Note: This is not a comprehensive archive of all messages to my talk page. It's only the ones that I feel like keeping. ;)
I have no idea what to write here - it just seemed it was time for a title like that on your page. :-) -- TStone 21:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Elonka. I'm very impressed by the cleanup work you did on the Masonic Knights Templar article. However, you should be aware that there is one or many self-described Masonic Knights Templar who will edit the article in order to support their view that there was and is Templar-Masonic connection. So you better keep watch. ;) -- Loremaster 01:01, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Spiffy that you put together an article on Brian. He deserves one :)
User:Adrian/zap 04:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
I had a quick read of the Stanley Dunin article, good job! No POV stood out to me. I checked the history and noticed that you created most of the article in a couple of hours, very quick work for such a technically well crafted article! Qutezuce 04:46, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Hey, Elonka, I'm not sure where more information can be found about Hengelmuller - I do wonder if you've spelled his name properly - shouldn't there be an umlaut over the "u"? john k 07:09, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
My dad graduated from Campion High School in 1943. His roommate and fellow classmate was:Leo Ryan.My dad's brother also graduated from Campion High School.The Campion High School article was one of the first article I started before I open an account with Wikipedia. Okay-there was an incident involving my dad and Leo Ryan.In the mid 1960s,Leo Ryan was a member of the California State Assembly.During this time,Ryan voluntarily got himself locked in Soledad State Prison. When my father heard about this, he went and bought Johnny Cash's record,Folsom Prison Blues and sent it to Leo Ryan.I can say Leo Ryan appreciated the gift and my dad's sense of humor.Many thanks- RFD 22:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Elonka - thanks for your clarity and thoughtful rewording of entries I've come across! I would say that I'm surprised that you have time with all your various interests, but I can't keep my fingers off Wikipedia either, and it seems to be a great place for people who care about information to hang out. So, nice to see you here! JustinHall 23:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind words. Your book is looking good, but it's not available in the UK yet. Does it have anything about how to solve the codes/puzzles or is that a diffrent book of yours? Petros471 19:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
I saw on your user page that you develop games, and you have a userbox saying you're addicted to computer & video games. I was wondering if you had a list of games you have made/helped with, or your favorites. I, too, am a gamer enthusiast, so I'm curious. -- SheeEttin 18:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
hi Elonka, I have a question,
the entry states that August Czartoryski was "Duke of Vista Alegre" but his mother was "Countess of Vista Alegre", how does that make sense? Could you please check again on either information and let me know? Thanks alot, greatly appreciated. Gryffindor 22:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Something new ...
![]() |
This user is a member of the Saints WikiProject. |
--
evrik
While I agree with ' don't bite the newcomers' policy, I consider political correctness a folly to be destroyed, and I'll use shorter terms when applicable. Besides, this post was made in place none of those editors are likely to frequent, and they are both n00bies - moving series of pages without using talk is without a doubt a n00bie tactic. Any experienced editors would ask questions (and review discussions) and the main related page, which is the List of Polish monarchs (where Polish king redirects to). They haven't replied to my comments on their talk, neither. I'll be happy to talk to them and guide them, but currently they are n00bies. PS. To be specific: they are n00bies in terms of moving articles - the double redirect mess they created is proof enough of that. They may not be n00bies in some other wiki-regards.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I did not realize you were the kryptos star. wow! i think you have done edits on couple my pages. Extremeweb 21:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Newest discussion at Talk:Michael of Chernigov Shilkanni 03:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
When I spotted this, my first reaction was "arggggh!" and I have since noticed that you have spotted it too. I can find no centralized discussion at all. What I am going to do is to take Category:Educational institutions established in xxxx to WP:CFD for renaming and start a centralized discussion on Category talk:Educational institutions by year of establishment. I also intend to take a lot of the empty categories over to WP:CFD for deletion. There is another issue, which is the rather bizarre classification of the first decades of each century: e.g. Category:Educational institutions established in the 1000s is made a subcategory of both Category:Educational institutions established in the 10th century and Category:Educational institutions established in the 11th century - this is probably because a pedant noticed that the year "1000" is technically in the 10th century but the other years are in the 11th. This is a level of pedantry that is not applied for e.g. Category:1900 births so I suggest it should be culled as well. Finally, once the discussion on Category talk:Educational institutions by year of establishment reaches consensus (which I am sure it will) any redundantly over-specific "year" categories can be sent over to WP:CFD for deletion. One of my earliest acts on Wikipedia was creating Category:Bridges by date, which, in my opinion, dealt with this "granularity" issue reasonably well. Please come over and contribute to the centralized discussion, so that a level of granularity can be decided for this project too! TheGrappler 13:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Elonka, regarding Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics) you wrote:
To be effective, the proposal needs a simple "Summary" paragraph at the top with general rules, rather than immediately launching into complex language.
I tried to follow you suggestion (should have done that a long time ago...). Just inviting you to have a new look at the "diacritics" proposal, and see whether I managed to do what you suggested. Anyway, don't feel inhibited to improve the proposal, and/or communicate new criticisms on its talk page. tx. -- Francis Schonken 10:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello! I just wanted to make sure you were aware of this mediation cabal case which probably includes you in some way. Your comments/opinions would be appreciated and I hope to see this resolved soon. Cheers! -- Keitei ( talk) 05:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Dear Elonka, I am a Lithuanian editor of wikipedia, Juraune. I am editing wikipedia only just for more that a month, and consider myself to be not very much experienced there. I happened to read materials of so called "Polish Cabal". I want to share with you some of my concerns that might help you to prove the true nationalistic views of Halibutt and Piotrus. I don't know what to do with the name of the article Ethnic composition of Central Lithuania, created in a big part by Halibutt. The naming is very misleading, I think. It is not a geographical region of Central Lithuania in the year 2006. As I have found out, this Central Lithuania is a translation from Polish "Litwa Srodkowa", the "puppet" state that existed in 1920-1922, or at least a very controvercial state if I try to express myself with less Lithuanian POV. Currently the territory of this historical formation spreads in South East part of Republic of Lithuania, and western part of Republic of Bielarus, both being souvereigh countries. I don't know how to challenge Halibutt on renaming the article, since I cannot compete with him on the knowledge of millitary history. Also, I cannot compete with Piotrus, on his knowledge of rules and laws of wikipedia, but I think he is often mistaken by his naive and deep love of Poland, and I came to believe, he is sincere there. If you happen to know an administrator, who might be not biased in this case, could you let me know, I would like to see these articles renamed. Best wishes! Juraune 18:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello Elonka! I just wanted to let you know that I've listened the episodes where you appeared on Binary Revolution Radio, and I was quite impressed. I've read quite a bit of your works, and I find it all to be very interesting, even inspiring, though a great deal of the mathematics of it escapes me.
I read the stuff about the "personal attacks" you had. I'm impressed with you, not impressed with Wikipedia. But you're right you know. The new users (like me) get the shaft, and longtime users can ignore whatever they want. Lame. It's almost as bad as politics. I'd like to give people like that a different kind of "personal attack."
