Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:01, 5 August 2012

		The Purple Heart Barnstar
		Za całokształt. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 20:22, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

• Your account activation code has been emailed to your Misplaced Pages email address.
  • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
  • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Misplaced Pages better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 21:06, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Re

With regard to this, I would like to assure that I am not taking any sides here. Speaking about Malick, he does not do any "anti-Russian" edits, not even remotely, at least from the point of view of someone who really knows these subjects. He supported completely wrong (I believe) arguments by Paul on AE. He did it in a highly partisan fashion, by bringing irrelevant issues to discussion, commenting in my section, and reverting my edits in my section. He recently proposed me to contact with him by email, and it's great that I politely refused his offer. Yes, indeed I tried to help him (and you) by providing some reasonable advice. But I am not taking and will not take any sides. Good luck, My very best wishes (talk) 13:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Debt-based monetary system

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Debt-based monetary system, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion. Thanks! KTC (talk) 00:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Alright, thanks.VolunteerMarek 00:55, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

AK and Red Army

Hi, VM.
Can you have a look at this photo? Don't you find strange that the Red Army solders and Armija Krajova solders are marching together? It seems to me that AK was more an opponent of the Red Army then an ally. It seems to me that the caption is wrong, and some other Polish military are shown on the picture. Could you please either chack that by yourself or ask someone who knows Polish history better?--Paul Siebert (talk) 18:14, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The "AK was more an opponent of the Red Army then an ally" is true but it is also a generalization. In particular, AK and the Red Army did cooperate/coordinate in numerous instances and in particular in the liberation of/attack on Wilno, which is where this photo comes from. See Operation_Ostra_Brama#Fights_in_cooperation_with_the_Red_Army (that article could most certainly use citations but it gets it essentially correct). Now, after the fighting was over the Soviets did arrest the Polish officers but that wasn't until the 17th or so. This photo says it's from the 12th so at that point AK and Soviet soldiers happily patrolling together makes some sense (another potential issue is that the relations between individual soldiers of the two formations could be quite different from "official" attitudes at the higher levels).VolunteerMarek 01:20, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

BTW, any particular issue which made you notice it? VolunteerMarek 01:29, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Good. I didn't know about any cooperation between AK and the Soviets. I thought they never cooperated, and the caption is a mistake. Thank you for explanation.

No particular issues. I noticed this caption and found it to contradict to what I know about the AK history. However, if you are sure that there was some cooperation I have no reason not to believe you.--Paul Siebert (talk) 01:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

PS. BTW, what you say is a very interesting and unusual. Surprisingly the WP article about AK contains no such information. Maybe, we need to update the Armija Krajova article, and to add this photo there?--Paul Siebert (talk) 01:41, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll look through the AK article again, but basically right after Operation Tempest (which Operation Ostra Brama was a part of) (August-September 1944) is when the relations more or less went from "suspicious but cooperative" to essentially hostile, mostly due to mass arrests of AK (higher) officers and the enforced conscription of lower officers and regular AK soldiers into Berling's Army or the Second Army (Poland) by the Soviets (on occasion AK soldiers joined the Soviet controlled armies "voluntarily" - it's how me granddad wound up fighting for/near Berlin).

The photo would be useful in the Operation Ostra Brama article, though NPOV would require that the caption explains that this was pre-arrest of Polish officers.

Also, one thing to keep in mind that before August-September 1944 the relations between Soviet partisans and AK varied widely by region. They were worst in present day Lithuania and northern Belarus, mixed but generally ok in Ukraine (where Poles were more fearful of UPA and had a small presence anyway).

I also see someone added some POV stuff to the AK article on the relations with the Soviets.VolunteerMarek 01:54, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Also, for other examples of Soviet-AK cooperation see my old article Battle of Porytowe Wzgórze as well as Battle of Osuchy. The 27th Volhynian AK division was also involved in several actions in cooperation with the Red Army, though that article's a bit sparse on that.VolunteerMarek 02:22, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Understood. The only thing I can add to that is the following. If the photo we discuss is relevant to the Eastern Front article, it seems to be even more relevant to the article about AK. In this situation I speak on behalf of an ordinary reader (I have no specific knowledge in this area, so I can be considered as an ordinary reader), and, being an ordinary reader, I went from the Eastern Front article to the AK article, and I didn't find this photo there. As a result, my first hypothesis was that there was a mistake, and that in actuality the Polish military on the photo were some pro-Soviet Polish troops. Had I found this photo on the AK page, no such questions would appear.--Paul Siebert (talk) 05:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Business and Economics Barnstar

