This 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. |
Archive 35 | ← | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | → | Archive 45 |
If you have spare time could you review NG Life as if it were a GA review? If you are too busy, I understand. Thanks. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 05:10, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello!
I have a quick question for you. I saw that on our page (Marriage in the United States) that a student review was taken place on the review page. Some of the things this person said I have taken into consideration, however some things I may not agree with. Do you think I should make the changes this person said? I can explain my point of view to you in class on Monday, but I didn't know because the WIKI is mostly due on Monday. Just thought I would ask to see what you thought.
Thanks so much, Mookielynn18 ( talk) 01:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I think we are officially good to go! -- Kgw2 ( talk) 01:36, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Natalie and I have asked our other group member mutiple times if she could find the information or when she is going to add it and she never really gives a straight answer. Natalie and I also seen that she has deleted the citations after the majority of her sentences that were added to her section. We are getting no response back from her and are concerned that she's going to affect our grades when we really put alot of effort into the project throughout the whole semester not just the day before the deadline and not sure how to get her to contribute and help us out... Thanks -- Nas132 ( talk) 18:28, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
On 14 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Celestyn Czaplic, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the reputedly impeccable moral character of Celestyn Czaplic, marshal of the Sejm of 1766 in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, became the subject of a proverb? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Celestyn Czaplic.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:03, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
My group just wanted to make sure that you would be able to show us how to submit for the good article nomination tomorrow after class without it being late. Please let me know when you can if this is possible. Thanks! Nll27 ( talk) 03:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Before submitting our Good Article nomination, I wanted to make sure citations were clear. There appears to be an issue with one of them at the bottom of our page, but I can't seem to make sense of it. I'd really appreciate some looking into it before the article is submitted, if you can. Thank you!
Leishanda G. ( talk) 05:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)Leishanda G.
Thanks again for your help!
Leishanda G. ( talk) 20:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)Leishanda G.
On 15 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Natalia Tułasiewicz, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Natalia Tułasiewicz, Polish teacher, was one of only two lay women beatified among the 108 Martyrs of World War II? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Natalia Tułasiewicz.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 16:03, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotr,
I feel that I made all the corrections that I was suppose to for the good article nomination. If you get a chance could you please review my edits? and leave any comments on my talk page. The person that did our good article nomination review would they be allowed to review my edits as well before the finale dead line? I dont mind asking him I just didnt want to screw something up, and then fail the nomination...
Thank you-- Nas132 ( talk) 23:54, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much for promoting the article. As far as GA reviews are concerned, I wish I could help but I am not competent enough. My English is not very good in regard of style and my knowledge about working with (and especially verifying) sources and image licenses is really limited... Regards, -- Gligan ( talk) 09:01, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
The reviewer for our article mentioned that we over referenced, however you responded by respectfully disagreeing. What should our group do?
- Steve Boser — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stboser ( talk • contribs) 22:03, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I your preliminary review of our article Double burden you say "bold text is used improperly in the Types of Double Burdens section, see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting#Boldface", what exactly do you mean by this? Is it done wrong? Or should it not be bolded at all?
Thank You, Jade.Richardson ( talk) 18:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
I have made some changes in the Types of Burden section of Double burden. Is the formatting correct now, regardes to the formatting of the quotes I orginally had up there, and the bolding? I have moved the quotes, but I a unable to unbold "Work vs. Family" and "Family vs. School" because they are heading titles. Nothing else in that section is bolded.
- Jade.Richardson ( talk) 18:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for nominating the article, I will keep an eye on it. Tymek ( talk) 04:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
On 18 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cross in front of the Presidential Palace in Warsaw, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the cross in front of the Presidential Palace in Warsaw became a focus of a major controversy in 2010, regarding the relations between church and state in Poland? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Panyd The muffin is not subtle 08:02, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I fixed one of the references in regards to Types of Marriages (under Sociology). However, when I went to fix the one regarding residential patterns, all the information I put in there was deleted and replaced with two sentences. What should I do?
KazzandraT ( talk) 23:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
The information was missing but I decided to put it all back in. I'm not sure who took it out or why but the information I originally had there, I typed back in.
KazzandraT ( talk) 23:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Hey Piotr! I've finished the review of College and university dating, but can't seem to find the one for Bride scam. Are the students ready to submit? Buggie111 ( talk) 04:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Kudos for this edit on the SOPA page. With the entry about to explode in size, someone keeping the references orderly will help it develop properly. I know that sort of Elven behavior gets overlooked a lot of the time, but it helps tremendously, thanks! Sloggerbum ( talk) 06:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC) |
A tag has been placed on Kiszone ogórki, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.
If you can fix the redirect to point to a
mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}
) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit
the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
DASHBot (
talk) 18:00, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
On 20 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joint custody, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that in some joint custody arrangements, children reside in one house and the parents move in and out from separate residences? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Joint custody. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 00:03, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Your Battle of Radzymin (1920) article is splendid. However, someone left 6 "citation needed" notes in the article. The criteria for B-class is that all text should be cited except the lead paragraph. Please review and fix. I also moved most of your pictures within the article. The pictures were all bunched at the top right and caused gaps to display in the article on my computer. I hope this improved things. Of course you may rearrange the pictures to more suitable locations. Djmaschek ( talk) 05:37, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotr,
We have been making progress on our page. However, we are having problems trying to get someone to review our page that can correct our grammer. Do you have any suggestions? we tried to get an appointment at the writing center, and I tried to get an english professor to look over the page. The writing center is booked. I am still trying to get an appointment, and my english professor that I had is to busy to review our document at this time because he is to busy and our document is to big. The reviewer is giving us 24 hours...
Thanks-- Nas132 ( talk) 12:59, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
An appointment opened up at 5pm. I am able to go I might have to leave class early.-- Nas132 ( talk) 14:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you-- Nas132 ( talk) 17:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus!
I replied to your comments on the GAR page, and did a few hours of editing last night, fixing the notes.
Thanks again for your help.
Best regards, Kiefer. Wolfowitz 17:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus! Sure, will do. My new semester started this week, and I've been having a hectic time in RL. I'll be away for a few days, but will check on the students when I get back. Bejinhan talks 13:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank Piotrus for creating this article. I Corps in the West is indeed a notable subject; nobody is arguing that case. But at the moment it's a one-paragraph unreferenced stub. Note that I did not remove the article or list it for deletion. What I would ask you to consider is leaving it as a redirect for now. All the information in the article is at Polish Armed Forces in the West#Army. If you wish to add information, and more importantly, references, they can be added to the PAFW article, and the article resplit when it's reached a reasonable size. Would you mind giving me your thoughts on this? (and would welcome your thoughts, by the way, as our Polish-subjects doyen, on the changes I've been making to Polish Armed Forces and Polish Land Forces. Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 19:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
I mean User:Piotrus/Morsels_of_wikiwisdom#On_the_perils_of_anonymity - Solution. How far have you canvassed this? Buckshot06 (talk) 19:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Regarding upload to Commons. This is only a rough version of the file. I'm working slowly on a version with less heavy borders. But I think the "draft version" already got taken to Commons. W. B. Wilson ( talk) 19:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm taking a lot of incoming rounds at FAC, but that is fine. I had the first say and it is better if I let others see what it all means for them.
Yeah, Signpost would be good. Please make it happen if you know how. Of course the reporter can/should report on those that are critical (even scathing) as well. That's the role of the press. And I really think our little Signpost newspaper is something special in terms of reporting on the Wiki, not just being another talk page to debate or article page to form (sometimes collaboratively, sometimes battling).
Dar is going to make it a research project as well (I got lazy when he told me to and asked him, as I don't know how).
Peace.
RetiredUser12459780 ( talk) 02:25, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I'm the anonymous user that started the neutrality debate on the Blue Army page, and now that everyone had a bit of time to cool off... I would like to indirectly address the problem, and raise a few issues that hopefully you could bring up on the discussion page of the Blue Army... this way my novice behavior is not discrediting the debate.
The first issue that struck me as being very bias is the quote by Pavel Korzec:
"Haller's troops established a reputation as, in the words of scholar Pavel Korzec, "the worst torturers of Jews."
One of the most basic rules of objective editing is never to use words such as "best", "worst", or "greatest" to describe anything. To do so is to present a personal point of view. Not only that, anyone can easily discredit that statement by asking a simple question. Worst that who? ...the Roman Legions? ...the Tsarist authorities? ...even worst than the Wehrmacht, or the SS? Really? This statement simply has no place in an objective narrative, but when I stumbled on the page a few day ago it was the very first phrase in the debated section.
The second issue is that of stating seriously contested assertions as facts as noted on the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view page. No one is denying that atrocities against civilians such as the Jews and Ukrainians happened, and no one is denying the Lwów pogrom of 1918. But, what is contested (yet presented a undisputed fact on the page) is the participation of the Blue Army in some of those events. Serious and legitimate doubts are raised as to the location of the Blue Army which was not allowed to cross German territory from France to Poland until four months after the Lwów pogrom, as cited on the page through documented sources. And, the accuracy of those who remembered the events is also put into question by quotes like that Faustian himself provided "What is important here is not facts themselves but the way in which they have been seen and remembered" Finally, there is no mention in the disputed section of the fact that some of those events were exaggerated by international media for political purposes. Please see the excerpt from the Lwów pogrom (1918) page below.
'The initial reports on the number of casualties of the pogroms were exaggerated, sensationalist in nature and often embellished.[37] The large casualty figures and supposed graphic details were transmitted through Berlin, where the new German government disseminated them for political propaganda reasons, hoping that they would affect the peace negotiations and prevent German territorial losses to Poland.[37] The Times, in December 1919 called the contemporary reports of the events "greatly exaggerated", while the Pall Mall Gazette blamed the German Reich for "machinations" and the exaggerations.[37] More accurate estimates from reliable sources, such as the Morgenthau report or American diplomats in the Polish capital, emerged only later.[38],,
In the end, I ask that those issues are addressed, and the article amended to reflect a more neutral interpretation of events in question. For the moment I will refrain from open discussion on the Blue Army Talk page... but, I ask that my concerns and recommendations be raised and addressed. Thank You. -- 76.118.227.161 ( talk) 04:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
The media file you uploaded as File:Zeligowski Lucjan.jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.
It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.
Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).
You may be interested in this. Peter jackson ( talk) 11:11, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Gg first.jpg. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{ di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.
