Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:21, 25 July 2006

Barnstar!

While you are asleep on your Wikibreak I, Renata, award you this Original Barnstar to let you know that your hard work and pictures on Lithuania-related topics are very much appreciated. Renata 07:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

No of course I don't. I welcome anybody's constructive edits (even the minor or silly ones). The more the better! Renata 17:49, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Ponowna próba

Wymazania informacji o zbrodniach popełnionych przez żółnierzy niemieckich podczas Kampanii Wrześniowej, tym razem w artykule: http://en.wikipedia.org/German_17th_Infantry_Division --Molobo 22:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Klaipėda Revolt

Of course I don't mind you taggingand editing the article. DeirYassin 18:35, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Poloniation & Russophobia.

I have already explained in the edit comment to Russophobia: Polonization is immediately relevant to the sentence where it is mentioned. If you cannot read carefully, I cannot help you, sorry. mikka (t) 07:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Vitovt

Ok, Volosatik. You do not like when Vitovt is called by his original name. Fine, we can leave Vytautas before we discuss it. But why the hell you delete everything esle? Maybe you left some explanation?

Polish-Lithuanian War

Thank you in concurring with me that the "war" took place, instead of "raged". Since I was wrong about my other edits and need sources, can you give me your sources for removing "raged". After all it was in the article to begin with. And by the way, do you happen to know the sources for the information in the article. Have the sources, as they stand now, come from all sides of the conflict? Thank you in advance, and counting on your impartiality. Dr. Dan 02:28, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

WP:BSNB

Hello, and I think you will be interested in this new initiative to gather together people interested in the three Baltic States. It is now in the development stages so your input is welcome. Please share your mind and take an active role in this new notice board. Renata 04:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Maskhadov

Before questioning something, please take an effort to do a simple google test. The very first result the google gives to "Maskhadov Vilnius tower" string is the article at eng.kavkaz.memo.ru from which I am quoting for you:

Maskhadov commanded a platoon in 1972-78. He next was a battery commander and chief of staff of a battalion in the Far East. In 1981-86 he served in Szeged, Hungary, with the Southern Group of Troops and then from 1986 in the Baltic Military District, first as commander of a self-propelled artillery regiment and from the autumn of 1990 as chief of staff of missile and artillery forces of the Vilnius, Lithuania, garrison and deputy commander of the 7th division. In January 1991 Aslan took part in the "Vilnius events" (the seizure of the television tower by Soviet troops).

Of course he became a "freedom fighter" later. But that's a different story. --Irpen 07:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Trollish rant

odpierdal się jebany skurwysynu od porównywania AK do UPA, jebany faszysto !!!!!!!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.96.248.99 (talk • contribs)

Who's the fellow, I wonder?. --Irpen 21:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I always feel flattered by this type of attacks. It confirms that I'm doing the right things. --_Lysy 10:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Historic names

Sorry you needed to go on break before you could tell me why you feel the Lithuanian town of Panevėžys, needs to have its Polish name in the English Misplaced Pages. Especially since there is a Polish article about the town, which links to the English article (it clearly enables the user to know the name in Polish, if that's a necessity). Dr. Dan 23:36, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, because it's the historic name of the town of the Commonwealth. Why does it bother you ? --_Lysy 08:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

p.s. I always though the above obscenity, added by the ranting troll, od....dol się, ended in dol, not dal. Did the fool spell it correctly? I could swear that a good friend of mine from Płock, used dol not dal.

I'm having problems staying on my wikibreak. I'll need to try harder. As for the "dol" you are right. I don't know about the US, but children are quite careless in PL nowadays. --_Lysy 08:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

UPA

dlaczego Pan z premedytacją sugeruje jakieś domniemane pojednanie AK i UPA, proszę przedstawić jakieś wiarygodne informacje nt., np. Zarządu AK, zdjęcia oficialne wystąpienia wladz AK, to jest niedopuszczlane co Pan robi, i obraźliwe dla kombatantów AK !!!! 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Od kiedy pojednanie jest obraźliwe ? Link do przykladowej informacji podany jest w artykule. Przeformulowalem ten paragraf, zeby nie sugerowal, ze takie pojednania maja obecnie oficjalny charakter. --_Lysy 07:51, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

a czy jest coś więcej poza tym 1 (JEDNYM) artykulem we Wprost ?, bo z treści postu wnoszę, że są jakieś jeszcze inne indywidualne pojednania (proszę o zacytowanie), bo mam wrażenie, że robi Pan sobie hucpę z tego "pojednania" jeśli kiedykolwiek do niego dojdzie! (wszak ludzie odchodzą i niewielu ich pozostaje). Od razu odpowiem że nie interesują mnie żadne prywatne uroczystości na prywatnym terenie. Sugeruje Pan również że są jakieś wnioski dotyczące budowy pomników upowców oraz próby oficialnych wspólnych uroczystości, proszę wskazać mi takie wydarzenia, wnioski, postulaty środowisk kombatanckich. Odnoszę wrażenie że nie jest Pan kombatantem a treść artykulu ma z grubsza inne przeslanie niż tylko "neutralna informacja" i byc może ma charakter osobistej wypowiedzi.