Anyways, I guess I don't really have anything to say. Bye. -- Othtim 05:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
"it is essential that the victims be above reproach, treat the situation with civility, and lay out a very clear documented case about what the problem is, so that a harried admin can see the problem. But as soon as the victims resort to name-calling or taunting (even if it's justified), the powers-that-be lose sympathy. ", which is why I told Centauri to cease from PAs. Erm yeah I agree with the majority of your comment. Englishrose 18:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
God did I love that game... good to finally see somebody else on this planet name-check it (even if it is one of the employees of the company who created the game :). I'd love to see a Wikipedia page on it. - Merzbow 21:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you've been proposing a lot of Poland-related page moves lately. In the future, would you mind advertising such proposals on the board? Cheers, Appleseed ( Talk) 03:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
hi. Been a couple of days away, and what bunch I then find in my talk page... Seems to be some overreaction. Those warnings are all too easy to drop. Please take a look at Talk:George I of Halych - what do you think of that naming? Maed 14:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
elonka - i saw your exchange with mukadderat. he is a sock puppet of mikkala. just go see 'claves' which mukadderat features a picture of on his user page and to which mikkala has a rather close connection. seems strange he makes the connection so clear. (Unsigned comment added by Extremeweb, 08:39, June 24, 2006 )
I certainly agree that this is a strong word and should be used with caution. However I believe I have the right to defend myself against the recent series of false accusations/misunderstandings/lies/etc. which can be summarized by the single word ( slander). What other word would you propose I use to describe such activities? I am open for a 'politically correct' suggestions, but for now when I see wolf, I cry wolf. There is a treshold at which point such personal attacks as I have been facing recently stop being a nuisance I can ignore and hope that they go away and become serious enough that they start intefering with the work of myself and of others editors, and at that point I will not hesitate to address the matter; however unlike most of my opponents you will note that I don't engage in badmouthing other people in talk without providing evidence, but I pursue the WP:DR process. That said, have you considered addressing the incivility of editors such as Ghirla - or do you think that they have the right to make presonal attacks against me and I don't have the right to defend myself against them?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi. It seems to me that an attempt to keep "oppose" votes at Jagello's naming as silent, is not succeeding. Rather, it seems to me that people are venting their Opposes to options they finf intolerable, supports to such which they really support, and there is a class between, apparently such options that could be tolerated but not outright supported. I am intending to change voting instruction there to reflect that behavior, seeing that your instruction is not accepted by participants. Shilkanni 21:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
By the way, I have been looking at how this ruler is the most vexing of the whole lot. The more I think about the situation, the clearer it seems that all other rulers get solved a bit easier. (Why try this one among the first? As very little has been solved regarding others, there is not ebough to set parameters for this...) But, also it seems to me that as vexing this is, it benefits from a unique solution. Charlemagne is that here also because the less elements the name has, the less warring. HE would have been an object of affection as Charles I of France, Charles I of Germany, Emperor Charles I, Charles the Great of quite many kingdoms... and finally, truthfully, in his era's appellations, Charles I of the Franks. How willing would you be to accept a short name, either Jagello or Jagiello? And what do your books say? Shilkanni 21:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Elonka
My name is ^demon, and I am going to mediate the case that you requested concerning the episodes of Lost. Right now, before we continue, I would like to know if you prefer public or private mediation. If you could just let me know over at your request for mediation, I would be most grateful. Have a pleasant evening.
Regards,
^
demon
[yell at me]
[ubx_war_sux] /
02:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
No worries. We all miss a letter or two here and there. Dismas| (talk) 06:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Good to know someone trusts me :) I can have a go, unless you've already got someone (like ^demon above?), though I still can't claim to be an expert at it! Petros471 08:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure he's apologized for anything specific or general. It don't matter all that much to me at this stage; neither of us are constantly at each other's throat. Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Minor nitpick: I thought that what you are doing is 'piping' (bypassing Wikipedia:Redirect), not 'disambiguating' (bypassing Wikipedia:Disambiguation).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
For your information - Pierre Plantard was not an author or publisher.
All he did was write his beliefs on pieces of paper by typewriter and deposit this material in the Bibliotheque Nationale - that does not make him an "author" or a "publisher",
Paul Smith (Posted 11:46, July 4, 2006 by User:195.92.168.170)
The original research policy exists to deal with the likes of crank theories and unverifiable information. It does not, however, deal with information which is (I assume, and no one has actually disputed this), evident to anyone who visits the site. Such information is informative and useful, and it is ridiculously overzealous to remove it on those grounds. Rebecca 23:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
I've chipped my two cents in here. Greetings, Blur4760 18:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I stumbled upon some articles you might be interested in: pl:Duninowie, pl:Stary Duninów, pl:Duninów Duży, pl:Nowy Duninów, pl:Gmina Nowy Duninów.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Dear Elonka,
After requesting the preference of mediation, the consensus appears to be public, with one person not responding (and has appeared to have left the project for the time being), and one person abstaining due to being away for the summer. This being decided, let us begin. I figure the easiest place to centralize all discussion can be the talk page of the RfM. Thanks for your time, and if you'll go there now, you'll see that I've begun a discussion on the topic. Thanks very much.
-^ demon [yell at me] [ubx_war_sux] / 11:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello! I have no bad thoughts about your edits completely. I am perfectly aware that the monarchs case issues are very complex, so all editors should work hard to produce the best possible salutations. What I did was only adjustments to your huge contribution.
Keep up with your contributions! Cya. M.K. 13:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Hiya, there's a link on this page that needs to be disambiguated (details at Wikipedia_talk:Selected anniversaries/January 20). I see that you were one of the last people to tweak that part of the page, can you please adjust it? Also, I'm considering applying for admin access so that I can get in to do these kind of janitorial things... Do you think I'd have a good case? -- Elonka 22:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Elonka! Could I ask you to comment on the following situation?
I found a comment [4] on the page Talk:Ukrainization by User:Irpen which, IMHO, is unrelated to the subject of the article. In accord with WP:NPA,
“ | Many Wikipedians remove personal attacks on third parties on sight, and although this isn't policy it's often seen as an appropriate reaction to extreme personal abuse. | ” |
I decided to move the comment to AndriyK's talk to keep the discussion at Talk:Ukrainization free from personal attacks and focussed on the topic of the article. But Irpen restored the comment [5].
I need an opionion of a neutral person, whether I was right or wrong when I was moving this comment. In the case I was wrong, what is the right way to keep the article talk focused on the subject? Flooding it with unrelated stuff makes it difficult to read and follow the discussion. Here is another example [6]: Irpen moved a long discussion from his talk to the Talk:Russian architecture. What is the best way to deal with it? I tried to contact Irpen [7] but got a very unpleasant answer [8].
