User talk:Radomil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 1

Contents

[edit] Poprawione

Tylko jedno słówko :) Warto też kopiować takie prośby na WP:PWNB, im wiecej sie zainteresuje tym lepiej :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greater Poland Uprising (1806)

Updated DYK query On 15 May 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Greater Poland Uprising (1806), 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.

--Wizardman 04:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Teatr Wielki

I believe it is usual to use a comma instead of "in" for page titles. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 19:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC) OK I will fix the links. Regards Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 19:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 28 May 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Air Force of the Polish 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.

--Smee 03:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Air Force of the Polish Army

The sentence about the 103rd Squadron has long since been rewritten by Poeticbent.

I knew that German (at least) uses British-style dates, and I read somewhere (but I can't find it now) that Wikipedia prefers British English for articles about Europe, presumably because Europeans are more familiar with British English than American English. The British-style dates were changed to U.S.-style dates by Poeticbent, not me, and it doesn't matter if people use date preferences.

Another thing I read somewhere that I can't find now, is that there are two styles of user page conversation on Wikipedia. The reason to reply on one's own page is to allow the complete conversation to be read by others without switching back and forth. If you look at any long user talk page, you can normally find some replies from the page's owner on his own user talk page. Both conversation styles can be accommodated by temporarily putting a user talk page on your Wikipedia:Watchlist when you leave a message. Art LaPella 17:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, some people (I think a minority) prefer answers on their own user talk page, but don't say it's because you get a notification - unless you understand that putting the other person's user page on your watch list will also give you a less immediate notification. Art LaPella 18:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm also an administrator, although I do more editing than discussion compared to other administrators. I don't keep track of old items on my watchlist - I unwatch them when someone edits them if the issue is no longer current, and if you look at random user talk pages you'll see how popular that is. Whatever. Art LaPella 18:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

What is a Polish chessboard? It isn't on English Wikipedia, and I don't think it's even on Google. The Google hits confuse chessboards from Poland with polishing a chessboard. The chessboards that do come from Poland look like American chessboards, 8x8 not 2x2 as in the picture.

The Transformation section seems disproportional to the rest of the article. I would think the most important facts about a military organization would be a description of its battles and a description of its capability if ordered into another war, not such a long list of demobilized organizations. Art LaPella 21:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Summary style says: "In shorter articles, if one subtopic has much more text than another subtopic, that may be an indication that that subtopic should have its own page, with only a summary presented on the main page" with a link to the subtopic's own page. Art LaPella 21:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure either, but at least I wouldn't make the section any longer without splitting it off into another article. Art LaPella 21:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Czemu nie przetłumaczysz artykułu na polski?

[edit] Poznań

Strona o Poznaniu jest dosyć uboga w zdjęcia. Może dobrze byłoby rozpatrzyć tę kwestię...??? Kajzderski

[edit] Polish Land Forces

thanks for the information you provided on my talkpage. I left the regional names given to the units out, as I did not know their English name most of the time and there isn't much space in the graphic to include these names. However where if you are willing to help- You can find the graphic here and I have the following questions:

  • First I have some questions about units that I already was able to include in the graphic:
    • Is "Batalionu Piechoty Zmotoryzowanej" correctly translated as “Motorized Battalion”? Y Done
    • What are: "kompania łączności", "kompania ochrony i regulacji ruchu", "kompania wsparcia".
    • I translated “Batalion Powietrznodesantowy” as Paratrooper Battalion. Correct? Y Done
    • 10th Logistics Brigade: Y Done
      • What does “składowania” mean? Y Done
      • What does “ewakuacji sprzętu” mean? Y Done
    • 23 Śląska Brygada Artylerii under the link "Struktura BA" you will find the Brigades units: What does “dra” mean? I made a Rocket Artillery Group of it… Y Done
    • I translated “Pułk Samochodowy” as Transport Regiment. Y Done
    • I translated “Pułk Ochrony” as Protection Battalion. Y Done
    • Does “batalionów łączności” mean “Signal Battalion”? Y Done
  • Secondly: there is a long list of regiments and battalions listed in the Polish Wikipedia article about the Polish Land Forces. I tried to translate these units, but I do not know where they belong to. Which command is responsible for these units and what is the English translation for them?
    • Samodzielne pułki
      • 14 Suwalski Pułk Artylerii Przeciwpancernej (Suwałki) = 14th Anti-Tank Rgt.
      • 4 Pułk Przeciwlotniczy (Czerwieńsk) = 4th Air Defence Rgt.
      • 8 Koszaliński Pułk Przeciwlotniczy (Koszalin) = 8th Air Defence Rgt
      • 1 Dębliński Pułk Drogowo-Mostowy (Dęblin) - jednostka Pomorskiego OW = ???
      • 2 Inowrocławski Pułk Komunikacyjny (Inowrocław) = 2nd Signals or PsyOps Rgt.?
      • 3 Włocławski Pułk Drogowo-Mostowy (Włocławek) - jednostka Śląskiego OW = ???
      • 5 Pułk Inżynieryjny (Szczecin) = ???
      • 9 Pułk Dowodzenia(Białobrzegi) = 9th Command Btn.
      • 49 Pułk Śmigłowców Bojowych (Pruszcz Gdański) = ???
      • 56 Kujawski Pułk Śmigłowców Bojowych (Inowrocław) = ???
      • 1 Pułk Specjalny Komandosów (Lubliniec) = 1st Special Forces Rgt.
      • 2 Hrubieszowski Pułk Rozpoznawczy (Hrubieszów) = 2nd Reconnaissance Rgt. – is this a Special Forces unit?
      • 9 Warmiński Pułk Rozpoznawczy (Lidzbark Warmiński) = 9th Reconnaissance Rgt. – is this a Special Forces unit?
      • 4 Pułk Chemiczny (Brodnica) = NBC Rgt.
    • Samodzielne bataliony i kompanie
      • 100 Batalion Łączności (Szczecin) – jednostka Międzynarodowego Korpusu Północ-Wschód = 100th Signals Btn.
      • 8 Batalion Walki Radioelektronicznej (Grudziądz) = 8th Signals Btn.
      • 11 Batalion Walki Radioelektronicznej (Legnica) = 11th Signals Btn.
      • 5 Batalion Chemiczny (Tarnowskie Góry) = 5th NBC Btn.
      • 1 Batalion Zabezpieczenia Dowództwa Wojsk Lądowych (Warszawa) = ???
      • 1 Kujawsko-Pomorski Batalion Zabezpieczenia Okręgu Wojskowego (Bydgoszcz) = ???
      • 2 Batalion Dowodzenia Okręgu Wojskowego (Wrocław) = 2nd Command Btn. ??
      • 28 Batalion Dowozu Amunicji = 28 Ammunition Btn.
      • 3 bataliony remontowe (52, 55, 112) = Maintenance Btn.
      • 8 batalionów zaopatrzenia (75, 82, 86, 91, 95, 97, 107, 122) = Supply Btn.
      • 6 batalionów ratownictwa inżynieryjnego (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) = ???
      • ponadto m. in. 2 kompanie kontroli ruchu 2 kompanie transportu ciężkiego itp. = ???
  • Third: These are the Brigades of which I could not find any information and therefore they are only in the graphic with the Brigade icon, but all their units are missing- if you or someone you know has information about these brigades, please let me know it.

Can you help? thanks, --noclador 08:01, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Radomil, thanks for your answers- I already updated the graphic :-) --noclador 09:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with all the translations. I'll wait 2-3 days with updating the graphic, in the hope that you might be able to find out, if these units are all directly under the Land Forces Command or other commands. The units that are under command of the Silesian and Pommeranian Military District I will add tonight. --noclador 09:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I found a link to the units of the Silesian Military district- could you have alook and try to find out, what the units of the 10 Logistic Brigade are? http://www.sow.mil.pl/index.php?id=jednostki#naglowek --noclador 06:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I just finished to update the graphic. As for the 10th LogisticsBrigade, I moved some of the units that are supposedly part of the Silesian Military district into the 10th Logistics Brigade- the reason: the 1stLogistic Brigade has the same kind and number of units as the Silesian Military district and I think it is more logical that these units have in the meantime be moved under command of the 10 Log. Brig... I also included all the Regiments and Battalions that are under direct command of the Land Forces. The new graphic is now up: commons:Image:Poland Land Forces.png --noclador 08:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia as you did to Polish Air Force article in this edit. Your edit do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. --Eurocopter tigre 12:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marcin Dunin