07:51, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Nie jestem kombatantem, sądze, że Pani też nie jest i to raczej w Pani działaniach wyczuwam zabarwienie osobistą nienawiścią i szowinizmem. Proszę sprawdzić historię artykułu, a zobaczy Pani, że paragraf, który mi Pani przypisuje nie jest mojego autorstwa. Jeśli chodzi o więcej przykładów, to nie trzeba daleko szukać, wystarczy użyć google. Gorąco zachęcam Panią do samodzielnych poszukiwań. Podaje przykłady kolejnych artykułów na ten temat Rzeczpospolita, Aspekt Polski. --_Lysy 08:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

przecież ten artykul nie dotyczy w zaden sposób tego o czym wy piszecie, ja również zachęcam do szukanie w googlach linków, napewno znajdziecie tam kontakt do Zarządu Glownego AK w Warszawie i rzecznika prasowego tego stowarzyszenia, Jeśli tak bardzi zależy panu na pojednaniu z grabażami Polski bardzo proszę utworzyć artykul np. LYSY pojednanie z UPA, zachęcam !

11:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your voting!

Hi, thanks for your voting on my RFA. It has finished with the result 88/14/9, and I am promoted. I am really overwhelmed with the amount of support I have got. With some of you we have edited many articles as a team, with some I had bitter arguments in the past, some of you I consider to be living legends of Misplaced Pages and some nicks I in my ignorance never heard before. I love you all and I am really grateful to you.

If you feel I can help you or Misplaced Pages as a human, as an editor or with my newly acquired cleaning tools, then just ask and I will be happy to assist. If you will feel that I do not live up to your expectation and renegade on my promises, please contact me. Maybe it was not a malice but just ignorance or a short temper. Thank you very much, once more! abakharev 07:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

An article

Hello. As someone who is interested in the history of these areas I thought you might want to check the Rainiai executions (former name: Rainiai massacre) article and as well the discussion in the talk page about the article's naming. DeirYassin 13:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Ukrainian articles

Regarding this edit summary I hope it is not a sarcastic disaproval of these edits I did just before that.

Now, to UPA, this would be one of the most difficult articles to bring anywhere close to the encyclopedic standards. Polish, Soviet and Ukrainian scholarship on this topic should all be taken with strong skepticism but other than these three, there is almost nothing left to consider. If you could bring in some scrutinized opinions of solid Polish scholars, that could certainly help. And thanks for guarding this and other related articles from the extremists. --Irpen 21:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

UPA

Panie LYSY proszę nie porównywać AK do UPA !!!! i nie prowokować agresji na forum , żadne wspólne uroczystości, żadnych pomników stawianych bandytom z UPA w Polsce nie było i nie będzie, proszę nie wypisywać treści które są dla Polaków obraźliwie, nie obchodzi mnie to że w Kanadzie bandyci Z UPA obchodzą swoje uroczystości i organizują marsze, i proszę uważać na to co Pan pisze !, bo inaczej ktoś może panu kark skręcić albo zabije was zwykły ludzki śmiech !!! 24 luty 2006, 08:50 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.96.248.99 (talk • contribs)

odnośnie tego pana IRPENa, ma racje , niech ktoś zbierze opinie uczniów szkół z woj. podkarpackiego i zbada ich percepcję na wydarzenia z lat 1939-47, i co myślą o ukraińcach: 9 wrzesien 1939 "pogrzeby polski" z udzialem popów, ukraińskiej gawiedzi i wojska niemieckiego, 28 kwietna 1943 powstanie SS Galizien, przemarsze i msze ukrainskich ochodników do SS w Sanoku, Lesku ...., 1946-1947 msze w cerkwiach i święcenia siekier, tasaków na wojne z polskimi sąsiadami ... , — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.96.248.99 (talk • contribs)

Now that the troll is blocked, I removed part of his "message". Whoever, pls use English. --Irpen 21:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Image

