Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:30, 1 February 2006

Talk archives: Archive 1 (moved Jan 17, 2005), Archive 2 (moved Feb 21, 2005), Archive 3 (moved May 19, 2005), Archive 4 (moved July 14, 2005), Archive 5 (moved September 27, 2005), Archive 8 (moved November 23, 2005), Archive 9 (moved January 7, 2006)

Geography of Poland discussion

Could you take a look at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Geography of Poland#Terminology? Logologist has begun renaming some of the voivodships (Lower Silesia to Dolny Śląsk), but I don't believe a clear consensus has been reached regarding terminology. Olessi 05:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Chickens War, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

My Request for Adminship

List of Poles - UTF

Now that even English Misplaced Pages is in UTF-8, maybe you could correct the links in your list of Poles from PSB so that it links to the version with diactrics? It would also make it easier to import to Polish Misplaced Pages. Ausir 23:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

BIOS - Biological Innovation for Open Society requested move

See Talk:BIOS - Biological Innovation for Open Society. Basically I feel that the redirect rather than the article has the better article name, so I would like to have the redirection reversed. Jokermage 10:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Dziadek

Myślę że tak, choć pewnie bardziej przez pryzmat książki (autor wspomnień - bla-bla-bla) niż jako żandarm, policjant itd. Halibutt 04:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Notability (people)

• Published authors, editors, and photographers who have written books with an audience of 5,000 or more or in periodicals with a circulation of 5,000 or more

A skoro o dziadkach mowa... Jerzy Kaźmirkiewicz Halibutt 14:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Kategoria

Możesz usunąć kategorię Category:Polish comic book artists? Dubluje się z Category:Polish comics artists.--SylwiaS | talk 23:43, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Dzięki. Uporządkowałam subkategorie w Category:Polish artists i przepisałam kogo się dało do subkategorii. Straszny bałagan! I bardzo dziwni ludzie. Niektóre artykuły wyglądają na samopromocję.--SylwiaS | talk 01:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Categories

Piotruś, can I convince you to hold off on creating additional categories for History of Poland and Polish people, based on the discussion on the board? Appleseed (Talk) 04:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

To subdivide the History of Poland category, I propose we use the naming scheme from Template:History of Poland, which avoids the awkwardness and imprecision of the "statehood" naming scheme.

• Category:Prehistory of Poland (until 966)
• Category:History of Poland (966–1370)
• Category:History of Poland (1370–1572)
• Category:History of Poland (1572–1795)
• Category:History of Poland (1795–1918)
• Category:History of Poland (1918–1939)
• Category:History of Poland (1939–1945)
• Category:History of Poland (1945–1989)
• Category:History of Poland (1989–present)

You'll notice that I made some changes to the years. I believe the death of Kazimierz Wielki, and not the Union of Krewo, to be a better dividing point between PotP and PotJ. Also, I prefer 1572, rather than 1569, as the divider between the PotJ and PLC. However, I'm still not sure if 1989 or 1990 is the better year to divide between PRL and 3PR. I plan to eventually adjust the dates in the exiting articles to match these changes. What do you think? Appleseed (Talk) 21:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

copied to Misplaced Pages talk:Polish Wikipedians' notice board.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I stay prided

I am poses more pride in aided to your interesting history. i expect why my humble and little "grains of sand" served how any remeber or less ligth reference respect at these historical questions.

of all topics why composed,exist one why i am poses much curiosity in confirm,i refer to Polish coastal battery and your actions during polish defensive campaing.

these heavy artillery piece was mentioned for spanish author and refer also about enemy vessels why figthing too.

i this exists,if another little knowed or forget historical sucess between of Polish military history.

more thanks

writer23

Vandalism

Please stop adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.. This is regarding your edit to the page Benjamin Franklin. - CobaltBlueTony 17:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for that clarification. Thought maybe you were slipping to the "dark side". ;-) - CobaltBlueTony 17:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Polish naming dispute

Piotrus, we seem to be having some fundamental disagreements on multiple article naming issues, such as at , , and most especially at Talk:List of Polish monarchs, where you exhibited behavior that I found highly questionable, especially for an administrator. I have spent some time reading through a few of the various naming discussions, and I have to admit a concern about your actions. There seems to be a pattern of you making a proposal, letting people post about it, and then you ignore their concerns and just go ahead and do whatever you proposed, without achieving consensus.