That is a wonderful picture of the sculpture, thank you for uploading it! Do you by any chance have a closer view of the face of the sculpture? Thank you, Elonka Dunin.  :) --Elonka 22:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! It's a great addition to Wikipedia, and I have several family members in the U.S. who will be interested in seeing it. Also, considering the chaos of my current RfA, it's actually a useful thing for me to look at. If I'm pondering the answer to a question, I can look at the picture, and think, "How would my ancestors have handled this?"  :) So again, thanks. --Elonka 18:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Polish Marines

I did not actually know when I created this article. I have been intending to do some research around it but have not yet found time to do so. I created this article when I noticed the term 'Polish Marines' was used in the Polish Navy article. --Hydraton31 09:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Many thanks for your help in creating this article, hopefully I will have time to do something about it. --Hydraton31 14:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] July 15th DYK

Updated DYK query On 15 July 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Marcin Dunin, 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.

--Andrew c [talk] 04:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:KKS_Lech_Poznań.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:KKS_Lech_Poznań.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. BigrTex 21:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYKi

Ostatnio mniej sledze nowe artykuly; polecam reklamowac takie jak Tramways in Poznań na Template talk:Did you know.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Odp: Polskie flagi

We wprowadzeniu do List of Polish flags zaznaczyłem, że lista obejmuje tylko flagi zdefiniowane przez polskie prawo na poziomie państwowym, czyli ustawy bądź rozporządzenia ("flags defined by Polish national law, either through an act of parliament or a ministerial ordinance"). A zatem nie obejmuje ona ani flag ustalonych przez samorządy, ani przez stowarzyszenia. Ponieważ bandery jachtowe są obecnie zdefiniowane tylko przez statuty stowarzyszeń żeglarskich, to uważam, że nie ma na nie miejsca w tym artykule. — Kpalion(talk) 14:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Articles wanted

  • Zdzisław Jezioro, also in Polish, [1]

greg park avenue (talk) 20:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Polish Air Force

bylo by milo gdybys skonczyl odwracac artykul Polish Air Force do poprzedniego, nieaktualnego stanu —Preceding unsigned comment added by Militaryboy (talk • contribs) 17:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] question about Image:MiG-21 RB6.jpg

Hi, there is an intriguing insignia on the fuselage near the nose (black, with wings). Do you know more about it? The MiG-21 appears to be non-operational. Is it in a museum or a park? --Jtir (talk) 11:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes. This is MiG-21PFM #4106 of Polish Air Force with insignia of 10th Fighter Reg. from Łask, near Łódź (not existing anymore, replaced on 1 Jan 2001 by 10th Tactical Sqn. and 32nd AF Base) currently on display in Museum of Armament (Muzeum Uzbrojenia) in Fort Winiary (better known as Cytedela) in Poznań, Poland. Radomil talk 11:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Ach, and insignia - this is black dragon - emblem of 1st Flight of 10th Fighter Reg. Radomil talk 12:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I have added your detailed description to your image on Commons. I did some copyediting, but I'm not an aviation or military specialist, so my usage may not be quite right. What is the Polish for "black dragon emblem"? A closeup might be a nice addition to Polish Air Force. There appears to be a square panel obscuring part of the emblem. Do know what that is? --Jtir (talk) 21:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the additional details. Now I see that the "panel" is part of the insignia. --Jtir (talk) 23:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Marcin Dunin

Hello Radomil, I edited about 2 hours to comment your deletion of German place names in this article -which I reverted. The edits are lost. To make it short: Good luck to change Rome to Rzym, and so on. Remember, we are in 2007, not in 1945. Gerhard51 (talk) 22:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It seems you like to have an edit war. Gerhard51 (talk) 22:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sword of Saint Peter

Na moje oko trzeba by rozbudowac mniej wiecej dwukrotnie do DYKa, na razie to stub.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] pl:Twierdza Poznań

Wypadałoby choć stubnąć... :) Ostatnio napisałem Toruń Fortress i na razie mi o fortyfikacjach pisac sie nie chce... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 06:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] your edits on Pomeranian names

Please note that the duchy of Pomerania joined in to Saxony in 1164 and into the HRE in 1181, German settlement and adapting German law / language / culture followed thereon (see eg Ostsiedlung). Please note that the Pomeranian_language (East Pom) and Polabian dialects (West Pom) used before (Low) German was introduced are not equal to modern Polish, though related.

