Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland and User talk:ペコペコ: Difference between pages

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
 
→‎W&M Selectivity: new section
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{| class="messagebox plainlinks" id="talkheader" style="width:62%;margin:auto;border:1px solid #8a8;background-color: #efe;"
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo = old(14d)
|archive = Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 11
}}
{| class="messagebox" style="background: AntiqueWhite; border-color:#D4213D;"
|-
|-
! colspan="3" style="background-color:#bdb; text-align:center;" |
|[[Image:Coat of arms of Poland-official.png|45px|left]][[Image:Poland map flag.svg|50px|right]]<center><br>'''Welcome to the Poland-related notice board!'''</center>
This is PecoPeco's [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]].</span>
|-
|}<center>
{| class="messagebox" style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em; border-color:#D4213D;"
! align="left" style="background:#ccccff" width="100%" | <center>Please add new comments in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Portal_talk:Poland/Poland-related_Wikipedia_notice_board&action=edit&section=new new sections] if you are addressing a new issue. Thanks in advance.</center>
|}<br /></center>
{| class="messagebox" style="background: AntiqueWhite;"
|-
|This talk page is '''automatically archived''' by [[User:MiszaBot|MiszaBot]]. Any sections older than '''14''' days are automatically archived to '''[[Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 11]]'''. Sections without timestamps are not archived automatically.
|-
|-
| [[Image:Internet-group-chat.svg|120px|right]]
* I will generally reply to your posts '''on your talk page'''.
* Please [[Wikipedia:Signatures|sign your comments]] with 4 tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>)
<center>[[Image:Nuvola Green Plus.svg|44px]] '''Leave a [{{fullurl:{{ns:3}}:{{PAGENAMEE}}|action=edit&section=new}} <span style="color: {{{linkcolor|#5a3696}}};">new message</span>]'''.</center>
|}
|}
<br clear="all"/>
{{archive box|
*[[Wikipedia talk:Polish Wikipedians' notice board/Archive1|Archive 1]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Polish Wikipedians' notice board/Archive2|Archive 2]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Polish Wikipedians' notice board/Archive3|Archive 3]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Polish Wikipedians' notice board/Archive4|Archive 4]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:Polish Wikipedians' notice board/Archive5|Archive 5]]
*[[Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 6|Archive 6]]
*[[Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 7|Archive 7]]
*[[Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 8|Archive 8]]
*[[Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 9|Archive 9]]
*[[Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 10|Archive 10]]
*[[Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 11|Archive 11]]}}


== Useful templates ==
== Hey ==


Great job with the brief picture. I've been looking for one that had a more standard look to them. The other photo on the article is horrible and disgusting, haha. Thanks --[[User:Danlev|<font color="#339966">'''Dan Leveille'''</font>]][[User talk:Danlev|<sup><font color="#77BB99">'''TALK'''</font></sup>]] 05:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Please note we have two functioning userboxes:


== Award Barnstar ==
{{User WikiProject Poland}} {{tl|User WikiProject Poland}}
<br clear="all"/>
{{User WPMILHIST Polish military history task force}} {{tl|User WPMILHIST Polish military history task force}}
<br clear="all"/>
There is also a [[:Portal:Poland/Welcome]] message that can be used to notify users about this noticeboard and our related projects. Just slap '''<nowiki>{{subst:Portal:Poland/Welcome}}--~~~~</nowiki>''' on their usertalkpage - it has its own heading.
<!-- End of Portal talk heading -->


{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
== Group of WPP:Poland members accused of "unhelpful" edits ==
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Original Barnstar.png|100px]]