I'ld like to present to you this long overdue award:

		The Business and Economics Barnstar
		For your tireless efforts to improve the quality of banking articles on Misplaced Pages. LK (talk) 04:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Much appreciated. VolunteerMarek 23:18, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Interesting

See http://strategy.wikimedia.org/Proposal:Journal_%28A_peer-review_journal_to_allow/encourage_academics_to_write_Wikipedia_articles --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Gdańsk

Hi, I have mentioned your revert at User talk:Dohn joe, you may wish to comment. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for participating in my RFA! I appreciate your support. Zagalejo^^^ 06:11, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Maus GA

HI! Thanks for the encouraging words. I intend to put Maus up for FA review soon, so if you have any input before I do, it would be greatly appreciated. CüRlyTüRkey_Contribs 07:05, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Shame on you!

Talking sense, especially on an Arbcom page, is one of the Things For Which Misplaced Pages Is Not. Don't do it again. pablo 09:49, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

That was an impressive rant. And it made a lot of sense. I was wondering briefly why I was left off the list, then I realised you must have written it before seeing that I had posted. Given that I posted there a second time, I think I should now be on that list... Carcharoth (talk) 05:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Holy cow that was a great rant. Hats off to you. --NeilN 16:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

request for comment

i would like you to comment on this thread on my talk page please. -- altetendekrabbe  12:28, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Debt-based monetary system

Based on the recent additions to the article, I'ld like to suggest a withdrawal of the AfD nomination for Debt-based monetary system. The current version appears to me to be POV free and notable. rgds, LK (talk) 08:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm just not seeing enough in that source to support the existence of this article. The text currently in it could be included in History of money, except it's mostly already there and in terms of monetary theories it's a bit fring-y, so undue needs to be observed. And gawd, that History of money article is a mess. I can't tell if it's due to vandalism or just plain ol' atrocious writing.VolunteerMarek 13:24, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm also waiting for a response from Carrite to see if he's got any other sources.VolunteerMarek 13:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	you did a great job exposing the tag-teamers. wikipedia needs more excellent editors like you.  altetendekrabbe  02:29, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Edits to several sited regarding expulsion of Germans during/after WWII

Marek, Why did you revert my addition to the link http://forgottenvoices.net/? I believe this newly published book (and website) add depth and breadth to the articles. Please let me know your specific concerns and I will be more than happy to address them. Should I perhaps add a direct link to the book (using ISBN number?) Much appreciated! PagehG (talk) 04:14, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that the links you are adding are just to the promotional site for the book. There are a lot of sources on this topic and if we were to include all the books that have been published on it in the "External links" section it would be really long. I looked at the website and the book looks like a good source, but that's how it should be treated - as a source. So if there's information in the book which you think should be added to the article then that's fine, but just putting in a link to the book is essentially promotional, which, since Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, is not what Misplaced Pages is about.VolunteerMarek 04:19, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

"Forgotten voices" link should be removed from the article

From the review: "in general the ethnic Germans had become fully integrated and loyal citizens of the areas from which they were expelled". The only reviewer (emeritus) lacks elementary knowledge. Xx236 (talk) 11:14, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

disruptive behavior

please note the extremely disruptive and destructive behavior of user shrike on the edit warring-noticeboard , and on the dhimmitude-page . he is blatantly trying to game the system by making disruptive edits so that he is reverted. he is making false accusations against me on the edit warring-noticeboard by listing up unrelated diffs. he became disruptive when he failed to get me banned, and when it became clear that he has been misrepresenting the sources.-- altetendekrabbe  10:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

A useless attempt: Volunteer Marek is only engaged if he finds me involved to oppose, otherwise he won't give a damn about your business. Estlandia (Miacek) (dialogue) 11:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

You haven't been following along have you? Seriously, read talk pages before you comment, revert or edit.VolunteerMarek 11:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

