Misplaced Pages

User talk:Piotrus: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:10, 17 April 2006 editLUCPOL (talk | contribs)6,608 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:59, 11 January 2025 edit undoOnel5969 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers937,554 edits →Anglo-American: ReplyTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|minthreadsleft = 0
|algo = old(5d)
|archive = User talk:Piotrus/Archive 70
}}

{{User:Piotrus/Top}}

{{tinc}}
<center> <center>
<!--]-->
]


]
{| style="border: 1px solid; background-color: #eeeeee" class="toccolours" align="center"
]
|align=center|] ''You have the right to stay informed. Exercise it by reading the ] today.''

{| style="border: 1px solid; background-color: #eee;" class="toccolours" align="center"
| align="center" | ] ''You have the right to stay informed. Exercise it by reading the ] today.''
|} |}

{| class="messagebox" style="background-color: AntiqueWhite;"
|-
| This talk page is '''automatically archived''' by ]. Any sections older than '''7''' days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps (not signed with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) are archived manually when I get around to it.
|-
|}



{| id="toc" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;" {| id="toc" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;"
! align="left" style="background-color: #ffd700;" width="100%" |
! align="left" style="background:#ccccff" width="100%" | Please add new comments in . Thanks in advance. ]
Please start all new discussions at the bottom of this page and include a heading. When in doubt, click the "" button above.
|}
{| id="toc" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;"
! align="left" style="background-color: #ccf;" width="100%" |
If I left you a message on your talk page, please answer it there by indenting one line and starting your response with a ]: <nowiki>{{Ping|Piotrus}}</nowiki> If you leave me a message here on my talk page, I will answer your message here by pinging you.
|}
{| id="toc" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;"
! align="left" style="background-color: #ffd700;" width="100%" |
Always ] your message (by clicking the sign button or by typing four tildes, like this: <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). Thanks in advance.
|} |}
</center> </center>


<div style="background:#eeeeee;border:thin solid black;padding:2pt;margin-bottom:4pt"> <!--<div style="background-color: #eee; border: thin solid Black; padding: 2pt; margin-bottom: 4pt;">
]
Talk archives: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]
Talk archives:
</div>
{{collapsetop}}
], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]
{{collapsebottom}}
</div>-->
{{archives|banner=yes|list=|small=|prefix=|root=User_talk:Piotrus}}


<div style="border: 1px solid #ADFF2F; background-color: #FFF5EE; color: Black; padding: 0.5em 1em;">
== Sassanid Empire ==
{{wstress3d|2|250|Reasons for my raising ]:<br><br>]}}
] mistress :)]]
<div style="padding-left:4px;"><div style="height: 450px; width: 300px; overflow: auto; background-color: #F5FFFA; border: 1px solid #aaa; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 85%;">__TOC__</div></div>


{{clear}}
Hi ! Thnak you for your support. About your objections could you be more specific so I could work on those ?] 06:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
<center>I agree to the ].</center>
: no no ! It wasn't problematic at all, all I'm saying is regarding to your comment "2) add a section on geography and administrative division" you mean I should add a geographical subsection or what ? All the best. ] 18:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


==Louis Faury== ==Lurking stats ==
I'm very sorry man, I don't have anything on him. Btw, I replied to your last message in the FAC review.] 04:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
{| class=wikitable style="background-color:rgba(0,0,255,0.1); margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"
! Page views for this talk page over the last 90 days
|-
| {{ PageViews graph | 90 | User talk:Piotrus | en.wikipedia.org }} <BR>
|}


== CfD nomination at ] ==


<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd mass notice--> Thank you. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 21:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


==DYK for German atrocities committed against prisoners of war during World War II==
==Hello==
{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that ''']''', the survival ratio of Jewish POWs was generally tied to the army or nation they served with, and not to their ethnicity?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ]. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page <small>(], )</small>, and the hook may be added to ] after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the ].
}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK --> ] (]) 12:03, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
{{DYK views|9,924|827.0|January 2025|German atrocities committed against prisoners of war during World War II}} ] (] • ]) (he/]) 03:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox
| image = Ehrenbach icicles.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
| bold = ] · ] · ]
}}
Thank you for the article! --] (]) 21:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)


==] has been nominated for merging==
You asked my about my numbers on my page about Poles who DIED fighting WITH the Soviets during ww2,
after the Soviets hade kicked out the nazies in 1944. If you have a source that says 30 thousand who died and I have have a source that syas 24 thousand it dosent mean that any of them are right or wrong, 6 thousand here 6 thousand there ment nothing to Stalin so we will never know the real number of Poles who died fighting with the Svoiets after the country got liberated. (] 14:13, 16 March 2006 (UTC))


<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>] has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the ] guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at ''']''' on the ] page.<!-- Template:Cfd-notify--> Thank you. ] (]) 17:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
==]==
I responded to your question about "]" on the article's discussion page.


== Your ] nomination of ] ==
I also previously left suggestions regarding titles for the "]" articles, I think, at ] discussion page (or perhaps in an email to him). ]|] 17:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've ] the article ] you nominated for ]-status according to the ]. ] This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. <!-- Template:GANotice --> <!-- Template:GANotice --> <small>Message delivered by ], on behalf of ]</small> -- ] (]) 01:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:Actually, they're on your talk page, Logologist. ] (]) 21:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


== Books & Bytes – Issue 66 ==
== Wieluń ==


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr">
Can you move ] to ] (it won't let me do it)? I'm not aware of any other time when the town was bombed. ] (]) 21:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
<div style="font-size: 1.5em; margin: 0 100px;">

]</div>
== Article listed for deletion ==
<div style="line-height: 1.2;">

<span style="font-size: 2em; font-family: Copperplate, 'Copperplate Gothic Light', serif">'''The Misplaced Pages Library''': ''Books & Bytes''</span><br />
Hi,
Issue 66, November – December 2024

</div>
I noticed from the Inclusionist page on Wikimedia that you're an article inclusionist and that you're against censorship, so I was wondering if you would be able to do me a ''huge'' favor and possibly vote here: ]. I've been working on the article for months, and now they want to delete it. If you could, I would be greatly in your debt.
<div style="margin-top: 1.5em; border: 3px solid #ae8c55; border-radius: .5em; padding: 1em 1.5em; font-size: 1.2em;">

* Les Jours and East View Press join the library
Best wishes,
* Tech tip: Newspapers.com

<big>''']'''</big>
] 16:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
</div>

</div>
== Warszawa ==
<small>Sent by ] on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --17:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)</small>

<!-- Message sent by User:Samwalton9 (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/Recipients&oldid=28051347 -->
Ostatnio znów przeglądałem mój zbiór sieciowych varsavianów i na jednej ze stron (bodaj - polecam) znalazłem coś nowego: . Niesamowita rzecz, niemieckie zdjęcia lotnicze mojego miasta, zrobione w ciągu ostatnich dni przed wybuchem powstania. Pół nocy spędziłem wgapiając się w ekran... ]] 04:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

::A skoro już o herbach mowa - ostatnio znów zacząłem się tym nieco bawić (zobacz ]. Masz jakieś zamówienia? ]] 17:09, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

== Epigon ==

Dorobiłem się epigona :) A nawet plagiatora, bo mam wrażenie, że facet (i to jeden z "naszych") popełnił zwykłe copyvio - i to seryjnie... ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]... Zastanawiam się co z tym fantem zrobić. Z jednej strony facet wyraźnie naruszył licencję GFDL (i był tego świadom, bo zakleił moją informację o moich prawach), a do tego jego mapki są dość niskiej jakości (mówię głównie o stronie technicznej). Z drugiej strony na pewno lepsze to niż moje wiecznie niedokończone mapy, nad którymi wciąż nie mam czasu posiedzieć... Masz jakiś pomysł co z tym fantem zrobić? ]] 07:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Poza moimi mapkami i kolorowymi zdjęciami z Time-Life, ów kolega wgrał także na commons coś z Twojej działki (] i ]. Widać jego podejście do kwestii praw autorskich jest jeszcze luźniejsze niż moje... ]]

::Oczywiście napisałem doń i na polskiej wiki i na commons, ale jak dotąd bez odzewu. Prawdę powiedziawszy, z jego strony dyskusji na polskiej wiki wynika, że nie ma on w zwyczaju odpowiadać na komentarze... ]] 17:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

:::Wychodzi na to, że nasz Mathiasrex powinien stać się nowym symbolem Matuzalema. Zobacz jaką fotkę własnoręcznie pstryknął: ] (''author-Maciej Szczepańczyk-user Mathiasrex''). ]] 13:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

== Cyrillic ==

BTW, if reading Cyrillic is a problem to you, you might want to install . In a matter of seconds it is able to transliterate whole web pages from cyrillic to international transcryption. You can even create your own custom transcryption scheme that would look almost like Polish. It makes one's life in wikipedia much, much easier ;) ]] 17:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