|rowspan="2" |
See, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Piotrus_2/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_M.K.]. - [[User:Darwinek|Darwinek]] ([[User talk:Darwinek|talk]]) 19:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Original Barnstar'''
:Yeah, I was going to inform about some outrageous remarks made there as well as the whole initiative of some users, whose aim is to get rid of Piotrus, one of the most creative members of the whole project.
|-
[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2]], which started as a series of complaining about [[User:Piotrus]] (whom you I am sure all know), has now expanded ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Piotrus_2/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_M.K.]) with claims that our Project/Noticeboard is a "cabal" and that all Polish editors are biased and likely support Piotrus in some terrible plan to undermine Wikipedia. Example arguments include: "...there is a small group of Polish nationals on Wikipedia"..."It has been happening all over Polish articles, with topics that they never edited before suddenly being besieged by Polish editors, and rules everyone else follows being swept aside by their block voting"..."Since Piotrus has a vast array of IRC and IM friends, happy to blindly revert to Piotrus's edits I doubt that it would work, but we can try"... Among other things, [[Gadu-Gadu]] is portrayed as a vehicle for cabalism :) It looks like about half of members of this Project/Board are mentioned there as contributing in some shape and form to the Piotrus-led Polish cabal - if you've ever interacted with Piotrus, you may find that and other diffs presented there as proof you are a member of his cabal. This would be funny if it wasn't serious (some editors who have been harassing Piotrus, and to a lesser extent, me and other members of this project) want to ban Piotrus and portray our WikiProject as an evil cabal. I hesitated to bring this issue here since at first it was about Piotrus, not our WikiProject, but now I think the line has been crossed. I am not very familiar with ArbCom, but I believe good places to post are:
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Thank you for creating an article about the [[Loch Raven Reservoir]] that was long awaited. [[User:Sebwite|Sebwite]] ([[User talk:Sebwite|talk]]) 23:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
* offer an outside statement at [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2]]
|}
* present evidence and/or defend against evidence of others at [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Evidence]]
* comment on proposed decisions at [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Workshop]]; in particular, Piotrus proposals at [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Piotrus_2/Workshop#Asking_for_input_is_not_canvassing_or_forum_shopping]] and [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Piotrus_2/Workshop#There_is_no_Polish_cabal_or_tag_team]] are very relevant to our WikiProject. [[User:Tymek|Tymek]] ([[User talk:Tymek|talk]]) 17:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

An anti-Polish witch-haunt. Who will be the next after Piotrus? [[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 05:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:Witch hunt ?
:People, shouldn't we take it easy ? They have read that ''[[meta:Poles are evil|Poles are evil]]'' and someone told them that [[Gadu-Gadu|GG]] was a tool of [[Satan]] so all is quite understandable. ;-) [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 07:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

::[[User:Halibutt]]. [[User:Lysy]]. [[User:Balcer]]. [[User:Appleseed]]. All gone, because editors who now harass me have targeted them and they couldn't take it. It's not a witch hunt. It's a long term campaign of character assassination, targeting editors who dare to stand up to certain [[WP:TAGTEAM|tag teams]]. PS. Don't confuse ArbCom party with ArbCom. The request might have been bad faithed, but ArbCom is composed of smart and neutral editors who have seen such tricks in the past and have seen through them, assuming they are shown the correct, unbiased evidence and background. --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 16:09, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:::I was away for quite a while. This is very saddening to see such things happening in Wikipedia and such outstanding users like Halibutt harassed and driven away by despicable maltreatment. If this is an organized and orchestrated campaign we should stand up and resist in a calm but steadfast manner. You have my full support for '''''responsible and coordinated''''' action that you deem necessary. [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 22:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Certainly ''responsibility and consideration'' is important. A lot of what have happened since you were gone was [[User:Piotrus/Morsels_of_wikiwisdom#On_radicalization_of_users|radicalization]]. Your input, comparing what's going on now with how it was in the beginning, would be priceless. If you have time to read through the ArbCom, I am sure many would love to hear your thoughts.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 23:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Because slandering accusations have been brought against users of the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board I think we might consider making a statement to the ArbCom and the Board. [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 05:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