Thanks in advance.-- Mbuk 14:04, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm doing the towns now. If you want to do the cities, that would be great. Thanks. Vegaswikian 06:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I posted on the mediation page, as requested, trying to indicate that I did object at the time. At the same time, don't you think it might be wise to back off the whole thing a little? I've worked with Piotrus a lot, and I genuinely think he is a well-intentioned user who is trying to improve wikipedia. I've also gotten into a lot of arguments with him, and disagreed with him about a ton of things, and I don't like the way the Polish monarchs move went down. But I think that Piotrus has done enough useful things for the project to warrant being given the benefit of the doubt in terms of acting in good faith, and I think escalating the thing into a personal conflict between the two of you (which, of course, he has been as much responsible for as you, as far as I can tell), and so forth, is only counter-productive. It is possible to disagree about content, and even to very strongly disagree, without it getting to the level of an enormously lengthy mediation page. I'm not sure what, at this point, would settle the issue, or even what the issue precisely is at this moment. I don't think Piotrus abused any admin privileges in carrying out the moves. While deleting redirects while making moves is, I suppose, technically an admin privilege, it is a pretty meager one, and I don't think that such a thing would be cause for de-sysopping. Beyond that, I'm not sure what admin privileges Piotrus would have violated - he isn't being accused of deleting actual articles, of inappropriately protecting or unprotecting pages, or of inappropriately blocking users, is he? john k 00:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Elonka;
Pardon the intrusion, but are you be any chance a countess? ;) Charles 04:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Is it just me but do you recognise the editing style of the person vandalising the Elonka Dunn page, could it be someone who is back with a grudge? Englishrose 09:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your consistent work on SMS Karlsruhe (1912) and others.-- mervyn 12:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Newbie experiment, Template:Newbie1 (note AfD), Template:Newbie.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:36, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello Elonka/Archive 1, and thank you for your support at my Request for Adminship, which succeeded with an overwhelming final count of (105/2/0). I was very pleased with the outpouring of kind words from the community that has now entrusted me with these tools, from the classroom, the lesson in human psychology and the international resource known as Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Your constructive criticism was helpful and insightful and I will keep it in mind... It's interesting that you thought I had improved in the intervening weeks, when I can't say I had been faced with a similar situation before or since. Please feel free to leave me plenty of requests, monitor my actions (through the admin desk on my userpage) and, if you find yourself in the mood, listen to some of what I do in real life. In any case, keep up the great work and have a fabulous day. Grand master ka 06:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
I agree! But if you want a biographical entry to be named by their penname, you should close off the fullname by making it a redirect to their penname. That will prevent a move to the fullname by anyone, and let people know you have used the truncated name as a deliberate decision. Everyone knows Bill Clinton and J.R.R. Tolkien but not everyone will be an expert on every great author. E. O. Wilson is the main page and Edward Osborne Wilson was created as a redirect. That way everyone knows that it is not an oversight, or that the page was created before people knew what the E and O stood for. Another way to handle a penname is to mention it in the text such as "Ernst Theodor Wilhelm Hoffmann (January 24, 1776 in Königsberg, East Prussia, Prussia–June 25, 1822 in Berlin, Brandenburg, Prussia), better known by his pen name “E. T. A. Hoffmann”, was a Romantic author of fantasy and horror, a jurist, composer, music critic, draftsman and caricaturist." Cheers. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on
my RfA, which passed with a final tally of
0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on
my talk page. Misza 13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing! NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated
ROT-26 algorithm. |
![]() |
I saw your comment on the talk page of administrator Tony Sidaway, as well as his less than friendly reply. Startling... Andrés C. 03:12, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello! I kind of noticed you stalking me, your name appearing in articles after I have tagged them ;-) I sometimes think "Poor Elonka, I do the easiest part, tagging the article as uncategorized, and leave her to search around for correct categories." Wish I could do more, but I am pretty bad at categorizing or stubbing. Currently I am working with the orphan lists, Special:Lonelypages and Wikipedia:Dead-end pages, sometimes the New pages log, and the recent changes ones. -- ReyBrujo 21:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that my bot was picking up Voivodeship category redirects; I checked it out, came across the CFD and thought it had better be closed! You have taken on a fiddly job there! When you want those categories deleted just leave me a note on my talk page and I'll do it when I get round to it. If you have voivodeship categories that need moving then let me know on my talk page rather than trying to move all the articles individually; one incarnation of my bot can move the category's content, then move all the articles, and then leave a note for me to delete the old one (or it can automatically leave a category redirect if that's what I tell it). Alternatively you can list it on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working in the appropriate section and another of the CFD bots will do it. Keep up the good work! Regards, RobertG ♬ talk 19:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Considering your appreciation for WP:CIV, I wonder if you would like to comment here or at the page the comment was made?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus talk 17:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
And now it seems you have been accused of being a 'perpetrator of nationalistic crap' (because you dated to criticize Ghirla). Welcome to my world, and remember: no good deed....-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't recall him posting there recently. I think he voted there few times, but didn't post comments - or I don't recall them, and I don't think I am involved in content dispute with all of the editors who voted different then me. And besides, I think content dispute exists when people edit main article and revert and stuff, not when they hash stuff out at talk without editing the main article (and I don't think I edited that article in weeks).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 04:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I am very much impressed by your efforts to mediate Jagiello/Jogaila issue... Ever considering working for UN? :) Renata 20:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Dear Elonka, I really admire you for your achievements and, especially, that you go for a compromise and are able to change your oppinion. There was never my intention to mock you, I don't know why Halibutt or SylviaS got this idea. As for Halibutt, he disrupts the work of Lithuanian editors, and polonises all the names that are not King names the way he finds it desirable without regard to others. Also, I want to ask you to add Lithuania related stub categories in the history articles, where you think it is pertinent. Sincerely, Juraune 13:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
While I don't support move wars, Balcer has the right to start an RM poll; it should not be closed. I would ask you (as I did on the article talk page) to revert yourself and allow the poll to continue.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 21:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I haven't really thought about it Elonka. I've no idea why you oppose Jogaila, but you've maintained integrity and I think you can be trusted to exercise good faith, so I don't really care why you oppose it. I know at least that you aren't a fanatic, and hence I know discussion with you won't be a pointless exercise. To be honest, I'm sick to the teeth with Jogaila. After all, it is just a page name, and every second I spend on it, I lose a second on something more useful, either on wiki or in my personal life. I share with you the desire to end this. But what I don't want is a biased name determined by a nationalistic "cabal". I'd be happy with any outcome so long as it is not produced in this manner. Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 17:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Just a technical note: perhaps you could set your AWB to mark minor changes as such. Recently I saw my entire watchlist filled with your changes and, to be frank, all of them were in fact minor. It was a tad tiresome to browse through three pages of watch list, and trying to find what is actually an interesting diff and what's simply a technical change of a single word with AWB. Cheers. // Halibu tt 12:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi again Elonka. Now, Jan III Sobieski is currently the only ruler of Poland/Poland-Lithuania to have the name John, instead of Jan. It used to be John, John III Sobieski, King of Poland, but Piotrus moved it. Should we try to get it moved back to John, this time John III Sobieski, or just leave it. Further point, what is going to be done about the inconsistencies in Polish monarch names, such as one X n of Poland but another Y n Nickname of Poland, do you think there is a need to standardize these names? Regards, Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
No problem, and thanks for your dedicated work toward updating everything. Olessi 23:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind help. The gender question was really creating some unessecary confussion, so I did my best to correct this situation on my user page and to explain my position. I also explained that I am a Roman Catholic, and by no means a Pagan, since some might have drawn this conclussion from my 'fierce' defence of 'Pagan Empire' :) Too bad that I do not have the time to do real edits of history articles :( Still, there is a lot of time ahead for that, I try to be optimistic. Best wishes. Juraune 18:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I just added some more to the above. Extremeweb 10:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey, it's me again. Check it out. I've been nominated for admin. I hope you vote. Thanx. íslenska hurikein #12 (samtal) 19:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Fairly standard form for the (Oxford) Dict. of Nat. Biography, under the name in question, since it confirms most or all of what you wrote; feel free to expand. (and to comment on my RfA, if you like.) Septentrionalis 21:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi Elonka;
You were involved in the discussions over the use of diacritics in the names of Polish kings. Do you have an opinion on the use of diacritics in the names of German cities (in this case, ß in the name of Meissen)? There is a discussion at Talk:Meissen and if you'd care to add your opinion, whatever it may be, it may contribute to settling the issue. Thanks. Charles 23:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
For your quick and thorough response to the {{ Uncategorized}} template on Dan Leibovitz. -- M @ r ē ino 20:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Since your advice was so useful last time, I wanted to show you this little 'gem': [9] and [10]? I wonder if this falls under WP:NPA? Either way it is not something I intend to pursue now (I don't care much what grafitti one posts on their user space), but I wonder what do you think about it?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
What do you recommend for WP:PRESS in the case of a syndicated column? For example, Dan Savage's syndicated column in this week's issue of the Metro Times "damns" Wikipedia for making it tough for him to lie about his age. Robert Happelberg 23:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
A similar situation to our previous one with Polish monarchs appears to have arisen in the articles on a number of medieval Scottish monarchs. Duncan I of Scotland is now Donnchad I of Scotland, and his son Malcolm III has been moved to Máel Coluim III of Scotland. This was done, so far as I can tell, with no discussion whatsoever (oddly enough, by User:Calgacus, whom you may recall as having been rather strongly opposed to the usage of Polish names way back when). Anyway, I don't know if you're interested, but a discussion is ongoing at Talk:Máel Coluim III of Scotland. The basic answer Calgacus and Angus McLellan have so far provided to the question of "How can this possibly be justified under the naming conventions" appears to be "We don't care." john k 14:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I have no problem you moving these pages now, but it'd have been better to have waited until voting ends. Anyways, you should move the talk pages also. There's a box you need to tick to do that below the move rectangle, you always need to make sure that is ticked. PS, the vote is not a consensus, it's two camps of relatively unreconcilable viewpoints; just because one camp got more voters to the page does not mean it's consensus. Regards, Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 01:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Please note that there's no living=yes parameter to template {{ Blp}}. Looks like your occasional usage of this param has caught my bot out :)
If the article is a bio, please use {{WPBiography|living=yes}}. If it's a list or some other non-biographical article about living people, please use {{ Blp}} without parameters.
