends for the rest of their lives; Stere included the Polish leader, under the name Stadnicki, as a character in his account of the Siberian sojourn, the novel În preajma revoluţiei ("On the Eve of the Revolution").
(Feel free to rephrase and split the above as you see fit)
The reference for both sentences is: Z. Ornea, Viaţa lui C. Stere, Vol. I, Cartea Românească, Bucharest, 1989, p.113 (red links are pending articles, so it's best not to remove them if you decide to use it).
I do not want to impose on the article (though I cannot help to notice that it needs several copyedits), and I don't know where in it this info could go (for example, perhaps asection on "Józef Piłsudski in literature" or "in art" or "in popular culture" could be created, but I don't know if you main contributors will consider that probable or necessary). Tell me what you think about. Oh, and in case you decide to use it, please let me know where it is: I haven't finished the Ornea books, and there may be more detail on this later on. Dziękuję. Dahn 15:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
On 6 March 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Łódź Army, 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. |
--ALoan (Talk) 23:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikify tag on Territorial changes of Germany after World War II
This article has plenty of Wikilinks. Perhaps there is another type of Wikification that you think this article needs. Can you be more explicit as to why you put the Wikify tag on the article? Thanks.
--Richard 19:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
WP:DYK
Ah ha! I was wondering why you hadn't responded to my reply. I just noticed on your talk page that you don't watch Talk Pages of other editors for replies to your messages. So here (belatedly) is my reply to your original message. --Richard 19:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm... I never thought of them as DYK candidates. If you tell me what you think would be a good DYK, I might get motivated and clean up the articles ASAP as opposed to "when I get around to it". I will admit that I am not a good polisher and therefore might need to enlist some help. --Richard 23:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Poland related contributions
Dziękuję za zaproszenie. Chętnie się włączę i posłucham mądrzejszych, bo - prawdę powiedziawszy - nie mam pojęcia how to share my contributions i wrzucam je jak leci. Mam w swoich zasobach w redakcji wiele ciekawych zdjęć i chętnie się nimi podzielę. Polskie zasoby na Commons są już całkiem spore, ale wciąż czegoś brak. Pozdrawiam serdecznie belissarius 05:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Battle of Hel
Hello. You create this article, that's why I ask you. May be, I found little mistake - please, watch to Talk:Battle of Hel. Ingwar JR 12:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Łysica
Witaj. Widziałem, że dodałeś tu przed chwilą zalążek o Łysicy. Jedna sprawa - na Łysicy nie ma żadnych ruin. U podnóża góry, we wsi pl:Święta Katarzyna znajduje się opactwo, ale wcale nie jest zrujnowane. Pozdrawiam Jakubhal 14:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Filing of request for arbitration re: move of Juozas Lukoševičius to Józef Łukaszewicz
I plan to file a request for arbitration. A mediator at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/Possible bad faith in use of citations involved in the move of Juozas Lukoševičius to Józef Łukaszewicz stated that bad faith issues should be handled by arbitration. Novickas 14:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Case filed: [34] Novickas 18:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Case closed: [35]
Per WP:DR, the steps in disputes are: discuss on the talk page, sleep on it, ask for mediation, ask for arbitration. These steps were followed. My eyes were open: I know that bad faith issues aren't covered in WP policy; the hope was to spur some evolution. Novickas 00:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
The page Wikipedia:Resolving disputes listed the informal mediation cabal as the step before RFC; the mediator cabalist's comment was "Allegations of bad faith are probably more appropriate for arbitration than mediation."[36] I now see that the cabalist probably meant "Go to RFC as a form of arbitration", but in my inexperience I interpreted the comment as "Go to RFA". Novickas 12:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Ukrained
Anything you can do to help educate Ukrained (talk • contribs)? He seems to have some serious attitude issues (e.g. [37]) and is about to try to get Khoikhoi sanctioned for what looks on the face of it like a legitimate block. A bit of commoon sense from the right corner of the globe might go down well. Thanks, Guy (Help!) 13:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I had a feeling you might be a bit more sympathetic to his issues than some. Oh, you have the PotD on your user page, and today it's the Gherkin (30 St Mary Axe) - I'll be at 33 St Mary Axe, right opposite, tomorrow :-) Guy (Help!) 17:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Ukrained
Thanks for your comments, Piotrus. I respectfully disagree, as IMHO, this is indeed a personal attack:
To Irpen: AlexPU was recently blocked for frank discussion of your "Ukrainian patriotism", so I'll refrain from a similar attempt. After all, who knows how many "embedded admins" have you recruited or lobbied (I already know two Russian ones threatening me, and two DYK foreigners that just "look away"). Instead I'll try to concentrate on your permanent breaches of WP rules (yes, this IS threat and warning). But PLEASE DON'T CALL ME YOUR "BUDDY", I CONSIDER IT AS A PERSONAL ATTACK AND TROLLING. Thank you all, Ukrained 21:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I explained to him earlier that he should be focusing on discussing the article, not other editors. If this and other comments he made didn't violate WP:NPA, then they certainly violated WP:CIVIL. As for AlexPU, I blocked him for 2 weeks based on his block log (all the blocks were for personal attacks), and the fact that he had just come off a one week-block.