:I have also noticed this new phenomenon. Piotrus calls it radicalization of users, but I think there's something more sinister taking place here. When Wikipedia was new, many users from similar backgrounds were editing at random, because they didn't know each other. It is only recently that many returning users finally got to know and trust those with similar views. They’ve learned who is who, which in turn enabled them to form a kind of Einsatz Gruppen for political and moral assassinations, and successful enforcing of extreme prejudices. I read about this worst case scenario online long before now, but it is only now that this scheme finally became possible. I’m not sure what is going to happen, but personally, I’m beginning to seriously worry about the outcome. --[[User:Poeticbent|<font face="Papyrus" color="darkblue"><b>Poeticbent</b></font>]] [[User_talk:Poeticbent|<small><font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#FF88AF;border:1px solid #DF2929;padding:0.0em 0.2em;">talk</font></small>]] 23:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Nothing new for me. Many places in this Wikipedia stink, some nations and some views are better than others and Poles are frequently underdogs. Very Christian ''Gazeta Wyborcza'' model of admitting all possible crimes doesn't work here, probably other nations don't have their ''Gazeta Wyborczas''. [[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 06:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh people, didn't you noticed that there is a new phase of Wikipedia and it is already being edited by special interest groups (i.e [[Committee_for_Accuracy_in_Middle_East_Reporting_in_America#Wikipedia|CAMERA]]), movements and influenced by intelligence community ? The days of enthusiast editors are mostly gone in areas of interest to politics.
--[[User:Molobo|Molobo]] ([[User talk:Molobo|talk]]) 15:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
:Interesting, but I'd still hope that such real cabals/tag teams are a small minority, not a rule. But then, I was always an optimist... --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 17:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
::Special interest groups... Quite interesting, I have always been wondering when that will start. As some influential person said on April 19, 1996: ''Poland will be publicly attacked and humiliated''. [[User:Tymek|Tymek]] ([[User talk:Tymek|talk]]) 16:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

== prohibition to speak Lithuanian (...) on phone until in the fall of communism in 1990 ==

Poosible under martial law, but not till 1990. [[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 13:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
:Uh. Isn't this something to raise on [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lithuania]] instead? And what article are you talking about - if any? --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 16:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
[[Lithuanian minority in Poland]]. Do you know a cooperative Lithuanian editor? I don't.[[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 07:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
:[[User:Renata3]] is, while not friendly, usually neutral in content matters. I am afraid I don't know of any others. PS. You can also post a general notice/question/link to this discussion at WikiProject Lithuania I linked above and see who replies. --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 18:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

== [[Kšyštof Lavrinovič]] and [[Darjuš Lavrinovič]] ==

I believe that both of them were imprisoned, now only one article informs about it. [[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 09:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:<s>There is no article about them. LINK articles you are discussing, please.</s> Wouldn't this belong on Lithuanian noticeboard? I've never heard of them... --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 16:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

They have a Polish father, which started several disputes, also around [[Poles in Lithuania]].[[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 06:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

== FAR: [[Virtuti Militari]] ==

[[Virtuti Militari]] has been nominated for a [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review|featured article review]]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to [[Wikipedia:What is a featured article?|featured quality]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review|here]]. Reviewers' concerns are [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/{{#if:|{{{2}}}|Virtuti Militari}}|here]]. --[[User:Roger Davies|<font color="maroon">'''R<small>OGER</small>&nbsp;D<small>AVIES'''</small></font>]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|'''talk''']]</sup> 15:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

== Is there an official position in relation to this kind of wording? ==

From the [[Białogard]] article:
<blockquote>
The Red Army occupied the town on March 4, 1945. As a result of the Potsdam Conference following World War II, Belgard was '''placed under Polish administration in 1945'''; its German population was expelled and replaced with Poles, many themselves expellees from Polish areas annexed by the Soviet Union.
</blockquote>

This is a jarring style to me I'd re-phrase that as ''integrated into Poland's territory in 1945''. Uncontroversial and neutral.<br> I'd also prefer ''removed'' to ''expelled'' and ''populated'' to ''replaced''. [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 15:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
:See my changes to the article; not quite what you suggested (I think integrated implies too much, and I don't see anything wrong with expelled), but hopefully an improvement.--[[User:Kotniski|Kotniski]] ([[User talk:Kotniski|talk]]) 15:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
::OK looks quite acceptable now, there's however some discrepancy with the Polish Wikipedia version which says that Belgard was conquered by Russian-Polish troops on the March 5, 1945 (no verifiable source given though). [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 15:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
:Official reaction? Other than us finding such non-neutral wording, restoring NPOV, and often fighting for years with certain POV pushers bent on stressing some POVS... no, not really.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 16:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