Thanks very much, no reply needed. -- kingboyk 10:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Pazmaneum is a school, the Collegium Pazmaneum, a Catholic seminary founded in 1623 by Péter Pázmány for Hungarian students in Vienna. Pázmány was a big figure in the Counter-Reformation, archbishop, primate of Hungary, and also founded the first Hungarian university in 1635, which still survives in Budapest. But him being a Catholic archbishop, he is probably not your ancestor :-) See also: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11595c.htm
The surname is likely related [1] to the Hont-Pázmány clan (also Hont-Pázmán, Hunt-Pázmán, Huntpázmány), which has an interesting history. According to the chronicles, the brothers Hont and Pázmán were Swabian (i.e. German) knights, who came to Hungary in the 10th century. They received huge tracts of land in what is today Western Slovakia, and the county Hont. They were the ancestors (documented from the 13th century) of a large number of noble families in Hungary, e.g. Forgách, Batthyány, Kővári, Bánki, Lázár, Ujhelyi, Szentgyörgyi and many more. Perhaps this gives you a starter... Hollomis 02:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Your thoughts about Wikipedia are refreshing and exciting. It can be interesting to be inside of a thing and outside of it at the same time... Wikipedia is sort of like a blog on steroids which is under the control of WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency)! Lmcelhiney 18:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
For your collection :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I created the badvertising article and have since noticed that it is tagged for clean-up and wikification. I wrote it pretty quickly and I know that certain aspects of it aren't encyclopaedic enough yet, but I was wondering what exactly you had in mind re the tagging? thank you. Saccerzd 14:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your help creating a fair use rationale for Image:pilot2backgammon.jpg on Thematic motifs of Lost.-- Opark 77 08:09, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
G'day Elonka. I'm a bit puzzled why you made Cylindrachetidae a redirect rather than leave it as a "definition" page (stub).
As I said in my creation note, "Create page so people don't get confused. Redir's won't do here 'cos it would be circular." I had intended to make it a redirect, but since I reference it from the Sandgroper taxobox, surely that would be a circular redirect?
I'm copying this to the Sandgroper Talk page, perhaps you would like to respond to it there, just to keep other people in the picture. Gordon | Talk, 25 September 2006 @12:51 UTC
I just wanted to return the thanks. I'm happy with the compromise, and I'm hopeful that we can build strong season articles, possibly even getting some of them to GA status. -- Kahlfin 20:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
You added {{ db-bio}} to Covington & Burling using AWB. Because CSD A7 does not apply to companies, I have removed the template. You could {{ prod}} it if you think WP:CORP applies, but I think an AfD is the best way to go on this article. Agent 86 10:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
You added speedy tags to categories when applying uncat tags! Please go back and fix these errors, they are clogging CAT:CSD. Punkmorten 11:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, speedy deletion in this case applies when there's not an assertion of notability. To me, the assertion that it's a song by an apparently popular singer is an assertion of notability. Meeting Wikipedia:Notability (songs) or not is more a question for AfD or PROD, speedy deletion is about whether it actually asserts anything that's possibly notable, or not. Traditionally these articles are just turned into redirects to the artist and so on if someone thinks the article is weak, which would appear to be called for in this case. It's a fine point, I admit, but it does serve its purposes (preserving the article history for a future good article, making sure a plausible search term goes to a meaningful target, etc.) -- W.marsh 17:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Aha, I'm sorry - I hadn't realised! I've been fixing the articles keeping in with the guidelines of the mediation, removing OR and fancruft from the Trivia sections etc. SergeantBolt ( t, c) 19:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm glad that we're finally through the mediation. And I'm especially happy that I somehow avoided the onslaught of those angry mobs with pitchforks. :) Let's move forward. -- PKtm 21:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your message. I know we've had our disagreements in the past (and still have some), but it looks like everything turns out for the best in the end. While we may not always see eye to eye, I enjoy working with people like you who are equally as passionate about making great, encyclopedic articles. Jtrost ( T | C | #) 21:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, saw you tagged contemplative education to dispute its notability. I've tried to address the concern by adding a section on its popularity as well as adding sources. Let me know if this has helped.
