User talk:Leszek Jańczuk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Speedy deletion

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Bfigura (talk) 23:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Leszek Jańczuk, 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 on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Bfigura (talk) 23:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Good work, a few pointers

First of all, I want to commend you on your work related to the New Testament Uncials. I've gone through your new articles and did some general clean up. I'll describe some of what I've done so in the future you may be able to write even better articles from the get go! First of all, the first line of an article should be a complete sentence (source). Next, the end section have a general order, normally "See also" then "Notes" then "References" then "Further reading" then "External links" (source). I have changed your "Further reading" section to "References" because these books contain all the information in the article, and can be used for verification purposes. Finally, short and one sentence paragraphs should be avoided, so I combined some of your single sentence paragraphs into larger paragraphs (source). Other than these style issues, I have no more constructive criticism. I'm glad you've taken the time to put together these articles, and I hope your hard work continues! If you need any help, or have questions, I'd be glad to do whatever I can. Good luck!-Andrew c [talk] 23:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding to lectionaries list: because it is inappropriate to have multiple articles on the same topic, I have boldly redirected List of Lectionary Manuscripts to List of New Testament lectionaries, and attempted to merge any content. As for the Munster link, I have changed it so it links directly to the page on lectionaries. Reworking the intro may be a good idea, and I may do it myself if I get a little more free time. -Andrew c [talk] 16:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More thanks

Thank you Dr Janczuk for helping English Wikipedia.

I hope Andrew's advice is helpful, we have our own ways of doing things. :)

Sharing your knowledge with information and references is the most important thing, though.

People like Andrew and me can "smooth" your work to English Wiki style.

Best regards to you, and for your work serving Polish students of the Bible. Alastair Haines (talk) 07:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes! I understand you exactly. I also am writing a book at the moment. I also am writing slowly. And I also find writing at Wikipedia helps me feel I am actually "doing something useful", when other writing is slow.
I understand the vital importance of your work on the history of the New Testament. When my own writing is slow, I will think to pray for you and your work, which is so much more important than my own.
Christos anesti Alastair Haines (talk) 00:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kenneth Willis Clark Collection

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Kenneth Willis Clark Collection, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/codex/clark_history.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Uncials

Your proposals sounds reasonable. Splitting the table between named/lettered manuscripts and the ones that just have numbers is a good idea because of the empty column problem.-Andrew c [talk] 17:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sinaiticus

Thank you for your kind words, despite what you say, you are much more liguistically accomplished than me.
And you like Bach and Handel. So do I. Of course! :D
Aber du sprichst nicht Deutsch? :(
I think the article means this.
  • Page 1.1 to 1 = 110 to 100 = width is 110%
  • Text 0.91 to 1 = 91 to 100 = width is 91%
  • Reciprocal is swapping height and width = 90° rotation
  • 1.1↑ to 1→ becomes 1↑ to 1.1→
  • Reciprocal of page 1 to 1.1 = 100 to 110 = 100/110 = 91%
  • Reciprocal of text 1 to 0.91 = 100 to 91 = 100/91 = 110%
It is easier to imagine with different numbers.
  • Page 3 to 2 = 150 to 100 = width is 150%
  • Text 2 to 3 = 67 to 100 = width is 67%
  • Reciprocal is swapping height and width = 90° rotation
  • 3↑ to 2→ becomes 2↑ to 3→
  • Reciprocal of page 2 to 3 = 100 to 150 = 100/150 = 67%
  • Reciprocal of text 3 to 2 = 100 to 67 = 100/67 = 150%
So, I think the text is correct, but it is very hard to understand.
A small diagram using the proportions 1.25 to 1 might help.
Alastair Haines (talk) 00:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References to Trinity College, Cambridge

I'd be grateful if references in your article contributions to the manuscripts and other items in the college library collections could include a direct link to the Trinity College, Cambridge article and not to the Trinity College disambiguation page.

--Lang rabbie 10:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Porphiryj Uspienski

A tag has been placed on Porphiryj Uspienski, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another Wikimedia project, or was transwikied out to another project. Please see Wikipedia:Translation to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from foreign-language Wikipedias into English.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ~ akendall 23:06, 25 May 2008 (UTC)