This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Sorry, I don't know, where I must write this. Wery strange edits of anonimous user: [1]. If you can, advice please, where I must to inform about such cases. Ingwar JR 09:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Dear friends:
If you have some extra time, I would appreciate if you can take a look to Category:Coats of arms of clans of Poland and Category:Polish nobility coats of arms images, mainly the Talk pages.
There is an Italian wikipedian, who knows nothing about Polish history and Polish szlachta and he is rearranging the categories in Category:Coats of arms of Poland
In commons he is User:G.dallorto
My point of view may have some mistakes but I would thank you very much your thought and your discussion on this issue.
As today I got few time I am sending this same message to:
If you know somebody else interested in Polish heraldry and Polish szlachta, please invite him to join this Discussion.
Best regards, my friends, and thank you by your answer to this request. -- Gustavo 08:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Witaj! Mamy duży problem. Lajskonik stworzył listę gmin, napisał gminy jako "Gmina XXX", ale zauważyliśmi, że już są opisane niektóre gminy, tyle, że jako "Gmina of XXX". Moglibyśmy to poprzenościć, ale nie jesteśmy pewni, jak jest. Co ty o tym sądzisz? Marcin Suwalczan [our talk] 14:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi. It looks a lot better, and I think it'll end up being kept. You might want to get someone to give the article a copy-edit to weed out any lingering minor issues. I would help, but I've been swamped with Final Fantasy WikiProject tasks. — Deckill er 17:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
The only thing I'd still like to see changed is the "See also" section, but that can likely wait until FAC; so please feel free to nominate the article for A-Class. Kirill Lokshin 18:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus
I just noticed a small error in Image:Podział administracyjny I RP.png uploaded by Commons:User:Poznaniak who apparently doesn't speak any language I know. Could you possibly drop him a small note in Polish? The error is that he has labelled the island of Öland (Olandia) as Danish, however this island has always been Swedish. All other islands are correctly labelled. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 06:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
witam dobry pomysl, bede linkowal artykuly, zawsze to jest odnosnik dla uzytkownikow
co do polskich znakow (np. Lodz) to mam problem bo operuje komputerem McIntosh i jest on bardzo dziwna maszyna i zmienia mi te znaki wiec nie jestem w stanie tego zrobic
jesli chodzi o te trivia to jestes ekspertem wikipediowym moze sam gdzies to dorzucisz? gdzie uwazasz? pozdro Tymek 13:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Panieri11.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
After this one [2] I do feel obliged to report a trolling action of an admin. Untill now I did feel free to edit whatewer I felt I had some expertise on, although edit summaries like (tag {{WikiProject Lithuania}} for Lokyz) seems to me like stalking and trying to push me to behave unreasonably. Therefore i do demand deletion of this edit summary and a personal appology with a promise I'll be not stalked in the future.-- Lokyz 22:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I'll make this offer formal. Would you and Lokyz like to enter enforceable mediation with me as your mediator? Both of you have petitioned me for assistance with your dispute. I'm not going to step in unilaterally, but I'll give you the opportunity to set clear limits for yourselves. The program is ready for experimental launch. Would you like to do this? Durova Charge! 23:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 00:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I never got any answers. Feel free to go poke the guy all you want. Circeus 00:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Reply at Wikipedia:External peer review/Chesney 2006#Response. -- Jeandré, 2007-03-17 t06:10z
May I ask you to wrap up this [3] before I forget? Thanks. -- Poeticbent talk 13:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
They're all done by hand, once a month. :-\ Kirill Lokshin 17:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips. I did not know about [WP:BABEL], and was always puzzled if I have to duplicate my answers on the other's talk pages, I was asking this question many times, but you were the fist to answer it clearly. I will make the G. I. Krivosheev stub, though it is too modern event for my interests. Barefact 17:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, could you please edit protect this page Pilsener, see this [5], two editors refused appealed discussion. What to do please ? ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 09:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
-- ALoan (Talk) 11:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
There is an interesting new article, Former eastern territories of Germany, you might want to look over. I drop the note because I see that few of wikipedians I'd normally expect to be there have noticed it yet. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 02:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus. Can you help me with this vandal? He has vandalised some pages like Cribbage (pool), replacing headings with stuff like this:
DELETED.
justinmobscene. you can't stop this.
Thank you for your time. MarkBA t/ c/ @ 16:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Please update the information you added following the recent changes in the pl version. Regs. Mynek 16:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News |
The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comment here, can I just copy and paste the contents of the last four articles into one of the first two and then add a merge tag to the first two? Appleseed ( Talk) 21:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, Darwinek seems to be in troubles, please see here [6]. ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 00:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Belarus has been up for about 2 days or so. If I haven't been doing to a dentist for everything under the sun, I would have a lot more of the questions done. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, that guy is on a tour, and, given what he allowed himself to say about me, I'm not ready to even pay attention to what he claims and argues (suffices to note that the emphasis is on "I would like you to state your opinion about Rumanization", which translates into "I have a POV to push"). In any case, I don't think the lead is wrong, but the sentence may be futile. Dahn 17:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Darwinek. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Darwinek/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Darwinek/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 19:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
When is it Vandalism, fixing your lack of knowlege about Polish history. I know everything about you, you are all over the internet, making up your own proof to the stories that you are teaching your students. The hammer will never kill the white eagle. I am very sorry for you, being (I Think) Polish and promoting the death and destruction of you families history. Countries don't annex, did the U.S. annex Iraq? I don't now how was teaching you as you grow up, and you ideas placed on you. Freedom is Equality, having a all high cantrolling Government will never give you freedom because they will always afraid of a revolt. If a government comes and a kill one of your kids with no trial, I hope you will not set back and say It's my Governments wish. Please if this is just for your doctrine, then don't give up on your history because the polish only have each other, and other country fear the polish to the exstint of killing them for fear and the power of the polish mind.
Please e_mail so we can have discuss history and polish believes. I am getting the Back by Polish Organizations in the USA and Polish.
Thanks
magusrobertus@yahoo.ie
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sir Gutowski ( talk • contribs) 17:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC).
Given his various other accusations of people being right-wingers, fascists, etc., I'm not actually convinced that he didn't intend a political subtext here; but, in any case, let's assume for the sake of argument that the usage was purely as a metaphor.
There are, in my opinion, different levels of "unacceptable" metaphors, ranging from the merely poorly-chosen ones to those which evoke comparisons so vile that excusing them is simply out of the question. In some sense, the very specificity of the term used is a negative factor here; I find it utterly inconcievable that Darwinek could have chosen the lebensborn comparison without actually being aware of what the history of the program was—and this necessarily forces me to conclude that he considered it acceptable to compare a fellow editor to Himmler. Frankly, I see no reason why we should tolerate such commentary here.
(It's a bit like the difference between saying "the admins are all thugs bent on abusing innocent editors" and "the admins are rounding people up like the Einsatzgruppen"; one is merely an insulting comparison, while the other is intended to evoke a very specific—and extraordinarily hateful—image.) Kirill Lokshin 19:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 20:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Czesc. I zauwazylem ze Pan, ponowne odnowil texty Biophys'ego ktore nie zawiera zadnej informacji o blogach. Prosze Pana, z poczatku czytac texty ktore sa reference'ami, i tylko zatym cos robic. Po drugie, mam nadzeje ze Pan to robi nie zatym ze jest bardzo zainteresowany w dezynformacjii o Rosjii. Vlad fedorov 05:05, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I marked the threads in question in your archives. Could you go to the Archive 13 linked above and add the full an honest translations of the threads in question for the ongoing ArbCom case. -- Irpen 06:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I removed the article at The Independent School, Inc. per your lapsed prod last night. The original author has requested that the article be restored, which I have done per the prod guidelines. You can read his request at User_talk:Kuru#Deletion_of_The_Independent_School.2C_Inc. - the next step is AFD, but you may want to wait a day or two to see if he improves the article or establishes some sort of notability. Kuru talk 23:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Check this out: Battle of Jarosław, and please, make it better :) Pan Wikipedia 12:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Piotrus. Could you please weigh in on the dispute here? It seems to me the other side is arguing that it was not an occupation, but as the citations I have provided in footnote 1 show, many legitimate sources call it that. See also my explanation on the talk page. Thank you for your assistance. Biruitorul 04:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Maps are not I feel a good target at the moment. Buildings I'm working on but my inkscape-fu is weak so it will may not be finished tonight. Geni 20:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. Please feel free to add new pages to my list when you find them :). NoSeptember 22:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 13 | 26 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I am going to remove some photos from the article, but I removed the Patria poster before I saw the comment on the FAR. I want to realign the posters, but I am just not sure how. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
There has been an extensive effort to combine Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research (together with much of Wikipedia:Reliable sources) into a new policy called Wikipedia:Attribution, and its FAQ, WP:ATTFAQ.
Recently, on Wikipedia talk:Attribution and on the Wiki-EN-l mailing list, Jimbo questioned whether the result had adequate consensus, and requested:
You are invited to take part; the community discussion should be as broad as possible. If you wish to invite other experienced and intelligent editors, please use neutral language. This message, for example, is {{ ATTCD}}. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hard to believe. Xx236 11:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I was going to weigh in on the article Kraków pogrom, and wanted to hear what you felt the major disagreement was. I think I know, but it would help me understand the breadth of the situation if you tell me yourself. You can respond on my Talk Page, where I've set up a section heading specifically for this. Arcayne 19:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, Piotrus! I corrected the names and removed Russian patronimics (they don't really use them in Wikipedia). I also corrected their ranks (colonel general instead of general colonel etc.). Happy editing! KNewman 19:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Northern Group of Forces.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Northern Group of Forces. This was fast! -- Petri Krohn 01:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
III Rzesza budowała autostrady a ZSRR był postępowy. Stanowczo nie należy ich krytykować. Xx236 06:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus, I know that you repeatedly refused to reign down on the POV-pushers if the POV they were pushing seemed "right" to you no matter what behavior they expressed. Molobo, Ksenon/Litwa, LUCPOL or Mathiasrex who you even instructed on how to file a 3RR report on myself.
