User talk:Mikołajski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is Mikołajski's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Mikołajski.


Contents

[edit] Thank you for your Poland-related contributions

Hello and welcome Mikołajski! Thank you for your contributions related to Poland. You may be interested in visiting Portal:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board, joining our discussions and sharing your creations with our community.

By all means, add yourself as a member. Templates: we have Template:Infobox Szlachcic, although it is not widely used. WP:TREE may have some info on genealogical trees and such; best trick is to imitate other articles. References are discussed at WP:CITE and WP:V; again - see how it is done in other articles (ex. Stanisław Koniecpolski is a good example).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. I figured it already that i can just watch other users edits, but i was wondering if there`s some standard tree template which should be used for gentry related articles, or is there any desired by wikiprojects for Polish-Lithuanian gentry. Mikołajski (talk) 22:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I am not aware of any standard tree templates, but I don't use them. There is one in featured Jogaila, but I don't know if it is a standard; I've seen several different variants on wiki. Again, WP:TREE is probably the best place to ask, but you can always try the WP:PWNB, too.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] House vs family Ostrogski

User:Piotrus might correct me, but Jogaila has not been and by any means, he could not imagine to be a member of szlachta. And Ostrogski family does not qualify to be szlachta even, since they were orthodox. Lithuanian nobility probably, for quite long time. A House, since you did ask me - IMO, no. Family - yes. See Radvila family, and there is no house, despite the Grand Duchess/Qeen Barbara Radziwiłł. Best regards.--Lokyz (talk) 22:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Our talk with Piotrus had nothing to do with it, besides at the times of Jogaila society was completly different, but if it goes for nobelity look at this. Szlachta (from German Geschlecht) is nothing else but Polish name for upper class (nobility) and religion not necessary had something to do with it (depends when), i`v got no doubts that by this mean Ostrogski, Radvila (most were protestant btw) or any other Lithuanian/Ruthenian influent family can be considered as a szlachta/nobility, especially if there was equality amongst nobles (well, in theory). I`m not askeing you, but reffering to examples and meaning of a "House" in this context as a synonym of family, clan etc. I only wanted to be sure that i`m not mistaken. Sorry, but that this name isn`t used to Radvila (or plenty other familyies) doesn`t proove that it`s reserved for Royal Houses.
Mikołajski (talk) 23:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Gosh. My trzy groszhy. Pierwszy: (Sigh) No - User:Piotrus has nothing to do with our discussion, and I did pointed him as a more experienced/active user. Secundo: There was a completely disaster to esablish who is who?. I'll not go as far as Belarus nobility, and if you'd follow my advice - please take time reading textbooks and monographs. Trečias: I'm well aware about legal (or rather estate-legal) status. Lithuanian nobility, and especially House of Gediminas ruled two Nations for several centuries not being Polish nobility. If you'd have some questions, I'd be glad to respond.--Lokyz (talk) 23:32, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm not nervous by any means:) By who is who disaster - I'm referring to failed attempt find at least some common point wit Polish editors here on who was szlachta member, and who was not. Sometimes it does seem that many people were assigned to szlachta much later than they have died. There is also no common ground who the szlachta were - Polish, Polish-Lithuanian or Polish and Lithuanian (since the Republic of Both Nations), or maybe Polish, Lithuanian, Ruthenian and Livonian nobility? Cheers.--Lokyz (talk) 09:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for continuing our discussion, rather than going into edit warring. It is a really a gulp of fresh air into Wikipedia and our common history, that was going into wrong direction(rather kickstand, than constructive edits).
Regarding who is who? question - I only tried humble to introduce you into ongoing, once again IMO, kickstand between Lithuanian and Polish (and as a matter Ukrainian and Belarus, in some cases involing Latvian) editors. I'm well aware of the nationality/language/ethnicity/religion issues, and their representation in national histriograhies. If you'd ask me, I'd rather stick with national borders as for now, with several exceptions - like the ethnic borders, known since 19th century. Ethnic - means based on ethnographic data rather than language (at least in the first half of 19th century). Hope you would not mind to, that we would stick to the idea, the modern Nationality was formed after French revolution, and German philosophers, notably, Fichte works (one of German university dwellers, that did look after a way to identify himself as German rather than francophonic German nobility). And, it does not apply to the previous ages, when Polish (Crown) and Lithuanian (Duchy) selfidentification - political, including foreign policy, actions were rather different, and were based not on language.
As for the house, well, I might be wrong, but until now i did perceive it as a Royal house. There is allways a way to improve things, even my perception. Maybe I was mislead by the infamous Familia. Well, Czartoryski have their ow House.
I do not want to raise the question on whether szlachta did exist after partitons - as far I'm aware, it was abolished as a class, but such things could make an unnncessary fuss.
Once again - thanks for our discussion, it may improve the climate over here.--Lokyz (talk) 12:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Wow, nice to hear that words, thanks. Well, i think that all of it made etchnic confusion amongst many people, if it goes for present historiographies, there are some biased/POVed sources, but it`s nothing compared to medieval "scholars", who in most of cases were "humble servants" of thier masters. Ok, but if you mean national borders tell me 4 example where`s Lt/Bel border, or Bel/Ukr? I wish it would be so easy. I agree, French revolution and romantism, supression of Russian Empire also made our both national identityies to develop, as well as literature. But look at persons like Mickiewicz, can you tell me which nationality/ethnicy he was?? Royal no doubt, but Princely/Knyaz familyies were "by blood" also royal, only Emperor could give the princely title (like in case of Radvila). Jagiellons were also "elected", so i`m not sure if we can consider it as a typical royal house, neither as some casual szlachta. I really don`t get why to give Polish nobility so exotic meaning in comparation to rest of feudal-elitar Europe, i mean that there were differences, but rule was everywhere similar. So it doesn`t matter if we consider Ostrogski or other clans as a szlachta, they were noble-elite familyies anyway and as i said religion not necessary was related to it. If it goes for Ostrogski, i`m not sure when they adopted catholicism, or if they ever did it before Zasławscy and Wiśniowieccy inherited thier possesions. Mikołajski (talk) 00:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