Please stop editwars on issues you obviously have not investigated deeply enough. If you want to discuss any specific matter you are welcome. Skäpperöd (talk) 14:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

With Brandenburg there was always struggling and warfare as Brandenburg sought to integrate the duchy of Pomerania within its realm, she also claimed Pomerania inheritance as a whole and Uckermark in specific throughout history - despite she would not succeed getting the whole duchy of Pom until the last Griffin died heirless, Brandenburg eg advanced into and temporarily incorporatet Stargard and (most of) Uckermark. There were a lot of treaties of Pomeranian dukes against Brandenburg or other threatening neighbors like Mecklenburg. The HRE's central authority most of the time was very limited, armed and diplomatic conflicts between the HRE's states/duchies/principalities were common until Prussia succeeded to create a much or less unified centralistic Germany under its hegemony in late modern times.
But in "our" case, alliances as the one you mentioned are not suitable for determing the language used in the duchy. Please, don't have your editwar continued as it really makes no sense to deny historical facts that can be studied with a low amount of time and means. Please inform yourself before further false edits are made.
Maybe you are confusing the duchy of Pom with Pomerelia? I really don't know what else I can do to get you study a bit of Pomeranian history which would prevent you from making false edits. Skäpperöd (talk) 16:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
You don't get the point. Just because HRE was not a nation state in modern sense it does not mean that the duchy of Pomerania was not German. The duchy joined in as a Slavic one, yes, but the dukes themselves turned the duchy into a German one just thereafter. You need to read about Pomeranian history, I'm getting tired of stating what you could easily know by yourself if you would just start to inform yourself before starting a silly edit war. Skäpperöd (talk) 05:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I have requested a comment on talk:Dukes_of_Pomerania, you are invited to post further arguments there. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The Talk:Dukes of Pomerania discussion is not intended to change WP:NCGN but to clarify the historical content and the English usage to those who are not comfortable with it. This discussion is not a poll to actually change the rules, so don't expect this to happen. If you want to establish a new naming rule, you need to start a poll on the WP:NCGN talk page. Skäpperöd (talk) 04:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Please. I gave you the historical content, I gave you the links to the respective wiki rules. This is not about you vs me or PL vs DE, but simply about the English use of historical names in wiki. I will again give you the respective links. Let's make great articles and not have a silly war because of a misunderstanding.

WP:NCGN

Talk:Gdansk/Vote#Results_on_VOTE:_Enforcement

Skäpperöd (talk) 05:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


I am glad you finally read some of the above links.

WP:NCGN:In cases when a widely accepted historic English name is used, it should be followed by the modern English name in parentheses on the first occurrence of the name in applicable sections of the article in the format: "historical name (modern name)." Now, as the duchy does not exist anymore, it does not have any modern name. Yet, because the city the duchy took its specifying name from changed its name after WWII, the new name, although not really related to the duchy, might be given in parentheses for orientation.

Gdansk vote says, in case of cities, we should use the name of the respective time span we are in first and the other name in parentheses.

You might want to consult an admin if you have trouble applying the rules, or you might start a campaign to change these rules. Be aware that persistent edits against Gdansk vote consensus are treated alike vandalism (see above enforcement link).

Skäpperöd (talk) 08:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


Stettin was the only name of the city before 1945. Before 45, there was no double naming or a preference or anything because only one name existed. Skäpperöd (talk) 06:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Gdansk vote: Be aware that persistent edits against Gdansk vote consensus are treated alike vandalism (see above enforcement link in the above Gdansk vote template).

3RR Please read about 3RR-rule. You violated that rule already and can easily get blocked. You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Article. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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.

Skäpperöd (talk) 07:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)