Ahhh, it's so cool you have uploaded it. Thanks, it made my day! But would you mind if I cropped it a little? Renata 20:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I was thinking that I might use the pic to say thank you or something similar (you know, instead of a formal barnstar). Polish names for towns are annoying as hell but I grew to ignore them. I realized that they don't really matter much, because it is only one word in the whole article. However, it is one very annoying word. Why? Because it indirectly implies that Lithuania was Polish and that Polish had control over Lithuania and that it still has some claims over it and some other stupid stuff. It's like feeling that there is nothing really Lithuanian under this sun. There was somewhere this discussion when Zivibundas (what's the right spelling?) was still around. So my conclusion is: is it annoying? Oh, yes. Is it important? Only for Poles and Lithuanians. Does it matter? No. Renata 21:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I know and I understand. And actually sometimes it is very useful, when say I am looking for some town and I don't know local/English name. However, one thing I don't understand is when inside the articles wikilinks refer to Polish or Russian or whatever names, and not the current one. It's not only Vilnius/Vilna/Wilno/etc. but also other smaller towns. The most recent example I remeber, was Kalvarija was named in Polish in some article about history of 1939-1945. That I don't understand other than outbreak of nationalism. Renata 22:04, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Let me correct myself, or the editor did not know the Lithuanian name. But I have seen quite a few edits were a user would remove Lithuanian name and put in Polish. Sometimes in piped links. Renata 22:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

The result of Panevezys debate: 3700 words were written over 1 word.... Renata 17:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Good summary. --_Lysy 16:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

?

Did I misunderstand that there was an agreement, that Lithuanian cities that had not been part of Poland 1918-1939, would not have a Polish name placed in the lead (especially ones with links to their respective language articles), or was this only with Balcer and not with Lysy. And that if there was an event or historical connection to Germany, Poland, or Russia, etc., it would be placed in the article, if appropriate. What requires Taurage to have it's Polish name included in the lead? Dr. Dan 16:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

No, Lysy believes that it's usfeul to have alternative names mentioned for places that shared Polish and Lithuanian history, not only after WW1 but also earlier. Lysy understands that this may be irritating for some who either were taught that these places had only Lithuanian names or those who for whatever reason prefer to present a single-sided view of the history. Lysy believes that this irriatation is a price worth paying for presenting a wider view, for undestanding, and respecting different POVs. Lysy also is against removing useful information for the sole purpose of meeting someone's agenda. Lysy does not think that mentioning the alternative names Polish implies that these places were, are or should be Polish. They are useful for people encountering Polish forms of the names in English language texts and the article's lead is perfect place for this. --Lysy 18:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Understood, does Lysy think a city like Lublin should have its Lithuanian name in the lead of the article for the same reasons mentioned by Lysy above? Does Lysy agree that there is a historical connection between Lublin and Lithuania visa vis the Union of Lublin? Is Lysy prepared to add the Lithuanian name, Liublinas to the lead in the article in en-Wiki, in order to present a wider view, for understanding, and respecting different POVs. Dr. Dan 20:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I don't mind, but practically, how many English language sources do you know, where "Liublinas" ? Another question: historically, in what period was "Liublinas" name in use in Poland instead or along with "Lublin" ? I think you're missing the point. --Lysy 21:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Lysy in the Third Person

Lysy, I don't ever want you to think that I don't like you, so I'm asking if you want to be addressed in the third person. Lysy used the third person in his above edit at 18:13 4 March 2006, repeatedly. This is why I'm asking. Besides that, I would like to read more about the revolt against Smetona in Taurage, in 1927. Where can I find it?

I don't think that you don't like me :-) You started addressing me in the third person first, above, I'm not sure why. As for the revolt, I've found it mentioned in Jerzy Ochmański's "Historia Litwy", Ossolineum 1990, page 292. He only mentions that the pro-democratic revolt in Taurage was very soon pacified. He does not say more about what happened to the rebels, does not mention any victims etc. I may try to find more on it for you tomorrow if this is interesting. As to your Lublin example, I really think it's missed. There were areas in Lithuania where ppl spoke Polish but not the other way round. There's nothing wrong or offensive in admitting this. On the other hand, there were areas of Poland where people spoke German and I don't think anyone takes offence that "Posen", "Graudenz" or "Wreschen" etc. are mentioned in the leads of the articles about these towns, even if they belonged to Poland during interbellum (as Taurage belonged to Lithuania). Is this a problem for you ? --Lysy 22:58, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I have seen many examples, of Poles being bothered with German names being addded to geographical locations, and upset with the deletion of Polish names from others, in the short time I've participated in Misplaced Pages. As I've said before, the easiest solution is a case by case basis. I've come to the conclusion that the portions of Lithuania, or Belarusia, or Ukraine that were part of Poland during the II Rzecpospolita, can have an inclusion of its Polish name. I'm not so sure that Polish was as widely spoken in the hinterlands of Lithuania as you might think. Especially amonst the common people. I have spent lots of time in Poland and been to Lithuania too. It amazes me how the very young have lost the ability to communicate in Russian, in a rather short time. As for you adding "Yiddish", in the lead of the Panevezys article, it speaks lots about where you are coming from. I don't think it's possible to communicate very well in Panevezys in Yiddish today. A pity, my Yiddish, is a lot better than my Hebrew. Dr. Dan 14:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC) p.s. the Tsar Alexander's stay in Taurage in 1807, long, short, trivial, or important?

