From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Łazienki Park,Warsaw,Poland

[edit] DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article All Sky Automated Survey, which you recently created, 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.

[edit] Warmia-Mazury

Thank you for expressing your support for my proposal to render wojewodztwo in English as "province."

There is a movement afoot now to move "Warmia-Mazury" to "Warmian-Masurian Voivodship." It occurred to me that you might like to review the arguments on the Talk:Warmia-Mazury page. I have given my own views there in a somewhat more detailed form than before.

logologist|Talk 02:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The move was made by a British teenager with no previous involvement in the discussion. Seems as though he did it as a lark.

I've added a section to "Voivodships of Poland" on "Etymology and usage of 'voivodship'."

Do you understand my point about using Polish geographic names in English in their noun, rather than adjective, forms? (Except for "Świętokrzyskie," which in this context appears only in adjectival form.)

Have you figured out where they've hidden Polish letters that carry diacritics? I've been having to use the old, convoluted system.

logologist|Talk 20:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Polański

Hmm, quite likely. Let's ask on that article's talk page for comments, and hopefully we can move it soon.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I am gettin start with english wikipedia and i expect any help and advice from older users. Greetz. Andrew₁₈ ^@ 23:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mass Deletion of Red Links from List of Poles

A user deleted almost all the non-articled names listed on List of Poles. I would have reverted but you made a bunch of edits after this was done, so I can't. Do you agree with this approach? Isn't it counterproductive to drop out all the red links, as now no one can make articles for these people (even I was planning on writing a few)? Antidote 21:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cześć Sylwia

I've invited you to the Raphael Kalinowski discussion page to explain your rvs of Vilnius to Wilno in the article. I made the original changes for consistency sake, and after reading your various contributions and arguments regarding other matters recently, I'm curious as to what you have to say about it. Dr. Dan 03:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Email

Tnx for the offer, but I am not sure if I can find enough time considering my time limitations. But I may know a person who would be willing to do this - can I pass the info to him?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 04:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ponowna próba

Wymazania informacji o zbrodniach popełnionych przez żółnierzy niemieckich podczas Kampanii Wrześniowej, tym razem w artykule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_17th_Infantry_Division --Molobo 22:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC) Dziękuję za pomoc w dyskusji

[edit] WP:3RR on Nicolaus Copernicus

Hello. Please be mindful of the three-revert-rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you  :) Adrian Lamo · (talk) · (mail) · 08:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jakbyś miała ochotę

To przetłumaczyć: http://glos.uni.torun.pl/2003/05/historia/ Na spotkaniu stanowiącym jednocześnie inaugurację Festiwalu profesorowie Janusz Małłek i Krzysztof Mikulski spierali się - z udziałem prof. Sławomira Kalembki jako moderatora - o narodowość Mikołaja Kopernika: "rodak czy współobywatel?". Spotkanie to miało specjalną dedykację: w tym roku mija 530. rocznica urodzin twórcy nowożytnej nauki oraz 150. fundacji jego toruńskiego pomnika. Obaj dyskutanci - specjaliści od historii Torunia i tzw. Prus Królewskich - przedstawili obszernie i obiektywnie stanowiska obu stron sporu - niemieckiej i polskiej - na omawiany temat, natomiast moderator podsumowywał i puentował.