To answer the question raised in the section's title: Yes, there is an official position in relation to this kind of wording:

The phrase "''placed under Polish administration''" is the (almost) exact phrase used in the [[Potsdam Agreement]] where it reads "''shall be under the administration of the Polish State''". A re-phrasing should thus not be necessary, eg "integrated into Poland's territory" would be a more troublesome wording as this could be challenged, you all know that the ''de facto'' status was quiet clear after the war, but the ''de jure'' status was not, and there are different POVs about whether or not it was "Polish territory administered by Poland" or "German territory administered by Poland" back then. What was and is unchallenged is "only" the "territory under Polish administration" (isn't that sufficient?). Given the scope of the article, it would be best to follow the phrasing of the Potsdam Agreement instead of using the "Polish territory" term, that way one must not further debate that issue getting forced by WP:NPOV to represent the different POVs. The phrase "expelled" is also ''the'' widely accepted term for the removal of the former German population, so why change?

Now what I don't get is what you mean by POV-pushing and non-neutral wording. [[User:Skäpperöd|Skäpperöd]] ([[User talk:Skäpperöd|talk]]) 17:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
:Would Postdam wording be superceeded by later treaties ([[Treaty of Zgorzelec]], [[Treaty of Warsaw (1970)]], [[Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany]], [[German-Polish Border Treaty (1990)]])? It seems to me that insistence on 60-year old wording is a bit... outdated, at the very least, and borders on border revisionism (questioning the stability of modern borders). --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 18:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
::Skäpperöd, Looking back and pasting literal phrasing from various non-effective treaties concerning European history into Wikipedia articles is not obviously the right thing to do. We are here to write the best possible encyclopaedic articles - Wikipedia's good is our goal not creating justifications for political decisions of superpowers from over 60 years ago. [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 19:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Well we were talking about 1945 events, and about the official wording for these events, weren't we? And until the various border treaties that Piotrus mentioned were drawn, the Potsdam Agreement was the only legal basis. Border revisionism? Justifications for political decisions of superpowers? Calm down, what are you talking about in the first place? [[User:Skäpperöd|Skäpperöd]] ([[User talk:Skäpperöd|talk]]) 20:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
:When we write about the [[Bible]], we don't use original statements from few thousand years old. In article about the Postdam Agreement, original quotes may be acceptable (if clearly marked as such). When we write about German invasion of Poland in 1939, we go beyond original German justifications for it, even if we write about the days before Polish or Western commentators issued their counter-justifications. In that case, just as when we write about modern Polish-German border, wording accepted by most modern scholarship should be used.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 20:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand you mistaken the Potsdam terminology for a unique historical phrase only used in this agreement meaningless to all further phrases used. That is not the case, this wording was and is used to describe the 1945+ events (see eg Condi Rice et al, 1997, find others via web searches), and no this is not used in a POV sense but merely to most accurately describe the situation ''without'' an interpretation. The rendering of the term to express a certain POV was done by (a) attributing the term "temporarily" (West German government POV) or (b) basing a final territorial claim on the Potsdam agreement ignoring the explicit postponing of this matter to a "final peace settlement" which never was drawn (Polish government POV), and that was only substituted by the 2+4 treaty prior to German reunification and the respective PL-GE-border treaties. I am not interested in using only contemporary phrases to describe historical events, which indeed would not make sense, but instead I am interested in proper adressing historical issues.