You and I both registered for Aikipedia accounts on the same day. Hmm, I found it amusing... - FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 18:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I'll try and keep an eye on the Elonka Dunn page. I do think it's strange how your page is being targeted, I noticed that one of the vandals reacted to putting a notability tag on of their created articles by vandalising yours. It wouldn't suprise me if they're all related. Also I've been a bit busy recently but I'll have a look at the Fateh Snr article when I have more time. Englishrose 22:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[11] Sigh, so it looks like we've got multiple vandals. Englishrose 19:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Please check histories of articles before nominating them for speedy deletion - this one was a legitimate disambiguation page before it was changed into the advertisement. Zocky | picture popups 03:57, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I apologize for my behavior when adding categories/providing an edit summary. I was enraged about the Platte Canyon High School shooting this week and Duane R. Morrison (I settled this by having several Tekken characters beat the crap out of Bryan Fury 20 times in Arcade VS. mode) taking the life of a girl (and then committed suicide), as that is violence towards women, one of my dislikes. I also blamed Vince and Shane McMahon, Jeff Hardy and Bam Margera as well. When you check the page, you should see the changes I made. Thanks, -- D.F. "Jun Kazama Master" Williams 04:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Are you really Elonka Dunin? -- Kimberly Ashton 20:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I removed that from the page due to the fact that somebody had placed that in the wrong episode. It is wrong, and my computer crashed before I could place it in "Further Instructions", which I am about to do. SergeantBolt ( t, c) 19:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank-you for your encouragement - you are most kind. I will proceed as suggested. Ben MacDui 18:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Note: This is not a comprehensive archive of all messages to my talk page. It's only the ones that I feel like keeping. ;)
I have no idea what to write here - it just seemed it was time for a title like that on your page. :-) -- TStone 21:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Elonka. I'm very impressed by the cleanup work you did on the Masonic Knights Templar article. However, you should be aware that there is one or many self-described Masonic Knights Templar who will edit the article in order to support their view that there was and is Templar-Masonic connection. So you better keep watch. ;) -- Loremaster 01:01, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Spiffy that you put together an article on Brian. He deserves one :)
User:Adrian/zap 04:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
I had a quick read of the Stanley Dunin article, good job! No POV stood out to me. I checked the history and noticed that you created most of the article in a couple of hours, very quick work for such a technically well crafted article! Qutezuce 04:46, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Hey, Elonka, I'm not sure where more information can be found about Hengelmuller - I do wonder if you've spelled his name properly - shouldn't there be an umlaut over the "u"? john k 07:09, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
My dad graduated from Campion High School in 1943. His roommate and fellow classmate was:Leo Ryan.My dad's brother also graduated from Campion High School.The Campion High School article was one of the first article I started before I open an account with Wikipedia. Okay-there was an incident involving my dad and Leo Ryan.In the mid 1960s,Leo Ryan was a member of the California State Assembly.During this time,Ryan voluntarily got himself locked in Soledad State Prison. When my father heard about this, he went and bought Johnny Cash's record,Folsom Prison Blues and sent it to Leo Ryan.I can say Leo Ryan appreciated the gift and my dad's sense of humor.Many thanks- RFD 22:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Elonka - thanks for your clarity and thoughtful rewording of entries I've come across! I would say that I'm surprised that you have time with all your various interests, but I can't keep my fingers off Wikipedia either, and it seems to be a great place for people who care about information to hang out. So, nice to see you here! JustinHall 23:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind words. Your book is looking good, but it's not available in the UK yet. Does it have anything about how to solve the codes/puzzles or is that a diffrent book of yours? Petros471 19:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
I saw on your user page that you develop games, and you have a userbox saying you're addicted to computer & video games. I was wondering if you had a list of games you have made/helped with, or your favorites. I, too, am a gamer enthusiast, so I'm curious. -- SheeEttin 18:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
hi Elonka, I have a question,
the entry states that August Czartoryski was "Duke of Vista Alegre" but his mother was "Countess of Vista Alegre", how does that make sense? Could you please check again on either information and let me know? Thanks alot, greatly appreciated. Gryffindor 22:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Something new ...
![]() |
This user is a member of the Saints WikiProject. |
--
evrik
While I agree with ' don't bite the newcomers' policy, I consider political correctness a folly to be destroyed, and I'll use shorter terms when applicable. Besides, this post was made in place none of those editors are likely to frequent, and they are both n00bies - moving series of pages without using talk is without a doubt a n00bie tactic. Any experienced editors would ask questions (and review discussions) and the main related page, which is the List of Polish monarchs (where Polish king redirects to). They haven't replied to my comments on their talk, neither. I'll be happy to talk to them and guide them, but currently they are n00bies. PS. To be specific: they are n00bies in terms of moving articles - the double redirect mess they created is proof enough of that. They may not be n00bies in some other wiki-regards.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I did not realize you were the kryptos star. wow! i think you have done edits on couple my pages. Extremeweb 21:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Newest discussion at Talk:Michael of Chernigov Shilkanni 03:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
When I spotted this, my first reaction was "arggggh!" and I have since noticed that you have spotted it too. I can find no centralized discussion at all. What I am going to do is to take Category:Educational institutions established in xxxx to WP:CFD for renaming and start a centralized discussion on Category talk:Educational institutions by year of establishment. I also intend to take a lot of the empty categories over to WP:CFD for deletion. There is another issue, which is the rather bizarre classification of the first decades of each century: e.g. Category:Educational institutions established in the 1000s is made a subcategory of both Category:Educational institutions established in the 10th century and Category:Educational institutions established in the 11th century - this is probably because a pedant noticed that the year "1000" is technically in the 10th century but the other years are in the 11th. This is a level of pedantry that is not applied for e.g. Category:1900 births so I suggest it should be culled as well. Finally, once the discussion on Category talk:Educational institutions by year of establishment reaches consensus (which I am sure it will) any redundantly over-specific "year" categories can be sent over to WP:CFD for deletion. One of my earliest acts on Wikipedia was creating Category:Bridges by date, which, in my opinion, dealt with this "granularity" issue reasonably well. Please come over and contribute to the centralized discussion, so that a level of granularity can be decided for this project too! TheGrappler 13:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Elonka, regarding Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics) you wrote:
To be effective, the proposal needs a simple "Summary" paragraph at the top with general rules, rather than immediately launching into complex language.
I tried to follow you suggestion (should have done that a long time ago...). Just inviting you to have a new look at the "diacritics" proposal, and see whether I managed to do what you suggested. Anyway, don't feel inhibited to improve the proposal, and/or communicate new criticisms on its talk page. tx. -- Francis Schonken 10:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello! I just wanted to make sure you were aware of this mediation cabal case which probably includes you in some way. Your comments/opinions would be appreciated and I hope to see this resolved soon. Cheers! -- Keitei ( talk) 05:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Dear Elonka, I am a Lithuanian editor of wikipedia, Juraune. I am editing wikipedia only just for more that a month, and consider myself to be not very much experienced there. I happened to read materials of so called "Polish Cabal". I want to share with you some of my concerns that might help you to prove the true nationalistic views of Halibutt and Piotrus. I don't know what to do with the name of the article Ethnic composition of Central Lithuania, created in a big part by Halibutt. The naming is very misleading, I think. It is not a geographical region of Central Lithuania in the year 2006. As I have found out, this Central Lithuania is a translation from Polish "Litwa Srodkowa", the "puppet" state that existed in 1920-1922, or at least a very controvercial state if I try to express myself with less Lithuanian POV. Currently the territory of this historical formation spreads in South East part of Republic of Lithuania, and western part of Republic of Bielarus, both being souvereigh countries. I don't know how to challenge Halibutt on renaming the article, since I cannot compete with him on the knowledge of millitary history. Also, I cannot compete with Piotrus, on his knowledge of rules and laws of wikipedia, but I think he is often mistaken by his naive and deep love of Poland, and I came to believe, he is sincere there. If you happen to know an administrator, who might be not biased in this case, could you let me know, I would like to see these articles renamed. Best wishes! Juraune 18:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello Elonka! I just wanted to let you know that I've listened the episodes where you appeared on Binary Revolution Radio, and I was quite impressed. I've read quite a bit of your works, and I find it all to be very interesting, even inspiring, though a great deal of the mathematics of it escapes me.
I read the stuff about the "personal attacks" you had. I'm impressed with you, not impressed with Wikipedia. But you're right you know. The new users (like me) get the shaft, and longtime users can ignore whatever they want. Lame. It's almost as bad as politics. I'd like to give people like that a different kind of "personal attack."