Uczestnikami wspomnianego sporu, który toczy się od dawna, byli i są historycy, biografowie, pisarze, publicyści, a nawet politycy. Autorzy niemieccy - przynajmniej większość z nich - głosili, że Mikołaj Kopernik był rdzennym Niemcem, ba więcej, że był wrogiem polskości i państwa polskiego, natomiast Polacy próbują go bezczelnie Niemcom ukraść. To był główny nurt tamtejszych wystąpień w wieku XIX i pierwszej połowie XX w. Natomiast autorzy polscy gromadzili argumenty na rzecz tezy, że Wielki Torunian nie tylko był poddanym króla polskiego, co jest - powinno być - oczywiste, bo urodził się w Toruniu w wiele lat po inkorporacji tego miasta do Królestwa Polskiego, ale, że był także etnicznym Polakiem. Żadna ze stron nie chciała odstąpić nawet o milimetr od zajmowanego stanowiska. A jak sprawa wygląda w świetle współczesnej wiedzy? Ród matki - toruńscy patrycjusze Watzenrode - był najpewniej niemieckiego pochodzenia, bo jego protoplasci przybyli do Torunia z Westfalii. Natomiast ojciec był zapewne Polakiem, bo przeniósł się do Torunia z Krakowa, dokąd wcześniej jego przodkowie przybyli ze Śląska. Czy ze wsi Koperniki - to jest dyskusyjne. Natomiast niewątpliwie nazwisko "Kopernik" jest polskie - oznacza bowiem tego, kto zajmuje się wyrobami z miedzi (kopr), tak jak cukiernik to ktoś, kto używa w pracy cukru. Tyle wiedzy obiektywnej i sprawdzonej. Rzecz jednak w tym, że cała ta problematyka jest anachroniczna, bowiem zupełnie nieprzystająca do pojęć z przełomu XV i XVI w., kiedy żył Kopernik. Z ówczesnego punktu widzenia, który niespodziewanie jest także i naszym, współczesnym sposobem patrzenia na sprawę, Kopernik urodził się w polskim (chociaż w większości zamieszkanym przez Niemców) mieście Toruniu. Był poddanym (wraz z całymi tzw. Prusami Królewskimi) polskiego władcy, a studiował w Krakowie, który przecież stanowił centrum polskiej kultury, na jednym z najstarszych w tej części Europy uniwersytecie, będącym - nawiasem mówiąc - liczącym się ośrodkiem ówczesnej matematyki i astronomii. Poza tym był Mikołaj Kopernik przez całe życie lojalnym obywatelem Królestwa Polskiego, nie tylko biernie ale i czynnie, - bronił Olsztyna przed Krzyżakami - i dążył do ekonomicznej oraz prawnej integracji Prus Królewskich z resztą państwa polskiego (m.in. jego traktat o monecie), a także mówił po polsku (po niemiecku również) i utrzymywał liczne kontakty z innymi poddanymi króla polskiego (czy też: obywatelami Królestwa Polskiego), jako jeden z nich. A poza tym i przede wszystkim dzieło Kopernika było najważniejszym (i najwcześniejszym) składnikiem owego wielkiego wybuchu kultury polskiej który miał miejsce w XVI w. Po nim pojawił się Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski, prekursor praw człowieka, i Jan Kochanowski, wielki poeta europejskiego renesansu. W sensie tu przedstawionym, ale tylko w tym sensie, sprawa jest bezdyskusyjna: Mikołaj Kopernik na pewno był Polakiem

Mnie jak zwykle nie będzie w weekend. Poza tym miałem gdzieś wywiad z profesorem który pokazywał jak to do XIX wieku nikt nie uważał Kopernika za Niemca i król pruski mówił o wybitnym "Polaku" ale niestety nie mogę odnależć. --Molobo 13:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Job

Thanks for trying to reach a consensus on those two pages; such wars are a waste of everyone's time, and it is much better if we all write and improve articles rather than get into fights over the use of language-specific names. Hopefully Raphael Kalinowski is sorted, but I don't hold out much hope for the Nicolaus Copernicus article. The current one is reasonable, but he's just one of those figures where this thing is problematic, so some are going to delete the Polish part (although why they don't delete the categories also is beyond me). - Calgacus 00:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Droga Sylwia, Vilnius is not a " modern " name. It is the Lithuanian name of the Capital of Lithuania. True it has other names in other languages as do other cities, e.g. Warsaw and Paris. Dr. Dan 04:03, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hej

Kaczka jest dopiero od kilku godzin. Przedtem miałem hełm pruski w kółku. Skryty Wielbiciel - Space Cadet

Mam niewątpliwy zaszczyt zaprosić Cię na Drugie Uroczyste Otwarcie mojej Galerii Nalepek Samochodowych pod tym adresem. Doradzam pośpiech, bo znając Wikipedię - to wszystko niedługo będzie poniszczone, zwandalizowane albo w najlepszym razie skasowane.
Zawsze Oddany,
Chłopak z Woli
(znany również jako Space Cadet)
P.S.
Jeśli masz jakiś pomysł na nalepkę, plakat, znak, symbol, albo nawet herb szlachecki, czy inny, to daj znać, uniżony sługa zawsze gotów.
P.S. II
Urodziłem się co prawda w Glendale w Kalifornii, ale wychowałem się w Warszawie - na Woli - na Młynowie - na Górczewskiej - na "Wesołym". "Wesołe" to takie śmieszne (i sławne) podwórko - 90% moich towarzyszy zabaw w piaskownicy siedzi dziś w więzieniu. Gwarę więzienną znam z zabaw z kolegami (dziećmi wyrokowców).