You're certainly right that Poles are often upset by German names of Polish locations. While I can understand there is a number of different reasons for this (including education, propaganda and historic experiences), I don't think this is something that is good or should be encouraged. Poles should understand, that historically Poland was a multi-national country, and that the notion of "nationality" as we know it today, did not exist in 17th century or earlier. Although the fact that someone spoke German did not make him "anti-Polish". As I understand it, what generally mattered was usually not the language, ethnic origin or religion (although it's easy to find counterexamples) but what we would today call "citizenship". This of course changed with the partitions and later. So, what I'm trying to say is that I consider looking at whole history from the perspective of 19th or 20th century nationalisms is a major mistake and source of misunderstanding. Keep in mind, that when the nationalisms erupted in the end of 19th century, much of the history was rewritten to suit individual agendas and this of course influenced the perception of our parents or grandparents. We can be wiser than that.

As to more specific issues: You doubt that Polish was widely used in Lithuania. Let me ask you a question then: If not Polish, what language was used by the common people ? was it Lithuanian ? No, it was Ruthenian. The upper class however increasingly used Polish. How do you think Taurage was called in the times of Radziwill ? What language did the Radziwills speak ? Polish. It's not that I think that it something to be proud or be ashamed of. The fact is it were the elites that decided on the names of their towns and villages, not the common people (regardless of whether they used Ruthenian or Lithuanian).

Similarly to you, I'm (unpleasantly) surprised by how quick the people lost their ability to communicate in Russian, both in Poland and Lithuania.

To summarise, I believe that there's nothing wrong in admitting that in this part of Europe the collonisation moved eastwards, and that German culture influenced Poland, similarly to Polish culture influencing Lithuania, Ruthenia or Ukraine. It's the common heritage, that people in each of the countries can be proud of instead of trying to denying it. --Lysy 15:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Of course it's not possible to communicate in Yiddish or Polish in Panevezys, but these names can be encountered in the articles about the town's history.

As for Alexander's stay in Taurage, I'll investigate it further. If it was not notable, I'd move it to "trivia" section. Otherwise, I'd expand it a little to explain its importance. You could help, too :-) --Lysy 15:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Lysy, Lysy what's going on here! You included that Alexander I stayed in Taurage, not in the trivia part, but in the main article. Now you'll investigate it further, after my questioning its relevance or significance. You included the Yiddish name for Panevezys in the lead, after some consensus was reached avoiding these types of provocations (someone took it out later, perhaps it was you). Of course it's not possible to communicate in Yiddish or Polish in Panevezys, so are we looking for fairness, or a provocation from you? Getting back to more serious points in our discussion. The common people in Lithuania, spoke Lithuanian, not Ruthenian. I'm speaking now of Lithuania itself, and not its Eastern territories, which were vast. Somehow you and others think that, these common people couldn't express themselves geographically. That until their polonized Radvilai/Radziwillczycy, named a town, it didn't have a name? Or maybe that until the Radziwills told them a name for a bird, it too, didn't have a name? Please take the time to look at the history of the Lithuanian language linguinstically and philologically, before making these sweeping generalizations. Dr. Dan 01:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

You're overestimating my desire to provoke you :-) As for alternative names in the lead of Panevezys, I maintain my position, that all reasonable names used thoughout history should be mentioned. I only did not insist on keeping the Polish names as I understood Polish irritates you for some reason and I would not like to get involved in a revert war over this as probaly both of us could use the time more productive. I think Balcer solved it gently by moving the Polish name off the lead. As for Yiddish, firstly the town was a centre of Yiddish culture and secondly, the latinised Yiddish name is frequently being used in English language literature of the town. Is this offensive as well as the Polish name ?

For Alexander's stay in Taurage in 1807, I think it's certainly not less notable than the other episodes mentioned in the history of this, otherwise relatively small town. I've expanded the context of his stay there a bit. Again, the article is still a stub and I'd like to encourage you to add some information there, too.