An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Moe ε 19:13, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I'm a little confused at how exactly you would like us to cite our articles/books on our wiki article. We are the open relationship group. Do you prefer us to do the individual page notations when it comes to a book, or do you simply just want the source? Your last few posts in our discussion page has me confused as to what your expectations are. Thanks, and sorry to bother you. Marikathrynarnold ( talk) 00:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I am writing you to let you know that I responded back to a good article reviewer. I will take his criticism into consideration and try to improve certain sections of the article when I return back. I will also look for theories about family honor and how it relates to sociology as we discussed after our last class. It is harder to work from home so when I return to campus I will begin to do research and make changes. I left some questions for the GA reviewer as well you can take a look and comment. You may understand what he's saying more clearly and be able to shed some additional light on the concerns he brought up. I also left a comment under the preliminary review section that I'd appreciate if you could take a look at and comment on. Thanks. Rojast07 ( talk) 02:32, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
On 26 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article German–Polish customs war, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that during a decade of the interbellum, Poland and Germany suffered from a customs war? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Panyd The muffin is not subtle 08:09, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
On 27 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Michał Radziwiłł Rudy, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that nobleman and diplomat Michał Radziwiłł Rudy was described as a psychopath by his own cousin, politician Krzysztof Radziwiłł? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Michał Radziwiłł Rudy.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady ( talk) 06:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 10:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot ( talk) 08:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the comments on my section. I went through all of the points and tried to correct as much as I could. I hope it is better now.
Bed28 ( talk) 20:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
We have a citation error at the bottom of our page Double burden and we are not quite sure what or where it is. Can you help us figure it out? Our reviewer asked if we could fix that first before he did the prose review. He also mentioned that he would have fixed but he couldn't find it either. Thank You Jade.Richardson ( talk) 17:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Doomtrader ( talk) 22:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)Hi, I would like to request for not removing the page for Wastelands Interactive. I don't think it's an advertise or spam etc. Could you please restore it for future improvement? Best regards, doomtrader
Hi, I'm looking through the students' articles right now. Since most of the concerns are being addressed at the respective GA nom pages, should I aid the students with meeting those concerns? Or should I leave them to make all the edits? There isn't much activity in the articles' talk pages at the moment. I'm really sorry I've been MIA. I'm trying to edit Wikipedia at a slower "rate" now due to time constraints. Coping with my semester work is taking up a bulk of my time. Bejinhan talks 15:17, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
many thanks! please feel free to make changes in Solahütte you feel necessary and to nominate it. i have no idea how to nominate things and i'm somewhat intimidated about learning the process. cheers. Cramyourspam ( talk) 17:48, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Basically, there were changes to the copyright laws that took effect in 1978. Previously, from the period 1923 - 1977, the item became public domain if it wasn't specifically marked as copyrighted. After 1977, items don't have to be marked copyright and thus won't revert to PD. There's another category re: the period from 1978 to 1985 and proof that copyright wasn't filed for, but it can be a big job or an almost impossible one if we're trying to find that information about an ad, etc.
There's also the aspect re: collective works-ads in magazines can't be claimed as copyrighted under any copyright for the magazine itself. They need their own copyrights and to have been marked as such. Have some links about things like this if you'd like them, as I do a lot of this type of work with photos and ads for free use here.
Google has tweaked its book searches and it's more difficult to get information like this now. :-( It used to be that you could initially search for Life magazine, then after that, do an advanced search which lets you set specific fields for the search. What you need to do now is first search on the magazine title, then grab the first one shown because advanced search is not an option any more until you get to that point. :-(
You can also search eBay for ads and use those if you can view a copy large enough to determine there's no copyright mark. Kellogg's was sort of tough with copyrighting their material for years. There's a long-gone radio show they sponsored, Don McNeill's Breakfast Club, and all of the promotional materials, including the listener postcards, were marked as copyright. If you want to use any of the material now, you would need to check for non-renewal. This is why I wasn't comfortable with just converting the file to PD-1978, as the Flickr uploader may have cropped it. We hope ( talk) 17:52, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your interest in the Wikipedia Education Program's Metrics and Activities Meeting. We're attempting to schedule the next meeting, and we'd like to get your input on days and times that you'd be available. If you're interested in joining us, please fill out this Doodle. We look forward to talking with you then. -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) ( talk) 19:05, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
in helping to eat the pie! Many thanks! We hope ( talk) 20:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Piotrus, I have a lot more articles in mind. If only I had more time... Tymek ( talk) 20:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Teutonic order charge.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Please come back :) // Halibu tt
I've left a message on the GA reviewer's talk page as you suggested. I also responded and made some comments. Feel free to look and comment. I'll do my best to try fixing things over the weekend. Thanks. Rojast07 ( talk) 19:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Please let me know if I did something wrong with the Hugo Kołłątaj B-class review. Orczar ( talk) 17:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Piotrus, is there anything you can do with the students involved with editing this article? The nomination will likely be failed soon if nothing more happen to improve it. Cheers, AstroCog ( talk) 14:07, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Would you be able to consider the recent series of edits to this article regarding pictures and either make edits or comment on talkpages as appropriate? Buckshot06 (talk) 20:13, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Can it really be described as part of the Russo-Turkish War? Just because the two conflicts occurred concurrently does not really make one part of the other. The Ottomans and the RT War is mentioned only very briefly in the article as part of the general background. I removed that part from the infobox. Volunteer Marek 16:29, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Re: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Radzymin (1920). Do you know if there's any timetable for this assessment? It's been there for ages now, nothing new appeared, all issues solved, no further input from anyone. Any ideas whom to poke? // Halibu tt 01:46, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Just thought I would have to say WOOHOO haha. -- Kgw2 ( talk) 23:56, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to address the issue of the disputed photo (Polish Army Soldiers 1951.jpg) on the Poland Land Forces page... I do have an issue with the image, and how Buckshot06 and W. B. Wilson are editing the content.
First, I'd like to state that the image is a poor choice for the page. We are all media savvy, and any newspaper or magazine editor will tell you that there is such a thing as a "bad" picture, which can be used to ridicule a subject. The image in question is just such a picture. There were many images on Wikipedia that were taken down because they were deemed to look too much like "propaganda", or an "advertisement"... So, surely there has to be an opposite of that, and the image in question portrays Poland's military in a less then flattering way. All, you have to do is look at other military pages such as that of United States Army, Canadian Army or even the Israel Defense Forces to see that all the pictures used are neutral, they do not portray the respective armed forces in a superhuman way, but at the same time they do not demean or humiliate the subject. Anyone can upload a lousy picture, add it to a page and start claiming that it is highly relevant to the text. Also, one of your first comments about the (Polish Army Soldiers 1951.jpg) image was "that the soldiers are grinning somewhat... stupidly" so, I am not the only person to see this photo in a negative light.
Another issue is that the photo lacks depth... it is not an image of a historic event, depicting Polish soldiers. It is a "static pose" that should be avoided, since they do not really go with the actual text of the article. Most pictures will have a short description of events depicted, and its significance. But, this image can only say "Polish troops, 1951"... that's it. So, why is this picture so important to Buckshot06 and W. B. Wilson, who are screaming censorship, when I clearly noted on numerous occasions that the picture is a poor choice, and should be replaced, and not because of some political agenda!
Finally, I am very troubled by how Buckshot06 and W. B. Wilson are conducting themselves... after the image in question was not chosen to replace the Eisenhower/Spychalski photo, because of the objections listed above, Buckshot06 went on the Polish Land Forces page, and added the questionable image to that article instead. If you claim to be serious about the legitimacy of Wikipedia, and it's neutral and honest approach, why would you do something like that? In the end, I would like to remove that image from the Land Forces page.-- 76.118.227.161 ( talk) 00:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In Theory of historical trajectory, you recently added links to the disambiguation pages Capital and State ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
I see you've commented on the disambiguation page of the above articles. It's taken me a while to think about it, the best way would have a vote on if the two articles can be easily merged together without any information lost. Of course if they are both merged then both article names would have to change (possibly). Adamdaley ( talk) 11:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Title says it all. Could you please notify the group of what a great job they did? Also, would be kind enough to ping me the next time a set of assignments hit the board? Thanks, Buggie111 ( talk) 02:12, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Kazimierz Karwowski at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 07:34, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Could I stop by your office when you have a chance today? I need to leave early because my brother needs a ride at 4 o'clock, so I was wondering if I could fill out the group work survey before then. Thanks!!!!! BonnieNoel ( talk) 16:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Could you please stop by the Proletarian poetry talk page and let the students know if you think their fixes to the legacy section are sufficient. Cloveapple ( talk) 20:40, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Here is a note reminding you of our unsuccessful attempts to find sources on family in advertising with a global view. Thanks for your help.
Alimosser61 ( talk) 21:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I have done what (in my opinion) my Reviewer has asked. He has made suggestions that are more criticisms which I believe are untrue, at least for my section. I have fixed what I believe needed to be fixed but the rest of his comments I found to be just plain wrong. In the end I am happy with my article however a second opinion would be nice.
Also you told me to mention the references to you, some of mine were red and you said you would fix them. Stboser ( talk) 21:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I discussed with you in class about my section on divorce and was hoping that you could give me some feedback. Thank you! Nll27 ( talk) 21:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I tried to fix the part about it not being a how to.. I entirely deleted what I previously had and wrote a whole new section. But, I will go through again and try to make some changes, and also I will add the blue links in. Thank you!
Nll27 (
talk) 01:24, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Also, I was wondering if you had any suggestions about rewording the last paragraph. I'm sort of having a hard time because our reviewer told me to put a part in about tips from experts, and I don't know how to make it not sound like tips without changing the information.
Nll27 (
talk) 01:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
On 10 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polish Armed Forces in the East (1914–1920), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that numerous Polish formations fought in Russia from the First World War, through the Russian Revolution of 1917 up to the Polish–Soviet War? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Panyd The muffin is not subtle 08:03, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
This image is for the wikipedia page Family Honor. It's an image that relates to the death of a woman mentioned in our article whose story is an example of an honor killing. Honor killings relate to family honor because they are a method of upholding a family's honor within certain cultures. The picture is specifically a picture of the woman who is mentioned within the article. It's a picture of women carrying out her casket from her funeral. Here's the link: http://archive.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=woman-claimed-last-victim-of-honor-killing-2011-03-02 Rojast07 ( talk) 21:45, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Stanisław Dunin-Karwicki at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 00:04, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Pilsudski in Kostiuchnówka's trenches.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:09, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Teutonic order charge.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus I requested a rotation of this image which showed correctly at full resolution but not as a thumbnail. I hope this works. The pic is an excellent one of the entrance to the old Muslim Library which I wish to use here [1].Cheers Robert Notafly ( talk) 13:08, 11 December 2011 (UTC) See also [2] I have not requested a rotation of this image.Do you wish me to? Notafly ( talk) 13:42, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Would you like to review my Gtranslated and cleaned up version of the Polish tank brigade article? Buckshot06 (talk) 14:01, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus!
My name is Peter Horvath, I am a plastic model maker from Hungary. I would like to prepare the Mig 21 which in the Katowice airportin 1/48 scale. I like your photos about then. Have you more pics about this airplane, becouse I need for the painting job. If you can help to me, and you have more picture please send me an email. Thank you!