== Breguet ==

Proste tłumaczenie licencji z pl.wiki. Ale masz rację, wypadałoby lepiej toto opisać. Myślę, że znajdę odpowiednią ustawę i zrobię szablon podobny do {{tl|PD-Poland}}. A co do PolandGov - czekam na odpowiedź od człowieka z którym rozmawiałem. Skarżył mi się że mają tam teraz straszny bajzel (nic dziwnego, wystarczy włączyć telewizor żeby wiedzieć dlaczego) i że termin oczekiwania na odpowiedź znacznie im się wydłużył. Zobaczymy, jeśli do połowy tygodnia nie odpowiedzą - będę dzwonił dalej. Jakby co - mam jeszcze w zanadrzu telefon do maherów od ADM i AAN w Warszawie, a nuż z nimi uda się dogadać. ]] 21:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

:A skoro o tym mowa, nie znasz kogoś, kto miałby dostęp do któregoś z serwisów prawniczych, w których takie ustawy można znaleźć? Chodzi mi zwłaszcza o ustawę z 1926 o prawie autorskiem i jej tekst ujednolicony z 1935... ]] 21:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

::What's wrong with section edit buttons at my talk page? I can see them and they work just fine... ]] 22:17, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

=="Category:Polish rokosz's"==
] points out correctly that "Category:Polish rokosz's," as written, is unsatisfactory. (Actually, it is '']'' — a ] instead of a ].) Would you object to changing the category to read: "Category:Polish ''rebellions''"? Within it, the various "rokoszes" would still appear under that name. ]|] 22:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

== Mikołaj Krzysztof Sapieha ==

Dear Piotr, I am sorry my only source about Mikołaj Krzysztof Sapieha is Ryszard Jurzak’s Dynastic Genealogy. ] 06:05, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

== Prawa i strona ==

Dzięki za zgłębianie tematu "ustawy o prawie autorskiem" (przedreformowa polszczyzna zawsze mnie wzruszała :) ). Co do mojej strony - zaiste, były z nią problemy dopóki tego nie naprawiłem, ale teraz wszystko wygląda u mnie normalnie, i w Firefoksie i w IE... Może to kwestia Twojego profilu (] i ])? ]] 13:06, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

:Pibwl obiecał . ]] 20:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

== Money ==

Ponieważ nie ma nigdzie wzmianki o tym, że Misplaced Pages ma pozwolenie od NBP (i autora projektu graficznego) na powielanie wizerunków banknotów i monet emitownych przez NBP, to znaczy, że wizeruki te łamią prawa autorskie i powinny być skasowane - zgodnie z regulaminem Wikipedii nie ma na nie tutaj miejsca (z polskiej Wiki już wyleciały wizerunki aktualnych polskich pieniędzy - może to się wielu niepodobać, lecz w kwestii praw autorskich na Wikipedii nie ma taryf ulgowych). ] 17:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Mylisz się co do licencji do przedstawiania polskich pieniędzy - nie jest to fair use - proponuję Ci wczytać się w informację dotyczącą wykożystania wizerunków polskich banknotów i monet zamieszczoną na stronie Narodowego Banku Polskiego (tekst angielski z tej strony zamieściłem pod każdą ze spornych grafik) - NBP pozwala na wykożystywanie wizerunku pieniędzy przez niego edytowanych '''wyłącznie pod warunkiem uzyskania zgody od NBP i od autora grafiki danego banknotu czy monety'''. Bez tych dwóch zgód nie można publikować wizerunków polskich pieniędzy - i nie dotyczy to tylko Polski, ale również całego świata (były już w Polsce sprawy sądowe o wykożystywanie wizerunków pieniędzy bez zgody NBP i sądy zgadzały sie z tym, że jest to naruszenie praw autorskich - tu muszę nadmienić, że wizerunki pieniędzy nie są traktowane jako dokumenty urzędowe, które, zgodnie z polskim prawem autorskim, nie kożystają z ochrony tego prawa). ] 07:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Jeśli uważasz, że można na en-Wiki dawać grafiki bez zgody ich właściciela, to ja nie będę się kłócić - na en-Wiki rzadko edytuję, więc mogę się mylić co do tutejszych zasad (biorąc pod uwagę Twój dorobek powinieneś być ekspertem w tym zakresie). Tagi {{tl|money}} poprzywracałem do wszystkich grafik już wczoraj, lecz pozostawiałem również {{tl|no license|month=March|day=18|year=2006}} - moim zdaniem warto do końca wyjaśnić tę kwestię. Jeśli będziesz (lub jesteś) na 100% pewien, że zamieszczanie tych grafik jest jak najbardziej w porządku, to skasuj moje uwagi - ja już czepiać się nie będę. ] 17:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Artykuł 4 p. 2 prawa autorskiego jest bardzo często przytaczany w kontekście publikacji urzędowych. Problem polega na tym, że nie wszystko co urzędy publikują jest materiałem lub dokumentem urzędowym (na polskiej Wiki od czasu do czasu ktoś twierdzi, że praktycznie wszystko co wyjdzie z polskich urzędów podlega pod ten punkt prawa autorskiego, co jest nieprawdą). Podobnie ma się sprawa w kwesti wizerunków banknotów. Zgodnie z ustwą o NBP "Znakami pieniężnymi są banknoty (bilety NBP) i monety opiewające na złote i grosze" (art. 7 p.2). Tak więc zgodnie z interpretacją ] "znaki pieniężne" = "znaki" wymienione w art. 4 p. 2 ustwy o prawie autorskim. Idąc dalej tym tokiem myślenia dojdziemy do wniosku, że skoro "znaki pieniężne" = "znaki" i "znaki pieniężne" nie podlegają ochronie prawnej, to można je dowolnie powielać w dowolnej formie, co by oznaczało, że fałszowanie pieniędzy jest w Polsce legalne. Dochodzimy zatem do absurdu. Nie można uogólniać i przyjmować potoczne znaczenie słów tak jak jest wygodnie - w języku prawniczym każde słowo ma znaczenie i może znaczyć ono co innego niż jego potoczne rozumienie. Dlatego nie ma żadnej równości pomiędzy "znakami pieniężnymi" dokładnie zdefiniowanymi w ustawie o NBP, którymi to są banknoty i monety (a nie ich wizerunki!), a "znakami" z ustawy o prawie autorskim. Jakiś czas temu były informacje w prasie, że NBP procesował się o reklamy z wizerunkiem banknotów i sprawę wygrał - co jednak potwierdza przynależność praw do wizerunków pieniędzy NBP. ] 21:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

==Ciągle==
Trwają próby wymazania informacji o zbrodniach w Złoczewie dokonanych przez ]. Jeśli możesz od czasu do czasu zerknąc na ten artykuł byłbym wdzięczny.
--] 17:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Nie do wiary! ] 18:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

==Armia Krajowa==
Mógłbyś to rozszerzyć tak aby miało bardziej obiektywny charakter ?:
Moje edycje sprowadzają różnych ludzi a nie chce z tego artykułu robić kolejnej wojny.
--] 14:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

== Ż. ==
:I've noted once that our good old Ż. has his ups and downs. Apparently the sun has entered yet another quadrant recently (). ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']]

Piotrus, I am trying to get a clue of what's going on and I will see what I can do. Please note that too many parties started to abuse "fact" and "dubious" tags in order to use them as a weapon in edit wars. , , , ,

One of our common collaborators even used image copyright issues for that lately! See , and .

I thought I would provoke some thoughts on whether we can come up with a set of informal rules that would define legitimate tagging from frivolous one at ] but judging by your responses there, I didn't make a very convinsing case. Wel...

In the meanwhile, please take a look at the activity of the usual suspect here at the Polosh contribution to WW2 article. It is kind of upsetting. I spent at least 3 hours yesterday compiling the info from 3 sources and adding it to the article, referencing it and proofreading and copyediting to make text flow smooth and article encyclopedic. I expected Molobo to have some POV issues with my work as he does with the work of most any non-Polish editor, be it a German, Russian or Ukrainian. What was really annoying that the text I carefully crafted was butchered sloppily, producing the version with the sentences broken and disconnected, the whole paragraphs duplicated a huge number of typos and added references being lost. I restored the text's integrity twice today and it took me lots of time to spend on each restoration trying to integrated the info Molobo brought into the normal text flow. After the first time, the article was butchered again and now, that I restored it again, I expect it to be butchecred as soon as Molobo gets online. Please take a look at the article's history and talk. I am not even talking POV issues here. I am talking a disrespectfully sloppy editing over other people's careful work by the user who seems to be working on the complex article sitting on his left hand at the same time and istead of trying to make an article better, tries to "outrun" his opponents by making sure that as much POV material is quickly inserted as possible disregarding the article's stucture, references and other people's work.

Again, even before we get to POV issues, this rush patchwork is got to stop. If I get sufficiently discouraged to do actual ''work'' on the PL related articles (because with such reactions it is a waste of time) I will have to restrict my contribution to Polish topics to tagging the inappropraitenesses or the whole articles and explain at talk the reasons to make sure the tag is not removed until the problem is addressed by other editors. As you know yourself, tagging is way easier than trying to contribute to the article and takes much less time.