But I really have no choice but to ask you again, now in connection with LUCPOL. As we speak he repeatedly removed my well explained tag from the NGF article without discussion and without adding a single entry to a talk page. I request that you take him to the woodshed about disruption and restore the tag on your own until our discussion is finished as I expect the fellow to be looking forward for an opportunity to accuse me in 3RR. He may even be the same fellow as Mathiasrex. -- Irpen 20:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus, this is not about people disagreeing. It is about acting reasonably or not. My objection are well explained and out of nowhere appears this friend of yours who reverts me without adding anything to the discussion. And, as always, you refused to curb on the friendly troll and use him instead as battering ram. I tried to appeal to your consciousness once again. Guess, I made a mistake. The rest of your accusations are not new and I will not dignify them with a response just to repeat what was said earlier. -- Irpen 20:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
You just pretend to not understand that WP:RS and WP:NPOV are different policies and they address different issues. Sigh. I've heard it already. -- Irpen 21:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Another straw man argument. No wikipedian can claim to be a reliable source. I never claimed otherwise. -- Irpen 21:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I hope that P.P. (aka Prokonsul Piotrus) would not ban me (as he threatens several times already) if I write about this situation. The same situation regarding usage of user: LUCPOL’s “services” I meet at Ponary massacre. Firstly Piotrus tried his best to remove referenced facts about Polish Jew killers with shocking edit summary , such behavior was denounced by other contributor [8] . And now then P.P. is alone with his POV and removal of facts, suddenly out of nowhere user: LUCPOL jumps in and restores “proper” version of article by removing referenced facts and tags presented by different contributors with with edit summary - this is OK . Feel the power? And literally LUCPOL did not add a single entry to a talk page why removal of facts is “OK”. He also did not add a single entry to the article before nor related articles. But just looking into LUCPOL contributions such behavior is not isolated, exact same happened and in other places. I find disturbing that contributor who allegedly can’t present his view and defensive speech to his ArbCom case [9] due to poor command of English (as Piotrus notes), but can easily remove facts and distort articles. Another interesting development, as P.P. notes LUCPOL has bad command of English (btw, did he/she understand articles in which he/she intervenes?), translation of LUCPOL’s thoughts to ArbCom and RFI was made also by Piotrus . So that do we have – same “contribution” scheme – when Piotrus intervenes in content dispute and needs "support" LUCPOL, who enjoyed Piotrus’ help in his ArbCom and RFI cases, jumps in out of nowhere and restores "proper" article version supported by Piotrus, without any further involvement in articles . Probably we will see more such developments in the coming future. M.K. 09:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all your work Piotrus! Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 05:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. Dpotop 06:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your phrase at my talk page, I don't know that phrase but I guess I get that. Regarding your request of Milovice geo-stub, there are three municipalities in the Czech Republic called Milovice. Two of them are villages, one is a town. Which one do you meant? - Darwinek 08:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 11:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus, you prodded Polish National Top 50, but one user and some IPs insist on keeping it by removing the template. I don't see any substantial improvements being made to that article. I've tried to engage the user in conversation, to no avail. What does one do in this situation? Appleseed ( Talk) 21:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
The
Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XIII - March 2007 | |
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 23:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Just to tell you in advance I was not stalking you. I accidentally run into this article when I came to 172's talk to tell him about a different one. Just letting you know 'cause I am getting used to ABF from your end. -- Irpen 02:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
This was prompted by DYK and DYK only. Again, not stalking. Thought I better explain. -- Irpen 04:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
So, you are saying that I did stalk you, aren't you? What should I take? This or your "did I ever accused you of stalking" rhetorical question just two entries above? -- Irpen 19:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for welcoming me. I was active last November, but using my IP. This time I decided to get an account. I'll check out the noticeboard and see if I can help with anything. I'm not 100% Polish, but of Polish descent (3/4ths). - Britlawyer 20:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Certainly I'm planning to contribute to that article, but at the moment I need to finish Krakow pogrom article, which tends to consume huge amount of time so far. I've also started a copy edit of Żydokomuna, which also remains unfinished. M0RD00R 21:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
--For heaven's sake, Piotrus!! ;) Camptown 13:04, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Witam, jestes moze z Brynowa? Widzialem Twoje zdjecia na Commons. Pytam tylko z czystej ciekawosci :) Necrokris 17:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou Piotrus for this medal. This is a great honour, coming from one of most prolific DYK contributors ever, and one of the most prolific article writers ever. You are one of those who deserve it much more than myself. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 04:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I've noticed that you are active in the BattleTech articles here at Wikipedia. I've started a proposal for a Battletech Wikiproject. If you are interested please check out my proposal at the Battletech main article's talk page. Thanks alot. NeoFreak 05:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Just through I'd give you a heads up, you have to put the AFD template on each of the pages, not your simple text without even a link to the AFD discussion. It may lead to the discussion being closed, and I don't think it was a good idea to proceed that route anyway. FrozenPurpleCube 06:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't suggest nominating all of them at once. That would likely be a bad idea. My advice is to try The Village Pump to get people's consensus on what to do, or to look for a few of the worst offenders in the category, nominate them, and see what the consensus is. Or both, there's no reason you couldn't try it either way. FrozenPurpleCube 20:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, PROD is one option, but in this case, I don't recommend it without more discussion. Not exactly much attention was paid to it. FrozenPurpleCube 20:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Framing (sociology). - Grumpyyoungman01 13:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
After creating my first article on Wiki ( Rudolf Christoph Freiherr von Gersdorff), I had no choice but recognizing your extraordinary contributes to this encyclopaedia. I hereby would like to draw your intention to my second try: Red Army atrocities (WWII). Probably you can give me some more information concerning Poland in this matter. Sincerely yours -- Dionysos 19:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Hoi: I'm very fond of your User:Piotrus/Wikipedia interwiki and specialized knowledge test; it's very interesting and a good antidote to subjective appraisals of Wikipedia's incompleteness. Anyway, recently on WikiEn-l, it has been proposed (and supported!) that article creation in general just be disabled for a while. The idea apparently is that biography articles are too troublesome and that Wikipedia is relatively complete anyway. I'd like to cite your essay in any such future discussions, but I'd be happier if it was brought up to date - besides, en and the other Wikipedias have grown and changed a lot since then! I don't know whether you have the spare time or want to do it at all, but if you did, I'd appreciate it. -- Gwern (contribs) 04:45 4 April 2007 (GMT)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 14 | 2 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Witaj. Powiem bez ogródek - jest już ten szablon na en.wiki. Zobacz hasło Warsaw - tam już działa. Co z resztą miast - te infoboxy jakieś takie nieporadne. -- Hiuppo 11:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear friend:
This is just a wish of happiness in this Easter from myself. (The Easter Egg is a kindly gift from Tomek)
Regards
-- Gustavo 13:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Vilnius Operation April 1919 Przybylski.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I've got informations, by no enough abilities in using English language :) Radomil talk 22:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Dzięki za zamek... a bezczelnie korzystajac z twojej uprzejmości - Poznań International Fair ;) Radomil talk 15:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, why did you change your mind? And here I was happy for 12 minutes that one problem has ended :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 01:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Write an article? I suppose I could do that, but keeping it encyclopedic would be very time consuming and time is just something I do not have. I would be glad to contribute to such an article, if one is started, but I don't think I could make one from scratch. At least, not right now. Should I get the time, I think I would like to do that. MVMosin 02:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your help with the Soviet occupation of Romania article; you may find this poll interesting too. Biruitorul 07:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Piotrus. According to Poznań 1956 protests, written mostly by you (Good job, BTW.), June 28th became a national holiday in Poland last year. I wonder if it was just for the 50th anniversary, or is it an anuual holiday from now on. If it's annual, would you mind updating Public holidays in Poland, please ? I don't know the Polish language, so references such as this doesn't help me. Thank you in advance. -- PFHLai 12:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
on this. Who is that you accusing in PA and a do you have a diff with the alleged PA? Note that baseless' accusations of PA are PA indeed. -- Irpen 19:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I will not reply, I will ask a counterquestion. Is accusation of Polonophobia a PA? -- Irpen 19:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
No, no. Not "something", Piotrus. A specific statement by you calling me "Polonophobic". More specifically, not that what I said was "polonophobic" but me being "Polonophobic". How could you forget? I am telling you in advance what this is, not that I am looking for any "paragraf" to nail you. Just have patience. -- Irpen 21:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Are you going to be able to work further on this for the FA review? It's quietly turned into a two month review and I don't know what to do with it. Hard data remains that ought to be cited (e.g., elections results at the beginning of The Gomułka period). Marskell 08:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 23:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope, nothing we can do. The way categories are displayed is controlled by MediaWiki; unless the devs come up with some general way of hiding categories, we're stuck with having them all shown like that. Kirill Lokshin 05:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
You assert that the British could've dropped bombs or leaflets. With what planes? The RAF was a hollow shell in 1939, equipped with obsolescent aircraft. Moreover, what good would dropped in a few bombs or leaflets have done? You think ther Germans would've said "Oh, the British bombed a city or two, so we'd better pull out of Poland, and make the Soviets do the same"? Only France was in a position to do anything meaningful during Fall Weiss. I have not yet reverted your change for the 2nd time, to give you the opportunity to defend it. If you'd like to reply, you can do so here. Parsecboy 16:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I have created a new article Internet brigades. It was marked for a speedy deletion. Could you take a look and tell your opionion? Is it really that bad? Biophys 17:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, those maps have made a difference, too. We're getting there!
I did note your previous request for a copy-edit of History of Poland. That I haven't addressed it is because I really can only work on a couple of articles at once (I'm slowly writing a new one of my own offline), and with Soviet invasion of Poland and the occasional FAC review, I am about up to capacity. For what I call "deep copyediting", I tend to delve into sources to check we really have accurate wording–which takes ages. In fact, I've just spent a couple of hours reading forty pages of a very detailed and, it seems to me, impressive book about the deportations (Rieber), in order to address Mosin's objection that we didn't (of all things) present a Soviet justification for the deportations. I enjoy close reading, so it's a pleasure. But at this slow rate of working, I can't do much else. qp10qp 02:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)–
Piotrus, I'm pretty sure you qualify for one of these. User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle Would you drop a line by my user talk and specify which articles? Cheers, Durova Charge! 02:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 05:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 16:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I hope that you could show me where in the cited sources you have found words "blogs", "blog" and "bloggers". 1 source, 2 source, 3 source. Po drugie, ja pszeczytalem artykul z Tygodniku Powszechnego i nie odnalazlem zadnej wskazowki na to co dotyczy blogow. Pan porusza reguly Wikipedia, kiedy wstawia dezynformacje do artykulu. Prosze milego Pana udowodnic i objasnic swoje dzeje... Vlad fedorov 11:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 06:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 15 | 9 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Siemka. Pisalem teraz Tobie na GG, otrzymales wiadomosc? - Darwinek 22:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 22:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 06:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi. User:Snowolf said you were Polish so I thought I would ask you to review this and comment on the accuracy of both translations. Machine translations are so patchy, and, sadly, I don't know Polish. Thanks, -- Guinnog 23:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean? I only my template to three articles ( stress and duress, human security and interdisciplinarity) and they all use the optional parameter.↔ NMajdan• talk 13:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus, I added photos of Ukrainian stadia to the 2012 UEFA European Football Championship under Poland-Ukraine bid section, but I could not locate equivalents of Polish stadiums. If you are aware of any, it would be great if you can add two photographs to balance out the gallery. -- Riurik (discuss) 16:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I knew he died a week after something important. It was (about) a week after the Secret Speech, not Stalin's funeral! Biruitorul 02:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, here's the exact quote on the scandal, from Machcewicz, p. 101: "Significant political changes were accelerated by the affair of pl:Józef Światło, a top-ranking official of the Polish security apparatus who defected to the West in December 1953. From the following autumn, his revelations of the crimes of the secret police and misdemeanours of the ruling Party were broadcast back to Poland by Radio Free Europe, based in Munich, shocking thousands of listeners, including many members of the Party. After a wave of criticism directed towards the Party leadership and collective security apparatus, for the first time expressed during official (although still confidential) meetings, the Ministry of Public Security was dissolved in December 1954." The article on Światło should definitely be translated at some point. Biruitorul 07:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
it takes two to tango... Anonimu 10:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, this edit [11] seems to have used a formatting script on most of the article. looking at the side-by-side comparison, I could not detect any difference from before/after. Out of curiosity - can you point me to a source that explains what that script does and why it is used? Thanks in advance István 14:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Hiya Piotrus,
I believe we may have argued in the past..? My memory is pretty hazy...
Can you make heads or tails of Talk:Zaolzie? Is this one POV-pusher trying to upset the apple cart, or are there legitimate probs? I'm inclined to delist the article from GA based on stability....