Back to out language discussion: I'm not suggesting that the origin of the name is Polish. I'd rather expect it to be German, or Lithuanian or a mixture, although in Polish it would also make sense ("the horns of a taur"). I'm not trying to speculate into this, though. What I was trying to say, is that Radziwills did not speak Lithuanian, therefore at least for a certain period of history the Polish name was used. I'm not sure when the Lithuanian form was firt mentioned. Since you mentioned "Lithuania itself", which I believe you mean to be "Lithuania proper", do you know when this term was born ? --Lysy 17:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Did it ever occur to you that the interaction between Poland and Lithuania brought elements of Lithuanian culture and language to Poland (oprócz chłodnika litewskiego), instead of it being all one sided? Think about it for a moment. And besides providing two of Poland's greatest leaders Władysław II, and Piłsudski, the two nations shared more than divided them, and the perception amongst Lithuanians was and is, that Poles and worse, Polonized Lithuanians, (like the Radziwills), held them as a "lesser" partner. As I told Halibutt recently, these are the reasons that the concept of "Between the Seas", the dream of the Marshall, didn't work out. This, was much, much more the reason than the bolsheviks or hiterism, that prevented this dream from flourishing and comming true. Lysy, do yourself, and your credibility a favor, and avoid adding information like 80% of Taurage was destroyed by the nazis. You should have known its nonsense, and not included it. It implies that once you are caught with "your hand in the cookie jar", you can't be trusted around cookies. All joking aside, I have been receiving contacts (emails), from different parts of the world, e.g., U.K., Belgium, France, as well as some more traditional neighbors of Poland, all concerning the behavior of one particular Polish editor (pointless to name, but you know very well who they mean). I honestly think that he does Poland's struggle for dignity and justice, a great disservice and a group should ask him to "cool it a bit". Even though its a "free Misplaced Pages", does the attitude and information provided by this editor help Poland or hurt Poland? Just a thought. Dr. Dan 02:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you are right about the Lithuanian perception of Poland. I'm very much aware of this as I have quite some Lithuanian friends and we've emptied many bottles over such issues. During my first visit to Lithuania I've been quite surprised to learn this attitude, as I naively assumed that "Poles and Lithuanians are brothers" etc. while then I've found that in Lithuanian perception Poland was almost an enemy. This is hopefully changing now, most if not all Poles that I know have respect for Lithuania and I strongly believe in the potential to build much better mutual relationship. So far most of the prejudices remain on the Lithuanian side in my opinion, and given the history, this is understandable. You're also right about the probably unfortunate fact that Poles held Lithuanians as a lesser partner, even in the interbellum period, but the fact also is that Lithuania was a lesser partner then. Lithuanians IMO were paranoid about Polish domination only to learn soon what a real totalitarian domination meant.

Thanks for the advice about the 80% damage. I usually check at least 2 sources if some information is otherwise unknown to me, this time I did not and it immediately fired back. I'm not saying that 80% of the town was destroyed by the Nazis or not. I simply cannot easily verify this information and it seems doubtful, therefore I should have not put it into the article in the fist place. You're right that this damages credibility unfortunately. As for the fighters that you've mentioned, every "nation" has them. I think it will cool down with time, but then the new ones will come. BTW, do you know that every time my wikipedia home page was vandalised, it was done by Polish nationalists ? --Lysy 11:18, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually I did not know this, however I did notice that some could not spell properly. Two points, first Lithuania was not a lesser partner in the interbellum, because it chose not to be a partner at all. Secondly, although I doubt you'll agree with this, but as to the idea that Lithuanians IMO were paranoid about Polish domination, I should think no less than Poles were paranoid about German or Russian domination. Dr. Dan 04:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Right, I'd disagree. The Polish "oppression" of Lithuanians in 1920s and 1930s were nothing compared to what Germans and Russians did to that country after 1939. This said I'm not trying to glorify Poland of the 1930s. --Lysy 07:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

You might be interested

--Molobo 12:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

You're a Good Guy

Hey, I like your unbiased approach to topics, and I'm sorry for lumping you in with Molobo, SpaceCadet and Halibutt before. Hopefully we can continue to cooperate on making wikipedia NPOV. --Jadger 18:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Love your idea of CANAPPUS, if you have time, can you look at the following two articles, You probably do not have extensive knowledge on the subject, but even a simple understanding of English shows a glaring POV problem in these articles. The author of the article does not like my revisions of the article. Perhaps a clearer head such as yours can help out the topics.

Canadian Soldier story

Operation Medak Pocket

--Jadger 23:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I have to second that, though the nickname can give some misconceptions ;-). Ksenon 21:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Only if you use Ł instead of L, followed by ...ysy. Dr. Dan 23:24, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I've no idea what are you talking about, guys. --Lysy 23:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

neither do I, CANNAPUS is some idea we came up with on my userpage Ksenon and Dr. Dan. Can I get some help on the Operation Medak Pocket page, it has gotten out of control and he has started to troll and flame me considerably, it would be nice to have someone who cannot be blamed of direct involvement to talk on the article.

--Jadger 04:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Here We Go Again

Lysy, in regards to your edit summary concerning Ukmerge, and "passion" and "constructiveness". Two points: First consistency, if I'm going to remove the Polish name from one city, why would I not from another? Or in German for that matter. Secondly, some good comes out of it, because you begin to add information in the article that wasn't there before, albeit usually more polocentric than not. BTW, I don't object, but its a legitimate observation.