Before taking further action though, I would like to propose a method of dispute resolution.

Some of your ideas are good ones, have merit, and may be worth implementing. Also, please assume good faith on my part -- I am not biased against the Polish language or Polish spelling, and I do my best to incorporate relevant translations and the appropriate diacriticals when I write my own articles. In terms of an article title in an English-language encyclopedia though, I feel strongly that it needs to be something that "most English speakers" could find, understand, pronounce, and easily communicate to other people in a verbal discussion. For example the "Polski Słownik Biograficzny" title, in my opinion, did not meet those criteria. Speaking for myself, even though I am fairly familiar with Polish language and spelling, even I have trouble remembering how to spell it, I am still not certain how to pronounce it, and if I were trying to verbally describe to someone what page they should link to, it would be very difficult with the Polish title, unless of course they spoke Polish. It is my opinion that your familiarity with the Polish language may be clouding your judgment as to what "common English" means.

Having said the above, I do agree with you about guidelines. And I agree that I would like to see something consistent, which is supported by consensus, even if the consensus disagrees with my own opinion! I am a big fan of consistency.

Would you join me in trying to resolve this matter? I suggest that we set up a page or section somewhere with a specific wording for a policy or guideline change, and then we make it as visible as possible. I would join you in finding places to invite comment, both via RfC and by personally inviting the various Wikipedians who have participated in these discussions in the past. You and those who support your side could make your case, and the opposing opinions could also be heard, and then we will see if we can reach a consensus solution, which will be written into the official guideline pages. If you truly believe that your way is the best way, then we should put it to the community at large and let you make your case. I give you my word that I am willing to go along with consensus, if you are. Elonka 04:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC) (feel free to reply here on your own page, I'll set up a watch for the discussion)

Piotrus, from my own perspective, I am quite .. I don't know even how to described it in English. The official guideling is about article naming scheme, and is not dealing with the what appears in article itself. So it was always acceptable to have it Boleslaw I of Poland and then in side the article, simply Boleslaw I the Brave (or whatever). the (naming and titles) naming conventions was always very clear about that. I wish I was tracking the discussion - it must be I was busy with other things on the time, but I strongly oppose your page moves. Szopen 08:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Tuchel heath

I thought this was a myth. This isn't my area of expertise, so would you mind looking into it? Appleseed (Talk) 16:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Katowice

Hey! Napiszę po polsku, bo z angielskim mam "jeszcze trochę" problemów. Wybacz, że usunełem zdjęcie z artykułu Katowice - poprostu chciałem, aby strona wyglądała jak najlepiej. A teraz zdjęcia nachodzą na siebie i pozostaje pustka między zdaniami. No trudno...
A tak po za tym - też chcę aby język ANGIELSKI panował na świecie :-) (hehehe). Jak by co to "narazie" jeśli piszesz coś do mnie na dyskusję to polecam język polski (narazie). W razie czego jestem głównie na pl.Wiki. Pozdrawiam --LUCPOL 16:11, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Już trochę artykuł poprawiłem. Zdjęcia już na siebie nie nachodzą bo dodałem tekstu. Wszystkie zdjęcia są już w commons, ale atrakcyjność artykułu polega między innymi na...mediach. Proponuję zostawić te zdjęcia tak jak są, a jedynie dodawać stopniowo tekst. Wtedy będzie w pozio :-)
...choć, jeśli usuniesz z artykułu zdjęcie "przekopanego" katowickiego ronda to będzie super (ta grafika jest w commons, więc się nie musisz martwić, że się straci). Pozdrawiam --LUCPOL 17:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Re:Categories/list tool?