Thanks -- Ling.Nut 12:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Można "Radku" ;) Ja nie tyle zmieniłem kolejność ile przeniosłem dwa ordery nadal przyznawane z historycznych do tych co są nadal przyznawane - Siły Zbrojne w Służbie Ojczyzny i Za zasługi dla obronności kraju. Pozdrawiam Radomil talk 10:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Jesteś pewien, że wszystkie medale "historyczne" są historyczne? Chodzi mi o to, że np. Wielkopolski Krzyż Powstańczy, który dotyczył przecież biorących udział w walkach w latach 1918-1919 zakończono nadawać 8 maja 1999. Być moze część odznaczeń za II wojnę światową nadal jest przyznawane (część na pewno zaprzestano przyznawać w tym samym momencie, ale czy wszystkie)? Radomil talk 10:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 16:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I have quoted Peroutka. My additions were deleted.
I have added Kovtun. My additions were deleted.
I have added Gawronska. My additions were deleted.
I have added information from Mamatey. The information was deleted.
I have added information from Gabal. The information was deleted.
I have added quotation of Chlebowczyk and Kosiński. The quotation was deleted.
Following this, I have deleted Watts. He presents view of one side only and Czech side has no defence. The deletion was twice reverted.
I cannot add, I cannot delete - I cannot edit the article. At the same time, I am subject of personal attacks and ad hominem arguments.
I appreciate that Darwinek is your friend but you may wish to be objective. What do you think?
-- Xixaxu 08:28, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 23:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thanks again Piotrus. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 01:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 16 | 16 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the Polish- English translations for the two photo captions. They provided the basis for improving the text. For the record: as I understand English usage, a tomb may be above or below ground; a grave is below ground, but the structure called a mausoleum may indicate aboveground burial which can't be known from merely viewing the photos. So your prompt response was most helpful! Perhaps future editors will expand the page with more particular information. -- Cheers, Deborahjay 04:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 16:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
BTW, I've tagged the image in the article, Image:Swiatlo.jpg as being unsourced. The URL you gave leads to a Page Not Found error. Hopefully you can find another source for it. Thanks. howcheng { chat} 16:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Your behavior will be scrutinized here: [12] M.K. 10:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi there...
I am wondering, as someone who indcates they can translate polish, could you review the following edit summary for this diff [13] and let me know it's general content. Based on the topic and the fact the edit reversed my editing, I believe it is likely in polish and directed at me. It is unlikely I will report it or anything, but it is always nice to know if someone is slamming you. Thanks.-- User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 12:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Your latest proposal seems to have broken ilink...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
you are invited to improve article, thanks -- Mt7 20:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC) what you say is humbug, no one is czechoslovak player Ján Čapkovič, Antonín Panenka, Ladislav Jurkemik, Ivo Knoflíček, František Plánička, Ján Švehlík, Josef Masopust, Alexander Vencel (born 1944), Ivo Viktor, we need a new wikipedia for you. -- Mt7 21:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. I will take a look. How did you know about my interest in this sort of stuff? -- HappyCamper 04:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Piotr. I appreciate it very much. I'm moving the awards to my userpage. Thanks a million. -- Poeticbent talk 22:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
But - remember, every rose has thorns :) The more active you are, the more effort you put in - the more enemies you make... there are days I wonder if it is worth it, really... -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Please note that an arbitrator has requested that you reduce the length of your statement on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Thank you. Newyorkbrad 14:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 20:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 05:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the article, Piotrus. How does one generate the kind of notice that I received from you the next time a user accesses en.Wikipedia?
Two comments on the article: Your subheading "Ethymology" is not as familiar as the equivalent "Etymology" – the former redirects to the latter in en.Wikipedia. Also, in the "Theory" section you write "A reification circle refers to the event when a norm, first seen as artificial and forces,...." It makes sense to me if "forces" should be "forced" but perhaps you had something else in mind that I'm not getting. I'll duplicate these comments on the Reification (fallacy) talk page if you want to discuss. — Blanchette 06:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I left a message for you here.
I can see your point about not keeping redundant information, as the two locations can get out of sync, causing confusion. But, if the out-of-date, and possibly redundant info hasn't been checked, before the article is removed, it is lost. And I think that should be checked first. Probably a lot of work to do a proper job of it.
Cheers! -- Geo Swan 15:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 01:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment wrt the Romania case. You wrote:
Maybe I am suffering from certain delusions, but may be I am correct on who you mean by "certain users". In this case, please reread the Latvia case, note the list of users ArbCom found engaged in "poor behavior", reread the talk of the Romania article find those engaged in poor behavior there as well and compare the list. I am writing to you off the arbcom page because the page is already loaded, but I welcome your continued scrutiny. In fact, from the pattern of your edits that show up in certain articles I am aware of being under the radar and it does not bother me. So, I would be interested in your more detailed analysis rather than a totally unsupported statement. -- Irpen 05:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
When you remove or significantly alter your comments to which I already replied, my comments start to look irrelevant at worst or strange and mysterious at best. Please post your new thoughts below (rather than in place) of old thoughts so that I know what I should be replying to and the reader may follow the discussion. TIA, -- Irpen 05:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 17 | 23 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I am removing Wikipedia:Third opinion Time of Troubles request because you did not include the section on the talk page it related to and there seem to be more than two people involved now. If I am mistaken please resubmit. -- Philip Baird Shearer 00:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi. You are an admin here, so I'd like to ask you for something. After my talk with User:Marcin Suwalczan, we agreed to keep standard of "Name Commune", not "Gmina Name". But I was move few articles before: Gmina Abramów; Gmina Adamów, Łuków County; Gmina Adamów, Zamość County; Gmina Adamówka, Gmina Aleksandrów, Biłgoraj County; Gmina Aleksandrów, Piotrków Trybunalski County; Gmina Aleksandrów Kujawski and Gmina Aleksandrów Łódzki, all of them should be moved back. And, as You know, it is not possible without deletion of redirect pages. Sorry for this perturbation. Regards Lajsikonik 20:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
We have a new anon on a destructive spree. Can you take care of this? Thanks. -- Poeticbent talk 15:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Okay, you're added. You may have to type /msg chanserv invite #wikipedia-en-admins before joining. -- Interiot 17:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 19:59, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
...but you do, of course. Can you leave a note for Commons:User:Ocuish? He or she is uploading images to Commons, but in the process expanding .jpg to .jpeg. That just means work for nothing at our end. Example: Image:Airport Terminal.jpg went to Commons:Image:Airport Terminal.jpeg. It could be that they were called .jpeg on the Polish wiki, but maybe you could ask him/her if there is a reason for it. Many thanks in advance for your multilingual assistance! Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I am sorry to disturb you with this, but I would greatly appreciate if you can look at the edits (well, in fact just reverts) by User:Odbhss. He is reverting to a version contradicting WP:NCGN. [15][] I have tried to explain him/her the convention on his/her talk page, but to no avail. He/she has a clear POV, [16] but I believe we should play by rules regardless our POV. What should I do? I have discussed WP:NCGN with other Hungarian editors on their notice board and, although one of them opposes the convention in general, the rest seem to accept it. Communication with Odbhss is kind of... not extremely fruitful. See User talk:Odbhss. I would be grateful for any help. Tankred 02:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
Your claim that Sarkar's Social Cycle Theory is a hoax or to tie its legitimacy with number of Google hits is amuzing. Please refer to the page were you deposited the claim. Here is the reply. Please consider resolving this issue before other measures need to be taken with regard to the offending entry.
Answer on the P. R. Sarkar talk page: "This is incorrect. There are plenty of hits of Sarkar's "social cycle theory" relating to Sarkar. Try the follwing search string "social cycle theory" & "sarkar". Please note "Sarker" is an incorrect spelling of Sarkar. In the Talk page of the present "Social cycle theory" the following was written: Wrong title for this article. The term Social Cycle Theory was first used in relation to The Law of the Social Cycle invented by P.R. Sarkar in his book Human Society, Vol. 2 published by Ananda Marga Press in Calcutta, India in the late 1950s. The term 'Social Cycle Theory' became popularised as the term for this law in other works in India and later in the West, including in the #1 New York Times best seller The Great Depression of 1990 by Ravi Batra published by Simon and Schuster in 1987. The SCT term was earlier introduced by Batra in his less well known book The Downfall of Capitalism and Communism: a New Study of History, published by MacMillan in 1976. The use of this term as a description of this article is therefore wrong and likely illegal. The term Sociological Cycle Theory could be used for this entry. The issue concerns the right to the use of this title. It has been used in copyrighted works for many decades. The use of this name for other theories is not as per academic standard and should be discontinued. Please do the honorable thing and make the change in the title of the offending page, as earlier suggested, and then this mess can be cleared up. Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Prabhat_Ranjan_Sarkar" Budfin 10:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for any confusion. I've replied here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Institute_of_National_Remembrance#Any__Piotru.C5.9B.27_puppets_here.3F and taken the liberty of correcting a (presumed) typographical error in your reply. I admire your contributions. ... Gaimhreadhan (kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 10:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 17:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
If he returns, I will block him for disruption.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 03:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
(You wrote)
Added LoP to my watchlist... --
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus |
talk 17:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Piotrus, for the information on Wawrzyniec Grzymała Goślicki and Thomas Jefferson. I am going to look into the references you suggested. Also, I have ordered a copy of Oldisworth's 1733 translation of The Accomplished Senator to see what I can find in there. I noticed the item in Wikipedia article about that "there is no evidence of a direct link with Jefferson's Declaration of Independence." It would be interesting if somebody could come up with one. -- Gjm5025 23:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Warsaw Uprising has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
nadav 05:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Wow, I screwed up. Sorry about that. Will get right on relisting... If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 16:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, may I ask you for a warning to this user due to the uncivility and personal attacks [18], [19], [20]? Thanks. ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 22:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Your user and talk pages are hard to view due to the speed at which my computer runs. :\ -- R e m i 01:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 06:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (Talk) 20:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus, you violated the 3RR in the IPN article. Times below are in GMT:
Please self-revert. Until recently, I would have never contacted you in connection with this or considered posting this to 3RR board but I can't help but make a connection between your act of joining the #admins [21] that we used to criticized together and this rather unexpected showing up of a know IRC member bashing me at your ArbCom. I consider resorting to this tactic beyond limit. Anyway, irregardless of whether you want to explain the connection between these two events, please self-revert your 3RR violation. Thanks, -- Irpen 01:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
My fourth diff is a revert by you to your previous version (except for additional spelling correction) with all my edits undone. I want you to self-revert and why so is self-explanatory from the article. Since you seem to employ against your opponents the tool we used to criticize together at better times, I am not willing to do any talk page chatter beyond the absolute minimum. I really did not expect the IRC thing from you. truly, -- Irpen 01:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
As for potential of secrecy and non-transparency, someone secretly and non-transparently have asked at IRC admins to take a look at my entries in connection with your arbcom. In view of your commitment above, you can make the log of that incident public unless you are saying that your joining the IRC had nothing to do with DG's sudden interest to the controversies surrounding the EE topic?
I stand by that comment in view of the past actions by you that I have seen repeatedly. Unlike some, I am on record with the diffs of you seeking the blocks. I warned an editor also publicly, knowing that my comments will be scrutinized. Diffs of past attempts to have the opponents sanctioned have been brought to your attention. You know them. I would appreciate if all your comments in connections with these affairs are made in public, so that the diffs would be there. You want DG to comment/reign in on Irpen? Ask him to do just that at his talk page. This is called integrity.
As for DG's comment it just shows that he (and you for agreeing with him) has not read the AGF policy for a while. How is that edit supposed to show my bad faith? How is my advise, which also included staying away from rv warring and commenting on the editors, is bad faith, or bad in any way? It isn't. I tell him that Piotrus will try to make him blocked. And this is true (and, btw, this has been attempted at once.) How is this assuming bad faith? That's something else. If I've tried assuming good faith and been proved wrong, I've got to stop assuming. And the AGF says just that. David is not saying I assume bad faith. He's saying I edit in bad faith. (In other words, it is David who is in violation as he is assuming bad faith of me.)