Now to the more important aspect of my deletions. I have stated that I will not remove the Polish names of geographical locations in present-day Lithuania, held by the II Rzeczpospolita 1918-1939. I have also stated, that putting these names in the leads of the articles about Lithuanian towns, not part of Poland in the interbellum, is particularly unnecessary and questionable, especially when there is a link in Polish, German, or any other language for that matter. I have further stated that if you need to know the Polish name for Rome, go to the article and find the Polish link, and boom there's Rzym. Lastly, if there is some truly revelevant information concerning Poland or some other country, it can and should be incorporated into the article. Perhaps with a little less emphasis on trivia. Frankly, I thought this was more or less agreed to and resolved. At least between Balcer, you, and I. Dr. Dan 15:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Please

Look in the article Renaissance in Poland a tag haas been made on it suggesting it isn't neutral. Explanation was given as : Contemporary Poland, before it brought in German settlers to urbanize it, could boast little more than a series of fortified cragie lumps with some mud-huts around them. --Molobo 21:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Lithuania's GDP

Hi Lysy. I see that you reverted my edits to Lithuania regarding 46% vs 56% of the European average in terms of GDP. According to the article European Union#Standard of living, Lithuania has a (projected) GDP of US$15,657 in 2006 (see this source). The EU average GDP is $28,114 in 2006. By mathematical calculation, $15,657 is 55.7% of the EU average GDP - hence, rounded off, Lithuania's GDD per capita is at 56% of the EU average. In fact, Latvia is the only country under 50% of the EU average at the moment. Thanks, Ronline ✉ 10:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC}

Raudonė

Hi Lysy, I saw today that you had added info, concerning a monument to the Red Army, in the Raudone, article about a month ago. Are you sure? Seems dubious. Dr. Dan 02:46, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Earth to Lysy, Earth to Lysy, can you read us? Hope you are O.K., or just having a nice vacation. Dr. Dan 03:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Oczywiście. Dr. Dan 15:30, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Lysy, pomyślę wy moglibyście potrzebować wiedzieć że pomnik w Raudanie był zainstalowany podczas Radzieckiego Okresu. To jest interesujące żeby one opuszczali to jedyne. Przypominuję sobie co podczas moich studiów w Krakowie, tam był raciej wielki pomnik do Czerwonej Armii z poważny (z grobami) w Plantach. Jest to wciąż tam? Dr. Dan 02:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Wesołych Swiąt! Dr. Dan 03:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Ausschwitz technical gas information

I still believe that comments are not relevant to the Ausschwitz article unless it can be commented that it was used for a particular feature. The detailed properties should be in the article of the gas. Agathoclea 09:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree, - saying that I have not checked the other article in detail, to see how much of the info is there or not. But it can be added with out any problem. Basically if it needs mentioning I would like to see something on the lines of "Gas X was choosen because of property Y (<ref>URL of source (or bookreference) </ref>" Agathoclea 19:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Prussia

All information about discrimination of national minorities in Prussia was deleted. Information that Poles were subject to discrimination in Prussian state have been stated as "historical revisionism" by a German user. All information about this presented on discussion page was either ignored or claimed that it is a Polish POV because Poles feel unsecure living on others land, despite the fact that sources were non-Polish. Please help in achieving NPOV in the article --Molobo 15:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Some very worrying edits

In Polish Corridor, A user appeared that seems to try portay Hitler as trying to get peace with Poland being portayed as "refusing". He removed several sources I provided as to Hitler's real intentions. He also uses data from military presecence to claim German majority in the region. The same is done in Polish September Campaign, where sources showing Hitler's real intentions have been deleted by the user or changed to POW way that downplayes Hitler's agression and true intentions. For example despite the fact that a source states The proposal served to practically subordinate Poland to the Axis and the Anti-Comintern Bloc. Warsaw refused this in order to retain its independence the user changed it to Poland, however, feared for its sovereignty and questioned Germany's motivations indicating an irrational motive on behalf of Poland. Further changes of the user are worrying. For example he changes German agresssion into "German aggression". The sentence With Poland refusing to abandon its sovereignty to German demands, Germany withdrew from both the German-Polish Non-Aggression Pact has been changed to : With Poland refusing its demands, Germany withdrew from both the German-Polish Non-Aggression Pact And so on. Please react to this. --Molobo 10:00, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hitler wanted peace with Poland and Nazi's only wanted to unite Germany ?...=

All information about the role of Lebensraum deleted from information about goals of Nazis deleted, Poland and Warsaw according to the user are part of "Greater Germany" : User doubts Hitler wanted war and Lebensraum in East and pursuses changes to indicate he wanted peace with Poland: Hitler wanted to settle territorial issues but Poland didn't trust him: No comments. I even went as far to give links but the user deletes them as POV. --Molobo 09:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Kernave image

Hi, long time no see :) I just wanted to let you know that I cropped and rotated this image. It looks now quite different. Hope it's ok ;) Renata 19:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Please check your email. Renata 22:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Notice of arbitration

Hi! I filled an arbitration request concerning the usage of "liberation" in WP articles. If you are interested in, please add your name to the list of the involved parties and type your statement.