Peter for Hungary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.92.116.8 ( talk) 07:37, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus!
My name is Peter Horvath, I am a plastic model maker from Hungary. I would like to prepare the Mig 21 which in the Katowice airportin 1/48 scale. I like your photos about then. Have you more pics about this airplane, becouse I need for the painting job. If you can help to me, and you have more picture please send me an email. Thank you!
rustypepe@gmail.com
Peter from Hungary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rustypepe ( talk • contribs) 07:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
On 13 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wroniec (book), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Wroniec, a dark fairy tale by Jacek Dukaj, was a taboo-breaking take on martial law in Poland, which was in effect from 13 December 1981? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wroniec (book).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
On 13 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kazimierz Karwowski, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Kazimierz Karwowski holds the record for being elected to the most Sejms of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kazimierz Karwowski.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 16:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Wonderful job with Wroniec (book). Thankyou for all the great work you do. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:12, 13 December 2011 (UTC) |
Agreed! Probably the best thing we can do is transwiki articles and try to address systematc bias. Will transwiki some Polish related articles today.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to be out of commission for a little bit so I was wondering if you could help with finishing up some work on the new article on Andrzej Bogucki, particularly adding inline citations in, and once it's ready nominating it for DYK (it was created by User:Nienk)? Since it's the holidays, I understand if you're busy as well though. Volunteer Marek 18:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
G'day, Piotrus, I'm not sure if you've seen my comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Łódź insurrection (1905). Are you able to respond to these? As the review has been open longer than 28 days, it will possibly be closed soon by one of the co-ords; it would be a shame for it to stall at this late date. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 06:06, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
On 15 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stanisław Dunin-Karwicki, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the ideas of 17th-century Polish reformer Stanisław Dunin-Karwicki have been both praised as the harbinger of later reforms, and criticized for not going far enough? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stanisław Dunin-Karwicki.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:03, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, may I remove notability template from this article? Kmicic ( talk) 21:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
G'day Piotrus, sorry I missed your comment about this in the ACR. Anyway, the duplicate link tool can be found here: User:Ucucha/duplinks. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 09:26, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Pilsudski in Kostiuchnówka's trenches.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your mssage Piotrus. The discussion preceding the merge was at User_talk:Buckshot06/Archive_17#People.27s_Armies, and W.B. Wilson's talkpage at East European Armies. The aim was to have a single 'Military of X' whatever country main historical page as is WP:MILHIST practice. Hope this message satifies your immediate need for information; I'll respond in a fuller fashion later. Buckshot06 (talk) 18:32, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Just how is one supposedto identify a newcomer ? Jim Sweeney ( talk) 23:38, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:42, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Hey. Just wondering when the grades would be due for the class I'm doing the GA reviews on. I've been absolutely swamped the past couple weeks and want to make sure I get all the prose issues up before time runs out, which it might on my end. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I'm afraid that I've just closed the A class review of Polish Underground State as being unsuccessful. Thanks for nominating this article. Nick-D ( talk) 05:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus -- following on our earlier conversation -- I'm going to fill in a few more redlinks. Could you do me a favor, and look at the last sentence of the first section of this article on the Polish wiki: "W ostatnich latach jego życia zgromadzenie wikariuszy katedralnych wytoczyło mu dochodzenia z powodu niedbałego wypełniania obowiązków administracyjnych i jakoby nieobyczajnego życia." It's too 'interesting' to skip, and there's nothing in my huge New Grove, nor in my Reese Music of the Renaissance (which otherwise covers this guy pretty well) that mentions this -- could you translate it for me? Thank you kindly! Antandrus (talk) 01:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Orleta1939.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
{{
di-replaceable fair use disputed}}
, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse ( talk) 03:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Theory of historical trajectory at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Marrante ( talk) 08:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotr, I have been doing everything that my reviewer has asked me to do, but yet he hasn't closed the review. I was wondering if you could tell me if there is a more efficient way of contacting him besides his talk page and the discussion page of my article. I would have made my last change sooner yesterday if I had not been on a six hour car ride home. I'm honestly quite frustrated with the fact that he waited until the last minute to start giving feedback on my article and now I find myself really stressed about it not receiving the GA status. Is there anything more that I can do other than what I have been doing? Marikathrynarnold ( talk) 14:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you've seen today's Wikimedia blog post. It's about somebody you know.
Best wishes for a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 04:07, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
On 20 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Theory of historical trajectory, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Karl Marx's theory of historical trajectory attempted to prove the long-term unsustainability of capitalism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Theory of historical trajectory.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady ( talk) 14:37, 20 December 2011 (UTC) 16:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotr, there's currently an ongoing discussion about splitting the Stop Online Piracy Act page at Talk:Stop_Online_Piracy_Act#ONGOING_DISCUSSION_-_Splitting_the_Article. You've familiarized yourself with the entry before, and your insight and perspective on the matter would be appreciated. Hope to see you there, Sloggerbum ( talk) 23:42, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:00, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
— Commander (Ping me) 05:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page.
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 21:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I have seen your name on the SOPA talk. I am also against SOPA. I also happen to be a citizen of an Eastern European country, Romania, living in Romania. I am using WIkipedia daily - I am an avid Encyclopaedia reader, and sometimes I also edit. I have noticed that you support and encourage WF to punish me, and others like me around the world, basically severely disturbing our lives by having WP blocked entirely, for something that politicians in a foreing country (USA) did and from which corporatocrats there will profit. I have to be frank here. If this thing happens, it will wreck my life pretty seriously and I am rather sure I did nothing at all to deserve having something like this being done to me. Please tell is there something practical that I can do to avoid this terrible thing that is about to happend to me (WF not allowing me to read it's previously "free" articles)? I mean I know about the right to close WP and the right to fork and that WF doesn't owe anyone anything, but I would have hoped us readers amongst ourselves and the WF have become firends and friends don't do this to one another. SOFT blanks I understand, even a 2-day complete block just for the US I understand, but what could I possibly do to avoid this being done to me, on the suggestion of you and others? I am not represented by anyone in the US congress... They can ban me, do anything they like but I am going to pester you with this question till I get an answer: what did I do to deserve this being done to me and what can I do to stop it (realistically)? Or are people like you just sadistic to defenseles fellow users? 79.112.59.92 ( talk) 23:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal | ||
For your work on Kiev Expedition (1018), Polish culture during World War II and Łódź insurrection (1905), which were promoted to A-Class between August 2008 and December 2011, I am pleased to present you with the Military history A-Class medal. On behalf of the project coordinators, Nick-D ( talk) 10:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
You are invited to the
National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my
stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success!
This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions1 as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic· t 01:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC) 1 Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited. |
On 30 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Triple Alliance (1788), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Triple Alliance of 1788, formed on the verge of the French Revolution, almost led to the war which would have pitted England and Prussia against Russia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Triple Alliance (1788).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 12:33, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Well its the same old "principles" being more important than content. I believe his slate should be wiped clean and allowed to continue using that account and doing what he is doing. We can't afford to block good faith editors regardless of their past. I've asked Amalthea, if he doesn't unblock him you and I and anybody else who supports him should request a unblock formally.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Yeah I know. I've redirected our posts to User:Xeno as Amalthea seems to be out of town. I will be creating a few Polish related articles later BTW. Feel free to give me some red link requests whenever you want!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:33, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Wow just noticed we don't even have building and structure categories for each region of Poland!! Must sort that..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:43, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI. The above listed discussion regards your DYK nomination for Public Domain Day. While I do not believe your presence is currently required at the discussion, your presence could assist with some of the concerns raised. -- Allen3 talk 13:04, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
On 31 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Defilada, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Andrzej Fidyk's documentary Defilada about North Korea, despite its anti- totalitarian message, was initially praised both by communist Poland's censors and in North Korea itself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Defilada.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 13:18, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.
This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn ( talk) and The ed17 ( talk) 17:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus, I'm afraid that I've just closed the A class review of this article as not being successful as it did not attract the necessary level of support. Thank you for nominating it, and please feel free to re-nominate the article in the future if you believe that the A class criteria are met. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 23:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
On 1 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Public Domain Day, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Public Domain Day is celebrated on January 1 in several countries, but not in the United States or Australia, where no works will enter the public domain until 2019 and 2026 respectively? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Public Domain Day.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 14:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Bloody Wednesday (Poland), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bund ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I will nominate Archduchess Sophie of Austria and Ladislaus of Anjou. Is that okay, to nominate two at once? -- Alexcoldcasefan ( talk) 17:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello there. Sadly, the article on the Battle of Radzymin failed at A-class assessment due to procedural reasons. All the issues were fixed but only two people actually voted for it. Since you helped to improve the article in the past, could I interest you in the new assessment? Thanks for any help. // Halibu tt 12:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
On a DYK you noted "missing wikiproject assessment template on talk, please add". I am not sure what this is. Pointers? Maury Markowitz ( talk) 16:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello, could you send me your e-mail? I've got photos from PSB. My e-mail is kmicic.wiki (at) wp.pl. Kmicic ( talk) 23:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
On 4 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Russo-Prussian alliance, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 1764 Russo-Prussian alliance, formed two years after the signatories clashed in the Seven Years' War, allowed them to intervene in internal matters of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Russo-Prussian alliance.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 08:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Collegium Nobilium (Olomouc), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Collegium Nobilium. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 17:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi this name isn't correct can you move it to the appropriate name?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
I just noticed his page. Interesting guy! Among the many changes you made on Jan. 3, you added this sentence:
During that time he developed extensive contacts at various European courts in Courland (Karlsbad), Austria (Vienna), Italy (Turin) and France (Paris).
The mention of Karlsbad as the location of the Courland court seems to be incorrect, since Courland is located in what is now Latvia and its capital in those days was Jelgava, while Karlsbad is the German name for a town in the Czech Republic which is now known as Karlovy Vary. Or am I missing something? Please double-check. DutchmanInDisguise ( talk) 15:26, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
On 6 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Konrad Prószyński, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Polish writer and educator Konrad Prószyński, author of internationally recognized primers, had to struggle with the censorship in the Russian Empire? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Konrad Prószyński. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 16:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
I've changed the hook a bit. Let me know if it is satisfactory or not. Regards, -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 05:48, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately your comment confirms that the current atmosphere is not a result of my edits but of the recent block of one of Poeticbent’s socks. Unfortunately it confirms that the latest activity of VM, MMA and Vecrumba (the latest) might be seen as an attempt to punish the one who has done something "evil" to a buddy. Should I mention that all of you were active members of the EEML and once banned for tagteaming, canvassing and battleground mentality?
If Poeticbent believes he should be allowed to edit again he should ask an Admin. What he shouldn’t do is to ignore the block and create large sockfarms. This is rather a basic rule and I’m sure you, as a former Admin, know it.