When that fellow "threatened" us with a leave at his RfC, I felt sorry that this was going to happen. With such a huge number of disruptions, I am starting to rethink this. --] 01:47, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

:I am sorring Irpen but what you call butchering was simply restoring NPOV in place of Soviet propaganda descriptions which you filled the article on regular basis despite lenghty explanations as to why your photos are wronged or biased. Also I don't think adding false data on regular basis, again after several remarks about why it is wrong speaks well about your behaviour in the article.
Molobo

==As usuall==
--] 19:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

== Intermediate technology ==

Hi Piotrus,

I notice you've contributed to the ] article in the part. You may be interested to know that there is now a ]. Cheers, ] 03:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

== WikiProject International development ==

Hi Piotrus,

I notice you've contributed to the ] article in the past. You may be interested to know that there is now a ]. Cheers, ] 03:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

== Block of ] ==
That block was indeed in error. I actually got his email, and thought I had already unblocked him. Any idea what I did wrong? --] 00:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
:It was reported to me on the Misplaced Pages Counter-Vandalism IRC channel. --] 03:19, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

== Please no personal attacks ==

Sorry, but I had to revert the edit as a direct personal attack. I promise to revert similar edits by Ghirlandajo or any other editor the moment I saw them. ] 07:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
:I was out of line here, I apologize. The recent increase of activity (not to use the v... word) by Ghirla on Poland-related page made me slip a little bit. Thanks for reminding me about the that.--] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 20:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

==See Catherine==
Article]. Russian users insist on avoiding information on annexation performed by Catherine instead insisting that she "absorbed" lands of Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine etc.
--] 13:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

== Cuban coSSack ==

Hi Piotrus, our fellow contributor Kuban coSSack talking about dictatorial ruler Lukashenka and today's storming of the October square, when hundreds of special police arrested peaceful demonstrators, totally destoryed the camp, threw empty vodka bottles into the mess and videotaped that for Belarusan state television. Here's Kuban coSSack's comment about this police action and break-up of a peaceful protest, which took place at 3AM so that there would be no witnesses of their activity:

* http://www.br23.net/en/2006/03/24/game-over/#comments
* http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Rydel#.22kuban_coSSack.22

Dear fellow Wikipedians, do you understand that his only purpose of his contributions on articles about Belarus (such as ], ], ], etc.) is to push Russian imperial POV and lies? Please, see history and talk pages of the Belarus-related articles. --] 16:29, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

== Honorverse ==
I hope this page is how I send you a message, and that I'm _NOT_ editing your (or any) page.

1)
QUESTION:
Are you the person who is doing most of the content on the List of Honorverse Characters page?
(http://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_Honorverse_characters)

2)
COMMENT:
Even though it's image links have been broken, I suggest you look at this page of mine: http://www.pihl.us/leif/honorverse/illustratedcharacterlist.htm

3)
QUESTION:
Schedule permitting, I _MAY_ be interested in helping edit your page.
Where would I go to get a primer on the rules, methods, common practices, and such?

4)
QUESTION:
Would you consider making a alternate set of Book Abbreviations acceptable on the Character list page?



Sincerly yours,

Leif Pihl

Send E-mail response in care of: "becky@pihl.us"

== Polishterm ==

I wonder if using such a template would be overkill, since our version would only have two fields (original Polish, English translation). I suppose we could also add a field with a link to a sound file. ] (]) 04:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

== Apology (copied from my talk page) ==

Piotrus, what can I tell you? I apologize for editing your comment and antipicating your vote in this way. I have always been an extremely impatient person and, in my own defense, I can only suggest that I am still relatively new and this is the first time I have participated in this process of Featrured Artciles. I do not understand excatly how things work (as I indiciated in my comment on the talk page of the Featured Article page for ].
As to your point about more citations: I'm not sure I agree with your view that something close to every single line in an encyclopedia entry should be refercned and cited. But I will do the best I can to add some more in the manner of your own article. I DO sincerly apologize though and I understand your indignation. I was being selfish and impatiet in a way that is not appropriate to a collabortaive project. I thank you for briniging this to my attention. Sometimes,the only way to learn is by making mistakes.--] 09:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

=== The point... ===

Though my behavior was inexcusable, I have to add that my real point was simply to suggest (for those who do not know me well) that when I say I will do something, I WILL DO IT. I did add those inline citations that you referred to. I'm now in the process of adding many, many more citations. If there is any fact left which is not yet referenced, it WILL BE referenced. Period. --] 18:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

== Fotosy ==
Jasne. Nie ma sprawy. Lecz nie wiem, o które obrazki ci chodziło. -- ] 18:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

==163x Progression Answer==
You:
Why did you moved to replace the Category:163x with a much more cumbersome and less user-friendly Category:1632-163x alternate history series? Not to mention that this cat does not exist yet? I think we should restore the old cat, it was perfectly fine as it was.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Fabartus"
Reply:
*163x<nowiki>=={ FanSpeak, WebHead, KidChat}/</nowiki>, '''not enclyclopediac''' and furthermore not proper English. Same thing with '-verse' suffixed 'Buzz=words', these are fine in common coloquialism on the web, but are something that should be included as 'notes' only near the bottom of an article; these things are taking to a higher encl. standard... '''] should be the target in everyone's eyes.
*More to the point, '''163x conveys absolutely zero information to the lay reader'', the whole 'purpose' of categories''''''. This construct, albeit longer, is also a label that will draw attention to the articles while conveying the information 'span of years' + Alt. Hist. = Oh, that's interesting. '163x' conveys instead ''Oh, look! Some kid has been making a typo with an incomplete label. This enclopedia sure has it's problems.''
*Which meaning do you want to convey? I gave my answer last night.
::And what's the cost that you're fussed about? An extra few (20? 30?) characters '''but one time ''per article page''''' plus my one-time investment to change that last night. Hardly worth the trouble arguing over considering since the ''prior tag said zip to the outsider''.
:If you guys had been using the talk pages correctly, this should have been aired out long ago, and someone else would have made my point. But the above's a flawed analysis too. When a new article is started, someone is just going to rip the guts out of the related ones preceding, modify what can be kept and start the new ('''e.g. 1633''') material. He's not going to type categories, just copy them.
But until I stubbed that, you folks didn't even lift a finger to create a 1633 stub!!! Shocking! Totally mind boggling to me, considering how easy it would be to cc the old 1632 (novel) and paste it down!
::Moreover, I'm looking forwards... as the stuff in the pipeline hits the stores, and if I can get you guys to actually bring some work onto the table towards ] then this is a tag we can grow the ''163x proiject'' with knowing a reader/user-noneditor can get useful information from the category.
:See ]; and esp. ] upshot is I spent whole night seeing everything here related to both Assiti and 163x; it's a wonder I can type as I'm not really awake. I need more than 3 hrs sleep at my age. I'll cc this to the series talk, as that is where it belogs like other series wide issues.
::<B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 21:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

re: yours to My talk on Naming post...
::Let's take this to the series talk page where it belongs since we're both apparently around and sortof working. Better yet email me. It'll be faster and not junk up talks. <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 21:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

===Your message===
Sorry not to have consulted before doing the move at FrankB's request. My feeling, though, is that the new title is more accurate and more informative (and I've seen many categories with titles as long or longer). --] (]) 22:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I see you've heard from Mel. He did move the cat but to a different name than asked, and I've already emailed a request with rationales as to why goto the title I used. That will clear up the red links.
But he's correct, his is better english, and the matter is trivial - we'll just post the categories on the header of the projects page so people can scoop them off with cut N paste between two windows, hardly difficult. Even with Mel's less instinctive hypenated construct. In the meantime, my latest 'Project Proposal' post has examples of what I mean.
::Sorry if you find keyword emphasis annoying. I usually start on the left margin by indicating source, purpose, or both (Some thing explainatory like 'fab says/responds:') and end my post with some text conclusion or other sign off, again in the full left margin. (if you hadn't noticed it yet).
*I must say I'm impressed by your wikiCredentials... you should be organizing and pushing this project, not me! I'd appreciate it if we can exhange some emails. Mine is listed on the header of my talk.
::You didn't respond on the talk (Series & Temp Project) about my cite back to you on the categories name... lower down I said we could keep both.
*I've added a lot of project organization stuff (about to save) and a longish list of categories that should be in the projects articles.
::Have a more urgent query... How do you manage to be in my home state of Pennsylvania and in Poland at the same time?
I'm good, but not that clever! <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 01:03, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
re:] cat cut...
*If you haven't you've done well at avoiding edit wars. Lucky you! Thought the temp cats were a good idea while we organized this thing. Have you experience putting together a project? That would be a big help.
*How'd the two short cat names strike you as a compromise? <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 17:09, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