I replied on my talk page. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Józef Hauke-Bosak

I'm not sure why you think that stubs don't need to be in decent English and to be presented clearly. The article is still in rather fractured English, and I've replaced the template until I or someone else can clean it up. Please don't remove it until the work has been done. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Piast

I don't think Piast or his father Chościsko were (legendary) rulers of Poland. According to the story, Piast deposed Popiel and made his son Siemowit ruler, but did not rule himself. Just wanted to let you know that I'll be removing the cats. Appleseed (Talk) 03:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, we could create a subcat of "Polish people" for legendary Poles. Appleseed (Talk) 03:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Polish Characters

Dear Proconsul Piotrus, please check the Polish characters. They are wrong. Best regards. Gustav Korwin-Szwedowski 05:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Cheers

Hi! I don't mean to intrude, but I noticed you have made some edits to the Cheers article in the past! I've given the article a serious reworking and I hope it can garner your support on it's FAC. Thanks again! Staxringold 01:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

About Polish characters

Dear Proconsul Piotrus, thank you for fix it so quickly. Gustav Korwin-Szwedowski 07:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

request for assistance

hello! I am in a dire need of some detective work ;) ...

I am certain that one of administrators who object against putting marijuana-related information at Polish wikipedia has deleted my translation work at:

pl:Wikipedysta:Devein:Uprawa konopii

(original link: Wikipedysta:Devein:Uprawa konopii )

Which is more strange, he/she erased also the history, so I cannot even prove that my work ever existed.

I've sent similar information to pl:Wikipedysta:TOR , without any response.

I would be very grateful if you could assist in detection of person/persons who deleted my work. Perhaps you can redirect me to persons who have some low-level wikipedia system access.

Thanks,

--Devein 12:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, i found who did it: pl:Wikipedysta:Gdarin. I've filed a request to him for recovery of my article.

Don't you think that I should make a complaint for such "rude" behavior?

Worried about Polish Misplaced Pages, --Devein 19:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedysta Gdarin nie przyjął mojej argumentacji, odmówił przywrócenia strony.

Nie jestem długo na wikipedii, nie chciałbym z tym narobić może niepotrzebnego rabanu w stylu zgłoszenia do AMA, co mam zrobić innego w takiej sytuacji? Jasno myśląc, uważam że moja argumentacja (w dużej mierze analiza prawna Marka Snowa) jest prawidłowa i Wikipedysta Gdarin powinien ją uznać.

Dzięki za pomoc, --Devein 19:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: Trubetskoy, etc

You may want to check my old note on Talk:Trubetskoy. I hoped to make good the article on this family, but was stymied by some nationalist clowns, who maintained that the Trubetskoys have been Belarusian or Polish rather than Russian and so had to give up in disgust. Of course the Trubetskoys were too polonophobic to be classified as Polish nobility. As for the nomenclature, their original name was Trubchevsky, derived from the town Trubchevsk which was their original demesne. Shortly after the Time of Troubles, the family went extinct in Russia, while its last scion, an ardent supporter of Wladyslaw, moved to Poland, converted to Catholicism, while his name Trubchevsky was polonized as Trubecki. Several decades later his grandson returned to Russia, where his Polish surname Trubecki was depolonized as Trubetskoy (Gallic spelling: Troubetzkoy). Hence, we should use Trubchevsky for the period until 1625, Trubecki for the next few decades, and Trubetskoy for the later period. Cheers, Ghirla | talk 17:42, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Copied to Talk:Trubetskoy as well as my original message from your talk page, let's hope we can fix this mess after all.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Cześć Piotruś

Z tego co wiem jesteś socjologiem. Mam do Ciebie czysto techniczne pytanie. Czy orientujesz może jak można z liczby populacji teoretycznie określić procentowy udział kobiet, mężczyzn i dzieci ? To znaczy chodzi mi o to czy są jakieś statystyczne prawidłowości które mówią że z reguły kobiet jest tyle procent, dzieci tyle procent, mężczyzn tyle i tyle procent. --Molobo 01:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Polański

Shouldn't the article Roman Polanski be moved to Roman Polański?--SylwiaS | talk 18:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I've just asked there.--SylwiaS | talk 09:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Moving categories

Hi, I wanted to move some categories but there's no move button. Is that a privileged operation?