For the record, I agree that Jogaila was not a member of szlachta, but Ostrogoscy certainly were (without doubt after 1569 and likely after the Union of Horodło). Do we know when they converted to Catholicism/Protestantism? Legal priviliges of szlachta were abolished I believe only after 1918, as a class they existed until 1939 (I'd have to look for some more data for specific dates, but certainly nobility was recognized by the partitioners - if not all the poorer ones, perhaps). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about Russian Empire times. Any references?--Lokyz (talk) 17:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
P.S. just remembered - Jozef Pilsudski article does state some things, that catholics could not be landowners in Rusian Empire, and also could not hold any state offices. Please correct me if I'm wrong.--Lokyz (talk) 17:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
There was some discrimination, but I am pretty sure some Catholic nobles were allowed to hold land and some minor offices. This is not however something I've researched extensively, User:Molobo may know more, perhaps you could ask him? PS. I can't find the passage you mention in Piłsudski's article? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
It might be copyedited, those things do happen (more often than one would expect). References question on szlachta legal status in Russian Empire is still open.--Lokyz (talk) 18:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Diminuitive forms

Thanks alot, but name Halszka seems to be in various sources also used, is it another name or maybe another language (for example old-Russian)? I feel confused with that names issues, especially Dniil had about four different names in different sources (Daszko, Detko etc.) as well as Feodor. How about that Danylko, is it diminuitive form of Daniil? Another thing i wish to ask is what`s wikipedia policy about such things like names and how can i redirect various names to one correct (i hope) page. Unfortunatelly i`v got no "move" button, is it question of my accounts set-up? Regards.Mikołajski (talk) 18:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not familiar with the form Halszka. I can't say something definite on this issue but I have doubts it was used for Elizaveta. Yes, Danylko is a diminuitive form of Daniil, Dashko probably too, while Detko is just a dimunuitive form of "child". The policy is that the articles should be found under the most common and the most used name. You can do redirect by starting a new article and then write #redirect[[]] with the main name inside. Yes, probably the move opting is not yet accessable for new users. If you want to move an article, you can ask me or other users to do it. Copy-pasting of the content to a new place is not welcomed, because edit history gets lost. Regards, Voyevoda (talk) 11:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again. May it be that Halszka was just Latinised/Polonised name, anyway i`v got finally that "move" button and i`ll just redirect Elżbieta/Halszka to "Elizaveta" and similar with others. If it goes for "Detko", i found it in many sources, exactly Det`ko, similar with Feodor and Fed`ko. If i can i wish you to tell me if Feodor (Fiodor/Teodor) and Ilia (Eliasz/Elias) are correct names. Mikołajski (talk) 00:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re:

No there is no article on Augustinus Rotundus. I think this spelling form is most common. There is an article of Albinas Jovaišas, Augusto Rotundo Lietuvos valstybės vizija (Vision of Lithuanian State by Augustus Rotundus) in Šešioliktojo amžiaus raštija (Sixteenth century writings), Senoji Lietuvos lteratūra V (Old Litherature of Lithuania, vol. 5), Vilnius 2000.

As for Genute Kirkienė - she seems to be a Ph.D from Vilnius University, I cannot say anything more. Her publications are published in respected journals like [1], and she has been working on Publications of Lithuanian Metrica together with other respected historians (LIETUVOS METRIKA (1522–1530). 4-oji Teismų bylų knyga (XVI a. pabaigos kopija). Parengė S. Lazutka, I. Valikonytė, G. Kirkienė, E. Gudavičius, J. Karpavičienė S. Viskantaitė, Vilnius, 1997) so she seems to be reliable. hope this helps.--Lokyz (talk) 11:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I do suggest to move this discussion onto related talk page - i.e. Talk:Augustinus Rotundus, hope you don't mind that I moved your questions there, and I provided my answers also there. Cheers.--Lokyz (talk) 15:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE

Hello, Mikołajski. You have new messages at dominik92's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

I think I found it, I left a link to a website that explains it on my talk page. The DominatorTalkEdits 06:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, why did you revert my edit? all it was was several spelling, grammar and MoS fixes. The DominatorTalkEdits 20:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Yup, I see it now, no problem. The DominatorTalkEdits 21:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Mikołajski. You have new messages at Dominik92's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

[edit] 5/5 DYK

Updated DYK query On 5 May 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Feodor Ostrogski, 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.

--Bedford 03:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] B/D cats

Please don't forget to add birth and date categories to the biographical articles you write - Category:1555 births and such.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 04:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Danzig/Gdańsk

This is a dead horse. If you don't believe me, ask on WP:PWNB or talk to users such as User:Molobo or User:Space Cadet, who often deal with Talk:Gdansk/Vote. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:25, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Simple way to improve your contributions

Use a browser with build in English spellchecker (SeaMoneky, Firefox, etc.). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 02:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stanisław Orzechowski - undeletion.

Article, which i just started yesterday, was deleated before i could even expand it. Maybe i should keep it in sandbox, at least there it would survive 12h. So please, undelete it and if it`s possible paste in User:Mikołajski/Sandbox2. Thanks in advance. Mikołajski (talk) 18:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Stifle (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maps

What do you want to use my maps for? Sure, you can (hence the license), but I'm just curious. If it's for publication - I could send you some better version, BTW. //Halibutt 23:38, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh my god... why don't you use GIMP, or any decent program. Paint is for painting walls, not graphics... //Halibutt 06:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Detailed description (and a legend) is available here: . //Halibutt 10:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok, now I feel my map's in good hands. Do with it whatever you want :) (BTW, there's also a layered version available, I guess it makes work easier). //Halibutt 11:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Communication

Don't hesitate to send me (and other users) a message on GG and activate your email.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 12:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Emailing users.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Union 1499

Hello, the discussion for move here was already closed (I added markers to see it clearly now). However you are more then welcome to reopen it by resubmitting move request in accordance with WP:RM (I may support your newest proposal). You also may be interested in here,as currently is proposed to impose and use a just a single name, instead of dual and more neutral one. M.K. (talk) 08:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello, answering to your question: if majority voted for move, why there`s still old name? it depend mostly on closing admin's decision. Actually I have no problems and naming that article, in this context, with Both Nations too. Cheers, M.K. (talk) 10:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Horodlo Union

Zobacze jak z czasem bede stal. Moze poprosic o pomoc innych na WP:PWNB? Dobre miejsce to takich prosb i ogloszen.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)