Anyways, I guess I don't really have anything to say. Bye. -- Othtim 05:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
"it is essential that the victims be above reproach, treat the situation with civility, and lay out a very clear documented case about what the problem is, so that a harried admin can see the problem. But as soon as the victims resort to name-calling or taunting (even if it's justified), the powers-that-be lose sympathy. ", which is why I told Centauri to cease from PAs. Erm yeah I agree with the majority of your comment. Englishrose 18:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
God did I love that game... good to finally see somebody else on this planet name-check it (even if it is one of the employees of the company who created the game :). I'd love to see a Wikipedia page on it. - Merzbow 21:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you've been proposing a lot of Poland-related page moves lately. In the future, would you mind advertising such proposals on the board? Cheers, Appleseed ( Talk) 03:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
hi. Been a couple of days away, and what bunch I then find in my talk page... Seems to be some overreaction. Those warnings are all too easy to drop. Please take a look at Talk:George I of Halych - what do you think of that naming? Maed 14:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
elonka - i saw your exchange with mukadderat. he is a sock puppet of mikkala. just go see 'claves' which mukadderat features a picture of on his user page and to which mikkala has a rather close connection. seems strange he makes the connection so clear. (Unsigned comment added by Extremeweb, 08:39, June 24, 2006 )
I certainly agree that this is a strong word and should be used with caution. However I believe I have the right to defend myself against the recent series of false accusations/misunderstandings/lies/etc. which can be summarized by the single word ( slander). What other word would you propose I use to describe such activities? I am open for a 'politically correct' suggestions, but for now when I see wolf, I cry wolf. There is a treshold at which point such personal attacks as I have been facing recently stop being a nuisance I can ignore and hope that they go away and become serious enough that they start intefering with the work of myself and of others editors, and at that point I will not hesitate to address the matter; however unlike most of my opponents you will note that I don't engage in badmouthing other people in talk without providing evidence, but I pursue the WP:DR process. That said, have you considered addressing the incivility of editors such as Ghirla - or do you think that they have the right to make presonal attacks against me and I don't have the right to defend myself against them?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi. It seems to me that an attempt to keep "oppose" votes at Jagello's naming as silent, is not succeeding. Rather, it seems to me that people are venting their Opposes to options they finf intolerable, supports to such which they really support, and there is a class between, apparently such options that could be tolerated but not outright supported. I am intending to change voting instruction there to reflect that behavior, seeing that your instruction is not accepted by participants. Shilkanni 21:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
By the way, I have been looking at how this ruler is the most vexing of the whole lot. The more I think about the situation, the clearer it seems that all other rulers get solved a bit easier. (Why try this one among the first? As very little has been solved regarding others, there is not ebough to set parameters for this...) But, also it seems to me that as vexing this is, it benefits from a unique solution. Charlemagne is that here also because the less elements the name has, the less warring. HE would have been an object of affection as Charles I of France, Charles I of Germany, Emperor Charles I, Charles the Great of quite many kingdoms... and finally, truthfully, in his era's appellations, Charles I of the Franks. How willing would you be to accept a short name, either Jagello or Jagiello? And what do your books say? Shilkanni 21:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Elonka
My name is ^demon, and I am going to mediate the case that you requested concerning the episodes of Lost. Right now, before we continue, I would like to know if you prefer public or private mediation. If you could just let me know over at your request for mediation, I would be most grateful. Have a pleasant evening.
Regards,
^
demon
[yell at me]
[ubx_war_sux] /
02:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
No worries. We all miss a letter or two here and there. Dismas| (talk) 06:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Good to know someone trusts me :) I can have a go, unless you've already got someone (like ^demon above?), though I still can't claim to be an expert at it! Petros471 08:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure he's apologized for anything specific or general. It don't matter all that much to me at this stage; neither of us are constantly at each other's throat. Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Minor nitpick: I thought that what you are doing is 'piping' (bypassing Wikipedia:Redirect), not 'disambiguating' (bypassing Wikipedia:Disambiguation).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
For your information - Pierre Plantard was not an author or publisher.
All he did was write his beliefs on pieces of paper by typewriter and deposit this material in the Bibliotheque Nationale - that does not make him an "author" or a "publisher",
Paul Smith (Posted 11:46, July 4, 2006 by User:195.92.168.170)
The original research policy exists to deal with the likes of crank theories and unverifiable information. It does not, however, deal with information which is (I assume, and no one has actually disputed this), evident to anyone who visits the site. Such information is informative and useful, and it is ridiculously overzealous to remove it on those grounds. Rebecca 23:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
I've chipped my two cents in here. Greetings, Blur4760 18:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I stumbled upon some articles you might be interested in: pl:Duninowie, pl:Stary Duninów, pl:Duninów Duży, pl:Nowy Duninów, pl:Gmina Nowy Duninów.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Dear Elonka,
After requesting the preference of mediation, the consensus appears to be public, with one person not responding (and has appeared to have left the project for the time being), and one person abstaining due to being away for the summer. This being decided, let us begin. I figure the easiest place to centralize all discussion can be the talk page of the RfM. Thanks for your time, and if you'll go there now, you'll see that I've begun a discussion on the topic. Thanks very much.
-^ demon [yell at me] [ubx_war_sux] / 11:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello! I have no bad thoughts about your edits completely. I am perfectly aware that the monarchs case issues are very complex, so all editors should work hard to produce the best possible salutations. What I did was only adjustments to your huge contribution.
Keep up with your contributions! Cya. M.K. 13:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Hiya, there's a link on this page that needs to be disambiguated (details at Wikipedia_talk:Selected anniversaries/January 20). I see that you were one of the last people to tweak that part of the page, can you please adjust it? Also, I'm considering applying for admin access so that I can get in to do these kind of janitorial things... Do you think I'd have a good case? -- Elonka 22:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Elonka! Could I ask you to comment on the following situation?
I found a comment [4] on the page Talk:Ukrainization by User:Irpen which, IMHO, is unrelated to the subject of the article. In accord with WP:NPA,
“ | Many Wikipedians remove personal attacks on third parties on sight, and although this isn't policy it's often seen as an appropriate reaction to extreme personal abuse. | ” |
I decided to move the comment to AndriyK's talk to keep the discussion at Talk:Ukrainization free from personal attacks and focussed on the topic of the article. But Irpen restored the comment [5].
I need an opionion of a neutral person, whether I was right or wrong when I was moving this comment. In the case I was wrong, what is the right way to keep the article talk focused on the subject? Flooding it with unrelated stuff makes it difficult to read and follow the discussion. Here is another example [6]: Irpen moved a long discussion from his talk to the Talk:Russian architecture. What is the best way to deal with it? I tried to contact Irpen [7] but got a very unpleasant answer [8].