*See Ans MyTalk<B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 01:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
re:*If you want to attract 163x-fans, check who edited the article in the past and inform them about your idea, if you want to seek category specialists, try ] and such. I think that ] is the best solution, no need for inclusion of '163x' (which I invented, as far as I know :>) or 'alt-hist' parts (just as Star Trek does not include Star Trek sci-fi or such).--] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 17:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
:For the moment, I'm assuming that they have things on watch. I'll 'spam' an alert once I know no one is paying attention, or I get to tired to see what needs done next. In the meantime, there's been lots of progress. I believe they're all cat'd properly now, whatever names we end up with, it'll be easy to hop back and forth using the current state.
*You have a point on the '-1632x', and I'll shed no tears on that. So I can blame you for all that extra typing! What's your field of study, computer geeks almost always like long names.
*But '1632 series' doesn't give any clue that it's a book, or that 1632 is a year; moreover you chose a bad example with star trek which is iconic. The alt-hist conforms to the Cat naming conventions better, IMHO. I excepted it so I'm still waiting for a rebuttal on that point. I think it's only fair since you reference the document! :)
:... Let me think on it some more. I haven't been to bed trying to move this project set into decent shape. If you have a good eye for spelling gaffs, a good look behind me would be appreciated!
::I'll see if I can scare up some copyedit types I know to do the same. I've been imbedding templates to attract help on that as well. We should really keep this on the series talk. Just bottom section post a minor period or some such with a summary message to go see where ever..
Later! <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 17:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
''SO what do we do with what's done?'' Not me! <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font>
What form are we not arguing about? More to the point, you do realize that any change is moot as they're already there. Even deleting one will cause more work. Some of them are redundant, but communicate different senses, thus are still useful. So what is the big deal??? The Cats are a one time, one edit in one page need. I fail to understand why this is no more than a matter of taste and style. Are you going to wake up screaming from a nightmare caused ''by the dream memory you couldn't shake screaming that you forgot the spelling? ''when you will hardly ever, if ever have to type one on any day going forward?
Can we just get some work done instead of quarreling about a negligible preference? I'm sorry you don't approve, but if you haven't gotten the hint, I'm shocked at what I found for the state of this project. You guys started this a year or more ago and just orphaned it in a stub state. Is that because you had too many arguements and couldn't divvy things up, or because no one cared? <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 18:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

== Request: ==

I ask that you reconsider your vote for abstention in light of the recent revisions that I have made to ]. --] 09:45, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

Could you translate the last missing Polish sentence into English? I can only guess he was voivode of Cracow and something else. Thank you, ] ] 19:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
:Much better! Thanks! ] ] 20:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

== Battles ==

Most of the boxes are already in each "Battles of (war)" subcat. For now, I've left the two boxes in Battles of Poland because they still have a lot of red links. ] (]) 20:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

==Flight of the turkey==
Hi, Piotrus, thanks for your comments on ] on FAC. The article has apparently just been promoted to FA this morning, but I'm going to add a little about the discovery of the Kvitøya camp like you suggested. (Not a whole section, though.) I was rather surprised it took so long before somebody requested it, actually. ;-) I was trying to keep the overall length down, as it was already longer than really appeals to me, but I guess it did leave a bit of a gap, you're quite right. Best, ] ] ] 09:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC).

== Troll User:66.228.120.35 also User:69.57.177.154 ? ==

Hi. At ], you wrote "{{User|66.228.120.35}} is a troll, no doubt about it. Revert on sight". I've noticed that {{User|69.57.177.154}} makes the same sort of edits, labelling people (mostly or all British) as Jews, without providing any evidence — eg., the to ]. S/he is also a bit "]"; see and .
I've only been editing Misplaced Pages for a few months, and I'm not completely sure what to do about this. I'd appreciate any suggestions you might have. — ] 13:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

==]==
Thankyou for your comments on the ] article. You were absolutely correct in the ommission of these two important sections. I hadn't thought to add them in before, probably because I was blinded by the medical aspects. A lot more data about the economic impact of AIDS, has been added in its own section coupled with some nice references. The stigma section has also been expanded upon slightly. What else do you think should be done to improve the article? --] 20:10, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


==Please see this==

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Russsian_claims_about_Warsaw_Uprising_1794 The author tries to put information from non-objective source as objective article. The source is from Imperial Russia regarding Polish uprising against its occupation. Imperial Russia was known for fabricating and being source of many antipolish fabrications. Because I didn't want to delete this(no blanking) I moved it to a proper article that would deal with claim.
--] 03:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

::... As to what Molobo written above, I believe we have a serious issue with Russian 19th century sources. The same set of Great Russian links are currently being added to a plethora of articles. Any ideas? ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 08:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

==Muscowy-Polish-Lithuanian Union==
This will interest you if you remember the discussion:
I think you could add this to article quite easly.
--] 06:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

== Just Announced Yesterday ==
Thought you'd like to know ASAP...
*1634: The Baltic War is now officially scheduled for hardcover publication in May 2007. You may perform the usual back-calculations to figure out webscription, e-arc and snippet availability.

:– The Loyal Minions
Snipped from Erics Site. They're months ahead of schedule per Webers 'schedule' on his web site!
B'regards <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 19:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

==Articles in mess==
Please see some recent entries at ] for my view on the problem which is getting worse lately. Improper choice of the articles to add information, similarly to the tag abuse, is the major problem IMO. --] 03:27, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

== Crusading again? ==

Dear prokonsul, if you again liken one of the most active and prolific wikipedians to your worthless pet troll (who you try to represent as a "precious content creator") - we shall have to continue this discussion on ]. Personal attacks and campaigning on talk pages are not likely to earn additional points for the rabid anti-Ghirlandajo crusade which you solemnly launched half a year ago and still pursue with too obvious enthusiasm.

However you may enjoy Molobo's trolling, the things this guy does comply meticulously with the description given in ]. As for my harsh treatment of Molobo in ] - the article in which he was trolling like hell with your full approbation and connivance - please let us settle the matter between ourselves. I'm afraid it is none of your business to make it a ram weapon in your anti-Ghirlandajo crusade.

As for ] you keep bringing about on every second page you post, without mentioning that its content has already been examined by the ArbCom, I assure you that such a bad-faith behaviour may entitle me to request for comment as to your continuing pestering and intimidation. I take no interest in Poland-related topics and never edit them, unless attacks by Molobo's gang on Russia-related articles constrain me to respond. Please leave me alone, I don't want to have anything in common with you or your pet trolls. --] <sup>]</sup> 07:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

== Interwar polish copyright law ==

I'm interested kaszanka1 małpa poczta kropka onet kropka pl ] 23:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
No dobra 2 mail gplichta@op.pl ] 23:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

== Support the PocketPacket! ==

Hi Piotrus. Thanks for your work on the Giddens article, which i have also contributed to. Sorry i didn't get a chance to do much extra with it recently. Meanwhile ... I created the entry for ] but it has been nominated for deletion. I am hoping that you might recognize a decent cultural phenomenon when you see one - and if so, you might cast a vote at ] for it to be '''kept''', or else '''moved''' to Misplaced Pages project space (as has been suggested). I don't mind either of those. If you feel able to help, that would be nice, but otherwise don't worry about it! Many thanks. ] 12:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

== ] and ] ==

Thank you for posting the ] article at the Germany portal! It is a good reminder that we need to write some more articles about 1989/1990 in East Germany. I also didn't know that ], ] was the day Solidarnosc won the elections -- quite an important date, with this and the Tiananmen massacre at the same time.

I come to my other point: ] is still in Polish and has been listed at ] (for two weeks already, I forgot to tell you earlier). Could you translate it or maybe redirect it to its only bluelinked entry until it does get translated? Thank you, ] ] 03:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:I see. Maybe it is enough to just link these titles such as ] and ] etc. and to say "of Krakow" instead of "krakowski" to make it somewhat more comprehensible for {{tl|User pl-0}} people like me (right now, it isn't clear that these are titles if you don't understand them). Or is "] of ]" a bad idea? ] ] 03:35, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
::Sure, go ahead and do that. As a temporary measure for the disambiguation page, I have put a notice linking to the ] on it so readers know where to find the information necessary to understand it. ] ] 03:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

==Res to ]==
Piotrus, I suggest you show us all that you are sincere about your <nowiki>**</nowiki> point (relevance). Please cleanup the stuff Molobo recently added to several articles about the Brest parade and Molotov's quote. He pasted that stuff from the narrower articles to the wider ones. This was a totally unwaranted WP:Point and, from what I know, if I removed it myself, you would have been the first to restore it back. Also, please go over the current masterpiece section entitled "Treatment of Polish citizens by the evil Soviet regime" and keep in the article only as much as it is really proper for its style.

In the meanwhile I will start writing as you encouraged me for the existing articles and we will see later what to do with this stuff, create narrower articles, or keep the info of Rydz' parade and Kiev destruction in History of PL and PSW articles and other similar issues.