You see I am trying to be most neutral, and I am astonished of you not bothering to study the matter first and instead yell POV and border revisionism at me. For the controversity I mentioned above, see eg [http://books.google.de/books?id=s82PHINkWHgC&pg=PA48&dq=territory+polish+administration&lr=&client=firefox-a&sig=ACfU3U2t-h8_1Njv_cm6ua5lJcrcFfSSMQ#PPA49,M1 Ryszard W. Piotrowicz et al, 1997] who gives a small overview stating a little more detailed what I summarized above, there are other books going into much more detail if you really are interested. [[User:Skäpperöd|Skäpperöd]] ([[User talk:Skäpperöd|talk]]) 07:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
:Purely from a language point of view, "placed under Polish administration" implies to me that it wdidn't become part of Poland, just that Poles were acting as the authorities there (as in certain parts of Iraq and Afghanistan recently). It may have been the language used in the original treaty, but the facts of the matter result from much more than just that treaty. Unless we are going to go into great detail about the circumstances of the border change in every article about a town in these territories (which seems undesirable, when we can just link to a general article), we should summarize the facts as the reader will best understand them. For me "became part of Poland" does that best - maybe someone can do better. One thing to avoid is giving the impression (as some articles of this type do) that the town or village in question was a specific issue in the post-war negotiations, rather than just a part of a much larger region that changed hands.--[[User:Kotniski|Kotniski]] ([[User talk:Kotniski|talk]]) 09:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
::''As a result of the Potsdam Conference following World War II, Belgard (Białogard) became part of Poland.'' - for me mentioning and linking to the Potsdam Conference is enough as a historical/political background. It'd be going overboard if we had to give more detailed explanations in ''every'' article about a town or village in these territories. [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 10:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

To go into much detail is just what I want to avoid, we have consensus on that. The aim is to find a terminology that does not express a POV and is immune against challenging, so we have a stable, NPOV version without detailed information that would violate WP:UNDUE. I think we have consensus about that, too.

@Kotniski: "''Purely from a language point of view, "placed under Polish administration" implies to me that it didn't become part of Poland, just that Poles were acting as the authorities there''" That is exactly what happened. And after the administration was turned over to the Polish authorities by the Red Army, the Polish authorities ''did'' integrate Belgard into the post-war Polish state, unlike the situation in eg Afghanistan today. Yet it is questionable if they were legitimized to do so by the Potsdam Agreement, there we have different POVs (in literature as shown above, please don't make that a personal issue). So either we let out the Potsdam Agreement as the cause of the integration into Poland, or we mention the Potsdam Agreement as a cause but let out the "part of Poland". Or we mention the Potsdam Agreement saying it placed Belgard under Polish administration, which it did (no more no less). The current (?) terminology used in the article, "became Polish", is also perfectly alright, yet you asked for the "official" one. [[User:Skäpperöd|Skäpperöd]] ([[User talk:Skäpperöd|talk]]) 10:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
:Maybe we'd do better not to mention the Potsdam Agreement specifically, since that was just one part of the process by which these regions became Polish. Maybe it would be better to say something like "as a result of the [[Territorial changes of Poland after World War II|post-war boundary changes]] B. became Polish/part of Poland." Then readers know where to go for full information, and are not misled in any of the various ways that they might be when we say that it happened "because of Potsdam".--[[User:Kotniski|Kotniski]] ([[User talk:Kotniski|talk]]) 13:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

As I said above that's one way to do that. "Post-war boundary changes" is a good choice, it combines all changes de facto, de jure, by force, by treaty, without going into detail about that or mentioning actual dates for which the situation would have to be described more accurately. The question is whether to wikilink that to [[Territorial changes of Poland after World War II]] as this seems to be a low-developed merge candidate, or rather to [[Oder-Neisse line]] which bears much more information, but is not in best shape either. (Maybe it won't really matter to which article we link at all because all the respective articles are interlinked...) [[User:Skäpperöd|Skäpperöd]] ([[User talk:Skäpperöd|talk]]) 14:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Because there has been no further input, I assume consensus and changed the line in the article accordingly, linking this discussion in the edit summary. [[User:Skäpperöd|Skäpperöd]] ([[User talk:Skäpperöd|talk]]) 17:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

== [[Polish Righteous among the Nations]] ==

This article is now at Good Article Review. Interested editors are asked to help address objections [[Talk:Polish_Righteous_among_the_Nations#GA_Review|at talk]].--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 16:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

