User talk:Intelligent Mr Toad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Intelligent Mr Toad, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Benji boi 08:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I am very offended that in two months no-one has officially welcome me to Wikipedia. Intelligent Mr Toad 03:13, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! ;) michael ^talk 07:57, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome Toady. DarrenRay 09:39, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I see no reason why not. Nice work on the caucus page. Will fill in the gaps. DarrenRay 10:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Completed the alignments of the remaining Caucus members. DarrenRay 10:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome, Are you psychotropic?

I'm certainly tropical, not so sure about psycho. Intelligent Mr Toad 05:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australian National Women's League

Excuse me, IMT, are you daring to suggest that an assertion referenced from The Age newspaper may be incorrect? Surely you jest. DarrenRay 12:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I have included more on your friend and mine Kim Carr as per your request. Feel free to re-write but I would prefer it if you didn't just delete without providing an explanation so I can figure out how I may be failing you. DarrenRay 08:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes I agree. He has lost a few pounds over summer. --2006BC 01:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I uploaded a photo of Kim Carr for the article. --2006BC 11:47, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Floridamap.gif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Floridamap.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. It really isn't clear that you created this image.Peta 06:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Desist personal attacks on Talk pages

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Mais oui! 14:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cabinet

Please refrain from changing the term "cabinet" on Nicolas Sarkozy. In France, in the context of governmental politics, "cabinet" has the precise meaning of "personal staff of a minister". It is not a term for the government.

Thank you for your understanding. Rama 21:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of sourced content

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Heinrich Müller. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. Bleh999 18:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redfern

Yes parts of Redfern may be socially deprived (this is more specifically the Block) but there are "richer" parts too like East Redfern as this section refers to: Redfern,_New_South_Wales#Population. It is unfair to characterise the whole suburb as socially deprived. Michellecrisp 15:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Agree with above. Also by using the words "socially deprived suburb" seems to imply that Towke came from a socially deprived background which may or may not be true. What if he came from a middle class family? LibStar 16:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Penny Wong

Just to let you know, Wong is a Chinese surname, check the Wikipedia entry. Michellecrisp 02:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

You're missing the point, having a Chinese name does not designate you a Chinese citizen. See the discussion on Penny Wong's surname, she is not quoted as "Penny Wong" in Chinese newspapers in Australia but commonly by her Chinese name. This common usage satisfies her Chinese name being notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. I've never heard of Joe Hockey being quoted in Armenian, or I don't even know if he can speak it. Check out Adrienne Clarkson former Governor General of Canada, John So Mayor of Melbourne. Michellecrisp 11:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Block

Please do not use talk pages such as The Block (Sydney) for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. See here for more information. Thank you.

[edit] Your edits to Andrew Theophanous

I have reverted your edit to Andrew Theophanous. You claim that information backed by a reliable source was incorrect, but did not provide any substantiation for this. In the future, if you remove cited information from an article, especially a biography of a living person, make sure that you have equally reliable sources to verify the original information was incorrect. If you fail to do so, your changes will be reverted again. Let me know if you have any questions, Caknuck 19:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see what you were getting at. Some of the other articles cited back it up, so we're good. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Caknuck 13:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jason Clare

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Jason Clare, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Mattinbgn\ ^talk 09:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Hundreds of people run for elected office every election in Australia, most of whom are forgotten after the election even those endorsed by a major party. Unless they are notable for something other than being a candidate, I don't believe that they are notable enough for an article. It may help your case to keep this article if you can find multiple reliable sources asserting his notability, independent from him and each other. Wikipedia's policy on notability may be of some use as well. As I take it you are contesting the PROD notice, I have listed it at Articles for deletion to let the community rule on its notability. Cheers, Mattinbgn\ ^talk 10:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Stating that he is certain to elected may be true but it is also original research and unless you can provide a independent, reliable source for the assertion, then it shouldn't be included in the article. Plenty of things can happen between now and when the election is called and I don't think there is any need to pre-empt the result. Regardless, the article is now listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Clare for discussion and your case will be better put there. -- Mattinbgn\ ^talk 11:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Rather than spitting the dummy, I would encourage you to have your say at the Afd debate. If my views are as ridiculous, pedantic and idiotic as you claim, someone as intelligent as you should have no problem refuting them and having your article kept. Or, alternatively, you could take the time to do what I suggested above and provide sources asserting notability. The article as it stands is entirely unsourced. You may see providing sources as wasting your time but it is one of Wikipedia's core policies. -- Mattinbgn\ ^talk 21:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Jason Clare