[edit] 14. DG SS

Już nie pamiętam, ale korzystałem z dwóch źródeł: ze świetnego serwisu internetowego WSSOB, którego niestety ostatnio już nie znalazłem i z książki Waffen SS Gwardia Adolfa Hitlera, czy jakoś tak, którą niestety mam w innym mieście :). Oba źródła sa porządne. Silthor

[edit] Jan Czarnowski

SylwiaS, if you have time, could you please translate this paragraph for me? It's about another of my uncles that I'd like to write an article about.  :) "Świeżo mianowany kawalerem maltańskim Jan Czarnowski z Rossochy, ponoć na prośbę konfratra, adm. Jerzego Zwierkowskiego11, przekazał z kolei bibliotece Związku szereg cennych XVII, XVIII i XIX-wiecznych dzieł związanych z dziejami Zakonu. Były tam m.in. dość tajemnicze, nieznane bibliografiom zakonnym dzieło Baudoina i de Naberata (?) Histoire des Chevaliers de l’Ordre de Malte (tom 1, wydany w Paryżu in folio w r. 1629) i Histoire des Chevaliers Hospitaliers... Vertota w 7-tomowej paryskiej edycji in octavo z 1778 r., a także de Borcha Lettres sur la Sicilie et l’ile de Malthe w dwóch tomach in octavo, wydane w Turynie w r.178212." [1]. Thanks! Elonka 23:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:History_of_Poland_(1939–1945)#Civil_war

What do you think? PS. I tinkered with you ToC (see history) - hope it helps.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 05:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Sure, time on Wiki flows differently - if you want, comment ahead :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:47, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Hi! You may be interested in checking our noticeboard. Welcome!--SylwiaS 16:18, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fon" I have, thank you - Fon (I am not sure how to add responses, hope this works all right.)

[edit] Voting

Well, I don't have time to do it myself, but I guess the results may be published by anybody and then changes applied as per vote.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:47, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Polish false friends

Dear Sylvia, thanks for your additions. Yes, this is what we need, but it would be good if everyone could enter exactly this information directly on the monolingual pages (in this case: False Friends of the Slavist/Polish) and, if appropriate, on the respective map pages. And then, if people had the time to go through the bilingual pages and modify the information there too, it would be even better. Otherwise I'm afraid that everyone will just say what they know about their language on the talk pages and there will be nobody to enter all these changes. But anyway, thanks for any minute you spend on this project. --Daniel Bunčić 10:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unexplained deletions on Talk:Nicolaus Copernicus

Sylwia: You completely removed a post of mine on Talk:Nicolaus Copernicus, and significantly reworded another user's properly signed and dated post [2]. Interestingly, your summary for this edit merely states "vote", which is why I ignored it when it appeared on my watchlist and why it took me a long time to find out about what happened to my statement. Do you feel that this is good form or legitimised by any policy? --Thorsten1 22:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I have no idea how it happened. It certainly wasn't my intentional doing. I put your edit back and gave my apologies on the article's talk page [3].--SylwiaS | talk 14:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm relieved to hear that, Sylwia, apology accepted. --Thorsten1 15:16, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 8

from Irpen

). --Irpen 07:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

WOW!!! Thank you very much, it's a great surprise.--SylwiaS | talk 18:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion request for images

you wrote "... authors are unknown, which means that the copyrights expired 70 years after they were made" ... that´s right to some extend but how can you be sure that the autor is realy unknown? unknown to you or the Wikipedia does not mean that he is really unknown ...Sicherlich ^Post 19:42, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

well; still you cant be sure ... but feel free to state your opinion or if you are admin on commons to decide what ever ;) ... according to commons:User:Historiograf the PD according the polish law before 1952 is questionable because Poland joined the EU; so we dont have it on de; but if you want to discuss details about this law ask historiograf not me (as i'm not to much involved in the image right stuff) ;o) ...Sicherlich ^Post 20:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

by the way; if the polis law applies the copyright tag needs to be changed ...Sicherlich ^Post 20:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please