My personal opinion on Poeticbent’s contributions and the justification of his block is completely irrelevant. But you shouldn’t expect a recommendation as far as I’m concerned. HerkusMonte ( talk) 09:20, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Have you considered revisiting Talk:Isaac and Miria/GA1. It has been about 11 days since the review. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 23:08, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
On 8 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bloody Wednesday (Poland), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that one of the largest operations of the Combat Organization of the Polish Socialist Party became known as the Bloody Wednesday? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bloody Wednesday (Poland).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
I'll work with both articles once I get to that point. Orczar ( talk) 01:32, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
It's a good question, and one I've never really figured out. But, Category:Transport infrastructure comes under Category:Infrastructure which is in Category:Buildings and structures (a classification which is copied in the PL category tree, which with the help of Cat Scan is why they appeared in my list). Road sure aren't buildings but I can see them being called structures, yes. (Similar arguments for reservoirs, locks etc). Severo T C 14:11, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Category:Honorverse templates, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 13:20, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
You appear to have overlooked my review - if you could see to the corrections that would be useful, otherwise I'll fail the article and you can see to them at leisure before renominating. Thanks, Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 13:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
On 11 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Siedlce pogrom, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Siedlce pogrom in the Congress Poland was organized by the Russian Empire's secret police, and carried out by the Imperial Russian Army, whose soldiers were later decorated? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siedlce pogrom.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Thanks for your article Victuallers ( talk) 16:02, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
The hunt for the best time for our January edition of the outreach:Wikipedia Education Program Metrics and Activities Meeting is underway. If you're interested in joining us, please fill out your availability on this Doodle by Monday, January 16, so we can schedule the meeting. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) ( talk) 22:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Can you propose an alt hook for Template:Did you know nominations/Scipione Piattoli? :) -- LauraHale ( talk) 00:11, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Prokonsul,
Hope you don't mind me sending you a message on here, I couldn't find a way of contacting you direct from your Wikipedia user page.
I work as a freelance video/AV editor and I am interested in using your "Clouds above Poland" image in a small project for a local company. I am being paid for the work so would be happy to pay you an amount to use the image, subject to my client's approval-I could afford €40 from my budget. I hope this would be agreeable to you, I can provide more details as to my intended usage if you wish.
Thanks,
Charlie Goodliffe charlie@thebrownroom.co.uk 90.220.67.205 ( talk) 21:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
On 13 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Armia Ludowa, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the exploits of the Polish partisan People's Army have been significantly exaggerated by the propaganda of the People's Republic of Poland? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Armia Ludowa.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
On 13 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polish–Prussian alliance, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Prussia refused to meet its obligations from the Polish–Prussian alliance of 1790, and instead of aiding Poland during the Polish–Russian War of 1792, helped Russia to quell the Kościuszko Uprising the following year? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Polish–Prussian alliance.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 16:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
The Content Review Medal of Merit | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured article reviews for the period October–December 2011, I am delighted to award you the Content Review Medal. Buggie111 ( talk) 17:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC) |
In reply to your comment at User talk:Black Falcon#Deletion review for Category:Freemasons:
I appreciate your notification; I was returning from a wiki-break at the time and, therefore, did not notice your post until the DRV had closed. For reference, the list of the category's original contents is available here. Cheers, -- Black Falcon ( talk) 20:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Nominations for the " Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D ( talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.
Hello, First of all, thank you for reviewing the What Work Is page. I will try to fix everything on it to make it up to snuff. I was part of the class project that was working on the page and the class has ended. But i care about the page and want it to work. So i will be trying to fix it up. I don't want to waste anymore of your time (i apologize for no one responding within the quite respectable amount of time that was given) so who would be a good person i could contact about certain aspects of editing? The plagarism parts confuse me but i will go back and look at the talk pages to see what the deal is. Thank you very much.
Jason Slavin
Piotrus, I have done a good amount of work. A great deal was word for word plagiarized than i had thought. I eliminated all of the plagiarism and fixed up the ferw references that were incomplete. Could you take a look at it and tell me what else may need to be done in order to nominate for GA statuse again? Thank you for your time! 76.126.173.103 ( talk) 23:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
On 17 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Scipione Piattoli, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the figure of Abbé Morio in Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace was modeled on Scipione Piattoli (pictured), one of the drafters of the Polish Constitution of May 3, 1791? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Scipione Piattoli.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 16:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Did anybody tell you that one of your articles was mentioned in yesterday's New York Times? [3] — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 17:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
SarahStierch ( talk) 21:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Piotrus, you may want to look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Pope John Paul II/archive3? -- Marek. 69 talk 02:23, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 00:33, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I've reworded a new sentence to the POMOA article now. -- Soman ( talk) 09:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I want to ask You for Your permission (or The Wikipedia permission) to paste informations about Polish composers from site www.pwm.com.pl. Do we have to sign an agreement or a licence? We have a lot of informations and we want to share it. PolishMusicLover1945 ( talk) 07:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
The January meeting has been scheduled. For instructions on joining and a time converter, see outreach:Wikipedia Education Program Metrics and Activities Meeting. Hope you can join the meeting. -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) ( talk) 20:57, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Let me know how the tool is doing, I haven't heard anything from you in a while. ΔT The only constant 00:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:25, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Nice work on the references at
Public Domain Day, that's a cleaner method, uncluttered and easier to find refs within a text. I might start it as my default method. Of course it won't stop others from adding new refs inline, creating a sort of mixed bag, but hopefully perhaps over time this method will become a best practice site wide.
Green Cardamom (
talk) 21:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
The Invisible Barnstar | ||
Thank you for contributing to the December 2011 Good Article nomination backlog elimination drive. AstroCog ( talk) 23:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Piotrus,
I know you have been well acquainted with academic research about Wikipedia for years. Any chance you could spend some time before tomorrow evening UTC to contribute something to the upcoming issue of the Wikimedia Research Newsletter? It just turns out that my co-editor Dario (WMF's research analyst) is unable to contribute this time due to travel and other obligations. I'm committed to getting this issue out as scheduled, but it might be a bare-boned version. Even a short summary (2-3 sentences) of a paper that interests you would be helpful. The draft page with a list of items that are intended be covered here and the coordination Etherpad (where one can sign up to cover a particular paper) is here. Thanks, and even if you can't find time on such short notice, your feedback and suggestions/contributions for future issues continue to be very welcome.
Regards, Tbayer (WMF) ( talk) 13:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
On 30 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abolition of serfdom in Poland, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the abolition of serfdom in Poland was spurred by unrest and uprisings such as the Kraków Uprising and the January Uprising? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Abolition of serfdom in Poland.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:03, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Grapple X ( submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Ruby2010 ( submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Jivesh boodhun ( submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!
The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.
A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.
We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.
A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
On 1 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zgromadzenie Przyjaciół Konstytucji Rządowej, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Society of Friends of the Constitution, formed in 1791 to support the Constitution of 3 May, was the first Polish political party? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zgromadzenie Przyjaciół Konstytucji Rządowej.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Cześć! Dzięki za powitanie na enwiki – wreszcie się doczekałem ;) Pozdrawiam serdecznie, -- Mikołka 18:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks so much! This totally made my day. - Darwin/Peacock [Talk] 20:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at WP:GL/M#Map translation: Battle of Bautzen (1945)'s talk page. I posted a couple of questions for you on the 'shop. Regards! -- Orionist ★ talk 06:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the Sociology Barnstar for my work on A Community of Witches! It's nice to feel appreciated. ( Midnightblueowl ( talk) 17:22, 2 February 2012 (UTC))
There is a dispute regarding an image that was scanned from a old Polish magazine form the communist era. The person who uploaded the file claims that since it was a state owned publisher, the photograph can be copied due to an alleged public domain claim. I myself believe that even during communist era, publishers and photographers protected their work form being ripped-off, or missuses by other printing houses... and I doubt that there is no copyright protection whatsoever. Also, the image itself was scanned form "Radio i Telewizja" weekly magazine, so the image may not actually be of Polish solders, but of TV stand-ins, and since the person who uploaded the image did not provide additional information when asked... the status and subject matter of the picture is unclear. If you have any knowledge on this subject, your input would be much appreciated, at this point I'm trying to get other users involved, and resolve this issue. Discussion page: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Polish_Army_Soldiers_1951.jpg -- 76.118.227.161 ( talk) 01:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Stanisław Staszic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slavic ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Piotrus. Could you excerpt and translate the portion of the link your provided (which is in Polish, which unfortunately I do not speak, and it would be faster for you to do so, rather than for me to attempt Google Translate) which authoritatively states or confirms that Szymborska called for the death penalty for the priests in question. Thanks. Quis separabit? 00:58, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
I would like to improve WP:MEDRS (medicine project), in particular with respect to its excessive weight given to secondary sources, which discourage contributors. I would like an experienced wikilawyer to monitor/assist the process: if I understood wp now, this became necessary. i can give more details. Are you interested? Mehmedmed ( talk) 15:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmedmed ( talk • contribs) 12:00, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
The Sociology Barnstar | ||
For excellence and dedication in your work on WikiProject Sociology. | ||
this WikiAward was given to Piotrus by Meclee ( talk) on 18:51, 4 February 2012 (UTC) |
i am trying to mention open research in WP policies What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:No original research (by specifying that wikipedia is not an open research tool, despite its appearance) but other editors do not want to, and there is beginning of edit war.
I cannot manage it, but i still think that mentioning alternatives (open research websites) can provide an incentive to openness, if established wikipedians do not want people to leave wp for or websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmedmed ( talk • contribs) 22:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Mehmedmed ( talk) 22:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Piotr! My previous message here seems to have slipped under your radar. So just to remind you, I finished your request at the Map Workshop but need you to answer a couple of questions before I upload the files. They are at WP:GL/M#Map translation: Battle of Bautzen (1945). Cheers! -- Orionist ★ talk 16:38, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
We're in a bit of a pickle in the Wagner discussion page. The issues concerns Social class (sociology) and the phrase supposedly common Germanic past and has now been dismissed by some editors as inconsequential.
At the end of the Wagner discussion page (under Edit War solution topic) there issome suggested courses of action that I was requested to list, from my point of view. Please help. Just take fast look. Thank you
In the introduction, removed as non consequential
In the Biography chapter removed as non consequential
User:Major Torp ( talk) 15:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I am a student working on the Thomas Green Clemson Wikipedia page. I had just recently made a rather large edit for the current size of the page and was wondering if you had any feedback for me that would make my page better. My user page is User:Chewey93 so please contact me if you have any tips. Thank you.
Is the site yours? Don't worry I did the job for you and removed it.
Hello. You have a new message at WP:GL/M#Map translation: Battle of Bautzen (1945)'s talk page.