• Category:Polish titles -> Category:Polish historical titles
• Category:Treasurer -> Category:Polish Grand Treasurers

Appleseed (Talk) 22:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Questionable edits

An anon. has been editing things into the "Oda von Haldensleben" and "Dagome iudex" articles that look questionable. Would you care to take a look? logologist|Talk 02:26, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Cheers

Thanks for your comments! Please check out the FAC for a response to your comment, hopefully turning your conditional support into full-fledged support! :) Staxringold 22:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Added the written source I know you were interested in. Staxringold 23:51, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Józef Olszyna-Wilczyński, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Russian troll

After vandalizing Belarusian language and History of Belarus article (and totally dirupting editing of these two articles), the Russian troll Kuban Kazak continued his activities on the article about my native town Vorsha (). I would like to ask Misplaced Pages admins and Misplaced Pages community members as what I should do in such a situation. Thank you very much. --rydel 14:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Wojsko

Talk:Wojsko_Polskie#So_what.3F - AFAIR you are the only admin to take part in the discussion - and the only one to be able to perform the move as suggested at the talk page some... 7 months ago. Halibutt 12:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Article about MechWarrior: Vengeance

I added few external links to pages where I got informations for the article. Is that what you meant with references? MechWarrior:_Vengeance#External_links Walter Smith 12:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I haven't found any article about a computer game that has cited it's sources. It leads me to assumption that articles about game generally doesn't have this. A reply in article ] seems to corroborate with my assumption. Walter Smith 15:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely sure of that? Try StarCraft, for instance... —Nightstallion (?) 15:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, ok. Article about Starcraft has cited few sources. My problem with sources is that everything I wrote in the article is knowledge gained from playing the game itself (perhaps also from reading of the manual). Should I write that my source is the game and its manual? Walter Smith 16:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

János Kornai

Dear Piotrus!

My name is Tamás Kornai, grandson of János Kornai. I would like to thank you that you maintain that Misplaced Pages page about my grandfather, we really appreciate that. Please note, that you keep claiming he is also known as Josef Kornai. I can assure you he was never called Josef, neither will be called Josef. József Kornai is a fairly unknown hungarian painter. If you have any comments on it, please write to the mail address kornait-online.hu

Thank you, Tamás Kornai

I guess the source I found was the only example of such a mispelling; in that case you are right we don't have to repeat it here, I was under the impression it is more popular. If you register, I could leave you this msg directly.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 13:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Dzielnice Katowic

Zrobiłem już 17 dzielnic (nie licząc twojego Osiedla Tysiąclecia). Narazie wszystkie to stuby. Reszta dzielnic i informacji o dzielnicach w miarę moich możliwości czasowych. Pozdrawiam. --LUCPOL 13:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: email

Thanks for getting back. For sake of continuity, I've placed a response on my user page. logologist|Talk 00:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

matthawkins404@hotmail.com

Request for assistance

Hello, Piotrus. As one of our Polish Wikipedians (I remember your assistance over the article about Witold Lutosławski), please can you look at pl:Grafika:Olivier_messiaen.jpg? It is listed there as in the public domain, but I am absolutely certain it is not. Everywhere I see the image used (here, on the cover of my copy of Jennifer Bate's recording of Livre d'orgue, on the cover of Paul Griffiths' "Olivier Messiaen and the Music of Time") it is always © Malcolm Crowthers. I think the PD assertion must incorrect, but I don't speak Polish, nor do I understand how the Polish Misplaced Pages deals with such problems. The error encouraged one of our French Wikipedian colleagues to upload it in error to commons, which is how I noticed it. Any chance you could take a look and do something to corrected the PD assertion? Best regards, RobertG ♬ talk 12:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. To be clear: I have sorted the problem on English Misplaced Pages and on Commons - but the PD tag on Polish Misplaced Pages really needs to change (either that or the image needs to be removed), because as it stands I'm sure it's a copyvio, and that's where I needed your kind assistance. Regards, RobertG ♬ talk 14:16, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Jogaila