Thanks in advance.-- Mbuk 14:04, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm doing the towns now. If you want to do the cities, that would be great. Thanks. Vegaswikian 06:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello, I posted on the mediation page, as requested, trying to indicate that I did object at the time. At the same time, don't you think it might be wise to back off the whole thing a little? I've worked with Piotrus a lot, and I genuinely think he is a well-intentioned user who is trying to improve wikipedia. I've also gotten into a lot of arguments with him, and disagreed with him about a ton of things, and I don't like the way the Polish monarchs move went down. But I think that Piotrus has done enough useful things for the project to warrant being given the benefit of the doubt in terms of acting in good faith, and I think escalating the thing into a personal conflict between the two of you (which, of course, he has been as much responsible for as you, as far as I can tell), and so forth, is only counter-productive. It is possible to disagree about content, and even to very strongly disagree, without it getting to the level of an enormously lengthy mediation page. I'm not sure what, at this point, would settle the issue, or even what the issue precisely is at this moment. I don't think Piotrus abused any admin privileges in carrying out the moves. While deleting redirects while making moves is, I suppose, technically an admin privilege, it is a pretty meager one, and I don't think that such a thing would be cause for de-sysopping. Beyond that, I'm not sure what admin privileges Piotrus would have violated - he isn't being accused of deleting actual articles, of inappropriately protecting or unprotecting pages, or of inappropriately blocking users, is he? john k 00:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Elonka;
Pardon the intrusion, but are you be any chance a countess? ;) Charles 04:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Is it just me but do you recognise the editing style of the person vandalising the Elonka Dunn page, could it be someone who is back with a grudge? Englishrose 09:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your consistent work on SMS Karlsruhe (1912) and others.-- mervyn 12:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Newbie experiment, Template:Newbie1 (note AfD), Template:Newbie.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:36, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello Elonka/Archive 1, and thank you for your support at my Request for Adminship, which succeeded with an overwhelming final count of (105/2/0). I was very pleased with the outpouring of kind words from the community that has now entrusted me with these tools, from the classroom, the lesson in human psychology and the international resource known as Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Your constructive criticism was helpful and insightful and I will keep it in mind... It's interesting that you thought I had improved in the intervening weeks, when I can't say I had been faced with a similar situation before or since. Please feel free to leave me plenty of requests, monitor my actions (through the admin desk on my userpage) and, if you find yourself in the mood, listen to some of what I do in real life. In any case, keep up the great work and have a fabulous day. Grand master ka 06:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
I agree! But if you want a biographical entry to be named by their penname, you should close off the fullname by making it a redirect to their penname. That will prevent a move to the fullname by anyone, and let people know you have used the truncated name as a deliberate decision. Everyone knows Bill Clinton and J.R.R. Tolkien but not everyone will be an expert on every great author. E. O. Wilson is the main page and Edward Osborne Wilson was created as a redirect. That way everyone knows that it is not an oversight, or that the page was created before people knew what the E and O stood for. Another way to handle a penname is to mention it in the text such as "Ernst Theodor Wilhelm Hoffmann (January 24, 1776 in Königsberg, East Prussia, Prussia–June 25, 1822 in Berlin, Brandenburg, Prussia), better known by his pen name “E. T. A. Hoffmann”, was a Romantic author of fantasy and horror, a jurist, composer, music critic, draftsman and caricaturist." Cheers. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on
my RfA, which passed with a final tally of
0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on
my talk page. Misza 13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing! NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated
ROT-26 algorithm. |
![]() |
I saw your comment on the talk page of administrator Tony Sidaway, as well as his less than friendly reply. Startling... Andrés C. 03:12, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello! I kind of noticed you stalking me, your name appearing in articles after I have tagged them ;-) I sometimes think "Poor Elonka, I do the easiest part, tagging the article as uncategorized, and leave her to search around for correct categories." Wish I could do more, but I am pretty bad at categorizing or stubbing. Currently I am working with the orphan lists, Special:Lonelypages and Wikipedia:Dead-end pages, sometimes the New pages log, and the recent changes ones. -- ReyBrujo 21:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that my bot was picking up Voivodeship category redirects; I checked it out, came across the CFD and thought it had better be closed! You have taken on a fiddly job there! When you want those categories deleted just leave me a note on my talk page and I'll do it when I get round to it. If you have voivodeship categories that need moving then let me know on my talk page rather than trying to move all the articles individually; one incarnation of my bot can move the category's content, then move all the articles, and then leave a note for me to delete the old one (or it can automatically leave a category redirect if that's what I tell it). Alternatively you can list it on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working in the appropriate section and another of the CFD bots will do it. Keep up the good work! Regards, RobertG ♬ talk 19:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Considering your appreciation for WP:CIV, I wonder if you would like to comment here or at the page the comment was made?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus talk 17:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
And now it seems you have been accused of being a 'perpetrator of nationalistic crap' (because you dated to criticize Ghirla). Welcome to my world, and remember: no good deed....-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't recall him posting there recently. I think he voted there few times, but didn't post comments - or I don't recall them, and I don't think I am involved in content dispute with all of the editors who voted different then me. And besides, I think content dispute exists when people edit main article and revert and stuff, not when they hash stuff out at talk without editing the main article (and I don't think I edited that article in weeks).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 04:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I am very much impressed by your efforts to mediate Jagiello/Jogaila issue... Ever considering working for UN? :) Renata 20:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Dear Elonka, I really admire you for your achievements and, especially, that you go for a compromise and are able to change your oppinion. There was never my intention to mock you, I don't know why Halibutt or SylviaS got this idea. As for Halibutt, he disrupts the work of Lithuanian editors, and polonises all the names that are not King names the way he finds it desirable without regard to others. Also, I want to ask you to add Lithuania related stub categories in the history articles, where you think it is pertinent. Sincerely, Juraune 13:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
While I don't support move wars, Balcer has the right to start an RM poll; it should not be closed. I would ask you (as I did on the article talk page) to revert yourself and allow the poll to continue.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 21:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I haven't really thought about it Elonka. I've no idea why you oppose Jogaila, but you've maintained integrity and I think you can be trusted to exercise good faith, so I don't really care why you oppose it. I know at least that you aren't a fanatic, and hence I know discussion with you won't be a pointless exercise. To be honest, I'm sick to the teeth with Jogaila. After all, it is just a page name, and every second I spend on it, I lose a second on something more useful, either on wiki or in my personal life. I share with you the desire to end this. But what I don't want is a biased name determined by a nationalistic "cabal". I'd be happy with any outcome so long as it is not produced in this manner. Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 17:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Just a technical note: perhaps you could set your AWB to mark minor changes as such. Recently I saw my entire watchlist filled with your changes and, to be frank, all of them were in fact minor. It was a tad tiresome to browse through three pages of watch list, and trying to find what is actually an interesting diff and what's simply a technical change of a single word with AWB. Cheers. // Halibu tt 12:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi again Elonka. Now, Jan III Sobieski is currently the only ruler of Poland/Poland-Lithuania to have the name John, instead of Jan. It used to be John, John III Sobieski, King of Poland, but Piotrus moved it. Should we try to get it moved back to John, this time John III Sobieski, or just leave it. Further point, what is going to be done about the inconsistencies in Polish monarch names, such as one X n of Poland but another Y n Nickname of Poland, do you think there is a need to standardize these names? Regards, Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
No problem, and thanks for your dedicated work toward updating everything. Olessi 23:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind help. The gender question was really creating some unessecary confussion, so I did my best to correct this situation on my user page and to explain my position. I also explained that I am a Roman Catholic, and by no means a Pagan, since some might have drawn this conclussion from my 'fierce' defence of 'Pagan Empire' :) Too bad that I do not have the time to do real edits of history articles :( Still, there is a lot of time ahead for that, I try to be optimistic. Best wishes. Juraune 18:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I just added some more to the above. Extremeweb 10:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey, it's me again. Check it out. I've been nominated for admin. I hope you vote. Thanx. íslenska hurikein #12 (samtal) 19:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Fairly standard form for the (Oxford) Dict. of Nat. Biography, under the name in question, since it confirms most or all of what you wrote; feel free to expand. (and to comment on my RfA, if you like.) Septentrionalis 21:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi Elonka;
You were involved in the discussions over the use of diacritics in the names of Polish kings. Do you have an opinion on the use of diacritics in the names of German cities (in this case, ß in the name of Meissen)? There is a discussion at Talk:Meissen and if you'd care to add your opinion, whatever it may be, it may contribute to settling the issue. Thanks. Charles 23:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
For your quick and thorough response to the {{ Uncategorized}} template on Dan Leibovitz. -- M @ r ē ino 20:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Since your advice was so useful last time, I wanted to show you this little 'gem': [9] and [10]? I wonder if this falls under WP:NPA? Either way it is not something I intend to pursue now (I don't care much what grafitti one posts on their user space), but I wonder what do you think about it?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
What do you recommend for WP:PRESS in the case of a syndicated column? For example, Dan Savage's syndicated column in this week's issue of the Metro Times "damns" Wikipedia for making it tough for him to lie about his age. Robert Happelberg 23:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
A similar situation to our previous one with Polish monarchs appears to have arisen in the articles on a number of medieval Scottish monarchs. Duncan I of Scotland is now Donnchad I of Scotland, and his son Malcolm III has been moved to Máel Coluim III of Scotland. This was done, so far as I can tell, with no discussion whatsoever (oddly enough, by User:Calgacus, whom you may recall as having been rather strongly opposed to the usage of Polish names way back when). Anyway, I don't know if you're interested, but a discussion is ongoing at Talk:Máel Coluim III of Scotland. The basic answer Calgacus and Angus McLellan have so far provided to the question of "How can this possibly be justified under the naming conventions" appears to be "We don't care." john k 14:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I have no problem you moving these pages now, but it'd have been better to have waited until voting ends. Anyways, you should move the talk pages also. There's a box you need to tick to do that below the move rectangle, you always need to make sure that is ticked. PS, the vote is not a consensus, it's two camps of relatively unreconcilable viewpoints; just because one camp got more voters to the page does not mean it's consensus. Regards, Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 01:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Please note that there's no living=yes parameter to template {{ Blp}}. Looks like your occasional usage of this param has caught my bot out :)
If the article is a bio, please use {{WPBiography|living=yes}}. If it's a list or some other non-biographical article about living people, please use {{ Blp}} without parameters.