Jason Clare, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Jason Clare satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Clare and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Jason Clare during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mattinbgn\ ^talk 10:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of James Bidgood (politician)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on James Bidgood (politician), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because James Bidgood (politician) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting James Bidgood (politician), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot 09:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Swiss election

I never added any aggregate [1]. It must have been another editor. Intangible2.0 (talk) 23:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:White elephants

I've finished with the article now. I don't have any way to know what you're editing, and suggest that you make use of Template:Inuse if you want to 'check out' articles. cheers, --Nick Dowling (talk) 04:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree that it's not a great article. The best thing it's got going for it is that it used to be much worse! --Nick Dowling (talk) 04:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thai constituencies

Where did you find that list of the single constituencies? I tried to find it with google some weeks ago without success. ~~And of course I would also love to know the error in my maps, so I can correct it.~~ Fixed the error in Ubon already, was just wrong numbers in the table, on the image description page of the map were the correct numbers. andy (talk) 20:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The error in Chonburi was already fixed shortly after you noted it on the talk page. Seems they both occurred when I changed the tables after the King Amphoe were upgraded to full Amphoe in August. Thanks a lot for the PDF - did you already do the tedious work of working through the Thai spellings in that document? I'd like to convert it something easier readable like a XML especially with the relation constituency number and geocodes (Changwat, Amphoe) within them, but don't like to repeat unnecessary tedious work. andy (talk) 20:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

For Nonthaburi the Amphoe Mueang is split into เทศบาลนครนนทบุรี เทศบาลเมืองบางศรีเมือง ตำบลบางไผ่ และตำบลบางกร่าง (City of Nonthaburi, Town of Bang Si Mueang, Tambon Bang Phai and Tambon Bang Krang), and as a second part เทศบาลตำบลไทรม้า และตำบลบางรักน้อย (Township Sai Ma and Tambon Bang Rak Noi). If I am not totally wrong the towns (thesaban) in this district cover whole tambon only. I don't have a map at hand, sadly the one at linked at amphoe.com is 404. But Mueang Nonthaburi isn't the only district which is split into several constituencies. Seems like I have to work through that PDF and translate it into some readable for non-Thais... andy (talk) 13:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can confirm, the two Tambon Sai Ma and Bang Rak Noi are those two in the northwest of the Amphoe. andy (talk) 12:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Funen / Fyn

Hi, and thanks for your contribution by making Fyn the main article rather than Funen. However, since this is the English language Wikipedia, the English title Funen should be the one used - just as Denmark wouldn't be placed under Danmark. So I have reverted your edits. If you disagree, please discuss it either here or on the articles' talkpages before changing it back again. Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I have replied at your talk page. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 09:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but Funen is very much the official English name for the island. It is also the name used in articles linking to the island here on Wikipedia. I am sorry that I missed your discussion on the talkpage, but seeing as noone had replied to it, it can hardly be seen as a consensus. I recommend leaving it at Funen and then asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Denmark to see if someone will help us decide one way or the other. Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, as I have replied on my own talkpage, I have now changed back to your way. However, you should now probably go to the "what links here" for Funen and edit all those articles to say Fyn instead. Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thai nicknames

Have at it; I want no quarrel with toads, especially intelligent ones! Pawyilee (talk) 15:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cabinet of Australia

Could you explain why you removed the paragraphs starting with "The Prime Minister and Cabinet, through the authority of the Defence Act 1903" and the next one beginning with "The Prime Minister is the "first among equals""? Ideally you should provide references for your changes, especially if your removing big sections of text. - Shiftchange (talk) 19:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quemoy and Matsu

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Quemoy and Matsu, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Quemoy and Matsu. M4gnum0n (talk) 12:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thai names

I've clarified the Thai names article: you're right, the "uniqueness" comments were confusing. Trust it's clearer now (family names must be unique to a family: different family members share a family name though, so it's not that every individual has a different family name, though that was implied by the previous text).

Nbarth (email) (talk) 02:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thaksin's nickname

Thai nicknames are often less than complimentary, see eg. [2] for some examples: "Fat", "Pig", "Baby chicken", etc. In Thaksin's case, it's said to be because his facial features resemble the Hmong.

Anyway, his political opponents don't call him that: they call him Square Face (Na Liam) instead. Jpatokal (talk) 05:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Philippine congressional districts

Hello!