An apparent Scot, User:Calgacus, has moved Władysław II Jagiełło to Jogaila of Lithuania, as "More sensible, less Polonocentric name." Ditto in Battle of Grunwald. Any thoughts? logologist|Talk 15:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Please go to discussion before reverting other people's work. The name you choose to move this king to is not acceptable on any reasoning. And even if an objective user (well, I'm neither Polish nor Lithuanian at least) such as myself lets it go, you can be sure that Lithuanian users in the future will make you go through the same process again. I regarded and still regard my move as uncontroversial. Maybe you can keep that in mind next time you post obnoxious comments on other people's talk pages, or at least make an attempt at discussion. Thanks. - Calgacus 17:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

History of Poland

FYI, I created three new cats under Category:History of Poland

• Category:History of Poland (1795–1918)
• Category:History of Poland (1918–1939)
• Category:History of Poland (1939–1945)

I created only these for now because their start and end dates are less ambiguous than those of the other periods of Polish history. We can add the other ones later. Appleseed (Talk) 18:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I thought I posted something somewhere about moving the "history" articles, but I don't think I got any responses (this was a while ago). I'll check to make sure. As for Category:Years in Poland, I think it should be deleted. If some poor soul actually did create categories for the remaining 1000+ years of Polish history that are missing from that category, I think they would be doing WP a disservice. I think it's overkill and inelegant to boot. Would you object to deleting it? Appleseed (Talk) 03:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

When the day comes when we can put even one article in each of those 1000 categories (I shudder to think of it), it will be easy enough to create them. Right now they're just clutter. I think they should meet their maker. :) Appleseed (Talk) 03:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The Sejm and democratic peace theory

The Sejm was originally left out in a simplifying edit by Robdurbar, which omitted almost all of the examples, and all those before 1800. Since the article had started to grow again, I have put it back in.

Ultramarine has come back again, and added his usual list of objections to anything he didn't write or which doesn't advocate the Truth according to UltraPedia. Some people would rather argue than edit. He has made the Sejm one of these complaints . You may wish to comment at Talk:Democratic_peace_theory#Poland-Lithuania.

I would in fact be obliged if you were to read the whole article, and then took a look at the list of objections. In many of them, Ultramarine reads the present article text as saying something I didn't mean it to say, and don't think it does. I am emotionally involved, and my English may have been too colloquial. But this would be more trouble for you. Septentrionalis 17:51, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Sociological view of anti-vaccinationists

I wonder if your colleague might be persuaded? Midgley 01:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Indo-Greek kingdom

Thanks for your (belated) support (and good suggestions) to the Indo-Greek Kingdom article! PHG 05:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

High Medieval Scotland Article

Thank you for your assistance on peer review (the gesture of reconciliation is also appreciated BTW :) ). I have a question though. If the bibliography is renamed "References", then what name does one give to the citations section (also called "references")? - Calgacus 23:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Zarubin i Katyń

Ciekawostka: jest sobie polski artykuł o Wasilim Zarubinie, jednym ze śledczych z Katynia. Jednocześnie jego oficjalna biografia (na stronie rosyjskiego wywiadu!) wspomina, że w początkach 1940 był jednym z oficerów odpowiedzialnych za współpracę z Gestapo... Zastanawiające. Halibutt 01:52, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Mój błąd, chyba jednak nie zrozumiałem do końca o co z tym gestapo chodziło. Będę musiał toto jeszcze raz przeczytać. Póki co zajmuję się odczerwienianiem linków z artykułu o Katyń massacre, w szczególności tych związanych z moim hobby - generalicją. Na razie mam już trzech generałów, będzie więcej. Halibutt 02:09, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Not that I expected anything more sensible... Halibutt 11:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

links

Hi, sorry if I goofed. Were you referring to the linked years? They shouldn't be linked unless there's a very good reason to do so, or the date (day) is included. See WP’s policy on this at Misplaced Pages:Make only links relevant to the context; see other information at Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (links)#Internal links, Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Date formatting and Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Dates_linking_convention_currently_ludicrous. Tony 10:58, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Piotrus,