And I would be very pleased to see the confirmation of who brought him there. -- Irpen 02:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd love to get back to that project if I had my reference books back :( Glancing over my resources, I could perhaps finish the series with what I have (mostly generalized tertiary sources), but the part dealing with the 18th and 19th centuries wouldn't be very thorough. This all is also a matter of having time to do it—I guess I've got so involved with modern administrative, territorial, and now municipal divisions of Russia that I don't really have much time left to deal with the historical development.
Anyway, if you are asking because you have something that you can contribute to the series (even if that "something" isn't terribly detailed), go right ahead; don't wait on my account.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 12:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
(You wrote)
Just so you know, WP:TE (tedious editing) is not a nice thing to say about somebody. Your evidence comment on evidence page would suggest I am guilty of it. Is this the intent of your message?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 03:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 18 | 30 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
In response to your comment at my talk page:
I don't know that it would be appropriate to {{ prod}} them as the deletion of the lists is obviously not uncontroversial. As for individual AfDs, I don't know whether that's really necessary ... if editors make use of the lists in counter-vandalism (recent changes patrolling), it makes no sense to delete them. If we are not going to leave them in the mainspace, we should at least projectify them instead of deleting (though, for the time being, it may be better to just leave them in the mainspace). Rather than 1-2 nominations per day, I think it would be better to start making requests to various WikiProjects to see if they'd consider projectifying their lists (e.g., asking WikiProject Germany if they'd projectify List of Germany-related topics). -- Black Falcon ( Talk) 07:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
-- ALoan (Talk) 14:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh man, what's going on? ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 18:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Orliński was based upon Polish Wiki article, without references... Oops, I wrote article on Polish Wiki, but it was long time ago, in pre-reference era. I must have used some Internet sources, because I can't find written ones. Pibwl ←« 21:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC) To musiało być na podstawie tego, ale brak miejsca pierwszej publikacji. Pibwl
Pamiętasz jeszcze USS Tennessee (BB-43) ? Teraz znalazłem coś takiego USS Whipple (DD-217) i USS Whipple (DD-217) World War II Service, 1941-1945 Zastanawiam sie - czy to jakoś oznaczać czy po prostu za twarz wziąść i skopiować do głównego tekstu-- Pmgpmg 21:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I am afraid the answer is negative. Firstly, the bot only looks for the new texts in the article space. Secondly, the very new userpages are rarely informative, usually people put some reasonable social information after some time on wiki, thirdly, I afrayd that in the post-Essjay world there is tendency to ignore or remove the real life credentials from the userpages.
There might be some bot solution but I am not aware of one yet. Alex Bakharev 07:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Can you enforce this rule on Odorheiu Secuiesc? This rule is simply ignored there even if the results of the vote are "PRO" this rule.-- 84.95.241.145 16:17, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
(You wrote)
It would be an interesting project to bring
Kraków to
WP:GA status, don't you think so?--
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus |
talk 17:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Citations are needed, certainly. We should also make sure the article is comprehensive. See cities (geography section) at Wikipedia:Good articles for standards we will be aiming at.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 18:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
History being my hobby, one less red link. :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Red links from history section can now be removed, as I copied the section to History of Kraków; we can now shorten/summarize what's left in the article.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I will copyedit and ref the history once we are done with Warsaw Uprising which is now in danger of losing its featured status.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 05:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I've seen such bots in the past, but I'm not aware of one that's operational at the moment. Kirill Lokshin 01:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Can you check out this article? This appears to be complete nonsense. Thanks. JRWalko 01:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Na marginesie dyskusji o Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-Polish cały pakiet spraw dot.
1. Grafik, których prawnym właścicielem był rząd III Rzeszy (np. MSZ III Rzeszy),lub agencje państwowe ( jak Deutsches NAchrichten Buro) - A NIE OSOBY PRYWATNE- prawa wygasły w maju 1945 po likwidacji III Rzeszy jako państwa -podmiotu prawa cywilnego. Prosi się o stworzenie {{ PD-NaziGov}}.
2. Zauważyłem ,że niektórzy administratorzy (konkretnie-niemieccy) próbują wykorzystać dyrektywę harmonizującą EU dla generalnej blokady foto sprzed 1945 r.- niezależnie od proweniencji.
3.Tymczasem podstawową sprawą jest kwestia istnienia lub nie MATERIALNYCH praw majątkowych do dzieła, ktore są zbywalne i mogą ulec umorzeniu nawet przed datą śmierci autora.
4.Przykładowo - zdjęcie , do którego prawa zostały sprzedane np.Ilustrowanemu Kurierowi Codziennemu czy DNB,albo wykonane przez pracownika Ministerstwa Propagandy Rzeszy czy DNB , a osoba prawna uległa likwidacji bez następców prawnych prawa nabytego jest zdjęciem w domenie publicznej (prawo zbyte skutecznie nie wraca do zbywcy -autora)
5. Poza tym bardzo dużo starych zdjęć to zdjęcia legitymacyjne, paszportowe etc robione przez rzemieślnicze zakłady fotograficzne , które albo w ogóle nie są ( i nie powinny być )przedmiotem prawa autorskiego , albo jeśli traktować to restrykcyjnie - prawa do nich zostały zbyte przez wykonawcę (twórcę)- fotografa w chwili wyjścia klienta z zakładu fotograficznego po zapłaceniu za wykonanie zdjęcia, niezależnie od tego gdzie pozostał negatyw ( i nikt po wydarzeniach II wojny i komunizmu badać tego nie będzie)
6. Pozostaje kwestia zdjęć amatorskich - bez autorstwa. Jeśli już dziś niektórzy niemieccy admini chcą usuwać zdjęcia egzekucji dokonanych przez Wehrmacht w 1939 r vide : Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Ciepielow.jpg
pod pretekstem dyrektywy harmonizacyjnej i poszukiwania autora ( gdyby się znalazł - to pierwszy do zawiadomienia - Prokurator IPN)...
a zdjęcia z powstania w getcie warszawskim zostały usunięte to aż się prosi o rozwinięcie tematu.
A prawna sytuacja jest taka,że w prawie europejskim ciężar dowodu faktu spoczywa na osobie,która z tego faktu chce wyciągnąć konsekwencje prawne. Dotyczy to zarówno prawa karnego ( domniemanie nieiwnności) jak i cywilnego , którego częścią jest prawo autorskie. Tzn. o ile nie ma dowodu na zastrzeżenie prawa o tyle ono nie istnieje . W polskim prawie autorskim przerzuca to ciężar dowodu na autora ,zaś wydawca ma jedynie OBOWIĄZEK ZACHOWANIA NALEŻYTEJ STARANNOŚCI - tzn. wiedzieć to co może uzyskać przy zachowaniu zwykłych wymogów staranności. Prawo zakłada domniemanie dobrej wiary użytkownika rzeczy czy prawa tzn. ewentualne naruszenie prawa materialnego może stwierdzić tylko właściciel tego prawa zwracając się z żądaniem do użytkownika o zaprzestanie naruszenia prawa ( i udowadniając swój interes prawny). Tzn. trzeba wykazać naruszenie prawa.
Ponieważ jest to powszechna zasada prawa rzymskiego ,obowiązująca zarówno w prawie polskim, jak i niemieckim inne postępowanie jest uzurpacją i po prostu robieniem ludziom wody z mózgu poprzez świadome mieszanie pojęcia autorskiego prawa osobistego, autorskiego prawa materialnego, zasady należytej staranności, domniemania legalności i zasady cięzaru dowodu po stronie tego, który zgłasza zarzut naruszenia prawa.
Generalnie: często słyszany argument,że każda grafika ma autora należy uzupełnić następująco: KAŻDA GRAFIKA MA AUTORA ALE WCALE NIE KAŻDA MA WŁAŚCICIELA i nie ma to nic wspólnego z datą śmierci autora.
To takie wstępne uwagi , które IMHO warto przemyśleć w długi weekend a potem przegadać z innymi adminami na Commons i na wikipl.
Serdecznie pozdrawiam:
85.89.162.47 08:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your translation to english. Superzohar Talk 15:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
The
Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XIV (April 2007) | ||
|
| |
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: |
| |
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 16:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I can agree, that my english is extreme horrible, but I can not agree with Idea Not notable. Their death was very referenced in media in Poland and all east Europe, for example in czech media is referenced as one from the first and most known victims of cyber and sexual bullying in East Europe, two czech common reportage about bullying in Czech republic and Europe cited their case), influence of their case on polish education system and schools politik is out of question. And you tell: Not notable?! -- Cinik 06:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
PS: Pokud jste sto dobře rozumět česky, dejte vědět, budu psát i česky. -- Cinik 07:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 06:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll say to you what I've already said to Lysy: my comment was poorly phrased and I'm sorry for that. However, I'm still concerned that tensions between Eastern European countries spread themselves on Wikipedia as well. In the Ghirla RfAr, which was requested on very poor grounds, this was exceptionally visible from all sides. These tensions manifest themselves on a number of issues, and it is a situation that has me very much worried.
As for not apologising earlier: I was very much affronted by your reply. I still think it is very ill-advised to reply to what you conceive as an inflammatory statement with another inflammatory statement, certainly if it is the first time you deal with an editor. Threatening people with ArbCom is not a good statement to start a discussion, it's not behaviour I'd expect from an admin and I still believe you owe me an apology for that.
Now I won't hold this against you, and I won't enter any evidence into your arbitration case, as I agree with Irpen that nothing can be gained from punishing a prolific editor. Instead, I hope you will learn from this experience, and that all the editors in the Eastern Europe part of Wikipedia can start working together more instead of combatting each other. Er rab ee 09:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Informacja o MTK jako o drugich pod względem wielkości w Polsce jest z całapewnością błędna. Swego czasu o miejsce to ubiegały się bodajże targi w Radomiu. Obecnie po katastrofie MTK z całą pewnością spedły. Pytanie tylko na które miejsce. Pozdrawiam Radomil talk 19:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
You might want to add a fair use rationale to Image:TimeCover10Dec1956.jpg, as otherwise Polish October might be quick-failed for GA. Er rab ee 23:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 ( talk) 00:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 19 | 7 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus. There is no standard length for evidence phases, nor is their an order of when parties submit evidence, but it usually takes between 2 and 6 weeks, and on the longer side for cases involving more than a dozen people like yours does. I'd recommend getting your initial evidence in quickly but keeping a close watch so when other parties submit theirs, you will be able to respond to perceived inaccuracies in their comments (in your own section mind you; it is a common mistake to rebut evidence in the provider's section!) Picaroon (Talk) 21:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for reminding me - it had kind of slipped my mind. I'll copyedit my way through the article over the next few days - let me know if there are any sections that you believe need special attention. Carom 16:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 07:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
What is the policy on dealing with strongly overlapping articles and sections of articles? -- Zz 14:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Trochę chyba mamieszałem ;-( Jak w końcu powinniśmy pisać Gmina of X, Gmina X, a może X commune?
Pozrd. -- Medard Talk 22:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Pan Piotr, can you take a look? I asked the uploader, but he has ignored me. I doubt he took it himself as he claims. Could you please review and delete or tag accordingly? Thx -- Y not? 23:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
W odpowiedzi na krytykę [22] przetłumaczyłem naskkrobany kiedyś przeze mnie artykuł z pl: wiki - User:Radomil/brudnopis. Mam swoją tradycyjną prośbę o (zapewne konieczna) korektę w wolnej chwili. Z gory dziękuję :) Radomil talk 23:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Takie małe podziękowanie za communist crime. :') OldEnt. 00:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Sorry, I don't know, where I must write this. Wery strange edits of anonimous user: [1]. If you can, advice please, where I must to inform about such cases. Ingwar JR 09:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Dear friends:
If you have some extra time, I would appreciate if you can take a look to Category:Coats of arms of clans of Poland and Category:Polish nobility coats of arms images, mainly the Talk pages.