July 2012

Talk about an abusive "Respect mah authority block!" done to cover your own incompetence .VolunteerMarek 12:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Quite the contrary Marek, indeed. I was quite open with my error, and cover nothing. Odd your behaviour today, as until about 37 seconds ago I held you in greatest respect. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Admin abuse of other editors combined with great stupidity, all in a context of extensive bullying is not a context in which one should mince words. You blocked me because I criticized (strongly) your actions. Not even gonna mention how much respect I've got for you.VolunteerMarek 12:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

No Marek, I encourage critique ... unfortunately, you laced yours with a direct personal attack. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

If your skin is so thin then you got no business taking controversial (and yes, um... wrongful) admin actions.VolunteerMarek 13:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I have not been involved in any controversial admin actions yet today (I made a small error, since corrected and apologized for), but nothing controversial yet. Since you ask, my skin is fantasticly thick by the way - my wife loves it, and it does a good job keeping all the requisite bodily fluids and parts inside. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Somebody show Kuru this diff .VolunteerMarek 12:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

When four editors oppose the edits of a single editor, surely Okham's Razor dictates that the contributions are flawed as opposed to a scheming tag team operation? Ankh.Morpork 13:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

This is Misplaced Pages. Anyway, OR is just a rule of thumb, often a very flawed one. I'll take the weight of evidence in regard to past behavior instead.VolunteerMarek 13:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll assume you're not referring to this. Ankh.Morpork 13:29, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmmmm. VM, it is not the first time your mouth has gotten you into trouble. You know the admin lottery better than most, if you prod them enough times, one of those random dice rolls is going to end up on a critical failure. Now, that particular comment was quite over the top, and I strongly suggest you refactor it (WP:SPADE has been grossly bent here, broken and jumped upon several times...). You should also appeal this block, I do think it is an unfortunate example of admin abuse: a combination of a decision to randomly enforce CIV/NPA (we all know how often this happens - not often enough), and also - what is worse - blocking when the editor is involved in a discussion him/herself. If the blocking admin was offended, s/he should have asked for another admin to review this. To block the editor herself is a very bad example of admin power abuse ("You loudmouth at me? Ahaha, I am an admin - and you are blocked!"). As far as I am concerned, you both failed here, and should be WP:TROUTed. Now, if both of you were to act like responsible adults (please do...), you'd promise to refactor your comment, and BWilkins would unblock you. I am curious to see who if anybody will try to act nice, and who will stand by their hurt pride in "I am holier than thou" mode? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Eh, I'm about to go to sleep and when I wake it'll be expired anyway so there's no point in giving the Eidolon of Drama an excuse to revisit this world by invoking its unholy name.VolunteerMarek 01:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Chess

Bc5. VolunteerMarek 12:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Done. Just spotted this. Ankh.Morpork 13:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.VolunteerMarek 13:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Bf2. VolunteerMarek 13:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Rd8. VolunteerMarek 13:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Kf8. VolunteerMarek 13:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Rd7. VolunteerMarek 14:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Kf6. VolunteerMarek 14:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Error. You are attempting to perform an illegal move. Ankh.Morpork 14:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Unless the base of the king remain on f8 but its top has toppled over onto the f6 square? Ankh.Morpork 14:22, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, Nf6...silly me Ankh.Morpork 14:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Oops, yes, knight.VolunteerMarek 14:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Stop horsing around. Ankh.Morpork 00:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Quit it with the silly chess pawns.VolunteerMarek 00:11, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Now for a good one. Alekhine was once asked whether he preferred chess or sex. "It depends", he said, "on the position." Ankh.Morpork 20:13, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, resign.VolunteerMarek 14:26, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

U wanna play as white? Ankh.Morpork 14:27, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, unless Double wants a turn.VolunteerMarek 14:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I won't be able to play just yet as I have a cricket game to watch and a belly to fill. But yeah, first move's on you. Ankh.Morpork 14:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

You can go first. (Can I be White next time?) Double sharp (talk) 15:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

England vs. SA? The English are doing good aren't they? Anyway:

Or the English South Africans are doing well. Its nice watching the two best teams battling it out - and the English prevailing. Ankh.Morpork 15:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

e4 VolunteerMarek 14:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Bc4 VolunteerMarek 16:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

That's the first time I've ever seen the Bowlder Attack (1.e4 c5 2.Bc4) used in any game. Double sharp (talk) 08:30, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Same here, although it looks like it might have slipped into a variation of the Alekhine defence. Ankh.Morpork 16:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

d3

Ne2

Now you're being plain lazy. I'm gonna get carpal tunnel if I have to do everything. Ankh.Morpork 22:53, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Well said

I agree.--andreasegde (talk) 15:11, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

here's a beer while you wait. looking forwards to having you back. cheers!  altetendekrabbe  15:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

German exodus from Eastern Europe to Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–1950)?