And of course "I have nothing but good faith on my mind." This whole mess was prompted, if you remember, by my adding the picture of Lodz liberation to History of PL article. Some of your friends just could not take that the readers of the articles see who kicked Nazis out of Poland. The rest you know well. In adding the pic I had no other intention than illustrating the article with an image of a very relevant event. --] 04:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)<br>
P.S. And please give a another thought to when to use the tags and when to just ask at talk. This is a huge pain and can be turned very aggravating as you know. I've heard youd past responses that you are sure that you acted rightfully. Just think for a moment before throwing seven tags in one paragraph when you feel like doing it next time. --] 04:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

:''Please let me know which articles (and preferably which edits) do you want me to look over, and if the stuff was pasted, where from. ''

The article is History of Pl (39-45). The stuff is:
*Parade in brest
*Quotes of Molotov congratulating Nazis
*The whole section especially written anout the evil Soviets (I proposed to paste that to a separate article as early as when it was at Halibutt's userspace while you voiced your preference to test it by fire.

:''As for that pic, I know you had good intentions and in that particular case others overreacted way to strongly - and when Ghirla joined the outcome was a mess. Happens - and I think we have it fixed somewhat (although the photo issue will not be resolved until we have an article about London victory parade and why Polish forces in the West could not take part in it). ''
The pic I am talking about is Lodz liberation, not the Red Square parade. Ghirla has nothing to do with that. It was Halibutt and Molobo who were continuously attacking it.

:''In other news, I can check the English spellings in Davies WERS book you requested, but plese let me know exactly what names (index? page nr?) you want me to look at, so when I go to the library I can do it as quickly as possible.''
As far as terminology is conserned, I would like to know how he calls the places included in ]. Also, I am interested whether Davies supports Halibutt's assertion that Poles won the ] (sic). So far it's not any historian's assertion but Halibutt's own conclusion from descriptive accounts. I disagree but his assertion was affirmed by a meaningless partisan three vs one vote and I had no more nerve to continue this discussion about nothing. --] 06:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)




*re: Tnx for the news! I am not that good with bar calculation, so if you can figure out the dates for those, let me know.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
*Did you get my email with Answer? <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 05:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi, I noticed you've done some work on the article ]. Have you read the book? I'm wondering because there are some quality issues with the article (detailed on ]) that I can't correct myself, having never read the book, but which nonetheless make the article read like nonsense to someone who has never read the book. Feel free to drop me a message if you have any questions about my notes on ]. -] 02:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

:Thanks a lot. As a huge fan of dystopias (that just sounds ''weird''), I appreciate your efforts. -] 02:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

::Cool, I'll take a look next time I'm at the library. By the way, that was some ''fast'' translation! I can't even imagine pulling that off with Russian! -] 02:58, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== With regards from Tymek ==

Hi there this is Tymek
You have written to me so I am writing back
I try to do my best so that whatever is interesting about Poland would be shared with other people on Misplaced Pages
Right now I am working on my project about Polish soccer/football in the late 1930s
and that's about it
thanks for encouragement ] 02:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

==Arbcom email==
Sorry about the late reply. I haven't been online lately as much as in the past... I should be getting Misplaced Pages email. If the feature is not working, try sending it directly to sokolov47@yahoo.com. Let me know if I can be of any help. ] | ] 06:15, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


BTW, I've taken a look at the ] article. Perhaps there should be a current event template there? ] | ] 06:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

== Bishopbox ==

I couldn't tell from your message if you would like a template or a nicer succession box. (The succession boxes on the pl wp are nice, but you have to be careful because if you start changing the size and colors, they won't stack as nicely as the regular succession boxes.) ] (]) 14:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

== Potocki ==

Hi- I am assuming Potocki because it also has the Latin motto for the Potocki family, but then again, that motto may be shared by other families, just like the crest is - and you are right it may be another A.Potocki I didn't see that list. I will email them in English with pictures and perhaps they will be able to reply, thank you for your help. -- ] 16:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

== You'r right ==

That's logical. Just let me finish the list so it's complete and I'll merge it with the main article.

/Q

== Patzer ==

dziendobry,
dodoal pan do listy 1000 polakow Patzera.

nie zamiescil pan artykolu, jesli potrzeba moge podeslac info. polecam polski slownik biograficzny.

pytanie, czemu sluzy lista i skad mial pan imie nazwisko i daty urodzenia i smierci?
dziekuje
td

== A request from a fellow teacher ==

Hi, I am writing to ask your permission to borrow some of your instructions from your university projects page for an assignment I am putting together for University of Hong Kong students. I will of course cite your contribution, but wanted to check with you first. Kindly let me know. -- ] 03:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

A watered-down version of the proposed policy against censorship is now open for voting. Will you kindly review the policy and make your opinions known? Thank you very much. ] 13:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

== Transhumanism problem ==

Piotrus -- a user with the IP address 204.184.48.113 has been vandalizing the ] article for some time now. Can you tell me how to get this user blocked or initate this process yourself? Thanks. --] 19:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

== Z dziejów sarkazmu i ironii w Polsce ==

Przy okazji szukania informacji o kaplicy moskiewskiej na Krakowskiem w Warszawie natknąłem się na . Pomyślałem, że Ci się spodoba, zwłaszcza notka ''Rosenzweiga, Kareiskapitana Cyrkułu Konieckiego'' :) Swoją drogą ów Rosenzweig byłby kolejnym z moich bohaterów zaraz obok Joselewicza. ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 23:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

:A przy okazji Skorpiona - widziałem pełnowymiarową makietę tegoż w hangarze PZL na warszawskim Okęciu. Stoi toto pod ścianą, razem z masą Wilg i innych reliktów, obok kilku prywatnych awionetek. Tyle że na pięć metrów dokoła niego jest czerwona linia na ziemi i ochrona nie pozwala się zbliżyć - ani zrobić zdjęć... ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 23:49, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

::''- ani zrobić zdjęć'' :( Rzucił się na mnie i niemal wyrwał aparat, jakby to nadal była tajemnica państwowa... Skutek jest taki, że zdjęć nie mam, a dogadywanie się z PZLem to droga przez mękę. Wiem coś o tym, załatwiałem wycieczkę po ich terenie... ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 04:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

::O, a skoro o tym mowa, jakiś czas temu przyjaźniłem się z towarzystwem z warszawskiego MEiL, głównie z chłopakami od konstrukcji płatowców. Opowiadali mi o planach wykonania pełnowymiarowej makiety-nielota Łosia, na podstawie oryginalnych planów. Mówili, że faceci z muzeum lotnictwa w Krakowie już od jakiegoś czasu zbierają fundusze, ale nie wiem na jakim etapie jest cały projekt. Chyba będę się musiał do nich odezwać i zapytać. A nuż udostępniliby jakieś zdjęcia albo plany... ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 15:28, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

==Warto zobaczyć tą dyskusję==
--] 11:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

== Missing landmarks of Warsaw ==

I was thinking of creating stubs for such buildings, but a list would be too much, as basically all of the city is missing, with some notable exceptions. While a Warsaw-pedia might be a nice idea, it would simply be too much work to do. Imagine a list of thousands of churches, buildings, market halls, squares and so on - each of them notable in itself. As for now I'll do some work on the most urgent ones, for instance the Arsenal. Any other requests? ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 15:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
:Warsaw Arsenal done. Will look for some pics now. ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 17:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
::You don't want me to start an article on it, do you... :) After all it was yet another precious pieces of Russian architecture vandalized by the Polish barbarians in 1920's :D ... AAMoF the spot used to be occupied by the Muscovite Chapel, the same where the Shuyski's were buried and the same where the Dominican church was later built. Then in early 19th century Corazzi buily the current palace there, as the seat of the Society of Friends of Sciences. Then the society was closed down by the Russians (after the Uprising), who later rebuilt it in some fancy Byzantine-Muscovite style I'd call gargamellic. The building housed yet another Orthodox church in Warsaw, this one dedicated to certain Tatiana the Roman. However, in mid-twenties it was restored to its original form and given to the Scientific Society of Warsaw. You have a detailed history (as well as some pics) . The best site to look for Warsaw's monuments and their history, if you'd ask me. Actually the first place I go before going to my parents' working room to check with our collection of ''varsaviana''. ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 21:58, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

== Kusma's RfA ==

] Hello, Piotrus! Thank you for your support in my recent successful ]. If you ever have problems that you could use my assistance with or see me doing stupid things with my new buttons, don't hesitate to contact me. Happy editing, ] ] 02:33, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

Are the galleries really ''that'' necessary? They really takes a sizeable amount of space, and most of them do not assert pertinence to the article. ] 03:07, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

:If they are really that useful, maybe ] would make that more obvious to the reader. ] 14:49, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

==Copyright paranoia==
Please take a look . --] 04:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