There is an Italian wikipedian, who knows nothing about Polish history and Polish szlachta and he is rearranging the categories in Category:Coats of arms of Poland
In commons he is User:G.dallorto
My point of view may have some mistakes but I would thank you very much your thought and your discussion on this issue.
As today I got few time I am sending this same message to:
If you know somebody else interested in Polish heraldry and Polish szlachta, please invite him to join this Discussion.
Best regards, my friends, and thank you by your answer to this request. -- Gustavo 08:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Witaj! Mamy duży problem. Lajskonik stworzył listę gmin, napisał gminy jako "Gmina XXX", ale zauważyliśmi, że już są opisane niektóre gminy, tyle, że jako "Gmina of XXX". Moglibyśmy to poprzenościć, ale nie jesteśmy pewni, jak jest. Co ty o tym sądzisz? Marcin Suwalczan [our talk] 14:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi. It looks a lot better, and I think it'll end up being kept. You might want to get someone to give the article a copy-edit to weed out any lingering minor issues. I would help, but I've been swamped with Final Fantasy WikiProject tasks. — Deckill er 17:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
The only thing I'd still like to see changed is the "See also" section, but that can likely wait until FAC; so please feel free to nominate the article for A-Class. Kirill Lokshin 18:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus
I just noticed a small error in Image:Podział administracyjny I RP.png uploaded by Commons:User:Poznaniak who apparently doesn't speak any language I know. Could you possibly drop him a small note in Polish? The error is that he has labelled the island of Öland (Olandia) as Danish, however this island has always been Swedish. All other islands are correctly labelled. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 06:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
witam dobry pomysl, bede linkowal artykuly, zawsze to jest odnosnik dla uzytkownikow
co do polskich znakow (np. Lodz) to mam problem bo operuje komputerem McIntosh i jest on bardzo dziwna maszyna i zmienia mi te znaki wiec nie jestem w stanie tego zrobic
jesli chodzi o te trivia to jestes ekspertem wikipediowym moze sam gdzies to dorzucisz? gdzie uwazasz? pozdro Tymek 13:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Panieri11.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
After this one [2] I do feel obliged to report a trolling action of an admin. Untill now I did feel free to edit whatewer I felt I had some expertise on, although edit summaries like (tag {{WikiProject Lithuania}} for Lokyz) seems to me like stalking and trying to push me to behave unreasonably. Therefore i do demand deletion of this edit summary and a personal appology with a promise I'll be not stalked in the future.-- Lokyz 22:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I'll make this offer formal. Would you and Lokyz like to enter enforceable mediation with me as your mediator? Both of you have petitioned me for assistance with your dispute. I'm not going to step in unilaterally, but I'll give you the opportunity to set clear limits for yourselves. The program is ready for experimental launch. Would you like to do this? Durova Charge! 23:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 00:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I never got any answers. Feel free to go poke the guy all you want. Circeus 00:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Reply at Wikipedia:External peer review/Chesney 2006#Response. -- Jeandré, 2007-03-17 t06:10z
May I ask you to wrap up this [3] before I forget? Thanks. -- Poeticbent talk 13:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
They're all done by hand, once a month. :-\ Kirill Lokshin 17:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips. I did not know about [WP:BABEL], and was always puzzled if I have to duplicate my answers on the other's talk pages, I was asking this question many times, but you were the fist to answer it clearly. I will make the G. I. Krivosheev stub, though it is too modern event for my interests. Barefact 17:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, could you please edit protect this page Pilsener, see this [5], two editors refused appealed discussion. What to do please ? ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 09:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
-- ALoan (Talk) 11:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
There is an interesting new article, Former eastern territories of Germany, you might want to look over. I drop the note because I see that few of wikipedians I'd normally expect to be there have noticed it yet. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 02:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus. Can you help me with this vandal? He has vandalised some pages like Cribbage (pool), replacing headings with stuff like this:
DELETED.
justinmobscene. you can't stop this.
Thank you for your time. MarkBA t/ c/ @ 16:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Please update the information you added following the recent changes in the pl version. Regs. Mynek 16:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News |
The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comment here, can I just copy and paste the contents of the last four articles into one of the first two and then add a merge tag to the first two? Appleseed ( Talk) 21:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, Darwinek seems to be in troubles, please see here [6]. ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 00:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Belarus has been up for about 2 days or so. If I haven't been doing to a dentist for everything under the sun, I would have a lot more of the questions done. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, that guy is on a tour, and, given what he allowed himself to say about me, I'm not ready to even pay attention to what he claims and argues (suffices to note that the emphasis is on "I would like you to state your opinion about Rumanization", which translates into "I have a POV to push"). In any case, I don't think the lead is wrong, but the sentence may be futile. Dahn 17:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Darwinek. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Darwinek/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Darwinek/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 19:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
When is it Vandalism, fixing your lack of knowlege about Polish history. I know everything about you, you are all over the internet, making up your own proof to the stories that you are teaching your students. The hammer will never kill the white eagle. I am very sorry for you, being (I Think) Polish and promoting the death and destruction of you families history. Countries don't annex, did the U.S. annex Iraq? I don't now how was teaching you as you grow up, and you ideas placed on you. Freedom is Equality, having a all high cantrolling Government will never give you freedom because they will always afraid of a revolt. If a government comes and a kill one of your kids with no trial, I hope you will not set back and say It's my Governments wish. Please if this is just for your doctrine, then don't give up on your history because the polish only have each other, and other country fear the polish to the exstint of killing them for fear and the power of the polish mind.
Please e_mail so we can have discuss history and polish believes. I am getting the Back by Polish Organizations in the USA and Polish.
Thanks
magusrobertus@yahoo.ie
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sir Gutowski ( talk • contribs) 17:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC).
Given his various other accusations of people being right-wingers, fascists, etc., I'm not actually convinced that he didn't intend a political subtext here; but, in any case, let's assume for the sake of argument that the usage was purely as a metaphor.
There are, in my opinion, different levels of "unacceptable" metaphors, ranging from the merely poorly-chosen ones to those which evoke comparisons so vile that excusing them is simply out of the question. In some sense, the very specificity of the term used is a negative factor here; I find it utterly inconcievable that Darwinek could have chosen the lebensborn comparison without actually being aware of what the history of the program was—and this necessarily forces me to conclude that he considered it acceptable to compare a fellow editor to Himmler. Frankly, I see no reason why we should tolerate such commentary here.
(It's a bit like the difference between saying "the admins are all thugs bent on abusing innocent editors" and "the admins are rounding people up like the Einsatzgruppen"; one is merely an insulting comparison, while the other is intended to evoke a very specific—and extraordinarily hateful—image.) Kirill Lokshin 19:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 20:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Czesc. I zauwazylem ze Pan, ponowne odnowil texty Biophys'ego ktore nie zawiera zadnej informacji o blogach. Prosze Pana, z poczatku czytac texty ktore sa reference'ami, i tylko zatym cos robic. Po drugie, mam nadzeje ze Pan to robi nie zatym ze jest bardzo zainteresowany w dezynformacjii o Rosjii. Vlad fedorov 05:05, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I marked the threads in question in your archives. Could you go to the Archive 13 linked above and add the full an honest translations of the threads in question for the ongoing ArbCom case. -- Irpen 06:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I removed the article at The Independent School, Inc. per your lapsed prod last night. The original author has requested that the article be restored, which I have done per the prod guidelines. You can read his request at User_talk:Kuru#Deletion_of_The_Independent_School.2C_Inc. - the next step is AFD, but you may want to wait a day or two to see if he improves the article or establishes some sort of notability. Kuru talk 23:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Check this out: Battle of Jarosław, and please, make it better :) Pan Wikipedia 12:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Piotrus. Could you please weigh in on the dispute here? It seems to me the other side is arguing that it was not an occupation, but as the citations I have provided in footnote 1 show, many legitimate sources call it that. See also my explanation on the talk page. Thank you for your assistance. Biruitorul 04:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Maps are not I feel a good target at the moment. Buildings I'm working on but my inkscape-fu is weak so it will may not be finished tonight. Geni 20:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. Please feel free to add new pages to my list when you find them :). NoSeptember 22:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 13 | 26 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I am going to remove some photos from the article, but I removed the Patria poster before I saw the comment on the FAR. I want to realign the posters, but I am just not sure how. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
There has been an extensive effort to combine Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research (together with much of Wikipedia:Reliable sources) into a new policy called Wikipedia:Attribution, and its FAQ, WP:ATTFAQ.
Recently, on Wikipedia talk:Attribution and on the Wiki-EN-l mailing list, Jimbo questioned whether the result had adequate consensus, and requested:
You are invited to take part; the community discussion should be as broad as possible. If you wish to invite other experienced and intelligent editors, please use neutral language. This message, for example, is {{ ATTCD}}. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hard to believe. Xx236 11:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I was going to weigh in on the article Kraków pogrom, and wanted to hear what you felt the major disagreement was. I think I know, but it would help me understand the breadth of the situation if you tell me yourself. You can respond on my Talk Page, where I've set up a section heading specifically for this. Arcayne 19:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, Piotrus! I corrected the names and removed Russian patronimics (they don't really use them in Wikipedia). I also corrected their ranks (colonel general instead of general colonel etc.). Happy editing! KNewman 19:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Northern Group of Forces.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Northern Group of Forces. This was fast! -- Petri Krohn 01:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
III Rzesza budowała autostrady a ZSRR był postępowy. Stanowczo nie należy ich krytykować. Xx236 06:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus, I know that you repeatedly refused to reign down on the POV-pushers if the POV they were pushing seemed "right" to you no matter what behavior they expressed. Molobo, Ksenon/Litwa, LUCPOL or Mathiasrex who you even instructed on how to file a 3RR report on myself.