Could we add the article German exodus from Eastern Europe to Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–1950)? They are essentially two articles about the same thing. And the name exodus is a bit dramatic and grotesque in its relation to Judaism --Gironauni (talk) 00:14, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that these should be merged and one (preferably the Biblical Exodus) should be made into a redirect to the other.VolunteerMarek 00:58, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Definitely not. It was not an exodus but an expulsion. The word used is a bit... odd... Do you know how to do these things? --Gironauni (talk) 18:56, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I think the underlying issue is that it was a bit of both, though "exodus" is not an appropriate term - that's why other (god, how many of them are there???) articles on the topic use the phrase "Flight and expulsion...".

The proper way to do this is to look at WP:MERGE and put in a {{merge|to}} template on it. Then you need to look at to what extent this article overlaps with the other and combine them properly. I'll go ahead and add the merge template myself.VolunteerMarek 19:32, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Marek, I am just a beginner and it seems to be so difficult :( What if I will make a mistake or somebody reverts all my efforts? Can I revert back? Why people revert? When can I do it? Can you merge the articles instead of me, please? --Gironauni (talk) 04:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Best thing for now is to just start a discussion on the talk page of one of the articles (which I think you already did) and wait and see what the comments are.VolunteerMarek 05:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I did it 2 days ago but nobody replied :( How long can we wait??? --Gironauni (talk) 13:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

For Requested move (this ain't that but sort of the same) it's standard procedure to wait seven days. However, if no one responds within a day or two then I'll start merging.VolunteerMarek 17:20, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

It is 7 days now (almost). What can we do now? --Gironauni (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Are you there? --Gironauni (talk) 23:19, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

<-- Yes. See the discussion here and here. While I agree with you, other(s) don't. The person who needs convincing is Pseudo-Richard. If the proposed doesn't work you might also propose that the "Exodus..." name be changed.VolunteerMarek 03:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't have time for it. I just changed what was to change. I mean Eastern Europe to Central and Eastern Europe because E Europe is very offensive, isn't it? --Gironauni (talk) 01:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I actually don't have much of the opinion on the Central vs Eastern Europe thing and I don't find the latter particularly offensive (though perhaps a bit ignorant and incorrect). I thought your main objection was to the word "Exodus"? VolunteerMarek 01:21, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah. It sounds funny. I read that E Europe is offensive and loaded because of the cold war. I watched even a documentary about it and it said so: http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2012/07/“east”-dead but there is clearly something wrong with it. if Europe's midpoint is in Belarus than the onl country in Eastern Europe is Russian Federation, isn't it? But because it is loaded, we don't say E Europe any more. This is how I understand it :/ These things confuse me a lot. My friend from here has a bf in Kosovo and they like to be called Balkan countries because they think E Europe has bad connotation. Do you know where I'm coming from? It's very confusing but we have to just go through it, if it offends people --Gironauni (talk) 16:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Mirosław Chojecki

Hi. Can you proof read this for me?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:17, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Done.VolunteerMarek 18:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Revisiting that RfC

How does one go about revisiting an RFC? Darkness Shines (talk) 15:26, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Just see if there's enough interest/disagreement with the original closure.VolunteerMarek 18:14, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

With who? Which notice board should I post to? Darkness Shines (talk) 18:18, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Just raise the issue on the talk page and see if there is support to that effect. Other than that could try WP:DR.VolunteerMarek 16:32, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

DR is a waste of time, just look at the majority of articles I edit and you will see the same behavior from a small group of editors. They constantly remove academically sourced content for no reason other than they do not like it, look at this current mediation going on for an example Darkness Shines (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Yunshui