== DYK ==

First of all, I don't think it is a good time to move these sections out of the article. However, such a solution has a merit of drawing all our vandals out of a featured article to some other place. Anyway, I'm currently working on preparing the article on ] (my long-forgotten hommage to my grandpa which I de-stubbed some 2 years ago and have been holding on my to-do list ever since). I've spent last 12 hours or so digging through some 30 books on the Holocaust and I'm not sure I could stand yet another horror. Sorry, but not today. I hope you'll understand. ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 23:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
:Speaking of which, could you take a look at the article and tell me what's missing? Use {{tl|fact}} tags as liberally as you please, I have all the sources (except perhaps two or three) at hand, so finding a decent citation would not be a problem. As a matter of fact, out of some 50 books on the topic published in Poland after 1945 my mom managed to collect some 40 altogether, including two or three published in tiny issues in obscure printing houses shortly after the war :) ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 03:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

::Thanks. As I said, it still needs some work (I asked Mozzerati to take a look and correct as much as he can) and expansion (see a brief to do list at the talk page). But now to sleep :0 ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 04:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Thanks for nominating it to Good Articles list, hopefully more people will come to take a look at the article and correct it (which I assume is the main purpose of that project). Do you thing the article is ready for standard peer review? I recently dug out some pictures, mostly from American state archives. I also gave the article some finishing touches, but I simply spent too much time on it and don't see what should be added to it any more, so alien input is badly needed. You know, the good old matura syndrome of reading what you have in mind rather than what you actually wrote..
:::Anyway, Mozzerati suggested that the article could be split onto more sections, which in general seems like a good option, but in practice is completely beyond my possibilities. I simply have no idea what could be split to a separate section. Any ideas? ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 21:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

==History of PL 39-45==
Piotrus, I started bringing the contentious article to normalcy. I removed the extensive quotes of Molotov that Molobo pasted from other articles. They simply don't belong to such a wide range article as History of Poland. For similar reasons, I removed the text about the Brest parade and Krivoshein's invitation towards Guderian also pasted by the same editor.

I hope you will help me in keeping them out. If you think they need returned back to the article, then, please help me introduce the info of the Rydz' "liberators" parade in Kiev to another History of PL article. Also, if we go into quoting politicians, we should add Machalski's quote on the parade, as well as Dmowski's quotes about "our duty to absorb other elements" whenever we can, Pilsudski's "Independence first, size later" and Bogdanovich's speech on the destruction of Nevsky cathedral.

I would like to move the "treatment of Polish citizens" section to a separate article. I don't even see it back as a summary, since it can be, and actually is, mentioned in the course of chronological events anyway. History of Country articles should be composed by chronology, that's my firm beleif and that what history book do and what Britannica does. We have separate history books on narrow topics, like "Holocaust in Poland", "Soviet Occupation", etc.

Similarly, the material under such titles belong to separate articles rather than interputing a text flow of the general history article.

Otherwise, we again see a lack of symmetry. "Treatment of minorities" in both interwar and post-war Poland can be made into useful and well-referenced articles and some material is already in Misplaced Pages. But do you support such separate section in History of PL articles?

Finally, please have some attitude talk with Halibutt. I don't care about his comments calling my edits "vandalism" even followed up that he simply calls them what they are at the article's talk. That just makes himself look ridiculous. But if he keeps reverting me "using popups", we will be heading towards an RfC at some point. I would hate to start a formal action against an undoubtedly prolific contributor. He has his strong sides and his short-temperateness, is perhaps a reflection of how he is in real life as well as, perhaps, the young age. Having said that, I am looking forward to normalization in the Eastern European topics, which with the departure of Molobo and low activity of a couple of other fellows seems possible. --] 23:51, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

:I would generally prefer to avoid the use of quotes which express opinions as much as possible (except possibly in biography articles about the author of the quote). Quotes stating facts might be allowed, but even there it is better to just state the fact, and maybe put the quote in the notes to back it up. Pasting in quotes to illustrate a particular POV seems to me a bad practice. This is especially the case when one is quoting politicians, who almost never express neutral, objective truth in public speeches. The Bogdanovich quote is the one that comes to mind here, but of course it is only one example of many.

:As for a chronological approach, that might be the ideal but at present the article is not organised chronologically, so doing so would require a total rewrite. Besides, a chronological approach is not a must. Take a look at ], which has clear, separate subsections for East Germany and West Germany, and discusses them separately.

:How about this compromise. Let's separate out the period before June 1941, and divide it into German occupation and Soviet occupation parts. This makes sense, as the experience of the inhabitants of the two parts was completely different. It also makes sense because the nature of the German occupation also changed after June 1941, when the mass extermination of Jews began. Then, as after June 1941 all of prewar Polish territory ended up under German occupation, we can discuss events in a single flow. ] 00:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

::As for the quotes, I hear you, Balcer. I removed Molotov's and Krivosheiin's quotes again and without Molobo, the chances of them getting restored are small (although non-zero). They are not lost, since they were pasted to several other articles already by now. If you remember, I did agree on the Bogdanovich's quote removal.

::As for non-chronological approach, it is usually the result of POV pushing. Someone with an issue or two over something elaborates on an issue close to his heart directly in the History of Country article, and at certain point we end up with section we don't know how to handle without the article's rewrite. Most history articles are chronological. Check the ] series? Check ]? For the latter there is no series because I am getting too little help, but I am trying to write a main article little by little strictly in a chronological order. Restoring chronology in History of PL (39-45) will help not only bring it to normalcy but will help it to remain normal for the years to come. The sections can indeed be titled not just by a year but "German occupation", "Soviet occupation", etc. But the basic structure of the article should go by chronology.

::If this takes rewriting much of the article, this is for you guys (plus Halibutt) mostly to do. I will be mostly watching. If you ever get to this, please consider, starting the article from September 1939 and add the pre-war events of '39 to the previous article where they structurally fit better. This is a single chain of events of frantic prewar motions by all sides. No need to interrupt it at January 1, 1939. --] 00:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

:::I'll reply here as this is a 3+ person discussion. I'd also recommend possible movement of this discussion to ]. Quotes with few exceptiosn belong on ]. I'd prefer to go for chronology too, but as Balcer points out it would require a complete rewrite of the article. I won't mind, but I am not volunteering to do it anytime soon either.--] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 01:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

::::The article could use a rewrite. Note that at present some section titles and contents resemble that of a separate article. This seems to me a little odd in a history article about such a short time period. There seems to be little unity to the whole thing, which a chronological approach would give. However, I definitely don't have time right now to attempt any drastic changes. The article in the current form is not great, but at least it conveys most of the essential information. Maybe, over the next few months, some of us will find the time to transform it gradually.

::::Quick note to Irpen: even the ] article has section Ukraine between the world wars, and within it subsections Soviet Ukraine,Galicia and Volhynia under Polish rule, Bukovina under Romanian rule and Transcarpathia under Czechoslovakia and Hungary. This is just another example how a chronological approach is not a requirement. ] 01:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I know, I added these sections to History of UA but there the situtation is fairly unique as the country was divided between several states and the history of non-Soviet Ukaine was developing with the history of the host-country. Poland, OTOH, in this period was only one.

I am with you Balcer, also, regarding current wierd sectionizing of the 39-45 PL article. The reasons of it I explained above. Someone just has a pet issue with evil Russians and Germans, and Yalta, etc. Those are the reasons. I would rather bring this to normalcy than add "treatment of minorities in interwar Poland" new section to the previous article. I was seriously considering writing it because I lost any chance that this one can be balanced.

Piotrus, I would purge the "treatment..." section out entirely. There is no good need for it at all. Everything can be said in the respective historic subsections. Then, we could safely move the talk section to the separate "treatment". If that get's POV attacked by some, I will live with it. That article by its very nature is almost guaranteed to be not neutral. In fact, I will do just that. With the talk somewhat cleaned up as the huge chunk follows the section, we can move this conversation to talk:History if you want. --] 01:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

:Until we start rewriting it, I think it is better to have this section then not. After all, it describes how 1/3 of Polish population got murdered - it's rather important for that period of Polish history.--] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 02:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I already removed it and moved the relevant talk. This section was non-existing until Halibutt's recent creativity gust and the article had enough problems. It is a bad idea to have forks. Some material can be added to the flow of other sections, while I think the attrocities are already covered in the article much better than the rest. --] 02:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

:I am sorry, but I can't agree with that. This section is as relevant as the Holocaust one. It may need a NPOVing copyedit, but until the entire article is rewritten it should stay.--] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 02:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I just forgot to split the Holocaust one as well. Corrected now. These are wierd sections for a History of Country articles. Two of them were just written. The third one was there written clearly with an agenda as well. I respect the agenda of the users who write articles on attrocities to their nation, but this material belongs to a proper place and not all over Misplaced Pages. This would just be a bunch of forks with independent edit conflicts, POV tainted independently and going further rather than towards the main article they are supposed to summarize. You've been around and you know how this happends. Just expand the article but no controvercial sections that simply don't belong to such articles. They were not there until recently anyway. --] 02:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks! I will unlikely be much around within hours to come (might stop by though) but I think we will handle this just right. Regards to Balcer as well. Please remember to check my talk for response when leaving me a message. --] 02:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