== strong tradition of antisemitism in Poland ==

Read all about it in increasingly destabilized [[Żydokomuna]] article... see [[Talk:%C5%BBydokomuna#Strong_tradition_of_anti-semitism_in_Poland|talk for relevant discussions]]. --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 05:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

== [[Stefan Knapik]] ==

Hello. I was asked in my discussion to translate this into English (it's now in Polish), but I checked on the wikipedia-pl on IRC, and admins there were not overly enthusiastic. He is not in the pl wiki or referenced there. The opinion (to be fair, of one Silesian admin) was that the biogram was unlikely to pass muster on the English Wikipedia as notable.


== Er... ==
So I punt this project over to you. :) --[[User:Mareklug|Mareklug]] <sup>[[User talk:Mareklug|<b>talk</b>]]</sup> 14:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


For those of us who can't input Japanese characters, would it be possible for you to create a redirect through [[User:PecoPeco]]? Just saying, because it can get somewhat confusing. But hey, at least I didn't take it to [[WP:UAA]] right? '''[[User:21655|<font color="red">Two One </font>]][[Special:Contributions/21655|<font color="#990000">Six Five</font><font color="black"> Five</font>]]''' <sup>[[User talk: 21655| τ]]</sup><sub>[[User:21655/Guestbook| ʃ]]</sub> 21:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
:if he really has an entry in Polski Słownik Biograficzny as one of the ref implies he ''is'' notable. A few users from the Polish Wikipedia could look it up. [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 21:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


== Wii: Wii Remote Tech Details ==
::For now, I suggest moving it to pl wikipedia. It can be copyedited there, and translated later to en.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 23:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


Hi ペコペコ (cool name, btw). I notice you are removing "and [[rotation]] in three axes" from the beginning of the Wii article, with your reason being that "Rotation is extrapolated from the accelerations and optical data, there are no separate sensors on board the remote dedicated to rotation".
::: {{done}} :) --[[User:Mareklug|Mareklug]] <sup>[[User talk:Mareklug|<b>talk</b>]]</sup> 04:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I would just like to point out that the article only mentions that it can detect rotation, not that there is any specific sensor or component that does the detection. Because of this, the part of the sentence you removed would hold true even with your argument. As a result I think it would be best to add it back into the article. -[[User:Zomic13|Zomic13]] ([[User talk:Zomic13|talk]]) 04:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


== DNA testing ==
== Ummm... ==


Do you find a standard behaviour to declare that an editor confirmed his nationality with a DNA testing? I find such statement racist and totally unrelevant to editing this Wikipedia. In this case it was allegedly a ''non-Polish'' DNA (what is it a Polish DNA ?), but I wouldn't like any such declaration about any nationality. [[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 07:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi PecoPeco - I guess? I just happened across your user entry somewhere in my watchlist. Are you confident that you are complying with username and sig policies? I'm not really sure who you are, and I'm not sure your sig is clickable in all the places it should be. Somewhat confused here, can you explain this a bit? Thanks. [[User:Franamax|Franamax]] ([[User talk:Franamax|talk]]) 08:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
:As far as I know, I'm complying with all username policies. You're going to have to be more specific if you think I'm missing something I ought to be doing. Cheers! &nbsp;--[[User:PecoPeco|Peco!&nbsp;Peco!]]<sup>[[User talk:PecoPeco|TALK]]</sup> 14:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
:Such statement looks like nationalistic (or racist) and very close to hate speech, so not a good thing to the Wikipedia community. However I suppose that from scientific standpoint it is completely senseless - it is impossible to claim that you are 100% Polish, German, French or whatever. What is the nationality after all ? One can say that his/her genetic makeup is in, let's say, 70% concordant with DNA shared by a population consisting of nationals of a given country. [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 15:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
::It says:<br>
:In what context was such a statement made? Diffs? --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 17:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
''Contributors are welcome to use usernames that are not spelled using the Latin alphabet, but should bear in mind that scripts of non-Latin languages (such as Arabic, Cyrillic, Chinese, Greek or Japanese) are illegible to most contributors to the English Wikipedia. To avoid confusion and aid navigation, users with such usernames are encouraged to use Latin characters in their signature and provide a corresponding redirect to their user page.''<br>
You've done that so you're fine. [[User: Dendodge|'''<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:#008000">George D. Watson</em>''' (Dendodge)]].<small>[[User talk:Dendodge|Talk]]</small><sup>[[User:Dendodge/Help|Help]]</sup> 20:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the clarification Dendodge. I wasn't too worried, just curious, you've cleared it up. PecoPeco, that is a pretty cool user name, does it have any partioular significance? [[User:Franamax|Franamax]] ([[User talk:Franamax|talk]]) 22:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