Thanks so very much for supporting the recent FAC of Cheers. It was successful and Cheers has been promoted! I'm looking forward to hopefully getting Cheers on the front page. In the mean time, please accept this Beer as a token of my gratitude.

Could you please take a look at list of charismatic leaders

See Talk:List_of_charismatic_leaders#See_also? thanks. Andries 19:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Greater Poland Uprising

Hi Piotruś, would you mind moving Greater Poland Uprising 1806 to Greater Poland Uprising of 1806? Thanks. Appleseed (Talk) 22:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Why not "Greater Poland Uprising (1806)"? logologist|Talk 01:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd recommend discussing it at the relevant page and then coming back to me :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Irving's credibility

"are all of his works non-credible?" Yes, all of his works are non-credible. After his neo-Nazi interpretations were challenged, historians investigated his earlier works like Uprising or his account of PQ-17, back to his first publications. In these early works (and earlier still) he falsified, mischaracterised, and habitually grossly mistranslated. When Irving has claimed access to special knowledge, as in Uprising this has been pure fabrication. "has it been confirmed he lied about facts?" Yes. This is unfortunate for the encyclopedist, as Irving's coverage appears to be broad in scope, and his works are readily and freely accessable in English to the internet public, unfortunately he needs to give away his works because they're unmarketable as history. Fifelfoo 23:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

My recommendation regarding using Irving as a citation is: don't. It is bad encyclopedism. It is bad history. It will make historians doubt the value of the article in question. If (and you seem to) you have Polish language, then cite Polish language sources, rather than Irving, even if Irving is the only widely available English language source. Fifelfoo 00:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Categories

It's quite simple, you don't need to add a category whose subcategory you've already added. For example, if you have put a hawk into a category named bird, you don't need to add the category animal into the hawk-article because Cat:bird already is in Cat:animal, so it's redundant. In this case, Category:World War II crimes is a subcategory of Category:History of Poland. As I can see, you've studied computer science, so you might know that concept from Inheritance_(computer_science).--Anti-Flag 23:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Check your email

--SylwiaS | talk 00:25, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Nagórski

Moje najnowsze dziecię, tym razem dość dopracowane (choć copyedit potrzebny na gwałt): Jan Nagórski vel Ivan Nagursky. Czy mógłbyś dodać toto do WP:DYK? Chodzi mi o informację o tym, że Jan Nagórski, jeden z pionierów lotnictwa i pierwszy człowiek nad Arktyką, był uważany za zmarłego przez 38 lat, nim okazało się, że żyje sobie spokojnie w Warszawie. Halibutt 08:25, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Wiem że mogę, ostatnio robię to nader często (jak widać na stronie głównej :) ). Tyle że zwyczajnie po nieprzespanej nocy szwankuje mi gramatyka i nie byłem pewien jak to ubrać w słowa. Dzięki za pomoc. Halibutt 14:02, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Contempt for edit summaries

Piotrus, such edits are unacceptable. I hope you are aware of WP:RV which reads: Rollbacks should be used with caution and restraint. Reverting a good-faith edit may send the message that "I think your edit was no better than vandalism and doesn't deserve even the courtesy of an explanatory edit summary." It is a slap in the face to a good-faith editor; do not abuse it. If you use the rollback feature other than against vandalism or for reverting yourself, be sure to explain on the talk page of the user whose edit(s) you reverted. I await your apologies. --Ghirla | talk 14:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)