::When it comes to a complete rewrite of the "history of PL 1939-1945" article - I'm sorry to say that but don't count on me too much gentlemen. At least not too soon. It's my favourite part of European history and the one I know about the most. However, my experiences from past conflicts with Zivinbudas, Irpen, Ghirlandajo, Molobo, Nico and all kinds of people who adopt the same attitude towards Misplaced Pages make me think that my contribution would simply be a major loss of my time. Why spend hours on digging up facts in verifiable, English-language sources if these guys are going to come (and they are, as they always do) and revert on sight or try to push their POV in at all cost, preferably with some "sources" as credible as the one recently presented in the article on Insurrection of Warsaw. It's not worth the effort IMO, especially that after several hours spent on such work these guys are going to abandon the talk page and resort to simple reverts anyway. Not worth my nerves. We recently rewrote a single part of that article - and take a look at what happened, both in the history of the article and at the talk page. Besides, I'd be happy not to enlarge the list of offences I host on my user page - which is not going to happen if I stay on the same articles those guys are interested in I'm afraid. Instead, I'm going to move along.
::When it comes to chronological order, I can't say I don't like the current one. The topical order seems just as good - and even better when we write a huge article that's going to be further split anyway. But I won't oppose a complete rewrite to chronological order either. ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 02:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

==Dyskusja wykluczająca dyskusję==
Rzuć okiem na <nowiki>]</nowiki> i doradź, co z tym zrobić. ] 15:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks. ]

== Admin help needed ==

Certain ] has pointed out recently that the article on ] should in fact be at ]. He was right, but then he went on to the wrong ways: blanked the original article, copypasted it elsewhere and started blanking the redirects instead of fixing them. Could you possibly delete the copypasted article and move it the proper way? ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 10:44, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks. ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']]

== Reorganization of Category:World War II ships of Poland ==

Hello! As a recent editor of World War II Polish ship categories, I wanted to invite you to join in on my of ] and its sub categories. --] (]) 13:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

== Czeski Cieszyn ==
Cześć. Mógłbyś zajrzeć na artykuł o Czeskim Cieszynie? Jakiś wandal stale kłócił się ze mną i w końcu dodał tam szablon NPOV. Chciałbym znać twoje zdanie, czy myślisz, że artykuł jest naprawdę nieobjektywny. Dzięki. Jeśli uważasz, że jest objektywny, to poprostu usuń ten szablon. -- ] 20:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

== than ==

Use ''than'' for comparisons and ''then'' for chronological relationships.

Thanks,

] 04:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

==Renaming==
Piotrus, in view of the ongoing debate about the ] renaming, what would you say about renaming of PMW to the ] or ]? I've seen it used in many sources. Please reply at your own talk. I will crosspost the pointer to this message to Balcer and Halibutt. I am interested in their opinion as well. --] 19:42, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

:Personally, I like ] just fine. Why don't we wait how that debate ends before we condsider moving other articles?

:As for other sources using different titles, please keep in mind that Britannica and many other books do not have NPOV as their guiding policy, but Misplaced Pages does. Hence scholars are allowed to use terms which are inherently POV to make their point, but Misplaced Pages should steer clear of them. In that light, "war" is a neutral term, "intervention" and "invasion" predispose the reader to a certain moral evaluation of the event and so should be avoided.

:To give one quick example, we have ], not ] or ], though both of the latter are of course perfectly accurate and much more descriptive of what actually took place. ] 20:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

::I say the basic way to name the war is by naming it as such. Hence the Polish-Swedish war and not the Deluge, the Polish-Muscovite war and not the Dmitriads and so on. The only problem arrises when there is a significant opposition to renaming one article (PSC) to some other name and the "Country-Country War" scheme would simply not work. That's where we could agree to rename it to some other title. However, contrary to Irpen I don't believe we should start a campaign of changing all the names in wikipedia to fit the new scheme. The Invasion of Poland would be an exception rather than a rule and is a neat solution to avoid naming that article in accordance with the common scheme (that is ]), which would produce a monstrosity. If Irpen cares so much about consistency, he should be happy that most of the articles already fit a consistent scheme. ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 20:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Or is the invasion of Poland should be an exception because Poland was a victim this time and we want the title to reflect that. Unlike when it was the perpetrator. WHat is the English historiography's name for the Polish invasionS of Russia in others' view? --] 21:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

:::I think all of this has to be analysed on a case by case basis. Condider: ] vs ], ] not ] (although this may be actually a wrong choice), ] not ], ] not...--] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 20:54, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

::::How about "]" and "]"? Granted, both uprisings spilled over into the following year; still, the ''year'' is much more informative to a non-Pole than the ''month''. ]|] 03:46, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

:The most important issue for me is: is the 'Polish invasion of Muscovy/Russia' the most popular term used in English ]?--] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 20:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
::And what is it in your opinion? --] 21:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
:::Polish invasion of Russia: 17 books but some refer to PSW
:::Polish invasion of Muscovy: 0
:::Polish-Muscovite War: 1
:::Polish-Russian War: quite a few, but most reffering to the Polish-Soviet War
:::Russian-Polish War: also quite a few
:::I think that the current title is much more informative (PioM is not used, and PioR can be confusing with PSW). --] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 21:09, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

The confusion can be eliminated by ]. At least you can see that this is the most used one. Or you say others are more used. Such title would sure fit to what happend! --] 21:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
:Honestly I think the entire ] renaming debate is opening a cans of warms and POV-pushing. I am perfectly happy with the current titles, and unlike some other renaming issue this one seems driven by POV-pushing agenda, not scholarly reasons. Please excuse me, but I don't want to waste more of mine - or yours - time on that issue - we have content to create.--] <sup><font color="green">]</font></sup> 21:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Piotrus, that's ''avoidance''. Look, the can has many worms and they will keep getting out until we sort this out once and for all. I was pleading at the Polish board about such massacres, martyrdoms and invasions titles (see ]) some weaks ago . We should not conviniently put an issue aside under the excuse of being busy with "content creation" and then defend the massacres articles elewhere. Besides, some of the most content creating Polish editors (you and Halibutt) created or contributed to the whole bunch of massacre articles and argued to keep the titles. I will raise this issue again the Polish board. I hope I will get some support this time. --] 23:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

::Irpen, just sit for a minute and think what you're doing. Before you accuse anyone of bad faith or POV-pushing through avoidance, think of your own actions. And then ask yourself why nobody ever tried to propose to rename any article to, say, , or , eventhough such names are perfectly known in sources - and in fact give more links than the searches for "Polish invasion of Russia".

::If we were to adopt your way of changing all neutral X-Y wars into X's invasions of Y, the struggles for whom invaded which state would never end as it is barely ever as evident as it was in the case of the war of 1939. The war naming scheme is a one size fits most solution. "Invasion of" is not. If the Poles invaded Russia in 1920, then what did the Russians in 1919? And then, shouldn't we adopt the POV of Belarus which was in fact invaded by both Poland and Russia? Or perhaps Ukrainian POV which states clearly that their state was invaded by several Russias (whites and reds at the same time)? Also, following your logic we should split most of the articles we have on 20th century conflicts onto separate parts just to allow for your "invasion" scheme to be sensible. ] would have to be split onto ], ], ] and ]. Some would also call the Polish alliance with Petlura a Polish invasion of Ukraine, simultaneous to the Ukrainian invasion of the Ukraine. But let's follow that trail even further. During the same time we also had a French invasion of Russia, American invasion of Russia, British invasion of Russia, Czech invasion of Russia that quickly became the Czechoslovak invasion of Russia. We'd also have a Latvian, Estonian and Lithuanian invasions, Russian invasion of Belarus, Belarusian invasion of Russia, Polish invasion of Belarus, Russian invasion of the Caucasus (which in the end should be split onto several country-specific articles, of course). Last but not least we'd have at least four different Russian invasions of Russia and at least two Ukrainian invasions of the Ukraine. Consistency is nice, but your way does not make much sense to me. Sorry. ''<font color="#990011">//</font>'']] 01:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Halibutt, that's the music to my ears as we are singing the same tune. Yes, I am also opposing using the strong words in article titles. However, the '39 as well as the 17th century wars stand out as straight-on invasions: one no more than the other and if we allow such names for the articles, both should be renamed. Also, why do we need all this massacres and martyrdoms in the titles? Please see my eariler post and the ] to my comment in the Polish board. --] 02:31, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

hello there,

thank you for finding the source of the image. I think many users are probably not quite aware of the ], I have posted a request on the Polish users talk page as you have recommended on the Commons, it is the primary responsibility of the user who uploads an image to make sure everything is up to code. If you wish, I can contact you or leave a message with the Polish users noticeboard if I find Polish-related images that are missing sources, instead of posting an immedeate deletion tag. Happy Easter... ] 18:32, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

==Happy Easter==

Wesołych Świąt! ] 03:48, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

==Double redirects==
How does one "fix double redirects"? ]|] 05:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

==Red Army==
I find your wholesale revert there disturbing. Besides, you entered another paragraph twice in text. Please go over your edit one more time and try to merge info by another editor rather than revert him.