Look in the article Renaissance in Poland a tag has been made on it suggesting it isn't neutral. Explanation was given as : Contemporary Poland, before it brought in German settlers to urbanize it, could boast little more than a series of fortified cragie lumps with some mud-huts around them.

--Molobo 21:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please see this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Russsian_claims_about_Warsaw_Uprising_1794 The author tries to put information from non-objective source as objective article. The source is from Imperial Russia regarding Polish uprising against its occupation. Imperial Russia was known for fabricating and being source of many antipolish fabrications. Because I didn't want to delete this(no blanking) I moved it to a proper article that would deal with claim. --Molobo 03:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IW Board of Regents

We have talked about you taking a postion on the Institute of Wikipediolgy's Board of Regents as a representative of female and European wikipedians, before and you said yes. If you are still interested please get back to me as soon as possible. Thanks. -JCarriker 02:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warto zobaczyć tą dyskusję

[4] --Molobo 11:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome back?

:)--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Aren't we all?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent history of Poland

Hi Sylwia. Thanks for your comment at my talk page, I couldn't have said it better myself. In fact I initially replied to Dr.Dan's comment, but I removed my reply the minute after I posted it as it was a tad too emotional. Why, oh why does my English lack the clarity... BTW, as you probably know this weekend Piotr's comming to Warsaw and I'm going to be his tour-guide for a day or two. Fancy a ride? :) //Halibutt 05:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, definitely it is too short. Having lived here for the last... err.. 25 years I still have lots to see and discover. Perhaps another time :) //Halibutt 06:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure yet, but I think we'll go the scenic route of Warsaw as a city that never was. I'll show him some of the absurdities that tourists often mistake for reconstructed old town (royal road never looked that way, Barbican built of Gothic brick from Nysa even though it was originally built of standard renaissance brick and was dismantled long, long ago). Also, I thought of a short trip to real Warsaw, like to Wola (Chłodna!), perhaps Praga (but, as most Varsovians, I do not know it well). All the typical tourist attractions he could visit himself, so I'll try to focus on things the tourguides would not tell him :)

Also, the Warsaw Rising Museum is a must, after all we collaborated on writing the article on Warsaw Uprising together. There's also lots of Uprising-related sites, like the Bank Polski redoubt, the Bracka 5 courtyard... Perhaps the Fotoplastikon would be a good idea as well, it's the only one in the world after all.

What else... should he be interested in architecture, we always have the southern Śródmieście around Poznańska, which is one of my favourites, as well as the backyard of Aleje Jerozolimskie. Oh, and there's the stone tablets marking the streets below the Pajac, which are among the strongest points in terms of emotions. //Halibutt 07:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wódka

Hi Sylwia, I noticed you placed a bunch of images in the Polish vodkas cat. I suggest we create a subcategory "Polish vodkas images" and put them all there. Also, we can probably get rid of Image:Bisonvodka.jpg since we already have the much nicer Image:Zubrowka.jpg. Appleseed (Talk) 22:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I meant delete it. Appleseed (Talk) 11:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Łańcut (vodka)

• It reads much like an advertisement. Anthony Appleyard 20:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree with Anthony. Too many of your recent vodka's article read like ads - try to rephrase them. Sorry to leave a criticial note, but sometimes we have to :) Take care, -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  04:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I did rephrase them already. I'd like to know how else to do that. I'm serious. I wrote an explanation to Anthony but got no answer. "Reads like..." isn't really a substancial information, is it?--SylwiaS | talk 04:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

It's very subjective - but I think you've got it now.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  00:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On 12 September 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polmos Łańcut, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

