Revision as of 19:17, 27 October 2009 editLudvikus (talk | contribs)21,211 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:02, 28 October 2009 edit undoIgny (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,699 edits →Soviet invasion of PolandNext edit → | ||
Line 98: | Line 98: | ||
{{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. --] (]) 15:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC) | {{#if:|] has|I have}} nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. --] (]) 15:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
:Hi Piotrus, Thanks for doing . I want to say that I can see your (positive) influence over the POV fights in articles related to Poland, and I consider the recent EEML predicament as completely uncharacteristic of you. (] (]) 00:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)) | |||
== ''The Misplaced Pages Signpost'': 26 October 2009 == | == ''The Misplaced Pages Signpost'': 26 October 2009 == |
Revision as of 00:02, 28 October 2009
: 632 : 82 : 6 : 22
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. |
"You have new messages" was designed for a purpose: letting people know you have replied to them. I do not watch your talk page and I will likely IGNORE your reply if it is not copied to my page, as I will not be aware that you replied! Oh, Template:Talkback is ok. Thank you. |
---|
Please add new comments in new sections if you are addressing a new issue. Please sign it by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Thanks in advance. |
---|
Talk archives:
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 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Current RfAdminship
All my email accounts have been disabled.All my email accounts have been disabled that I used to connect to Misplaced Pages. I am awaitng google's assistance. For now please be warned that if anything will be posted be my that seems strange I won't be me.—Preceding unsigned comment added by MyMoloboaccount (talk • contribs) Relocation of EEML evidenceJust a notice: For a few users I have relocated your EEML evidence to a sub-page. The reasons for this are because your sections are now so long it was becoming impossible to navigate and decipher who wrote what, particularly towards the end of sections. This effectively rendered your evidence as unusable, which was not a good thing. Rather than reduce the size of your evidence (which I deemed as unfair) I have removed them to private subpages. These are yours and yours alone to edit. They certain make interpreting your evidence MUCH easier. The downside is that when you update your evidence it does not go into the history log of the principal evidence page. Hence I suggest you add a brief "Updated evidence on ..." note beneath your evidence heading on the main evidence page. This will alert people to changes on your subpage. An extra bit of hassle I know, but it a small price for having evidence which can be understood. Also feel free to create a single sentence description of your main headings and insert it on the main page below the link I have added. See for an example from a previous case. I hope none of you are upset by this - I assure you my only objective was to increase the usability of your evidence. Sincerely, Manning (talk) 22:58, 20 October 2009 (UTC) DYK for Radom Ghetto
Operation Reinhard Defined IncorrectlyThe definitions given in en and de.Misplaced Pages for Aktion Reinhard are unsupported by any documentation. The term "Aktion Reinhardt" most definitely was in use during Nazi ethnic-cleansing operations, but it was named after Fritz Reinhardt and referred to recovering and turning in valuables from the persons apprehended for imprisonment or execution in concentration camps. You'll find my evidence in the en article under subheading "Alternative Definition." It is the only part of the article that enjoys references to documentation attributed directly to an actual participant (Höss).--Joe (talk) 15:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC) user pageczesc, mozesz zablokowac moja strone uzytkownika do edycji dla wszystkich poza adminami, czeste wandalizmy, malo tu edytuje i nie jestem wstanie tego pilnowac, a obrazliwe zdanie wisialo przez miesiac i nikt nie cofnal, dzieki DingirXul (talk) 12:42, 22 October 2009 (UTC) Soviet invasion of PolandCould you please be so kind as to explain why you removed my text (which was properly sourced) but left statements which are entirely unsourced and in complete contradiction to the available sources?Varsovian (talk) 17:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
EEML WorkshopIn light of your recent edit summary that stated "since it appears replies from parties are accepted":
Jedwabne pogromHi Piotrus. Thanks for your note. I've seen a lot of activity at that article lately, but I've been afraid to look at what the edit-warring's all about. I'll take a look at the issues over the weekend and see if I can help. — ] (talk · contribs) 06:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Battle of the Cosmin ForestCould you, please, help improve and develop this article? I have access to sources in Romanian and English, but I don't know Polish. Perhaps you can do a more detailed search in Polish and on-line and off-line Polish sources, and - why not - English ones. I know it is very time consuming, so I won't pressure you to do it immediately. But I don't know other people qualified to do it comprehensively (I can ask others for short Polish-English translations, but that's no enough). Dc76\ 09:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Lesser Poland mapHi Piotrus, could you help me out with this very useful map: I do not know how to add it to the Lesser Poland article. Thanks in advance. Tymek (talk) 05:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Minor sabotage
extra credit blogpostHello, I have done a post about the origins of the word revolution for extra credit. http://da1globsoc09.blogspot.com/2009/10/origins-of-word-revolution.html Thanks Rgg6 (talk) 02:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC) DYK nomination of Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in WarsawHello! Your submission of Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ♠ B.s.n. ♥R.N. 09:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC) Soviet invasion of PolandI have nominated Soviet invasion of Poland for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. --Labattblueboy (talk) 15:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
The Misplaced Pages Signpost: 26 October 2009
Wikibooks and suchlikeOK, I know I might be considered to be one of the Boris Badenov type ;). If you think that joke is a bit obscure, hey, I'm mumbledy-mumble years older than you, so I have a somewhat deformed, and possibly senile, sense of humor. I honestly do think that if you can find any sources which could be added to Wikibooks, particularly sources which might not otherwise be available to us English readers, that would be as valuable if not more as being an editor here. I know a lot of people aim for GAs and FAs. If you look at my personal history, however, you will clearly see that I am not one of them, having none of either. I think it would probably be just as useful for the encyclopedia, and possibly even more useful than making a comparatively few GAs and FAs here. I acknwoledge that I myself can't read a lick of Polish, and actually even have a little trouble with German, which I took classes for, but I would be more than willing to do what I could to transfer material from there to here, particularly if it is on notable subjects we don't have covered yet. I know like a lot of other countries in Europe there are hundreds or thousands of individuals in Polish history who have established their notability, and, basically, earned mention. Particularly if you could find some sort of dictionary of Polish biography, history, or geography and work on that, I think that sort of a source, which would give us a broad base of material relevant to the history of the country, might be one of the best things we could do. And, if you were to want to go ahead on this for Poland or any other EE country, feel free to let me and probably User:Himalayan Explorer know. Right now, with Fritzpoll and a few others, we're kind of the point men for the less-well-covered parts of the world in general, which is pretty much everything outside of the UK, US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and maybe France and Germany, and would welcome anything you could do to help improve content for those areas. John Carter (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC) ANI noticeHello, Piotrus. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have an interest in adding your comments. The thread is User:Ludvikus revisited. Thank you. --Ludvikus (talk) 19:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC) |