I just assembled the map using the information from Wikipedia and a very helpful Wikipedian (you can view our correspondence above). The provincial borders are from the blank map of Philippine provinces available at Tambayan while the district boundaries (especially intra-city ones) are from Wikipedia maps and research using sources such as official provincial/city government websites and Mapcentral.ph.

As for election statistics, I'm afraid I don't have any information on them. I think your best bet is to get in touch with COMELEC, which should have the info you need.

Hope that helps! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dakilang Isagani (talk • contribs) 16:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Your website is excellent, kudos! Dakilang Isagani (talk) 12:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dead links

Hi we don't delete dead links we simply note they are dead and try t find an archive version of the sane info. Benji boi 08:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Kube.JPG

Thank you for uploading Image:Kube.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] German Presidents

Hello,

I am of course aware that this is a case of regime change, but I consider that infoboxes should also help users to navigate from one head of state to another. Though it is granted that they did not act in the same capacity, it cannot be denied that Dönitz predeced Heuss and Pieck as actual Head of State of Germany. Moreover, he was already credited in his own infobox as being succeeded by Theodor Heuss for the FRG and Wilhelm Pieck for the GDR (I did not add that info) : hence, it seemed logical to credit the other two with Dönitz as predecessor. Best regards, Wedineinheck (talk) 09:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Obviously, both Heuss and Pieck succeeded Dönitz as German Heads of State, as Germany was split in two. I don't think this should be a cause for bickering : infoboxes should be used to navigate between articles and see a chronology; hence they have to aknowledge the complexity of situation. This can be pretty much compared to Saddam Hussein, who was succeeded as Head of State of Iraq by the Coalition Provisional Authority, or Louis XVI, who was succeeded by the National Convention. The logic is to take into account who actually ruled the country, regardless of regime changes : the infoboxes should only make it clear that it was not in the same capacity. Best, Wedineinheck (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Granted, but Dönitz was officially President, even though he didn't have much left to Preside over. I also think that the Allied Forces would be a more logical direct successor to Dönitz, and predecessor to Heuss and Pieck, but as they were not a homogenous body of State, it is difficult to include them in the direct line of succession. They are nevertheless included in the infobox, which makes the complex situation rather clear IMHO. And, regardless of what one thinks of Hitler, he was still Head of State of Germany, so he has to be succeeded by someone. Wedineinheck (talk) 10:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I see your logic, but the dissolution of the State does not mean the dissolution of the Country (hence the various regime changes in France between 1792 and 1870). This should be disputed, as Germany was split in two in 1949, but it has since been reunited, so the chronology should be kept. The Third Reich ceased to exist (much like the Saddam Hussein regime in 2003) but someone still ruled Germany after that (much like Iraq). I didn't make up that logic, as it is taken into account in the great majority of succession boxes on wikipedia. Actually, we could add a "Third Reich disestablished" caption in Dönitz's infobox, in order to stress the regime change, but I don't know if that'd be very useful. Wedineinheck (talk) 10:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

If you have the time, check the Louis-Philippe of France article and its talk page (not to mention Charles X of France), you'll see how agonizing it can be to find a compromise for a logical line of succession. :)) Wedineinheck (talk) 10:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Goebbels children

The book I cited in the relevant passage notes that the Soviet doctor just said there were bruises on Helga, but did not say where on her body they were. I looked up a number of accounts and they all seem to differ. Some say her face was bruised, some say it was her arms, but apparently the original source did not indicate where they were at. Look up the book. That's where I got it. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 01:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR at Roy Castro

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Raúl Castro. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. An intelligent editor takes his case to talk.

[edit] Free French

Unfortunately, being an administrator does not grant me any particular special powers to solve this problem. An uninvolved editor would be the one to do any locking, etc., of the article. john k (talk) 08:27, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll back up your reverts, if necessary. Let me know if I'm needed. john k (talk) 14:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

L'intelligent Monsieur Crapaud! I fell by chance on the article, read it all as well as the discussion, i.e. your arguments with Rama. I regret not having the time to get involved in your discussion, besides, I would only repeat what you are saying & present the same preuves, but I do want you to know that you are 1000 per cent correct, not in my opinion, but as far as facts are concerned. I flipped when I read in the infobox that Londres was the "French Republic Free French Government capital in exile". Poor de Gaulle was certainly not considered as "President" of anything while in exile in England. He was in exile, his fellow countrymen were in exile, but la République française was not. In fact, since Pétain had created l'État français, la République was dormant. There came a government in exile headed by de Gaulle only when he signed the Ordonnance du 3 juin 1944 in Algiers. A very good text to read on the subject is the one by the université de Perpignan that you also found: Les gouvernements de la France libre de la France combattante et de la Libération:http://mjp.univ-perp.fr/france/co1940fl.htm

This alone should be enough proof in your argumentation. Should a vote be needed at any time to settle the matter, please let me know.