On an entirely different matter, I noticed parts of the Przasnysz article (such as the dates, etc.) are still in Polish. Is there any chance you could translate them to English? Thanks, Khoikhoi 18:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- There are three things going on here. First, Ukrained has been incivil and has edit warred. He needs to be gently informed that this is not acceptable, by someone he will not immediately denounce as being in the cabal (TINC). Piotrus seemed to me like a good candidate for that job. Second, he has concerns with content, and needs help putting his point across without pissing everybody off and getting blocked again. Piotrus can probably help here, too, as Piotrus (unlike me) understands the underlying content issues. No doubt you, Khoikhoi, can also help, but he won't listen to you because you are "in the Cabal" (TINC). Third, he is agitating about being blocked. I think it's a righteous block given his behaviour. I don't believe Khoikhoi was in a content dispute with Ukrained at the time, so I don't see any reason that another admin should have done it, but either way a block was justified. Probably for others, too. So if Piotrus and Khoikhoi can work together perhaps the fighting can be stopped. Guy (Help!) 19:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- I wonder whether Piotrus took even time to read Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive212#Personal Attacks by User:Ukrained or he just rushed to defend a user based on the "enemy of my enemy" logic. Anyway, I will make a point of Piotrus' suddenly grown tolerance towards aggressive trolling and will hope that he will extend this not only to pushers of the "right" POV. So, we are to see less of Piotrus' complaints all around Wikipedia aimed at sanctioning his content opponents.
-
- Finally, it would be a poor precedent to insist on removing of the blocking admin from the right to deal with the user simply because the user actively trolled the admin in response. There were no edit conflicts whatsoever. There is no evidence that Khoi conspired with anyone either. Otherwise, we open a path to a total immunity by some who simply post "all admins are dicks" at their talk pages. --Irpen 05:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Matthead
Hi, could you please check Mattheads edits like this [38], he is pushing german translations all over the inapropriate places. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 09:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
New article announcements
I have noticed that on 4 March 2007 User:Umedard created a stub called Krościenko nad Dunajcem. It is quite unfortunate that the user does not have the habit of checking for existing articles first. Besides, the title of the article is written in Polish, not in English. Please see also: Krościenko. I'm letting you know about this because you placed his stub at Portal:Poland/New article announcements on 12 March 2007. --Poeticbent talk 18:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Skidel
It is now a blue link (and a stub). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 11 | 12 March 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 05:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Redirect
Can you remove this redirect? [39] I think it is mean spirited, created only to prove a point in the days gone by. --Poeticbent talk 06:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
List of Polish Jews
Stumbled upon a little clique of identically editing users trying to make up their own definition of "Polish Jew" on there. None make an effort to provide a reference for all the people they keep returning as Polish. Appreciate some comments. Same measures worked out fine on List of Poles and List of Polish painters though, as expected. LeszekB 14:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
A misunderstanding
In your list of Poles you have listed two different people called Józef Bielawski. Now you have a link to Józef Bielawski because I have created an article about him. The problem is that I have created an article about Józef Bielawski - the Islamic scholar and not about Józef Bielawski - the violinist, or Józef Bielawski - the writer. I suggest we create a disambiguation page to solve this problem. Kkrystian 15:25 (UTC) 16 January 2007
Law and Justice, German National People's Party
Witam!
Proszę spojżec na historię tych artykułów. Moim zdaniem User:Deutscher Patriot powinien zostac przynajmniej ostrzeżony przez admina lub zablokowany(jestem za).
Proszę o reakcję. Pozdrawiam. Medard
Notes in small print
I have a question - how to make a list of notes, or references (like at the end of the Poland prehistory article I'm working on) make appear in small print? Also how to have a date and time automatically appended to the signature (like the one below)?
link
http://nasz-czas.tripod.com/317/czas3.html
Aktorzy
bedziemy tworzyc ten artykuł o polskich aktorach? Patryczek94
Hello
Thank you for noticing - its nice to know someone actually reads the small contributions I make. --User:Gabe76