Please inform everybody who could be interested in.--AndriyK 20:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

RfC about Irpen's conduct

Hi! We filled a request for comment concerning the conduct of User:Irpen. Your comment is kindly invited.--AndriyK 17:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Stettin article

As to the Stettin article. I appreciate your comments. IN 1945 the Polish troops, contrary to Potsdam Conference, which had left Stettin inside of the Soviet German occupation zone, occupied Stettin, and the Soviet troops handed over command to the Polish. After that its citizens were expelled. That's how history simply was. Nothing more, nothing less.Smith2006 14:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It's very likely, however it would be good to have sources to support it. From what I know:

1. there's been a Polish minority in Stettin already before the Soviets entered the town in 1945.
2. Almost all Germans fled the town earlier in 1945 but many returned (over 80 thousand by July)
3. They were expelled later in 1950s (the expulsions started in 1946), some worked in Soviet camps in Szczecin and its suburbs.
4. The Soviets officially transferred the town to Poland on July 5th, 1945, but maintained their military presence long thereafter.
5. The Soviets kept the seaport of Szczecin until 1955, when they handed it over to Poland.
6. According to Szczecin's official web page: "During the Potsdam Conference, the Great Threesome decided to award Szczecin to Poland"

--Lysy 14:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

sorry lysy ther was no polnish minorty in Stettin existing before 1945, thats wrong.--Golumbuss 14:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe not before 1939, but certainly before 1945 as the Nazis relocated a number of Poles there for forced labour. --Lysy 14:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Well that might be (1000 or 2000 in the Stettiner Vulkan AG shipping yards) but they were not permant inhabitnts with property there. The polnish people which live there right know, live entirely on stolen property of the prewar 350,000 german inhabitants. These act of ethnical cleansing should be clearly pointed out in the city history. Because its historically unique in its dimension in Europe. Sorry don´t get me wrong I am not anti polnish but this must be sayed. --Golumbuss 17:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

regarding your move warring at Act of Kreva

I have to say that your conduct tastes bad. You first moved the article to your preferred location, then open a RM. Majority had spoken in talk page a couple of days ago. We should give your RM the setting that you are requesting that move, not opposing it. Our difference seems to be that one of us uses English, one has reflections of another language (Polish) behind its use. Seeing the meaning of the term "Union", these are not unions. Henq 18:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I have looked at the talk history and it is not true that majority had spoken in talk page a couple of days ago. I've also noticed that there was opposition to the rename in the first place. Therefore, the article should not have been moved without opening a formal request. Only 3 ppl were in favour of the move and one opposed, that's not a consensus and a wider opinion should be seeked before renaming. The remaining talk shows that there were more ppl against the rename. Also, "Union of Krewo" is not my favourite wording, nevertheless I oppose the rename. --Lysy 18:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Lysy, there is a digest of what I tried to prove in discussions above. This document is not a 'Union' document. It is only a set of promises made by Jogaila to the Queen of Hungary, a mother of 11 years old Polish Queen, asking her daugher's hand. There is no other documents confirming that the real 'Union' of Poland and Lithuania did happened in year 1385. When Jogaila married Polish Queen and became a King of Poland Wladyslaw II next year, in a terminology of historians he "started" personal union. As to the name Krewo for the location, where the confirmation of the document took place, even Polish historians Jerzy Lukowski and Hubert Zawadski in "Concise history of Poland" call the place "Krėva". It never was a Polish location, except for a period of 1922-1938. Current name of this Belarus location is "Kreva". Juraune 19:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I understand and acknowledge that formally, it might have not been a union, nevertheless, it is the name that is used for this. It's just a name and does not imply whether the documents constitued a formal union or not. However, we should not be inventing new names as we please, against the usage in scholarly works. It's good to explain in the article that it was not a union, but the title should stay. --Lysy 19:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Please don't engage in 'move war', and please list the moves on the WP:RM page.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Augustus III

There is no need to apologize. My time was not wasted at all and misunderstandings arise all of the time. I was rather rude to you and for that I apologize. Charles 05:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Kielce Pogrom

Please read this article carefully, and do not be misled by the title. As the article shows, the IPN has found no evidence for any outside inspiration. Here is the conclusion of the prosecutor: Według prokuratora, stan materiału dowodowego pozwalał przyjąć jako najbardziej prawdopodobną hipotezę, że "wydarzenia kieleckie z 4 lipca 1946 roku miały charakter spontaniczny i zaistniały wskutek nieszczęśliwego zbiegu okoliczności natury historycznej i współczesnej".

So, the most likely explanation, according to the official investigation, is that the pogrom was carried out spontaneously, without outside provocation. Our article should strongly reflect this conclusion. Balcer 15:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but some historians, including those from IPN still speculate (or argue) that despite the lack of firm evidence the pogrom was likely inspired. Some of their arguments include the fact that most of the victims were shot or that the army isolated the area and did not let the people who could have helped into it. Of course if it was NKVD inspired than it would be hard to expect that they would be leaving documents with proofs behind. Anyway, I agree with you, that the fact that the investigation was inconclusive should be stressed. --Lysy 15:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I basically agree with your viewpoint, but let me stress that "inconclusive" in this case simply means that after 60 years IPN was not able to charge any particular individual with a crime. In other words, they were unable to prove that living person X struck a blow against victim Y etc. I do not believe it means that the basic understanding of the pogrom and what caused it is still not available.