==Wikipedia meetup==
== Sołtanowicz hoaxes return? ==


As someone who may live or work near Washington D.C., you may be interested - if you've not heard already - about the meetup scheduled for Saturday, May 17th, at [[Union Station (Washington, D.C.)|Union Station]]. For details, please see [[Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 4]].
{{user|Franek Dolas}} seems to be engaging in creating a series of Sołtanowicz family hoaxes similar to those of the blocked {{user|Potocki}}. I've left him a message on his user talk; how long should we wait before mass revertions and blocking? --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 00:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
:For hours at best. He can always request an unblocking. [[User:Mieciu K|Mieciu K]] ([[User talk:Mieciu K|talk]]) 16:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
::In that case, will you do the revert/delete/block honors, where appropriate? Or shall I? :) The user is inactive since Oct 5 and has not replied to my message on his talk (and his email is inactive). --<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 16:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Those articles have no relaiable sources and their notability is doubtful. He should start by adding such semi-notable characters to Polish wikipedia first, only if they are notable to stay there should they be included into English Wikipedia. I'm not an admin (on en wiki) and the deletion process on en wiki is long and complicated so could you just speedy delete those articles? [[User:Mieciu K|Mieciu K]] ([[User talk:Mieciu K|talk]]) 17:00, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
::::Looks like proof of vandalism [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AGrand_Chancellors_of_the_Crown&diff=243263175&oldid=227571938]. Jan Ocieski existed [http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Ocieski]. [[User:Mieciu K|Mieciu K]] ([[User talk:Mieciu K|talk]]) 17:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::For some reason I thought you were an admin here. Have you considered applying? Speeding them now.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 18:36, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
::::::Maybe I will apply in the future. [[User:Mieciu K|Mieciu K]] ([[User talk:Mieciu K|talk]]) 14:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


<small>You are receiving this automated message because your userpage appears in [[:Category:Wikipedians in Maryland]].</small> <font color="forestgreen">[[User:MelonBot|'''Melon''']]</font>‑<font color="darkorange">[[User talk:Happy-melon|'''Bot''']]</font>'''&nbsp;<small>(<font color="red">[[User talk:MelonBot|STOP!]]</font>)'''</small> 19:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
== Translation request ==


== USC water polo photo ==
I'd like, if I may, to put in a request for a translation of [[:pl:Kościół św. Rocha w Białymstoku]] - I fell in love with it when I was in Poland, but alas my knowledge of the language is so poor as to preclude any decent attempt at translating on my own. Also I'd like to see an article on the priest who served there, if possible.


I moved a photo of a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:USC_Waterpolo_Player.jpg USC water polo player] that you added to the [[Water polo]] article, and edited the caption to demonstrate information within the water polo equipment subsection. As it was originally, it is likely to become a focus for [[Wikipedia:Edit war|edit war]]s, multiple other vanity photos, etc, being added to the article. Captioned as it was, I suggest that it may be better located in an article about USC sports. - Regards, [[User:Ryanjo|Ryanjo]] ([[User talk:Ryanjo|talk]]) 14:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
''Dziękuję!'' --[[User:AlbertHerring]] <sup>[[User_talk:AlbertHerring|Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!]]</sup> 14:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for your comments. I'll leave it up to you about the best location of the photo within the article. The caption change was an attempt to a) add context, and b) make the photo generic enough to apply to a general article about Water polo. Thanks for the contribution. [[User:Ryanjo|Ryanjo]] ([[User talk:Ryanjo|talk]]) 00:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


==Request to move article [[:Swim Briefs]] incomplete==
== "Polityka" 11th october 2008 ==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important blue.svg|60px|left]]
You recently filed a request at [[WP:RM|Wikipedia:Requested moves]] to move the page [[:Swim Briefs]] to a different title - however your proposal is either '''incomplete''' or '''has been contested''' as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the [[WP:RM#Incomplete_and_contested_proposals|incomplete and contested proposals section]]. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.