This 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. |
Archive 35 | ← | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | → | Archive 45 |
If you have spare time could you review NG Life as if it were a GA review? If you are too busy, I understand. Thanks. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 05:10, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello!
I have a quick question for you. I saw that on our page (Marriage in the United States) that a student review was taken place on the review page. Some of the things this person said I have taken into consideration, however some things I may not agree with. Do you think I should make the changes this person said? I can explain my point of view to you in class on Monday, but I didn't know because the WIKI is mostly due on Monday. Just thought I would ask to see what you thought.
Thanks so much, Mookielynn18 ( talk) 01:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I think we are officially good to go! -- Kgw2 ( talk) 01:36, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Natalie and I have asked our other group member mutiple times if she could find the information or when she is going to add it and she never really gives a straight answer. Natalie and I also seen that she has deleted the citations after the majority of her sentences that were added to her section. We are getting no response back from her and are concerned that she's going to affect our grades when we really put alot of effort into the project throughout the whole semester not just the day before the deadline and not sure how to get her to contribute and help us out... Thanks -- Nas132 ( talk) 18:28, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
On 14 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Celestyn Czaplic, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the reputedly impeccable moral character of Celestyn Czaplic, marshal of the Sejm of 1766 in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, became the subject of a proverb? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Celestyn Czaplic.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:03, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
My group just wanted to make sure that you would be able to show us how to submit for the good article nomination tomorrow after class without it being late. Please let me know when you can if this is possible. Thanks! Nll27 ( talk) 03:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Before submitting our Good Article nomination, I wanted to make sure citations were clear. There appears to be an issue with one of them at the bottom of our page, but I can't seem to make sense of it. I'd really appreciate some looking into it before the article is submitted, if you can. Thank you!
Leishanda G. ( talk) 05:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)Leishanda G.
Thanks again for your help!
Leishanda G. ( talk) 20:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)Leishanda G.
On 15 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Natalia Tułasiewicz, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Natalia Tułasiewicz, Polish teacher, was one of only two lay women beatified among the 108 Martyrs of World War II? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Natalia Tułasiewicz.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 16:03, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotr,
I feel that I made all the corrections that I was suppose to for the good article nomination. If you get a chance could you please review my edits? and leave any comments on my talk page. The person that did our good article nomination review would they be allowed to review my edits as well before the finale dead line? I dont mind asking him I just didnt want to screw something up, and then fail the nomination...
Thank you-- Nas132 ( talk) 23:54, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much for promoting the article. As far as GA reviews are concerned, I wish I could help but I am not competent enough. My English is not very good in regard of style and my knowledge about working with (and especially verifying) sources and image licenses is really limited... Regards, -- Gligan ( talk) 09:01, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
The reviewer for our article mentioned that we over referenced, however you responded by respectfully disagreeing. What should our group do?
- Steve Boser — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stboser ( talk • contribs) 22:03, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I your preliminary review of our article Double burden you say "bold text is used improperly in the Types of Double Burdens section, see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting#Boldface", what exactly do you mean by this? Is it done wrong? Or should it not be bolded at all?
Thank You, Jade.Richardson ( talk) 18:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
I have made some changes in the Types of Burden section of Double burden. Is the formatting correct now, regardes to the formatting of the quotes I orginally had up there, and the bolding? I have moved the quotes, but I a unable to unbold "Work vs. Family" and "Family vs. School" because they are heading titles. Nothing else in that section is bolded.
- Jade.Richardson ( talk) 18:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for nominating the article, I will keep an eye on it. Tymek ( talk) 04:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
On 18 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cross in front of the Presidential Palace in Warsaw, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the cross in front of the Presidential Palace in Warsaw became a focus of a major controversy in 2010, regarding the relations between church and state in Poland? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Panyd The muffin is not subtle 08:02, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I fixed one of the references in regards to Types of Marriages (under Sociology). However, when I went to fix the one regarding residential patterns, all the information I put in there was deleted and replaced with two sentences. What should I do?
KazzandraT ( talk) 23:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
The information was missing but I decided to put it all back in. I'm not sure who took it out or why but the information I originally had there, I typed back in.
KazzandraT ( talk) 23:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Hey Piotr! I've finished the review of College and university dating, but can't seem to find the one for Bride scam. Are the students ready to submit? Buggie111 ( talk) 04:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Kudos for this edit on the SOPA page. With the entry about to explode in size, someone keeping the references orderly will help it develop properly. I know that sort of Elven behavior gets overlooked a lot of the time, but it helps tremendously, thanks! Sloggerbum ( talk) 06:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC) |
A tag has been placed on Kiszone ogórki, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.
If you can fix the redirect to point to a
mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}
) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit
the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
DASHBot (
talk) 18:00, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
On 20 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joint custody, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that in some joint custody arrangements, children reside in one house and the parents move in and out from separate residences? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Joint custody. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 00:03, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Your Battle of Radzymin (1920) article is splendid. However, someone left 6 "citation needed" notes in the article. The criteria for B-class is that all text should be cited except the lead paragraph. Please review and fix. I also moved most of your pictures within the article. The pictures were all bunched at the top right and caused gaps to display in the article on my computer. I hope this improved things. Of course you may rearrange the pictures to more suitable locations. Djmaschek ( talk) 05:37, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotr,
We have been making progress on our page. However, we are having problems trying to get someone to review our page that can correct our grammer. Do you have any suggestions? we tried to get an appointment at the writing center, and I tried to get an english professor to look over the page. The writing center is booked. I am still trying to get an appointment, and my english professor that I had is to busy to review our document at this time because he is to busy and our document is to big. The reviewer is giving us 24 hours...
Thanks-- Nas132 ( talk) 12:59, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
An appointment opened up at 5pm. I am able to go I might have to leave class early.-- Nas132 ( talk) 14:42, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you-- Nas132 ( talk) 17:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus!
I replied to your comments on the GAR page, and did a few hours of editing last night, fixing the notes.
Thanks again for your help.
Best regards, Kiefer. Wolfowitz 17:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus! Sure, will do. My new semester started this week, and I've been having a hectic time in RL. I'll be away for a few days, but will check on the students when I get back. Bejinhan talks 13:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank Piotrus for creating this article. I Corps in the West is indeed a notable subject; nobody is arguing that case. But at the moment it's a one-paragraph unreferenced stub. Note that I did not remove the article or list it for deletion. What I would ask you to consider is leaving it as a redirect for now. All the information in the article is at Polish Armed Forces in the West#Army. If you wish to add information, and more importantly, references, they can be added to the PAFW article, and the article resplit when it's reached a reasonable size. Would you mind giving me your thoughts on this? (and would welcome your thoughts, by the way, as our Polish-subjects doyen, on the changes I've been making to Polish Armed Forces and Polish Land Forces. Kind regards Buckshot06 (talk) 19:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
I mean User:Piotrus/Morsels_of_wikiwisdom#On_the_perils_of_anonymity - Solution. How far have you canvassed this? Buckshot06 (talk) 19:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Regarding upload to Commons. This is only a rough version of the file. I'm working slowly on a version with less heavy borders. But I think the "draft version" already got taken to Commons. W. B. Wilson ( talk) 19:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm taking a lot of incoming rounds at FAC, but that is fine. I had the first say and it is better if I let others see what it all means for them.
Yeah, Signpost would be good. Please make it happen if you know how. Of course the reporter can/should report on those that are critical (even scathing) as well. That's the role of the press. And I really think our little Signpost newspaper is something special in terms of reporting on the Wiki, not just being another talk page to debate or article page to form (sometimes collaboratively, sometimes battling).
Dar is going to make it a research project as well (I got lazy when he told me to and asked him, as I don't know how).
Peace.
RetiredUser12459780 ( talk) 02:25, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I'm the anonymous user that started the neutrality debate on the Blue Army page, and now that everyone had a bit of time to cool off... I would like to indirectly address the problem, and raise a few issues that hopefully you could bring up on the discussion page of the Blue Army... this way my novice behavior is not discrediting the debate.
The first issue that struck me as being very bias is the quote by Pavel Korzec:
"Haller's troops established a reputation as, in the words of scholar Pavel Korzec, "the worst torturers of Jews."
One of the most basic rules of objective editing is never to use words such as "best", "worst", or "greatest" to describe anything. To do so is to present a personal point of view. Not only that, anyone can easily discredit that statement by asking a simple question. Worst that who? ...the Roman Legions? ...the Tsarist authorities? ...even worst than the Wehrmacht, or the SS? Really? This statement simply has no place in an objective narrative, but when I stumbled on the page a few day ago it was the very first phrase in the debated section.
The second issue is that of stating seriously contested assertions as facts as noted on the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view page. No one is denying that atrocities against civilians such as the Jews and Ukrainians happened, and no one is denying the Lwów pogrom of 1918. But, what is contested (yet presented a undisputed fact on the page) is the participation of the Blue Army in some of those events. Serious and legitimate doubts are raised as to the location of the Blue Army which was not allowed to cross German territory from France to Poland until four months after the Lwów pogrom, as cited on the page through documented sources. And, the accuracy of those who remembered the events is also put into question by quotes like that Faustian himself provided "What is important here is not facts themselves but the way in which they have been seen and remembered" Finally, there is no mention in the disputed section of the fact that some of those events were exaggerated by international media for political purposes. Please see the excerpt from the Lwów pogrom (1918) page below.
'The initial reports on the number of casualties of the pogroms were exaggerated, sensationalist in nature and often embellished.[37] The large casualty figures and supposed graphic details were transmitted through Berlin, where the new German government disseminated them for political propaganda reasons, hoping that they would affect the peace negotiations and prevent German territorial losses to Poland.[37] The Times, in December 1919 called the contemporary reports of the events "greatly exaggerated", while the Pall Mall Gazette blamed the German Reich for "machinations" and the exaggerations.[37] More accurate estimates from reliable sources, such as the Morgenthau report or American diplomats in the Polish capital, emerged only later.[38],,
In the end, I ask that those issues are addressed, and the article amended to reflect a more neutral interpretation of events in question. For the moment I will refrain from open discussion on the Blue Army Talk page... but, I ask that my concerns and recommendations be raised and addressed. Thank You. -- 76.118.227.161 ( talk) 04:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
The media file you uploaded as File:Zeligowski Lucjan.jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.
It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.
Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).
You may be interested in this. Peter jackson ( talk) 11:11, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Gg first.jpg. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{ di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.