But I really have no choice but to ask you again, now in connection with LUCPOL. As we speak he repeatedly removed my well explained tag from the NGF article without discussion and without adding a single entry to a talk page. I request that you take him to the woodshed about disruption and restore the tag on your own until our discussion is finished as I expect the fellow to be looking forward for an opportunity to accuse me in 3RR. He may even be the same fellow as Mathiasrex. -- Irpen 20:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus, this is not about people disagreeing. It is about acting reasonably or not. My objection are well explained and out of nowhere appears this friend of yours who reverts me without adding anything to the discussion. And, as always, you refused to curb on the friendly troll and use him instead as battering ram. I tried to appeal to your consciousness once again. Guess, I made a mistake. The rest of your accusations are not new and I will not dignify them with a response just to repeat what was said earlier. -- Irpen 20:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
You just pretend to not understand that WP:RS and WP:NPOV are different policies and they address different issues. Sigh. I've heard it already. -- Irpen 21:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Another straw man argument. No wikipedian can claim to be a reliable source. I never claimed otherwise. -- Irpen 21:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I hope that P.P. (aka Prokonsul Piotrus) would not ban me (as he threatens several times already) if I write about this situation. The same situation regarding usage of user: LUCPOL’s “services” I meet at Ponary massacre. Firstly Piotrus tried his best to remove referenced facts about Polish Jew killers with shocking edit summary , such behavior was denounced by other contributor [8] . And now then P.P. is alone with his POV and removal of facts, suddenly out of nowhere user: LUCPOL jumps in and restores “proper” version of article by removing referenced facts and tags presented by different contributors with with edit summary - this is OK . Feel the power? And literally LUCPOL did not add a single entry to a talk page why removal of facts is “OK”. He also did not add a single entry to the article before nor related articles. But just looking into LUCPOL contributions such behavior is not isolated, exact same happened and in other places. I find disturbing that contributor who allegedly can’t present his view and defensive speech to his ArbCom case [9] due to poor command of English (as Piotrus notes), but can easily remove facts and distort articles. Another interesting development, as P.P. notes LUCPOL has bad command of English (btw, did he/she understand articles in which he/she intervenes?), translation of LUCPOL’s thoughts to ArbCom and RFI was made also by Piotrus . So that do we have – same “contribution” scheme – when Piotrus intervenes in content dispute and needs "support" LUCPOL, who enjoyed Piotrus’ help in his ArbCom and RFI cases, jumps in out of nowhere and restores "proper" article version supported by Piotrus, without any further involvement in articles . Probably we will see more such developments in the coming future. M.K. 09:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all your work Piotrus! Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 05:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. Dpotop 06:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your phrase at my talk page, I don't know that phrase but I guess I get that. Regarding your request of Milovice geo-stub, there are three municipalities in the Czech Republic called Milovice. Two of them are villages, one is a town. Which one do you meant? - Darwinek 08:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 11:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus, you prodded Polish National Top 50, but one user and some IPs insist on keeping it by removing the template. I don't see any substantial improvements being made to that article. I've tried to engage the user in conversation, to no avail. What does one do in this situation? Appleseed ( Talk) 21:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
The
Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XIII - March 2007 | |
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 23:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Just to tell you in advance I was not stalking you. I accidentally run into this article when I came to 172's talk to tell him about a different one. Just letting you know 'cause I am getting used to ABF from your end. -- Irpen 02:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
This was prompted by DYK and DYK only. Again, not stalking. Thought I better explain. -- Irpen 04:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
So, you are saying that I did stalk you, aren't you? What should I take? This or your "did I ever accused you of stalking" rhetorical question just two entries above? -- Irpen 19:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for welcoming me. I was active last November, but using my IP. This time I decided to get an account. I'll check out the noticeboard and see if I can help with anything. I'm not 100% Polish, but of Polish descent (3/4ths). - Britlawyer 20:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Certainly I'm planning to contribute to that article, but at the moment I need to finish Krakow pogrom article, which tends to consume huge amount of time so far. I've also started a copy edit of Żydokomuna, which also remains unfinished. M0RD00R 21:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
--For heaven's sake, Piotrus!! ;) Camptown 13:04, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Witam, jestes moze z Brynowa? Widzialem Twoje zdjecia na Commons. Pytam tylko z czystej ciekawosci :) Necrokris 17:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou Piotrus for this medal. This is a great honour, coming from one of most prolific DYK contributors ever, and one of the most prolific article writers ever. You are one of those who deserve it much more than myself. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 04:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I've noticed that you are active in the BattleTech articles here at Wikipedia. I've started a proposal for a Battletech Wikiproject. If you are interested please check out my proposal at the Battletech main article's talk page. Thanks alot. NeoFreak 05:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Just through I'd give you a heads up, you have to put the AFD template on each of the pages, not your simple text without even a link to the AFD discussion. It may lead to the discussion being closed, and I don't think it was a good idea to proceed that route anyway. FrozenPurpleCube 06:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't suggest nominating all of them at once. That would likely be a bad idea. My advice is to try The Village Pump to get people's consensus on what to do, or to look for a few of the worst offenders in the category, nominate them, and see what the consensus is. Or both, there's no reason you couldn't try it either way. FrozenPurpleCube 20:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, PROD is one option, but in this case, I don't recommend it without more discussion. Not exactly much attention was paid to it. FrozenPurpleCube 20:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Framing (sociology). - Grumpyyoungman01 13:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
After creating my first article on Wiki ( Rudolf Christoph Freiherr von Gersdorff), I had no choice but recognizing your extraordinary contributes to this encyclopaedia. I hereby would like to draw your intention to my second try: Red Army atrocities (WWII). Probably you can give me some more information concerning Poland in this matter. Sincerely yours -- Dionysos 19:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Hoi: I'm very fond of your User:Piotrus/Wikipedia interwiki and specialized knowledge test; it's very interesting and a good antidote to subjective appraisals of Wikipedia's incompleteness. Anyway, recently on WikiEn-l, it has been proposed (and supported!) that article creation in general just be disabled for a while. The idea apparently is that biography articles are too troublesome and that Wikipedia is relatively complete anyway. I'd like to cite your essay in any such future discussions, but I'd be happier if it was brought up to date - besides, en and the other Wikipedias have grown and changed a lot since then! I don't know whether you have the spare time or want to do it at all, but if you did, I'd appreciate it. -- Gwern (contribs) 04:45 4 April 2007 (GMT)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 14 | 2 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Witaj. Powiem bez ogródek - jest już ten szablon na en.wiki. Zobacz hasło Warsaw - tam już działa. Co z resztą miast - te infoboxy jakieś takie nieporadne. -- Hiuppo 11:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear friend:
This is just a wish of happiness in this Easter from myself. (The Easter Egg is a kindly gift from Tomek)
Regards
-- Gustavo 13:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Vilnius Operation April 1919 Przybylski.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I've got informations, by no enough abilities in using English language :) Radomil talk 22:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Dzięki za zamek... a bezczelnie korzystajac z twojej uprzejmości - Poznań International Fair ;) Radomil talk 15:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, why did you change your mind? And here I was happy for 12 minutes that one problem has ended :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 01:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Write an article? I suppose I could do that, but keeping it encyclopedic would be very time consuming and time is just something I do not have. I would be glad to contribute to such an article, if one is started, but I don't think I could make one from scratch. At least, not right now. Should I get the time, I think I would like to do that. MVMosin 02:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your help with the Soviet occupation of Romania article; you may find this poll interesting too. Biruitorul 07:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Piotrus. According to Poznań 1956 protests, written mostly by you (Good job, BTW.), June 28th became a national holiday in Poland last year. I wonder if it was just for the 50th anniversary, or is it an anuual holiday from now on. If it's annual, would you mind updating Public holidays in Poland, please ? I don't know the Polish language, so references such as this doesn't help me. Thank you in advance. -- PFHLai 12:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
on this. Who is that you accusing in PA and a do you have a diff with the alleged PA? Note that baseless' accusations of PA are PA indeed. -- Irpen 19:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I will not reply, I will ask a counterquestion. Is accusation of Polonophobia a PA? -- Irpen 19:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
No, no. Not "something", Piotrus. A specific statement by you calling me "Polonophobic". More specifically, not that what I said was "polonophobic" but me being "Polonophobic". How could you forget? I am telling you in advance what this is, not that I am looking for any "paragraf" to nail you. Just have patience. -- Irpen 21:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Are you going to be able to work further on this for the FA review? It's quietly turned into a two month review and I don't know what to do with it. Hard data remains that ought to be cited (e.g., elections results at the beginning of The Gomułka period). Marskell 08:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 23:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope, nothing we can do. The way categories are displayed is controlled by MediaWiki; unless the devs come up with some general way of hiding categories, we're stuck with having them all shown like that. Kirill Lokshin 05:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
You assert that the British could've dropped bombs or leaflets. With what planes? The RAF was a hollow shell in 1939, equipped with obsolescent aircraft. Moreover, what good would dropped in a few bombs or leaflets have done? You think ther Germans would've said "Oh, the British bombed a city or two, so we'd better pull out of Poland, and make the Soviets do the same"? Only France was in a position to do anything meaningful during Fall Weiss. I have not yet reverted your change for the 2nd time, to give you the opportunity to defend it. If you'd like to reply, you can do so here. Parsecboy 16:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I have created a new article Internet brigades. It was marked for a speedy deletion. Could you take a look and tell your opionion? Is it really that bad? Biophys 17:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, those maps have made a difference, too. We're getting there!
I did note your previous request for a copy-edit of History of Poland. That I haven't addressed it is because I really can only work on a couple of articles at once (I'm slowly writing a new one of my own offline), and with Soviet invasion of Poland and the occasional FAC review, I am about up to capacity. For what I call "deep copyediting", I tend to delve into sources to check we really have accurate wording–which takes ages. In fact, I've just spent a couple of hours reading forty pages of a very detailed and, it seems to me, impressive book about the deportations (Rieber), in order to address Mosin's objection that we didn't (of all things) present a Soviet justification for the deportations. I enjoy close reading, so it's a pleasure. But at this slow rate of working, I can't do much else. qp10qp 02:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)–
Piotrus, I'm pretty sure you qualify for one of these. User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle Would you drop a line by my user talk and specify which articles? Cheers, Durova Charge! 02:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 05:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 16:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I hope that you could show me where in the cited sources you have found words "blogs", "blog" and "bloggers". 1 source, 2 source, 3 source. Po drugie, ja pszeczytalem artykul z Tygodniku Powszechnego i nie odnalazlem zadnej wskazowki na to co dotyczy blogow. Pan porusza reguly Wikipedia, kiedy wstawia dezynformacje do artykulu. Prosze milego Pana udowodnic i objasnic swoje dzeje... Vlad fedorov 11:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 06:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 15 | 9 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Siemka. Pisalem teraz Tobie na GG, otrzymales wiadomosc? - Darwinek 22:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 22:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 06:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi. User:Snowolf said you were Polish so I thought I would ask you to review this and comment on the accuracy of both translations. Machine translations are so patchy, and, sadly, I don't know Polish. Thanks, -- Guinnog 23:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean? I only my template to three articles ( stress and duress, human security and interdisciplinarity) and they all use the optional parameter.↔ NMajdan• talk 13:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus, I added photos of Ukrainian stadia to the 2012 UEFA European Football Championship under Poland-Ukraine bid section, but I could not locate equivalents of Polish stadiums. If you are aware of any, it would be great if you can add two photographs to balance out the gallery. -- Riurik (discuss) 16:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I knew he died a week after something important. It was (about) a week after the Secret Speech, not Stalin's funeral! Biruitorul 02:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, here's the exact quote on the scandal, from Machcewicz, p. 101: "Significant political changes were accelerated by the affair of pl:Józef Światło, a top-ranking official of the Polish security apparatus who defected to the West in December 1953. From the following autumn, his revelations of the crimes of the secret police and misdemeanours of the ruling Party were broadcast back to Poland by Radio Free Europe, based in Munich, shocking thousands of listeners, including many members of the Party. After a wave of criticism directed towards the Party leadership and collective security apparatus, for the first time expressed during official (although still confidential) meetings, the Ministry of Public Security was dissolved in December 1954." The article on Światło should definitely be translated at some point. Biruitorul 07:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
it takes two to tango... Anonimu 10:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, this edit [11] seems to have used a formatting script on most of the article. looking at the side-by-side comparison, I could not detect any difference from before/after. Out of curiosity - can you point me to a source that explains what that script does and why it is used? Thanks in advance István 14:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Hiya Piotrus,
I believe we may have argued in the past..? My memory is pretty hazy...
Can you make heads or tails of Talk:Zaolzie? Is this one POV-pusher trying to upset the apple cart, or are there legitimate probs? I'm inclined to delist the article from GA based on stability....
Thanks -- Ling.Nut 12:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Można "Radku" ;) Ja nie tyle zmieniłem kolejność ile przeniosłem dwa ordery nadal przyznawane z historycznych do tych co są nadal przyznawane - Siły Zbrojne w Służbie Ojczyzny i Za zasługi dla obronności kraju. Pozdrawiam Radomil talk 10:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Jesteś pewien, że wszystkie medale "historyczne" są historyczne? Chodzi mi o to, że np. Wielkopolski Krzyż Powstańczy, który dotyczył przecież biorących udział w walkach w latach 1918-1919 zakończono nadawać 8 maja 1999. Być moze część odznaczeń za II wojnę światową nadal jest przyznawane (część na pewno zaprzestano przyznawać w tym samym momencie, ale czy wszystkie)? Radomil talk 10:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 16:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I have quoted Peroutka. My additions were deleted.