[edit] List of Polish Jews

Can you provide some insight at List of Polish Jews? We have the same user who tried to add Jewish categories to the Adam Mickiewicz article now suggesting Mickiewicz is without-a-doubt a valid entry on the list because one place unequivocally says his mother was of a Frankist family an in return, completing ignoring the citations needed to assert Mickiewicz was a Jew himself. Furthermore, all other sources suggesting this information is no more than a possibility are being ignored, which is certainly not in line with WP:RS#Evaluating Sources and WP:NPOV#Undue Weight LaGrange 23:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

As I have explained on Talk:List of Polish Jews, the article is a list of people of jewish descent as well as just Jews. We have a very reputable source that says unequivocally that his mother was Jewish. We should report what this source says, though of course note that there are conflicting views. What we should not do is deny that this source exists.--20.138.246.89 14:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Are you completely ignoring WP:NPOV#Undue Weight, WP:RS#Exceptional_claims_require_exceptional_evidence, and most importantly WP:CITE? We DO report what the source says, straight in the Adam Mickiewicz article. It will be treated as it should, with extreme caution, as it is an exceptional claim. Secondly, despite Encyclopedia Judaica being reputable, per WP:RS, a reputable source does not always have to be be reliable source. We must go on to start WP:RS#Evaluating Sources and comparing sources. You can continue to repeat your arguments, copying and pasting from what was already discussed in TALK:List of Iberian Jews. Take a hint. LaGrange 04:38, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, as far as I'm concerned I really think that the information about Mickiewicz's mother being a Jew is nothing but a rumour. Everything I read supports it by bringing up his genealogy. The Jewish sources don't bring anything to support their view, they simply say she was Jewish. Seems a bit too little. I have no problem with writing in Wiki that someone's mother/father was a Jew, I don't see anything wrong with it, but in this case it really seems that Mickiewicz's mother wasn't. I understand that Wiki says to bring arguing sources together, but here it seems like just repeating the rumour. Someone said something 200 years ago, and people are republishing it. Mickiewicz was telling other people about his family, and he never suggested that his mother was Jewish. Moreover the gossip was built on his mother's maiden name, but then her mother's maiden name was different. So if someone would be Jewish it would be Mickiewicz's maternal grandpa. Also, as I said before. She wasn't from those Majewskis who converted, and there is really a lot of Majewskis in Poland. I simply don't understand what sense is in writing he was Jewish with practically no evidence to back it up. Also, adding the information about his wife to support the view is rather misleading. He didn't love his wife. It's suspected that he married her because she blackmailed him. One day she paid him an unexpected visit and a month later they were married. Just enough time to have the banns published. I think all of that is good for a biographical work, but not for an encyclopedic article which should stick to facts and only the most important ones.--SylwiaS | talk 22:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:HoS

Tnx for the copyedit, I fixed the problematic sentence.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Happy New Year!

Happy New Year! (Ukrainian: З Новим Роком!, Russian: С Новым Годом!). I wish you in 2007 to be spared of the real life troubles so that you will continue to care about Wikipedia. We will all make it a better encyclopedia! I also wish things here run smoothly enough to have our involvement in Wikipedia space at minimum, so that we can spend more time at Main. --Irpen

[edit] Fair use images on user page

Hi SylwiaS. I've turned the fair use images on your user page into links. User pages may not display fair use images, sorry. Also, do not upload fair use images that could be replaced by freely licensed images, such as the vodka pictures you uploaded. Thanks. ~MDD4696 18:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notice board?

What notice board? And yes, I do realize I haven't logged on to check my messages in over a year... Abu Dhabi 20:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Harnas.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Harnas.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 08:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Zubrowka.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Zubrowka.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Propolonia.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Propolonia.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Starka boxopen.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Starka boxopen.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 21:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zofia Kulik

An article that you created, Zofia Kulik, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zofia Kulik Thank you. SkierRMH 20:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Head zubrowka.jpg

Hello, SylwiaS. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Head zubrowka.jpg) was found at the following location: User:SylwiaS. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Lancut_red.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Lancut_red.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of List of Poles

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of Poles, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Poles. Thank you. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 17:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] We miss you

We miss you, Sylwia. I hope you will return one day! -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Head zubrowka.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Head zubrowka.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. β^_command 22:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Starka-50-1glas.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Starka-50-1glas.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)