An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Moe ε 19:13, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I'm a little confused at how exactly you would like us to cite our articles/books on our wiki article. We are the open relationship group. Do you prefer us to do the individual page notations when it comes to a book, or do you simply just want the source? Your last few posts in our discussion page has me confused as to what your expectations are. Thanks, and sorry to bother you. Marikathrynarnold ( talk) 00:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I am writing you to let you know that I responded back to a good article reviewer. I will take his criticism into consideration and try to improve certain sections of the article when I return back. I will also look for theories about family honor and how it relates to sociology as we discussed after our last class. It is harder to work from home so when I return to campus I will begin to do research and make changes. I left some questions for the GA reviewer as well you can take a look and comment. You may understand what he's saying more clearly and be able to shed some additional light on the concerns he brought up. I also left a comment under the preliminary review section that I'd appreciate if you could take a look at and comment on. Thanks. Rojast07 ( talk) 02:32, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
On 26 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article German–Polish customs war, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that during a decade of the interbellum, Poland and Germany suffered from a customs war? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Panyd The muffin is not subtle 08:09, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
On 27 November 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Michał Radziwiłł Rudy, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that nobleman and diplomat Michał Radziwiłł Rudy was described as a psychopath by his own cousin, politician Krzysztof Radziwiłł? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Michał Radziwiłł Rudy.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady ( talk) 06:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 10:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot ( talk) 08:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the comments on my section. I went through all of the points and tried to correct as much as I could. I hope it is better now.
Bed28 ( talk) 20:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
We have a citation error at the bottom of our page Double burden and we are not quite sure what or where it is. Can you help us figure it out? Our reviewer asked if we could fix that first before he did the prose review. He also mentioned that he would have fixed but he couldn't find it either. Thank You Jade.Richardson ( talk) 17:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Doomtrader ( talk) 22:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)Hi, I would like to request for not removing the page for Wastelands Interactive. I don't think it's an advertise or spam etc. Could you please restore it for future improvement? Best regards, doomtrader
Hi, I'm looking through the students' articles right now. Since most of the concerns are being addressed at the respective GA nom pages, should I aid the students with meeting those concerns? Or should I leave them to make all the edits? There isn't much activity in the articles' talk pages at the moment. I'm really sorry I've been MIA. I'm trying to edit Wikipedia at a slower "rate" now due to time constraints. Coping with my semester work is taking up a bulk of my time. Bejinhan talks 15:17, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
many thanks! please feel free to make changes in Solahütte you feel necessary and to nominate it. i have no idea how to nominate things and i'm somewhat intimidated about learning the process. cheers. Cramyourspam ( talk) 17:48, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Basically, there were changes to the copyright laws that took effect in 1978. Previously, from the period 1923 - 1977, the item became public domain if it wasn't specifically marked as copyrighted. After 1977, items don't have to be marked copyright and thus won't revert to PD. There's another category re: the period from 1978 to 1985 and proof that copyright wasn't filed for, but it can be a big job or an almost impossible one if we're trying to find that information about an ad, etc.
There's also the aspect re: collective works-ads in magazines can't be claimed as copyrighted under any copyright for the magazine itself. They need their own copyrights and to have been marked as such. Have some links about things like this if you'd like them, as I do a lot of this type of work with photos and ads for free use here.
Google has tweaked its book searches and it's more difficult to get information like this now. :-( It used to be that you could initially search for Life magazine, then after that, do an advanced search which lets you set specific fields for the search. What you need to do now is first search on the magazine title, then grab the first one shown because advanced search is not an option any more until you get to that point. :-(
You can also search eBay for ads and use those if you can view a copy large enough to determine there's no copyright mark. Kellogg's was sort of tough with copyrighting their material for years. There's a long-gone radio show they sponsored, Don McNeill's Breakfast Club, and all of the promotional materials, including the listener postcards, were marked as copyright. If you want to use any of the material now, you would need to check for non-renewal. This is why I wasn't comfortable with just converting the file to PD-1978, as the Flickr uploader may have cropped it. We hope ( talk) 17:52, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your interest in the Wikipedia Education Program's Metrics and Activities Meeting. We're attempting to schedule the next meeting, and we'd like to get your input on days and times that you'd be available. If you're interested in joining us, please fill out this Doodle. We look forward to talking with you then. -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) ( talk) 19:05, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
in helping to eat the pie! Many thanks! We hope ( talk) 20:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Piotrus, I have a lot more articles in mind. If only I had more time... Tymek ( talk) 20:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Teutonic order charge.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Please come back :) // Halibu tt
I've left a message on the GA reviewer's talk page as you suggested. I also responded and made some comments. Feel free to look and comment. I'll do my best to try fixing things over the weekend. Thanks. Rojast07 ( talk) 19:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Please let me know if I did something wrong with the Hugo Kołłątaj B-class review. Orczar ( talk) 17:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Piotrus, is there anything you can do with the students involved with editing this article? The nomination will likely be failed soon if nothing more happen to improve it. Cheers, AstroCog ( talk) 14:07, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Would you be able to consider the recent series of edits to this article regarding pictures and either make edits or comment on talkpages as appropriate? Buckshot06 (talk) 20:13, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Can it really be described as part of the Russo-Turkish War? Just because the two conflicts occurred concurrently does not really make one part of the other. The Ottomans and the RT War is mentioned only very briefly in the article as part of the general background. I removed that part from the infobox. Volunteer Marek 16:29, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Re: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Radzymin (1920). Do you know if there's any timetable for this assessment? It's been there for ages now, nothing new appeared, all issues solved, no further input from anyone. Any ideas whom to poke? // Halibu tt 01:46, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Just thought I would have to say WOOHOO haha. -- Kgw2 ( talk) 23:56, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to address the issue of the disputed photo (Polish Army Soldiers 1951.jpg) on the Poland Land Forces page... I do have an issue with the image, and how Buckshot06 and W. B. Wilson are editing the content.
First, I'd like to state that the image is a poor choice for the page. We are all media savvy, and any newspaper or magazine editor will tell you that there is such a thing as a "bad" picture, which can be used to ridicule a subject. The image in question is just such a picture. There were many images on Wikipedia that were taken down because they were deemed to look too much like "propaganda", or an "advertisement"... So, surely there has to be an opposite of that, and the image in question portrays Poland's military in a less then flattering way. All, you have to do is look at other military pages such as that of United States Army, Canadian Army or even the Israel Defense Forces to see that all the pictures used are neutral, they do not portray the respective armed forces in a superhuman way, but at the same time they do not demean or humiliate the subject. Anyone can upload a lousy picture, add it to a page and start claiming that it is highly relevant to the text. Also, one of your first comments about the (Polish Army Soldiers 1951.jpg) image was "that the soldiers are grinning somewhat... stupidly" so, I am not the only person to see this photo in a negative light.
Another issue is that the photo lacks depth... it is not an image of a historic event, depicting Polish soldiers. It is a "static pose" that should be avoided, since they do not really go with the actual text of the article. Most pictures will have a short description of events depicted, and its significance. But, this image can only say "Polish troops, 1951"... that's it. So, why is this picture so important to Buckshot06 and W. B. Wilson, who are screaming censorship, when I clearly noted on numerous occasions that the picture is a poor choice, and should be replaced, and not because of some political agenda!
Finally, I am very troubled by how Buckshot06 and W. B. Wilson are conducting themselves... after the image in question was not chosen to replace the Eisenhower/Spychalski photo, because of the objections listed above, Buckshot06 went on the Polish Land Forces page, and added the questionable image to that article instead. If you claim to be serious about the legitimacy of Wikipedia, and it's neutral and honest approach, why would you do something like that? In the end, I would like to remove that image from the Land Forces page.-- 76.118.227.161 ( talk) 00:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In Theory of historical trajectory, you recently added links to the disambiguation pages Capital and State ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
I see you've commented on the disambiguation page of the above articles. It's taken me a while to think about it, the best way would have a vote on if the two articles can be easily merged together without any information lost. Of course if they are both merged then both article names would have to change (possibly). Adamdaley ( talk) 11:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Title says it all. Could you please notify the group of what a great job they did? Also, would be kind enough to ping me the next time a set of assignments hit the board? Thanks, Buggie111 ( talk) 02:12, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Kazimierz Karwowski at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 07:34, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Could I stop by your office when you have a chance today? I need to leave early because my brother needs a ride at 4 o'clock, so I was wondering if I could fill out the group work survey before then. Thanks!!!!! BonnieNoel ( talk) 16:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Could you please stop by the Proletarian poetry talk page and let the students know if you think their fixes to the legacy section are sufficient. Cloveapple ( talk) 20:40, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Here is a note reminding you of our unsuccessful attempts to find sources on family in advertising with a global view. Thanks for your help.
Alimosser61 ( talk) 21:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I have done what (in my opinion) my Reviewer has asked. He has made suggestions that are more criticisms which I believe are untrue, at least for my section. I have fixed what I believe needed to be fixed but the rest of his comments I found to be just plain wrong. In the end I am happy with my article however a second opinion would be nice.
Also you told me to mention the references to you, some of mine were red and you said you would fix them. Stboser ( talk) 21:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I discussed with you in class about my section on divorce and was hoping that you could give me some feedback. Thank you! Nll27 ( talk) 21:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I tried to fix the part about it not being a how to.. I entirely deleted what I previously had and wrote a whole new section. But, I will go through again and try to make some changes, and also I will add the blue links in. Thank you!
Nll27 (
talk) 01:24, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Also, I was wondering if you had any suggestions about rewording the last paragraph. I'm sort of having a hard time because our reviewer told me to put a part in about tips from experts, and I don't know how to make it not sound like tips without changing the information.
Nll27 (
talk) 01:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
On 10 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polish Armed Forces in the East (1914–1920), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that numerous Polish formations fought in Russia from the First World War, through the Russian Revolution of 1917 up to the Polish–Soviet War? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Panyd The muffin is not subtle 08:03, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
This image is for the wikipedia page Family Honor. It's an image that relates to the death of a woman mentioned in our article whose story is an example of an honor killing. Honor killings relate to family honor because they are a method of upholding a family's honor within certain cultures. The picture is specifically a picture of the woman who is mentioned within the article. It's a picture of women carrying out her casket from her funeral. Here's the link: http://archive.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=woman-claimed-last-victim-of-honor-killing-2011-03-02 Rojast07 ( talk) 21:45, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Stanisław Dunin-Karwicki at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 00:04, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Pilsudski in Kostiuchnówka's trenches.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:09, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Teutonic order charge.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus I requested a rotation of this image which showed correctly at full resolution but not as a thumbnail. I hope this works. The pic is an excellent one of the entrance to the old Muslim Library which I wish to use here [1].Cheers Robert Notafly ( talk) 13:08, 11 December 2011 (UTC) See also [2] I have not requested a rotation of this image.Do you wish me to? Notafly ( talk) 13:42, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Would you like to review my Gtranslated and cleaned up version of the Polish tank brigade article? Buckshot06 (talk) 14:01, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus!
My name is Peter Horvath, I am a plastic model maker from Hungary. I would like to prepare the Mig 21 which in the Katowice airportin 1/48 scale. I like your photos about then. Have you more pics about this airplane, becouse I need for the painting job. If you can help to me, and you have more picture please send me an email. Thank you!