Also, I am really surprised to see you reintroduce the Brest parade to a such broad topic article. We discussed the issue when talking about Victor's parade in Kiev. Would you think info about the Rydz' parade and vandalism in the city should be duplicated in the broad topic articles as well. If so, please do that yourself. The similar article would be ]. I could do that myself, but it would look more convinsing if done by a Polish editor. --] 02:26, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

As per and our previous dialog: see, that's much better than reverting, while adimtedly took more time. That's exactly what I was saying when calling to revert only when obvious nonsense. I managed to embed at times even Molobo's edits. Please clean up ] from Russophobia, when you have time. --] 06:21, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

== Barnstar Award ==

{{award2|image=Barnstar-stone2-noback.png|size=100px|topic=The Epic Barnstar|text=For your particularly fine History-related contributions concerning the Polish-Soviet War I present to you this award.<font color="violet">]</font> 05:49, 16 April 2006 (UTC) }}

Whoooooo-Weeeeee! Congrats Man! Bottom posting is a pain as you miss so much flying past w/o being able to look! Keep up the good work! <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 06:25, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

== If I can trouble you for a little feedback ==

I got sidetracked into this 'gem' (Ahem) and we haven't touched base for a while.
It's not quite a party, but...
You are cordially invited to pick on Frank:<br>(Beats handling problems!<G>)<br>
re: ] on new article: ]
This post is being made Friday 14 April 2006 to a double handful (spam?) of admins & editors for some reactions, and advice (Peer Review) on this article, and it's remaining development, as I'd like to put it to bed ASAP. (Drop in's welcome too!) Your advice would be valuable and appreciated. Replies on talk link (above) indicated. Thanks! <B>]</B><font color="green">]</font> 20:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
*I just ripped this off my talk cleaning up for a WikiDayOff tomarrow, and realized you weren't an invitee on the above. Apologies. I've gotten some good input, but can use more. Bear in mind to go to the talk section link first for the brief, then the article. The issue is really how to design an article covering the topic. This 'draft' just sort of 'happened', as is explained. (btw- if you don't like history, don't bother! <G>)
Best!

== Jan Piotr Norblin @ DYK ==


{| class="messagebox standard-talk"
|-
|]
|''']''' has been updated. A fact from the article ''']''', which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the ]. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on ].
|}

== ] ==
Dear Piotrus:
Thanks for your letter. Right now Im too tired (a party and a concert) to look for places on the internet where that statement could be backed up. I only based that statement, being an asiduous visitor of Hobby Stores (I am building a small town for my niece, sort of a much smaller scale of Amsterdam city town in Holland) and everytime I go there are three rooms dedicated to men's and boys toys with one room left for dolls! lol!

I will try to find internet information that backs that statement tomorrow. Meanwhile, pleasse pass by one of my newest contributions, ].

Thanks and ] bless you!
'']''

==]==

Piotrus, your last edit to the Peace of Riga article 4/16/06, @5:30, is awkward and poorly written. The English is messy, and it is TMI (too much information). It's actually untypical of your contributions. Getting rid of it altogether might be better, than trying to rewrite it. Just an opinion, that might be helpful. ] 16:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
: Sorry, but I'm not that computer literate, to link some of these matters. More importantly however, is I made a mistake, I meant the edit at 14.52, not 5.31. ] 16:43, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

== Mosque FAC Comment ==


==DYK for Prisoners of war in World War II==
I have responded to your comments on the ]; I hope I have addressed your concerns sufficiently. Feel free to comment more on issues with the article on the FAC page. ]]] 03:11, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that as many as 35&nbsp;million soldiers became ''']''', according to some estimates?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ]. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page <small>(], )</small>, and the hook may be added to ] after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the ].
}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK --> – 🌻 ] (] &#124; ]) 00:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)


==Disambiguation link notification for January 11 ==
== User notice: temporary 3RR block on ] ==


An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ].
]You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the ]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. <!-- Template:3RR3 --> The duration of the is 3 hours.


(].) --] (]) 07:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry about this, but you have clearly broken 3RR (ou are joking? please stop restoring Soviet propaganda) plus 3 explicitly marked. You say: ''I have not broken 3RR as my reverts today were not to my own version but to Irpen's compromise version from earlier today'' - this is wrong. No such defense exists.


== ] ==
] 18:54, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


Hi. Not adverse to a dab, however the first item does not point to a particular subject, rather it is more of a definition than a link to an article on that subject. Therefore there is currently only one valid target. ] <sup>]</sup> 11:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
The reverts are: , , (those 3 labelled revert) and . I can't see why those aren't 4 reverts, within 24h ] 20:11, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


:@] I am not sure if this is against policy? There is also ]. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]&#124;]</sub> 13:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
==Prośba==
::Hi. I'm pretty sure it is. One of the 3 aspects of a dab page is "Ensuring that a reader who searches for a topic using a particular term can get to the information on that topic quickly and easily, whichever of the possible topics it might be." The first item on the dab page was little more than a definition, and definitely didn't link to get the reader to a particular topic. In addition, each bullet on a dab should only have a single blue link. Also, I'm not quite sure what you intended to refer to in that first definition. Did you mean inhabitants of those 5 countries? Those 5 countries as a group? Or that each of those countries might also be referred to by that term? Finally, re: the plc, that can be handled by a hatnote, since the demographic is clearly the primary target. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Cześć. Mam do ciebie prośbę - czy możesz przetłumaczyć na angielski nazwę "Górnośląskie Zagłębie Węglowe" (nie mylić z Górnośląskim Okręgiem Przemysłowym). Z góry dzięki. ] 22:10, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:59, 11 January 2025

This user wrote 632 DYKs: 632 This user wrote 82 Good-class articles.: 82 This user wrote 6 A-class articles.: 6 =This user wrote 22 Featured-class articles.: 22
There is no Cabal

You have the right to stay informed. Exercise it by reading the Misplaced Pages Signpost today.
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps (not signed with ~~~~) are archived manually when I get around to it.


Please start all new discussions at the bottom of this page and include a heading. When in doubt, click the "New Section" button above.

If I left you a message on your talk page, please answer it there by indenting one line and starting your response with a ping: {{Ping|Piotrus}} If you leave me a message here on my talk page, I will answer your message here by pinging you.

Always sign your message (by clicking the sign button or by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~). Thanks in advance.

Archiving icon

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69

This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Reasons for my raising wikistress:

Some general observations on Misplaced Pages governance being broken and good editors trampled by the system
Misplaced Pages is a kawaii mistress :)
I agree to the edit counter opt-in terms.

Lurking stats

Page views for this talk page over the last 90 days
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

Detailed traffic statistics

CfD nomination at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 6 § States and territories (dis)established in YYYY

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 6 § States and territories (dis)established in YYYY on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. harrz 21:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

DYK for German atrocities committed against prisoners of war during World War II

On 9 January 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article German atrocities committed against prisoners of war during World War II, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that while Germans murdered millions of prisoners of war during WWII, the survival ratio of Jewish POWs was generally tied to the army or nation they served with, and not to their ethnicity? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/German atrocities committed against prisoners of war during World War II. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, German atrocities committed against prisoners of war during World War II), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:03, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Hook update
Your hook reached 9,924 views (827.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2025 – nice work!
GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
story · music · places

Thank you for the article! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Category:Works has been nominated for merging

Category:Works has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. 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. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 17:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ten no Hate Made – Poland Hishi

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ten no Hate Made – Poland Hishi you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 66

The Misplaced Pages Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 66, November – December 2024

  • Les Jours and East View Press join the library
  • Tech tip: Newspapers.com

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Misplaced Pages Library team --17:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

DYK for Prisoners of war in World War II

On 11 January 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Prisoners of war in World War II, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that as many as 35 million soldiers became prisoners of war in World War II, according to some estimates? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Prisoners of war in World War II. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Prisoners of war in World War II), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

– 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 00:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Western Allies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Czechoslovak Army in the West.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Anglo-American

Hi. Not adverse to a dab, however the first item does not point to a particular subject, rather it is more of a definition than a link to an article on that subject. Therefore there is currently only one valid target. Onel5969 11:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@Onel5969 I am not sure if this is against policy? There is also Anglo American plc. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:35, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi. I'm pretty sure it is. One of the 3 aspects of a dab page is "Ensuring that a reader who searches for a topic using a particular term can get to the information on that topic quickly and easily, whichever of the possible topics it might be." The first item on the dab page was little more than a definition, and definitely didn't link to get the reader to a particular topic. In addition, each bullet on a dab should only have a single blue link. Also, I'm not quite sure what you intended to refer to in that first definition. Did you mean inhabitants of those 5 countries? Those 5 countries as a group? Or that each of those countries might also be referred to by that term? Finally, re: the plc, that can be handled by a hatnote, since the demographic is clearly the primary target. Onel5969 18:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)