Joyeuses Pâques! Frania W. (talk) 14:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Cher Monsieur le Crapaud intelligent: I understand/know exactly what you need but, as I mentioned above, "I fell by chance on the article", was shocked by the title in the infobox & could not but agree with your arguments. But incapable at this time to bring anything new to support your stand, I retained from reverting because edit wars are time-consuming and, beside leaving a bitter taste, often end up with a text in limbo & filled with wrong data because the person who is right either gets tired or kicked out. Not being in France full time, it is difficult for me to access my books or go to a bibliothèque, the BNF or Archives nationales. However, I googled a couple of official French government sites & believe I may have found a very simple answer to the argument of "London as capital in exile" for the “French Republic Free French Government” . Within a few hours, I shall put something on the Talk page. In the meantime, here is something for you to check, if you have not already done so:

http://www.assembleenationale.fr/histoire/histoire-1940.asp

Cordialement, Frania W. (talk) 14:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Archives nationales: http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:9sjA6Bd8ZFkJ:www.archivesnationales.culture.gouv.fr/chan/chan/pdf/sm/A_2007.pdf+Archives+nationales+Fran%C3%A7ais+libres+Londres+1940&hl=fr&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us

Frania W. (talk) 19:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What do you mean?

As I said, I'm willing to revert if necessary, but there's nothing I can do beyond that. If you want formal action, you should take it to mediation or arbitration. john k (talk) 07:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Here you go

		The Socratic Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for your excellent arguments in the discussion about National Socialist German Workers Party --DerRichter (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hobby

Hi Toad, My email is spacecadet123@inorbit.com
Give me your email (I will not abuse it), so I can send you some cool pictures from former Pommern, former Elbing and former East Prussia. Old buildings, ruins, inscriptions etc. Space Cadet (talk) 15:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool! Space Cadet (talk) 15:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] For your journey

Since you are looking for old maps, here are a few for Wroclaw:
http://wroclaw.hydral.com.pl/mapy/wroclaw/1938/1.jpg
This old German Pharus (publisher for travel guides) map is available as a reprint in Wroclaw, for 4 or 5€ I think. And:
http://wroclaw.hydral.com.pl/mapy/wroclaw/1939/2.jpg
This map is even better and very handy if you are researching the partial reconstruction of the town.
http://wroclaw.hydral.com.pl/
And this website is definitively the best website about the town. Tons of old and new pictures and lots of old and new maps (http://wroclaw.hydral.com.pl/test.php?f=mapy). Karasek (talk) 09:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You are correct that majority of Germans supported Nazism

I noticed your comments on Nazi Party talk page and you are correct. During 1947 in a poll made in the American German occupation zone 58% of Germans while 37% supported genocide of Jewish and Polish people.

[3] "Opinion poll data from the immediate post-war years confirm the limited impact of Allied efforts. In October 1946, when the Nuremberg Trial ended, only 6 percent of Germans were willing to admit that they thought it had been 'unfair', but four years later one in three took this view. That they felt this way should come as no surprise, since throughout the years 1945-49 a consistent majority of Germans believed that 'Nazism was a good idea, badly applied'. In November 1946, 37 per cent of Germans questioned in a survey of the American zone took the view that 'the extermination of the Jews and Poles and other non-Aryans was necessary for the security of Germans'"

--Molobo (talk) 11:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lights

You've asked on Talk:Poland, why people drive with lights turned on all time - it's our law, that obliges drivers to keep them on, in order to stay more visible. It should've decreased the number of car-pedestrian accidents, however, it doesn't work that well. Have a nice stay in Poland :) Jubilee line (talk) 19:15, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've always been dreaming about visiting the city of Adelaide, because a part (that further part, unknown cousins etc.) is living there. Maybe some time :P Wrocław and Kraków are the most beautiful Polish cities - and the richest ones (that's quite easy to notice, Wrocław is even more western than Warsaw :P). If you're planning a longer trip, you should also visit our neighbours, the Czech Republic, among some Poles known as "a better Poland" ;) Jubilee line (talk) 20:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, it only looks alike. Warsaw is really awful, especially its part called... Praga (also the Polish name of Prague), which is situated on the Vistula's right bank. Jubilee line (talk) 12:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)