Thanks very much, no reply needed. -- kingboyk 10:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Pazmaneum is a school, the Collegium Pazmaneum, a Catholic seminary founded in 1623 by Péter Pázmány for Hungarian students in Vienna. Pázmány was a big figure in the Counter-Reformation, archbishop, primate of Hungary, and also founded the first Hungarian university in 1635, which still survives in Budapest. But him being a Catholic archbishop, he is probably not your ancestor :-) See also: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11595c.htm
The surname is likely related [1] to the Hont-Pázmány clan (also Hont-Pázmán, Hunt-Pázmán, Huntpázmány), which has an interesting history. According to the chronicles, the brothers Hont and Pázmán were Swabian (i.e. German) knights, who came to Hungary in the 10th century. They received huge tracts of land in what is today Western Slovakia, and the county Hont. They were the ancestors (documented from the 13th century) of a large number of noble families in Hungary, e.g. Forgách, Batthyány, Kővári, Bánki, Lázár, Ujhelyi, Szentgyörgyi and many more. Perhaps this gives you a starter... Hollomis 02:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Your thoughts about Wikipedia are refreshing and exciting. It can be interesting to be inside of a thing and outside of it at the same time... Wikipedia is sort of like a blog on steroids which is under the control of WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency)! Lmcelhiney 18:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
For your collection :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I created the badvertising article and have since noticed that it is tagged for clean-up and wikification. I wrote it pretty quickly and I know that certain aspects of it aren't encyclopaedic enough yet, but I was wondering what exactly you had in mind re the tagging? thank you. Saccerzd 14:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your help creating a fair use rationale for Image:pilot2backgammon.jpg on Thematic motifs of Lost.-- Opark 77 08:09, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
G'day Elonka. I'm a bit puzzled why you made Cylindrachetidae a redirect rather than leave it as a "definition" page (stub).
As I said in my creation note, "Create page so people don't get confused. Redir's won't do here 'cos it would be circular." I had intended to make it a redirect, but since I reference it from the Sandgroper taxobox, surely that would be a circular redirect?
I'm copying this to the Sandgroper Talk page, perhaps you would like to respond to it there, just to keep other people in the picture. Gordon | Talk, 25 September 2006 @12:51 UTC
I just wanted to return the thanks. I'm happy with the compromise, and I'm hopeful that we can build strong season articles, possibly even getting some of them to GA status. -- Kahlfin 20:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
You added {{ db-bio}} to Covington & Burling using AWB. Because CSD A7 does not apply to companies, I have removed the template. You could {{ prod}} it if you think WP:CORP applies, but I think an AfD is the best way to go on this article. Agent 86 10:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
You added speedy tags to categories when applying uncat tags! Please go back and fix these errors, they are clogging CAT:CSD. Punkmorten 11:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, speedy deletion in this case applies when there's not an assertion of notability. To me, the assertion that it's a song by an apparently popular singer is an assertion of notability. Meeting Wikipedia:Notability (songs) or not is more a question for AfD or PROD, speedy deletion is about whether it actually asserts anything that's possibly notable, or not. Traditionally these articles are just turned into redirects to the artist and so on if someone thinks the article is weak, which would appear to be called for in this case. It's a fine point, I admit, but it does serve its purposes (preserving the article history for a future good article, making sure a plausible search term goes to a meaningful target, etc.) -- W.marsh 17:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Aha, I'm sorry - I hadn't realised! I've been fixing the articles keeping in with the guidelines of the mediation, removing OR and fancruft from the Trivia sections etc. SergeantBolt ( t, c) 19:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm glad that we're finally through the mediation. And I'm especially happy that I somehow avoided the onslaught of those angry mobs with pitchforks. :) Let's move forward. -- PKtm 21:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your message. I know we've had our disagreements in the past (and still have some), but it looks like everything turns out for the best in the end. While we may not always see eye to eye, I enjoy working with people like you who are equally as passionate about making great, encyclopedic articles. Jtrost ( T | C | #) 21:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, saw you tagged contemplative education to dispute its notability. I've tried to address the concern by adding a section on its popularity as well as adding sources. Let me know if this has helped.
You and I both registered for Aikipedia accounts on the same day. Hmm, I found it amusing... - FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 18:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I'll try and keep an eye on the Elonka Dunn page. I do think it's strange how your page is being targeted, I noticed that one of the vandals reacted to putting a notability tag on of their created articles by vandalising yours. It wouldn't suprise me if they're all related. Also I've been a bit busy recently but I'll have a look at the Fateh Snr article when I have more time. Englishrose 22:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[11] Sigh, so it looks like we've got multiple vandals. Englishrose 19:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Please check histories of articles before nominating them for speedy deletion - this one was a legitimate disambiguation page before it was changed into the advertisement. Zocky | picture popups 03:57, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I apologize for my behavior when adding categories/providing an edit summary. I was enraged about the Platte Canyon High School shooting this week and Duane R. Morrison (I settled this by having several Tekken characters beat the crap out of Bryan Fury 20 times in Arcade VS. mode) taking the life of a girl (and then committed suicide), as that is violence towards women, one of my dislikes. I also blamed Vince and Shane McMahon, Jeff Hardy and Bam Margera as well. When you check the page, you should see the changes I made. Thanks, -- D.F. "Jun Kazama Master" Williams 04:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Are you really Elonka Dunin? -- Kimberly Ashton 20:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I removed that from the page due to the fact that somebody had placed that in the wrong episode. It is wrong, and my computer crashed before I could place it in "Further Instructions", which I am about to do. SergeantBolt ( t, c) 19:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank-you for your encouragement - you are most kind. I will proceed as suggested. Ben MacDui 18:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)