I have added Kovtun. My additions were deleted.
I have added Gawronska. My additions were deleted.
I have added information from Mamatey. The information was deleted.
I have added information from Gabal. The information was deleted.
I have added quotation of Chlebowczyk and Kosiński. The quotation was deleted.
Following this, I have deleted Watts. He presents view of one side only and Czech side has no defence. The deletion was twice reverted.
I cannot add, I cannot delete - I cannot edit the article. At the same time, I am subject of personal attacks and ad hominem arguments.
I appreciate that Darwinek is your friend but you may wish to be objective. What do you think?
-- Xixaxu 08:28, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 23:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thanks again Piotrus. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 01:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 16 | 16 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the Polish- English translations for the two photo captions. They provided the basis for improving the text. For the record: as I understand English usage, a tomb may be above or below ground; a grave is below ground, but the structure called a mausoleum may indicate aboveground burial which can't be known from merely viewing the photos. So your prompt response was most helpful! Perhaps future editors will expand the page with more particular information. -- Cheers, Deborahjay 04:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 16:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
BTW, I've tagged the image in the article, Image:Swiatlo.jpg as being unsourced. The URL you gave leads to a Page Not Found error. Hopefully you can find another source for it. Thanks. howcheng { chat} 16:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Your behavior will be scrutinized here: [12] M.K. 10:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi there...
I am wondering, as someone who indcates they can translate polish, could you review the following edit summary for this diff [13] and let me know it's general content. Based on the topic and the fact the edit reversed my editing, I believe it is likely in polish and directed at me. It is unlikely I will report it or anything, but it is always nice to know if someone is slamming you. Thanks.-- User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 12:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Your latest proposal seems to have broken ilink...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
you are invited to improve article, thanks -- Mt7 20:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC) what you say is humbug, no one is czechoslovak player Ján Čapkovič, Antonín Panenka, Ladislav Jurkemik, Ivo Knoflíček, František Plánička, Ján Švehlík, Josef Masopust, Alexander Vencel (born 1944), Ivo Viktor, we need a new wikipedia for you. -- Mt7 21:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. I will take a look. How did you know about my interest in this sort of stuff? -- HappyCamper 04:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Piotr. I appreciate it very much. I'm moving the awards to my userpage. Thanks a million. -- Poeticbent talk 22:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
But - remember, every rose has thorns :) The more active you are, the more effort you put in - the more enemies you make... there are days I wonder if it is worth it, really... -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Please note that an arbitrator has requested that you reduce the length of your statement on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Thank you. Newyorkbrad 14:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri 20:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 05:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the article, Piotrus. How does one generate the kind of notice that I received from you the next time a user accesses en.Wikipedia?
Two comments on the article: Your subheading "Ethymology" is not as familiar as the equivalent "Etymology" – the former redirects to the latter in en.Wikipedia. Also, in the "Theory" section you write "A reification circle refers to the event when a norm, first seen as artificial and forces,...." It makes sense to me if "forces" should be "forced" but perhaps you had something else in mind that I'm not getting. I'll duplicate these comments on the Reification (fallacy) talk page if you want to discuss. — Blanchette 06:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I left a message for you here.
I can see your point about not keeping redundant information, as the two locations can get out of sync, causing confusion. But, if the out-of-date, and possibly redundant info hasn't been checked, before the article is removed, it is lost. And I think that should be checked first. Probably a lot of work to do a proper job of it.
Cheers! -- Geo Swan 15:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 01:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment wrt the Romania case. You wrote:
Maybe I am suffering from certain delusions, but may be I am correct on who you mean by "certain users". In this case, please reread the Latvia case, note the list of users ArbCom found engaged in "poor behavior", reread the talk of the Romania article find those engaged in poor behavior there as well and compare the list. I am writing to you off the arbcom page because the page is already loaded, but I welcome your continued scrutiny. In fact, from the pattern of your edits that show up in certain articles I am aware of being under the radar and it does not bother me. So, I would be interested in your more detailed analysis rather than a totally unsupported statement. -- Irpen 05:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
When you remove or significantly alter your comments to which I already replied, my comments start to look irrelevant at worst or strange and mysterious at best. Please post your new thoughts below (rather than in place) of old thoughts so that I know what I should be replying to and the reader may follow the discussion. TIA, -- Irpen 05:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 17 | 23 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I am removing Wikipedia:Third opinion Time of Troubles request because you did not include the section on the talk page it related to and there seem to be more than two people involved now. If I am mistaken please resubmit. -- Philip Baird Shearer 00:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi. You are an admin here, so I'd like to ask you for something. After my talk with User:Marcin Suwalczan, we agreed to keep standard of "Name Commune", not "Gmina Name". But I was move few articles before: Gmina Abramów; Gmina Adamów, Łuków County; Gmina Adamów, Zamość County; Gmina Adamówka, Gmina Aleksandrów, Biłgoraj County; Gmina Aleksandrów, Piotrków Trybunalski County; Gmina Aleksandrów Kujawski and Gmina Aleksandrów Łódzki, all of them should be moved back. And, as You know, it is not possible without deletion of redirect pages. Sorry for this perturbation. Regards Lajsikonik 20:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
We have a new anon on a destructive spree. Can you take care of this? Thanks. -- Poeticbent talk 15:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Okay, you're added. You may have to type /msg chanserv invite #wikipedia-en-admins before joining. -- Interiot 17:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 19:59, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
...but you do, of course. Can you leave a note for Commons:User:Ocuish? He or she is uploading images to Commons, but in the process expanding .jpg to .jpeg. That just means work for nothing at our end. Example: Image:Airport Terminal.jpg went to Commons:Image:Airport Terminal.jpeg. It could be that they were called .jpeg on the Polish wiki, but maybe you could ask him/her if there is a reason for it. Many thanks in advance for your multilingual assistance! Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I am sorry to disturb you with this, but I would greatly appreciate if you can look at the edits (well, in fact just reverts) by User:Odbhss. He is reverting to a version contradicting WP:NCGN. [15][] I have tried to explain him/her the convention on his/her talk page, but to no avail. He/she has a clear POV, [16] but I believe we should play by rules regardless our POV. What should I do? I have discussed WP:NCGN with other Hungarian editors on their notice board and, although one of them opposes the convention in general, the rest seem to accept it. Communication with Odbhss is kind of... not extremely fruitful. See User talk:Odbhss. I would be grateful for any help. Tankred 02:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
Your claim that Sarkar's Social Cycle Theory is a hoax or to tie its legitimacy with number of Google hits is amuzing. Please refer to the page were you deposited the claim. Here is the reply. Please consider resolving this issue before other measures need to be taken with regard to the offending entry.
Answer on the P. R. Sarkar talk page: "This is incorrect. There are plenty of hits of Sarkar's "social cycle theory" relating to Sarkar. Try the follwing search string "social cycle theory" & "sarkar". Please note "Sarker" is an incorrect spelling of Sarkar. In the Talk page of the present "Social cycle theory" the following was written: Wrong title for this article. The term Social Cycle Theory was first used in relation to The Law of the Social Cycle invented by P.R. Sarkar in his book Human Society, Vol. 2 published by Ananda Marga Press in Calcutta, India in the late 1950s. The term 'Social Cycle Theory' became popularised as the term for this law in other works in India and later in the West, including in the #1 New York Times best seller The Great Depression of 1990 by Ravi Batra published by Simon and Schuster in 1987. The SCT term was earlier introduced by Batra in his less well known book The Downfall of Capitalism and Communism: a New Study of History, published by MacMillan in 1976. The use of this term as a description of this article is therefore wrong and likely illegal. The term Sociological Cycle Theory could be used for this entry. The issue concerns the right to the use of this title. It has been used in copyrighted works for many decades. The use of this name for other theories is not as per academic standard and should be discontinued. Please do the honorable thing and make the change in the title of the offending page, as earlier suggested, and then this mess can be cleared up. Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Prabhat_Ranjan_Sarkar" Budfin 10:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for any confusion. I've replied here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Institute_of_National_Remembrance#Any__Piotru.C5.9B.27_puppets_here.3F and taken the liberty of correcting a (presumed) typographical error in your reply. I admire your contributions. ... Gaimhreadhan (kiwiexile at DMOZ) • 10:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 17:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
If he returns, I will block him for disruption.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 03:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
(You wrote)
Added LoP to my watchlist... --
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus |
talk 17:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Piotrus, for the information on Wawrzyniec Grzymała Goślicki and Thomas Jefferson. I am going to look into the references you suggested. Also, I have ordered a copy of Oldisworth's 1733 translation of The Accomplished Senator to see what I can find in there. I noticed the item in Wikipedia article about that "there is no evidence of a direct link with Jefferson's Declaration of Independence." It would be interesting if somebody could come up with one. -- Gjm5025 23:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Warsaw Uprising has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
nadav 05:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Wow, I screwed up. Sorry about that. Will get right on relisting... If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 16:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, may I ask you for a warning to this user due to the uncivility and personal attacks [18], [19], [20]? Thanks. ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 22:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Your user and talk pages are hard to view due to the speed at which my computer runs. :\ -- R e m i 01:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 06:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (Talk) 20:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Piotrus, you violated the 3RR in the IPN article. Times below are in GMT:
Please self-revert. Until recently, I would have never contacted you in connection with this or considered posting this to 3RR board but I can't help but make a connection between your act of joining the #admins [21] that we used to criticized together and this rather unexpected showing up of a know IRC member bashing me at your ArbCom. I consider resorting to this tactic beyond limit. Anyway, irregardless of whether you want to explain the connection between these two events, please self-revert your 3RR violation. Thanks, -- Irpen 01:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
My fourth diff is a revert by you to your previous version (except for additional spelling correction) with all my edits undone. I want you to self-revert and why so is self-explanatory from the article. Since you seem to employ against your opponents the tool we used to criticize together at better times, I am not willing to do any talk page chatter beyond the absolute minimum. I really did not expect the IRC thing from you. truly, -- Irpen 01:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
As for potential of secrecy and non-transparency, someone secretly and non-transparently have asked at IRC admins to take a look at my entries in connection with your arbcom. In view of your commitment above, you can make the log of that incident public unless you are saying that your joining the IRC had nothing to do with DG's sudden interest to the controversies surrounding the EE topic?
I stand by that comment in view of the past actions by you that I have seen repeatedly. Unlike some, I am on record with the diffs of you seeking the blocks. I warned an editor also publicly, knowing that my comments will be scrutinized. Diffs of past attempts to have the opponents sanctioned have been brought to your attention. You know them. I would appreciate if all your comments in connections with these affairs are made in public, so that the diffs would be there. You want DG to comment/reign in on Irpen? Ask him to do just that at his talk page. This is called integrity.
As for DG's comment it just shows that he (and you for agreeing with him) has not read the AGF policy for a while. How is that edit supposed to show my bad faith? How is my advise, which also included staying away from rv warring and commenting on the editors, is bad faith, or bad in any way? It isn't. I tell him that Piotrus will try to make him blocked. And this is true (and, btw, this has been attempted at once.) How is this assuming bad faith? That's something else. If I've tried assuming good faith and been proved wrong, I've got to stop assuming. And the AGF says just that. David is not saying I assume bad faith. He's saying I edit in bad faith. (In other words, it is David who is in violation as he is assuming bad faith of me.)