Peter for Hungary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.92.116.8 ( talk) 07:37, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus!
My name is Peter Horvath, I am a plastic model maker from Hungary. I would like to prepare the Mig 21 which in the Katowice airportin 1/48 scale. I like your photos about then. Have you more pics about this airplane, becouse I need for the painting job. If you can help to me, and you have more picture please send me an email. Thank you!
rustypepe@gmail.com
Peter from Hungary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rustypepe ( talk • contribs) 07:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
On 13 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wroniec (book), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Wroniec, a dark fairy tale by Jacek Dukaj, was a taboo-breaking take on martial law in Poland, which was in effect from 13 December 1981? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wroniec (book).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
On 13 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kazimierz Karwowski, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Kazimierz Karwowski holds the record for being elected to the most Sejms of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kazimierz Karwowski.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 16:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Wonderful job with Wroniec (book). Thankyou for all the great work you do. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:12, 13 December 2011 (UTC) |
Agreed! Probably the best thing we can do is transwiki articles and try to address systematc bias. Will transwiki some Polish related articles today.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to be out of commission for a little bit so I was wondering if you could help with finishing up some work on the new article on Andrzej Bogucki, particularly adding inline citations in, and once it's ready nominating it for DYK (it was created by User:Nienk)? Since it's the holidays, I understand if you're busy as well though. Volunteer Marek 18:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
G'day, Piotrus, I'm not sure if you've seen my comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Łódź insurrection (1905). Are you able to respond to these? As the review has been open longer than 28 days, it will possibly be closed soon by one of the co-ords; it would be a shame for it to stall at this late date. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 06:06, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
On 15 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stanisław Dunin-Karwicki, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the ideas of 17th-century Polish reformer Stanisław Dunin-Karwicki have been both praised as the harbinger of later reforms, and criticized for not going far enough? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stanisław Dunin-Karwicki.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:03, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, may I remove notability template from this article? Kmicic ( talk) 21:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
G'day Piotrus, sorry I missed your comment about this in the ACR. Anyway, the duplicate link tool can be found here: User:Ucucha/duplinks. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 09:26, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Pilsudski in Kostiuchnówka's trenches.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your mssage Piotrus. The discussion preceding the merge was at User_talk:Buckshot06/Archive_17#People.27s_Armies, and W.B. Wilson's talkpage at East European Armies. The aim was to have a single 'Military of X' whatever country main historical page as is WP:MILHIST practice. Hope this message satifies your immediate need for information; I'll respond in a fuller fashion later. Buckshot06 (talk) 18:32, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Just how is one supposedto identify a newcomer ? Jim Sweeney ( talk) 23:38, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:42, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Hey. Just wondering when the grades would be due for the class I'm doing the GA reviews on. I've been absolutely swamped the past couple weeks and want to make sure I get all the prose issues up before time runs out, which it might on my end. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I'm afraid that I've just closed the A class review of Polish Underground State as being unsuccessful. Thanks for nominating this article. Nick-D ( talk) 05:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus -- following on our earlier conversation -- I'm going to fill in a few more redlinks. Could you do me a favor, and look at the last sentence of the first section of this article on the Polish wiki: "W ostatnich latach jego życia zgromadzenie wikariuszy katedralnych wytoczyło mu dochodzenia z powodu niedbałego wypełniania obowiązków administracyjnych i jakoby nieobyczajnego życia." It's too 'interesting' to skip, and there's nothing in my huge New Grove, nor in my Reese Music of the Renaissance (which otherwise covers this guy pretty well) that mentions this -- could you translate it for me? Thank you kindly! Antandrus (talk) 01:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Orleta1939.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
{{
di-replaceable fair use disputed}}
, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse ( talk) 03:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Theory of historical trajectory at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Marrante ( talk) 08:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotr, I have been doing everything that my reviewer has asked me to do, but yet he hasn't closed the review. I was wondering if you could tell me if there is a more efficient way of contacting him besides his talk page and the discussion page of my article. I would have made my last change sooner yesterday if I had not been on a six hour car ride home. I'm honestly quite frustrated with the fact that he waited until the last minute to start giving feedback on my article and now I find myself really stressed about it not receiving the GA status. Is there anything more that I can do other than what I have been doing? Marikathrynarnold ( talk) 14:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you've seen today's Wikimedia blog post. It's about somebody you know.
Best wishes for a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 04:07, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
On 20 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Theory of historical trajectory, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Karl Marx's theory of historical trajectory attempted to prove the long-term unsustainability of capitalism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Theory of historical trajectory.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady ( talk) 14:37, 20 December 2011 (UTC) 16:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotr, there's currently an ongoing discussion about splitting the Stop Online Piracy Act page at Talk:Stop_Online_Piracy_Act#ONGOING_DISCUSSION_-_Splitting_the_Article. You've familiarized yourself with the entry before, and your insight and perspective on the matter would be appreciated. Hope to see you there, Sloggerbum ( talk) 23:42, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:00, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
— Commander (Ping me) 05:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page.
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 21:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I have seen your name on the SOPA talk. I am also against SOPA. I also happen to be a citizen of an Eastern European country, Romania, living in Romania. I am using WIkipedia daily - I am an avid Encyclopaedia reader, and sometimes I also edit. I have noticed that you support and encourage WF to punish me, and others like me around the world, basically severely disturbing our lives by having WP blocked entirely, for something that politicians in a foreing country (USA) did and from which corporatocrats there will profit. I have to be frank here. If this thing happens, it will wreck my life pretty seriously and I am rather sure I did nothing at all to deserve having something like this being done to me. Please tell is there something practical that I can do to avoid this terrible thing that is about to happend to me (WF not allowing me to read it's previously "free" articles)? I mean I know about the right to close WP and the right to fork and that WF doesn't owe anyone anything, but I would have hoped us readers amongst ourselves and the WF have become firends and friends don't do this to one another. SOFT blanks I understand, even a 2-day complete block just for the US I understand, but what could I possibly do to avoid this being done to me, on the suggestion of you and others? I am not represented by anyone in the US congress... They can ban me, do anything they like but I am going to pester you with this question till I get an answer: what did I do to deserve this being done to me and what can I do to stop it (realistically)? Or are people like you just sadistic to defenseles fellow users? 79.112.59.92 ( talk) 23:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal | ||
For your work on Kiev Expedition (1018), Polish culture during World War II and Łódź insurrection (1905), which were promoted to A-Class between August 2008 and December 2011, I am pleased to present you with the Military history A-Class medal. On behalf of the project coordinators, Nick-D ( talk) 10:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
You are invited to the
National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my
stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success!
This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions1 as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic· t 01:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC) 1 Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited. |
On 30 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Triple Alliance (1788), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Triple Alliance of 1788, formed on the verge of the French Revolution, almost led to the war which would have pitted England and Prussia against Russia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Triple Alliance (1788).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 12:33, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Well its the same old "principles" being more important than content. I believe his slate should be wiped clean and allowed to continue using that account and doing what he is doing. We can't afford to block good faith editors regardless of their past. I've asked Amalthea, if he doesn't unblock him you and I and anybody else who supports him should request a unblock formally.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Yeah I know. I've redirected our posts to User:Xeno as Amalthea seems to be out of town. I will be creating a few Polish related articles later BTW. Feel free to give me some red link requests whenever you want!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:33, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Wow just noticed we don't even have building and structure categories for each region of Poland!! Must sort that..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:43, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI. The above listed discussion regards your DYK nomination for Public Domain Day. While I do not believe your presence is currently required at the discussion, your presence could assist with some of the concerns raised. -- Allen3 talk 13:04, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
On 31 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Defilada, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Andrzej Fidyk's documentary Defilada about North Korea, despite its anti- totalitarian message, was initially praised both by communist Poland's censors and in North Korea itself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Defilada.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 13:18, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.
This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn ( talk) and The ed17 ( talk) 17:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus, I'm afraid that I've just closed the A class review of this article as not being successful as it did not attract the necessary level of support. Thank you for nominating it, and please feel free to re-nominate the article in the future if you believe that the A class criteria are met. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 23:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
On 1 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Public Domain Day, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Public Domain Day is celebrated on January 1 in several countries, but not in the United States or Australia, where no works will enter the public domain until 2019 and 2026 respectively? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Public Domain Day.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 14:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Bloody Wednesday (Poland), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bund ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I will nominate Archduchess Sophie of Austria and Ladislaus of Anjou. Is that okay, to nominate two at once? -- Alexcoldcasefan ( talk) 17:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello there. Sadly, the article on the Battle of Radzymin failed at A-class assessment due to procedural reasons. All the issues were fixed but only two people actually voted for it. Since you helped to improve the article in the past, could I interest you in the new assessment? Thanks for any help. // Halibu tt 12:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
On a DYK you noted "missing wikiproject assessment template on talk, please add". I am not sure what this is. Pointers? Maury Markowitz ( talk) 16:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello, could you send me your e-mail? I've got photos from PSB. My e-mail is kmicic.wiki (at) wp.pl. Kmicic ( talk) 23:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
On 4 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Russo-Prussian alliance, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 1764 Russo-Prussian alliance, formed two years after the signatories clashed in the Seven Years' War, allowed them to intervene in internal matters of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Russo-Prussian alliance.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 08:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Collegium Nobilium (Olomouc), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Collegium Nobilium. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 17:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi this name isn't correct can you move it to the appropriate name?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
I just noticed his page. Interesting guy! Among the many changes you made on Jan. 3, you added this sentence:
During that time he developed extensive contacts at various European courts in Courland (Karlsbad), Austria (Vienna), Italy (Turin) and France (Paris).
The mention of Karlsbad as the location of the Courland court seems to be incorrect, since Courland is located in what is now Latvia and its capital in those days was Jelgava, while Karlsbad is the German name for a town in the Czech Republic which is now known as Karlovy Vary. Or am I missing something? Please double-check. DutchmanInDisguise ( talk) 15:26, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
On 6 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Konrad Prószyński, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Polish writer and educator Konrad Prószyński, author of internationally recognized primers, had to struggle with the censorship in the Russian Empire? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Konrad Prószyński. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 16:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
I've changed the hook a bit. Let me know if it is satisfactory or not. Regards, -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 05:48, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately your comment confirms that the current atmosphere is not a result of my edits but of the recent block of one of Poeticbent’s socks. Unfortunately it confirms that the latest activity of VM, MMA and Vecrumba (the latest) might be seen as an attempt to punish the one who has done something "evil" to a buddy. Should I mention that all of you were active members of the EEML and once banned for tagteaming, canvassing and battleground mentality?
If Poeticbent believes he should be allowed to edit again he should ask an Admin. What he shouldn’t do is to ignore the block and create large sockfarms. This is rather a basic rule and I’m sure you, as a former Admin, know it.