Three things, if you don't mind... and if you do, please just ignore this. First, minor but it threw me, I think you must mean the answer to Q7, not Q6. Secondly, I think it's fairly clear Yunshui is referring to COI SPAs. We do get an awful lot of them: a look at C:CSD most days of the week will show a preponderance of SPAs at work. And finally, I see where you're coming from on the vandal-fighting thing, but if you step back, what you are therefore ultimately arguing is that we don't need more admins and I don't believe for one second that you think that. And finally, why am I bothering over this, on an RfA that looks set to sail through regardless? Well... my own experience tells me that a unanimous RfA feels very special. Anyway, like I said, please feel free to ignore this if you like. Cheers, --Dweller (talk) 08:36, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi VolunteerMarek. I appreciate your decision to change your !vote (although I hope it wasn't purely based on "week of 100% RfAs phenomenon!). Your point about the project being well equipped with vandal-fighters is valid - many RfAs I've seen recently have concentrated on that aspect of the role - my reason for choosing to operate in that area is that it's something I'm already experienced in, so it's less likely that I'll screw up and get desysoped within a week... If it reassures you at all, I've slowly found myself becoming involved in diverse areas of Misplaced Pages over time as a regular editor, and I suspect the same will happen with admin work, but I don't want to get into anything too far out of my comfort zone too early on.

I also appreciate that many SPAs do create valid content, and the fact that Dweller had to expand on my answer above suggests it wasn't sufficiently clear. Because of the areas I spend time working in, I do tend to see a lot of dreadfully promotional COI pages, which may skew my perspective a bit. I'd like to make it plain, though, that whilst most promotional pages are created by SPAs, I don't believe all SPAs create promotional pages. Hopefully that clears things up a bit. Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 21:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

RFA

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		What you did at the RfA was a remarkably thoughtful and kind thing to do. Hopefully your generous attitude is contagious, and spreads Wiki-wide. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:54, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! VolunteerMarek 22:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

That was nicely done. You're a star. --Dweller (talk) 08:47, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

• thirded .. class. Chedzilla (talk) 00:59, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

AN/I thread Re: Talk:Gdansk/Vote

I started this ANI thread to discuss the AN3 report, as well as related issues, as a neutral party. - Penwhale | 09:44, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution IRC office hours.

Hello there. As you expressed interest in hearing updates to my research in the dispute resolution survey that was done a few months ago, I just wanted to let you know that I am hosting an IRC office hours session this coming Saturday, 28th July at 19:00 UTC (approximately 12 hours from now). This will be located in the #wikimedia-office IRC channel - if you have not participated in an IRC discussion before you can connect to IRC here.

Regards, User:Szhang (WMF) (talk) 07:07, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Anaheim police shooting and protests

On 29 July 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Anaheim police shooting and protests, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a fatal shooting on July 22 was the sixth shooting incident in less than a year involving Anaheim, California, police officers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anaheim police shooting and protests. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added 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.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Czarne

On 31 July 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Czarne, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a majority of German-Swedish forces in the Battle of Czarne mutinied, capitulated and then joined the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth Army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Czarne. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added 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) 16:04, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–1950)

Marek, I'd like to add the link below to this article (and related) for the book, "Forgotten Voices; The Expulsion of the Germans from Eastern Europe after World War II" This book is a scholastic work published by Transaction Publishers of New Brunswick, N.J. and London. Transaction is the scholastic publishing house of Rutgers University, the State University of New Jersey. Transaction is also the publisher of record in International Social Science. The purpose for listing it in the reference section of the Misplaced Pages pages is solely to bring it to the attention of its readers as a serious and well-balanced source for further information on this subject. Although the book was published only about four months ago, over 150 universities, and libraries, world-wide have purchased it. This can be verified by consulting WorldCat.org or the ISBN data base.

Merten, Ulrich (2012). "Forgotten Voices: The Expulsion of the Germans from Eastern Europe after World War II". New jersey: Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-1412843027.

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Hieronymus Roth at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 10:04, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Dirschau (Now Tczew)

Hey there! I contacted Grimme (Michał) from the Polish post I linked to and he sent me some good sources. He was very happy to help out. Though they're all in Polish so if you want to look and maybe help me out here a bit I can send it to you? Imonoz (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Reval (1602) and Capture of Daugavgriva

Please remember to provide sources for your information when creating new stubs. Thanks. PamD 08:14, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

AE