And I would be very pleased to see the confirmation of who brought him there. -- Irpen 02:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd love to get back to that project if I had my reference books back :( Glancing over my resources, I could perhaps finish the series with what I have (mostly generalized tertiary sources), but the part dealing with the 18th and 19th centuries wouldn't be very thorough. This all is also a matter of having time to do it—I guess I've got so involved with modern administrative, territorial, and now municipal divisions of Russia that I don't really have much time left to deal with the historical development.
Anyway, if you are asking because you have something that you can contribute to the series (even if that "something" isn't terribly detailed), go right ahead; don't wait on my account.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 12:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
(You wrote)
Just so you know, WP:TE (tedious editing) is not a nice thing to say about somebody. Your evidence comment on evidence page would suggest I am guilty of it. Is this the intent of your message?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 03:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 18 | 30 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
In response to your comment at my talk page:
I don't know that it would be appropriate to {{ prod}} them as the deletion of the lists is obviously not uncontroversial. As for individual AfDs, I don't know whether that's really necessary ... if editors make use of the lists in counter-vandalism (recent changes patrolling), it makes no sense to delete them. If we are not going to leave them in the mainspace, we should at least projectify them instead of deleting (though, for the time being, it may be better to just leave them in the mainspace). Rather than 1-2 nominations per day, I think it would be better to start making requests to various WikiProjects to see if they'd consider projectifying their lists (e.g., asking WikiProject Germany if they'd projectify List of Germany-related topics). -- Black Falcon ( Talk) 07:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
-- ALoan (Talk) 14:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh man, what's going on? ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 18:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Orliński was based upon Polish Wiki article, without references... Oops, I wrote article on Polish Wiki, but it was long time ago, in pre-reference era. I must have used some Internet sources, because I can't find written ones. Pibwl ←« 21:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC) To musiało być na podstawie tego, ale brak miejsca pierwszej publikacji. Pibwl
Pamiętasz jeszcze USS Tennessee (BB-43) ? Teraz znalazłem coś takiego USS Whipple (DD-217) i USS Whipple (DD-217) World War II Service, 1941-1945 Zastanawiam sie - czy to jakoś oznaczać czy po prostu za twarz wziąść i skopiować do głównego tekstu-- Pmgpmg 21:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I am afraid the answer is negative. Firstly, the bot only looks for the new texts in the article space. Secondly, the very new userpages are rarely informative, usually people put some reasonable social information after some time on wiki, thirdly, I afrayd that in the post-Essjay world there is tendency to ignore or remove the real life credentials from the userpages.
There might be some bot solution but I am not aware of one yet. Alex Bakharev 07:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Can you enforce this rule on Odorheiu Secuiesc? This rule is simply ignored there even if the results of the vote are "PRO" this rule.-- 84.95.241.145 16:17, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
(You wrote)
It would be an interesting project to bring
Kraków to
WP:GA status, don't you think so?--
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus |
talk 17:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Citations are needed, certainly. We should also make sure the article is comprehensive. See cities (geography section) at Wikipedia:Good articles for standards we will be aiming at.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 18:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
History being my hobby, one less red link. :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Red links from history section can now be removed, as I copied the section to History of Kraków; we can now shorten/summarize what's left in the article.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I will copyedit and ref the history once we are done with Warsaw Uprising which is now in danger of losing its featured status.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 05:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I've seen such bots in the past, but I'm not aware of one that's operational at the moment. Kirill Lokshin 01:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Can you check out this article? This appears to be complete nonsense. Thanks. JRWalko 01:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Na marginesie dyskusji o Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-Polish cały pakiet spraw dot.
1. Grafik, których prawnym właścicielem był rząd III Rzeszy (np. MSZ III Rzeszy),lub agencje państwowe ( jak Deutsches NAchrichten Buro) - A NIE OSOBY PRYWATNE- prawa wygasły w maju 1945 po likwidacji III Rzeszy jako państwa -podmiotu prawa cywilnego. Prosi się o stworzenie {{ PD-NaziGov}}.
2. Zauważyłem ,że niektórzy administratorzy (konkretnie-niemieccy) próbują wykorzystać dyrektywę harmonizującą EU dla generalnej blokady foto sprzed 1945 r.- niezależnie od proweniencji.
3.Tymczasem podstawową sprawą jest kwestia istnienia lub nie MATERIALNYCH praw majątkowych do dzieła, ktore są zbywalne i mogą ulec umorzeniu nawet przed datą śmierci autora.
4.Przykładowo - zdjęcie , do którego prawa zostały sprzedane np.Ilustrowanemu Kurierowi Codziennemu czy DNB,albo wykonane przez pracownika Ministerstwa Propagandy Rzeszy czy DNB , a osoba prawna uległa likwidacji bez następców prawnych prawa nabytego jest zdjęciem w domenie publicznej (prawo zbyte skutecznie nie wraca do zbywcy -autora)
5. Poza tym bardzo dużo starych zdjęć to zdjęcia legitymacyjne, paszportowe etc robione przez rzemieślnicze zakłady fotograficzne , które albo w ogóle nie są ( i nie powinny być )przedmiotem prawa autorskiego , albo jeśli traktować to restrykcyjnie - prawa do nich zostały zbyte przez wykonawcę (twórcę)- fotografa w chwili wyjścia klienta z zakładu fotograficznego po zapłaceniu za wykonanie zdjęcia, niezależnie od tego gdzie pozostał negatyw ( i nikt po wydarzeniach II wojny i komunizmu badać tego nie będzie)
6. Pozostaje kwestia zdjęć amatorskich - bez autorstwa. Jeśli już dziś niektórzy niemieccy admini chcą usuwać zdjęcia egzekucji dokonanych przez Wehrmacht w 1939 r vide : Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Ciepielow.jpg
pod pretekstem dyrektywy harmonizacyjnej i poszukiwania autora ( gdyby się znalazł - to pierwszy do zawiadomienia - Prokurator IPN)...
a zdjęcia z powstania w getcie warszawskim zostały usunięte to aż się prosi o rozwinięcie tematu.
A prawna sytuacja jest taka,że w prawie europejskim ciężar dowodu faktu spoczywa na osobie,która z tego faktu chce wyciągnąć konsekwencje prawne. Dotyczy to zarówno prawa karnego ( domniemanie nieiwnności) jak i cywilnego , którego częścią jest prawo autorskie. Tzn. o ile nie ma dowodu na zastrzeżenie prawa o tyle ono nie istnieje . W polskim prawie autorskim przerzuca to ciężar dowodu na autora ,zaś wydawca ma jedynie OBOWIĄZEK ZACHOWANIA NALEŻYTEJ STARANNOŚCI - tzn. wiedzieć to co może uzyskać przy zachowaniu zwykłych wymogów staranności. Prawo zakłada domniemanie dobrej wiary użytkownika rzeczy czy prawa tzn. ewentualne naruszenie prawa materialnego może stwierdzić tylko właściciel tego prawa zwracając się z żądaniem do użytkownika o zaprzestanie naruszenia prawa ( i udowadniając swój interes prawny). Tzn. trzeba wykazać naruszenie prawa.
Ponieważ jest to powszechna zasada prawa rzymskiego ,obowiązująca zarówno w prawie polskim, jak i niemieckim inne postępowanie jest uzurpacją i po prostu robieniem ludziom wody z mózgu poprzez świadome mieszanie pojęcia autorskiego prawa osobistego, autorskiego prawa materialnego, zasady należytej staranności, domniemania legalności i zasady cięzaru dowodu po stronie tego, który zgłasza zarzut naruszenia prawa.
Generalnie: często słyszany argument,że każda grafika ma autora należy uzupełnić następująco: KAŻDA GRAFIKA MA AUTORA ALE WCALE NIE KAŻDA MA WŁAŚCICIELA i nie ma to nic wspólnego z datą śmierci autora.
To takie wstępne uwagi , które IMHO warto przemyśleć w długi weekend a potem przegadać z innymi adminami na Commons i na wikipl.
Serdecznie pozdrawiam:
85.89.162.47 08:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your translation to english. Superzohar Talk 15:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
The
Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XIV (April 2007) | ||
|
| |
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: |
| |
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 16:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I can agree, that my english is extreme horrible, but I can not agree with Idea Not notable. Their death was very referenced in media in Poland and all east Europe, for example in czech media is referenced as one from the first and most known victims of cyber and sexual bullying in East Europe, two czech common reportage about bullying in Czech republic and Europe cited their case), influence of their case on polish education system and schools politik is out of question. And you tell: Not notable?! -- Cinik 06:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
PS: Pokud jste sto dobře rozumět česky, dejte vědět, budu psát i česky. -- Cinik 07:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 06:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll say to you what I've already said to Lysy: my comment was poorly phrased and I'm sorry for that. However, I'm still concerned that tensions between Eastern European countries spread themselves on Wikipedia as well. In the Ghirla RfAr, which was requested on very poor grounds, this was exceptionally visible from all sides. These tensions manifest themselves on a number of issues, and it is a situation that has me very much worried.
As for not apologising earlier: I was very much affronted by your reply. I still think it is very ill-advised to reply to what you conceive as an inflammatory statement with another inflammatory statement, certainly if it is the first time you deal with an editor. Threatening people with ArbCom is not a good statement to start a discussion, it's not behaviour I'd expect from an admin and I still believe you owe me an apology for that.
Now I won't hold this against you, and I won't enter any evidence into your arbitration case, as I agree with Irpen that nothing can be gained from punishing a prolific editor. Instead, I hope you will learn from this experience, and that all the editors in the Eastern Europe part of Wikipedia can start working together more instead of combatting each other. Er rab ee 09:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Informacja o MTK jako o drugich pod względem wielkości w Polsce jest z całapewnością błędna. Swego czasu o miejsce to ubiegały się bodajże targi w Radomiu. Obecnie po katastrofie MTK z całą pewnością spedły. Pytanie tylko na które miejsce. Pozdrawiam Radomil talk 19:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
You might want to add a fair use rationale to Image:TimeCover10Dec1956.jpg, as otherwise Polish October might be quick-failed for GA. Er rab ee 23:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 ( talk) 00:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 19 | 7 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus. There is no standard length for evidence phases, nor is their an order of when parties submit evidence, but it usually takes between 2 and 6 weeks, and on the longer side for cases involving more than a dozen people like yours does. I'd recommend getting your initial evidence in quickly but keeping a close watch so when other parties submit theirs, you will be able to respond to perceived inaccuracies in their comments (in your own section mind you; it is a common mistake to rebut evidence in the provider's section!) Picaroon (Talk) 21:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for reminding me - it had kind of slipped my mind. I'll copyedit my way through the article over the next few days - let me know if there are any sections that you believe need special attention. Carom 16:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
-- howcheng { chat} 07:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
What is the policy on dealing with strongly overlapping articles and sections of articles? -- Zz 14:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Trochę chyba mamieszałem ;-( Jak w końcu powinniśmy pisać Gmina of X, Gmina X, a może X commune?
Pozrd. -- Medard Talk 22:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Pan Piotr, can you take a look? I asked the uploader, but he has ignored me. I doubt he took it himself as he claims. Could you please review and delete or tag accordingly? Thx -- Y not? 23:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
W odpowiedzi na krytykę [22] przetłumaczyłem naskkrobany kiedyś przeze mnie artykuł z pl: wiki - User:Radomil/brudnopis. Mam swoją tradycyjną prośbę o (zapewne konieczna) korektę w wolnej chwili. Z gory dziękuję :) Radomil talk 23:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Takie małe podziękowanie za communist crime. :') OldEnt. 00:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)