Given that the investigation of the IPN was quite through and did not find solid evidence of outside inspiration, and that no former member of the Communist or Soviet Secret Services has revealed their involvement in the pogrom, blaming it on outside forces really falls into the realm of conspiracy theory at this stage. These searches for some rational, "complex" explanation for what was fundamentally a "simple", spontaneous, irrational event are a common psychological phenomenon (see John F. Kennedy assassination etc.)Balcer 16:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably you're right. It's also possible that it was inspired but on a much lower, local level, which would be also much closer to the "spontaneus" explanation. Only a speculation of course. Feel free to change the wording in the article to better reflect what you wrote about. I find it difficult to differentiate opinions from facts in this article and believe every word should be carefully considered. --Lysy 16:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Gadu-Gadu

Me and Balcer were just talking using it, and we thought it would be nice if you would use it, too.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:59, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Err, I could only use skype, I was not aware that the Polish cabal used gadugadu ;-) --Lysy 22:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for 8 hours

Due to your edit warring and incivility on the page Erika Steinbach, you have been blocked from editing for violating Misplaced Pages policy against disruption of the Misplaced Pages. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list.
Note to sysops: Unblocking yourself should almost never be done. If you disagree with the block, contact another administrator. Stifle (talk) 22:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

{{unblock| I have neither been incivil nor disrupted the wikipedia. Also, please take a look at the talk page of the article and my edits of other articles, before accusing me of "doing very little other than participate in a sterile revert war". I believe the blocking admin have seen the accusations of Donnog but have not bothered to verify them and blocked me instead}} I'd appreciate an apology for the careless accusations. --Lysy 22:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I support Lysy in that the block is undeserved. More in my post at the 3RR board. --Irpen 22:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I'd rather neither of them is blocked. Telling Donnog to revert back or be blocked is a gesture of goodwill to end the revert war. If he doesn't take it, he can be blocked, the war is over for some time. If he does, the war is over for some time but without punishments. Both parties tried to use the talk page, after all. But Donnog should have given up the revert war because he could have known that he's in the minority (1 vs 2) and it was impossible for him to "win" this way, due to 3RR, only by discussion. On this unspoken right, namely to have the version that more approve of, Lysy insisted (which is understandable) but still tried to discuss things. With all due respect, I think the blocks should be undone. Sciurinæ 22:55, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Since I did not see any uncivility (incivil is a bastardization), nor any disruption, after reading the Steinbach matter, this "Block" strikes me as borderline censorship, or a weird type of punishment. It should be removed, and an apology forthcoming as well. Dr. Dan 23:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I will post my thought on this soon at WP:AN as soon as I am able to write them. I hope it will be soon. --Irpen 00:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

• I have took my liberty to Unblock you, per discussion on this talk page abakharev 05:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I greatly appreciate the comforting support I immediately received for my unblock request from Dr. Dan, Irpen, and Sciurinæ (in alphabetic order). I hope you're not members of the Polish Cabal, guys ;-) --Lysy 10:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Reply to a message from my talk page

Hi, do you think I deserve your apology for accusing me of incivility and of disrupting the Misplaced Pages  ? If you do I'd appreciate it, otherwise I'd like to know what in my behaviour was uncivil. Thanks. --Lysy 21:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't always agree today with what I did yesterday. In this case, I withdraw that you were incivil and disruptive, but I do maintain that you were revert warring, as was Donnog. It was probably not a good idea, in hindsight, to block you, and I have placed a message to that effect in your block log. Stifle (talk) 21:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

This user is one of several nationalist POV pushers and revert warriors who seriously disrupt and damage Misplaced Pages, and should be blocked indefinitely. Donnog 22:23, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Donnog, that I do not agree with your POV does not mean that you have to exercise personal attacks on me. Please consider this. --Lysy 22:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Lysy, I think you might be interesyed in this. --Irpen 04:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Please let me deal with trolls first

Lysy, may I ask you for a short break in UA-zation article's discussions and extensive edits. I would really like to discuss and develop this with you and many others, but with disruption and pestering introduced and reintroduced by Mbuk who keeps doing it even this very minute, I would like to deal with this nuisance first. I need a short time to address his and AndriyK disruption to the Arbitrators and I would be happy to get back to the article.

You must admit that it is not a terribly bad article and with all the tags added by those fellow, the reader is warned anyway of whatever problems you see in it. TIA, --Irpen 21:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I need a wikibreak anyway. --Lysy 21:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time away from your wikibreak to correct my typo. Dr. Dan 04:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)