My personal opinion on Poeticbent’s contributions and the justification of his block is completely irrelevant. But you shouldn’t expect a recommendation as far as I’m concerned. HerkusMonte ( talk) 09:20, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Have you considered revisiting Talk:Isaac and Miria/GA1. It has been about 11 days since the review. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 23:08, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
On 8 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bloody Wednesday (Poland), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that one of the largest operations of the Combat Organization of the Polish Socialist Party became known as the Bloody Wednesday? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bloody Wednesday (Poland).You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
I'll work with both articles once I get to that point. Orczar ( talk) 01:32, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
It's a good question, and one I've never really figured out. But, Category:Transport infrastructure comes under Category:Infrastructure which is in Category:Buildings and structures (a classification which is copied in the PL category tree, which with the help of Cat Scan is why they appeared in my list). Road sure aren't buildings but I can see them being called structures, yes. (Similar arguments for reservoirs, locks etc). Severo T C 14:11, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Category:Honorverse templates, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 13:20, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
You appear to have overlooked my review - if you could see to the corrections that would be useful, otherwise I'll fail the article and you can see to them at leisure before renominating. Thanks, Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 13:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
On 11 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Siedlce pogrom, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Siedlce pogrom in the Congress Poland was organized by the Russian Empire's secret police, and carried out by the Imperial Russian Army, whose soldiers were later decorated? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siedlce pogrom.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Thanks for your article Victuallers ( talk) 16:02, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
The hunt for the best time for our January edition of the outreach:Wikipedia Education Program Metrics and Activities Meeting is underway. If you're interested in joining us, please fill out your availability on this Doodle by Monday, January 16, so we can schedule the meeting. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) ( talk) 22:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Can you propose an alt hook for Template:Did you know nominations/Scipione Piattoli? :) -- LauraHale ( talk) 00:11, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Prokonsul,
Hope you don't mind me sending you a message on here, I couldn't find a way of contacting you direct from your Wikipedia user page.
I work as a freelance video/AV editor and I am interested in using your "Clouds above Poland" image in a small project for a local company. I am being paid for the work so would be happy to pay you an amount to use the image, subject to my client's approval-I could afford €40 from my budget. I hope this would be agreeable to you, I can provide more details as to my intended usage if you wish.
Thanks,
Charlie Goodliffe charlie@thebrownroom.co.uk 90.220.67.205 ( talk) 21:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
On 13 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Armia Ludowa, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the exploits of the Polish partisan People's Army have been significantly exaggerated by the propaganda of the People's Republic of Poland? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Armia Ludowa.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
On 13 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polish–Prussian alliance, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Prussia refused to meet its obligations from the Polish–Prussian alliance of 1790, and instead of aiding Poland during the Polish–Russian War of 1792, helped Russia to quell the Kościuszko Uprising the following year? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Polish–Prussian alliance.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 16:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
The Content Review Medal of Merit | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured article reviews for the period October–December 2011, I am delighted to award you the Content Review Medal. Buggie111 ( talk) 17:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC) |
In reply to your comment at User talk:Black Falcon#Deletion review for Category:Freemasons:
I appreciate your notification; I was returning from a wiki-break at the time and, therefore, did not notice your post until the DRV had closed. For reference, the list of the category's original contents is available here. Cheers, -- Black Falcon ( talk) 20:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Nominations for the " Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D ( talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.
Hello, First of all, thank you for reviewing the What Work Is page. I will try to fix everything on it to make it up to snuff. I was part of the class project that was working on the page and the class has ended. But i care about the page and want it to work. So i will be trying to fix it up. I don't want to waste anymore of your time (i apologize for no one responding within the quite respectable amount of time that was given) so who would be a good person i could contact about certain aspects of editing? The plagarism parts confuse me but i will go back and look at the talk pages to see what the deal is. Thank you very much.
Jason Slavin
Piotrus, I have done a good amount of work. A great deal was word for word plagiarized than i had thought. I eliminated all of the plagiarism and fixed up the ferw references that were incomplete. Could you take a look at it and tell me what else may need to be done in order to nominate for GA statuse again? Thank you for your time! 76.126.173.103 ( talk) 23:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
On 17 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Scipione Piattoli, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the figure of Abbé Morio in Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace was modeled on Scipione Piattoli (pictured), one of the drafters of the Polish Constitution of May 3, 1791? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Scipione Piattoli.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 16:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Did anybody tell you that one of your articles was mentioned in yesterday's New York Times? [3] — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 17:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
SarahStierch ( talk) 21:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Piotrus, you may want to look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Pope John Paul II/archive3? -- Marek. 69 talk 02:23, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Ed
[talk]
[majestic titan] 00:33, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I've reworded a new sentence to the POMOA article now. -- Soman ( talk) 09:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I want to ask You for Your permission (or The Wikipedia permission) to paste informations about Polish composers from site www.pwm.com.pl. Do we have to sign an agreement or a licence? We have a lot of informations and we want to share it. PolishMusicLover1945 ( talk) 07:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
The January meeting has been scheduled. For instructions on joining and a time converter, see outreach:Wikipedia Education Program Metrics and Activities Meeting. Hope you can join the meeting. -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) ( talk) 20:57, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Let me know how the tool is doing, I haven't heard anything from you in a while. ΔT The only constant 00:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:25, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Nice work on the references at
Public Domain Day, that's a cleaner method, uncluttered and easier to find refs within a text. I might start it as my default method. Of course it won't stop others from adding new refs inline, creating a sort of mixed bag, but hopefully perhaps over time this method will become a best practice site wide.
Green Cardamom (
talk) 21:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
The Invisible Barnstar | ||
Thank you for contributing to the December 2011 Good Article nomination backlog elimination drive. AstroCog ( talk) 23:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Piotrus,
I know you have been well acquainted with academic research about Wikipedia for years. Any chance you could spend some time before tomorrow evening UTC to contribute something to the upcoming issue of the Wikimedia Research Newsletter? It just turns out that my co-editor Dario (WMF's research analyst) is unable to contribute this time due to travel and other obligations. I'm committed to getting this issue out as scheduled, but it might be a bare-boned version. Even a short summary (2-3 sentences) of a paper that interests you would be helpful. The draft page with a list of items that are intended be covered here and the coordination Etherpad (where one can sign up to cover a particular paper) is here. Thanks, and even if you can't find time on such short notice, your feedback and suggestions/contributions for future issues continue to be very welcome.
Regards, Tbayer (WMF) ( talk) 13:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
On 30 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abolition of serfdom in Poland, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the abolition of serfdom in Poland was spurred by unrest and uprisings such as the Kraków Uprising and the January Uprising? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Abolition of serfdom in Poland.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:03, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Grapple X ( submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Ruby2010 ( submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Jivesh boodhun ( submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!
The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.
A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.
We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.
A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
On 1 February 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zgromadzenie Przyjaciół Konstytucji Rządowej, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Society of Friends of the Constitution, formed in 1791 to support the Constitution of 3 May, was the first Polish political party? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zgromadzenie Przyjaciół Konstytucji Rządowej.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Cześć! Dzięki za powitanie na enwiki – wreszcie się doczekałem ;) Pozdrawiam serdecznie, -- Mikołka 18:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks so much! This totally made my day. - Darwin/Peacock [Talk] 20:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at WP:GL/M#Map translation: Battle of Bautzen (1945)'s talk page. I posted a couple of questions for you on the 'shop. Regards! -- Orionist ★ talk 06:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the Sociology Barnstar for my work on A Community of Witches! It's nice to feel appreciated. ( Midnightblueowl ( talk) 17:22, 2 February 2012 (UTC))
There is a dispute regarding an image that was scanned from a old Polish magazine form the communist era. The person who uploaded the file claims that since it was a state owned publisher, the photograph can be copied due to an alleged public domain claim. I myself believe that even during communist era, publishers and photographers protected their work form being ripped-off, or missuses by other printing houses... and I doubt that there is no copyright protection whatsoever. Also, the image itself was scanned form "Radio i Telewizja" weekly magazine, so the image may not actually be of Polish solders, but of TV stand-ins, and since the person who uploaded the image did not provide additional information when asked... the status and subject matter of the picture is unclear. If you have any knowledge on this subject, your input would be much appreciated, at this point I'm trying to get other users involved, and resolve this issue. Discussion page: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Polish_Army_Soldiers_1951.jpg -- 76.118.227.161 ( talk) 01:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Stanisław Staszic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slavic ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Piotrus. Could you excerpt and translate the portion of the link your provided (which is in Polish, which unfortunately I do not speak, and it would be faster for you to do so, rather than for me to attempt Google Translate) which authoritatively states or confirms that Szymborska called for the death penalty for the priests in question. Thanks. Quis separabit? 00:58, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
I would like to improve WP:MEDRS (medicine project), in particular with respect to its excessive weight given to secondary sources, which discourage contributors. I would like an experienced wikilawyer to monitor/assist the process: if I understood wp now, this became necessary. i can give more details. Are you interested? Mehmedmed ( talk) 15:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmedmed ( talk • contribs) 12:00, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
The Sociology Barnstar | ||
For excellence and dedication in your work on WikiProject Sociology. | ||
this WikiAward was given to Piotrus by Meclee ( talk) on 18:51, 4 February 2012 (UTC) |
i am trying to mention open research in WP policies What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:No original research (by specifying that wikipedia is not an open research tool, despite its appearance) but other editors do not want to, and there is beginning of edit war.
I cannot manage it, but i still think that mentioning alternatives (open research websites) can provide an incentive to openness, if established wikipedians do not want people to leave wp for or websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmedmed ( talk • contribs) 22:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Mehmedmed ( talk) 22:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Piotr! My previous message here seems to have slipped under your radar. So just to remind you, I finished your request at the Map Workshop but need you to answer a couple of questions before I upload the files. They are at WP:GL/M#Map translation: Battle of Bautzen (1945). Cheers! -- Orionist ★ talk 16:38, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
We're in a bit of a pickle in the Wagner discussion page. The issues concerns Social class (sociology) and the phrase supposedly common Germanic past and has now been dismissed by some editors as inconsequential.
At the end of the Wagner discussion page (under Edit War solution topic) there issome suggested courses of action that I was requested to list, from my point of view. Please help. Just take fast look. Thank you
In the introduction, removed as non consequential
In the Biography chapter removed as non consequential
User:Major Torp ( talk) 15:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I am a student working on the Thomas Green Clemson Wikipedia page. I had just recently made a rather large edit for the current size of the page and was wondering if you had any feedback for me that would make my page better. My user page is User:Chewey93 so please contact me if you have any tips. Thank you.
Is the site yours? Don't worry I did the job for you and removed it.
Hello. You have a new message at WP:GL/M#Map translation: Battle of Bautzen (1945)'s talk page.