Please make sure you have completed '''all three''' of the following:
I encourage everyone to get a copy of the [http://www.polityka.pl/w-najnowszym-numerze-polityki/Lead30,1301,270193,16/ current "Polityka" weekly magazine]. There is a very interesting article about hunger in post-WWII Poland. This article is very interesting in the context of Polish post-war antisemitism (for eg Kilece Pogrom could be explained as baisicly a [[food riot]].) and the failior of post-war anti-communist resistance can be viewed as a result of apathy caused by hunger. [[User:Mieciu K|Mieciu K]] ([[User talk:Mieciu K|talk]]) 16:33, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


# Added '''<nowiki>{{move|NewName}}</nowiki>''' at the top of the [[Talk:Swim Briefs|talk page of the page you want moved]], replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article. This creates the required template for you there.
==Bishopric of Ermland / Warmia==
# Added '''<nowiki>{{subst:RMtalk|NewName|reason for move}}</nowiki>''' to the bottom of the [[Talk:Swim Briefs|talk page of the page you want to be moved]], to automatically create a discussion section there.
Please see [[Wikipedia:Ethnic_and_cultural_conflicts_noticeboard#Bishopric_of_Ermland.2FWarmia]]: IP wars in progress, input from experienced editors needed.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 04:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
# Added '''<nowiki>{{subst:RMlink|PageName|NewName|reason for move}}</nowiki>''' to the top of today's section [[WP:RM#Other_proposals|here]].


If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at [[WT:RM|Wikipedia talk:Requested moves]] or contact me on my talk page. - [[User:JPG-GR|JPG-GR]] ([[User talk:JPG-GR|talk]]) 03:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
== Spelling Czeslaw ==


== W&M Selectivity ==
There is a new article on [[Czeslaw Lejewski]]. Trying to find related sources, I saw the given name spelled somewhere with a [[Ł]]. Is it always the case? Is it in his, anyway? If it is correct, the article should be moved. [[User:Danny lost|trespassers william]] ([[User talk:Danny lost|talk]]) 13:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
:It's indeed always the case (some non-Polish sources will omit the [[diacritics]], but our convention is to use them). I've moved the article.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 16:16, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


I've had issues with that person for a while. S/he keeps changing so that it doesn't say "highly selective," even though it says the same thing later on in the Admissions/Selectivity section later on in the page.
==Polish-Jewish ethnicity in lead==
Please see [[Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Polish-Jewish_ethnicity_in_lead]].--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 20:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:58, 13 October 2008

Hey

Great job with the brief picture. I've been looking for one that had a more standard look to them. The other photo on the article is horrible and disgusting, haha. Thanks --Dan LeveilleTALK 05:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Award Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for creating an article about the Loch Raven Reservoir that was long awaited. Sebwite (talk) 23:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Er...

For those of us who can't input Japanese characters, would it be possible for you to create a redirect through User:PecoPeco? Just saying, because it can get somewhat confusing. But hey, at least I didn't take it to WP:UAA right? Two One Six Five Five τ ʃ 21:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wii: Wii Remote Tech Details

Hi ペコペコ (cool name, btw). I notice you are removing "and rotation in three axes" from the beginning of the Wii article, with your reason being that "Rotation is extrapolated from the accelerations and optical data, there are no separate sensors on board the remote dedicated to rotation". I would just like to point out that the article only mentions that it can detect rotation, not that there is any specific sensor or component that does the detection. Because of this, the part of the sentence you removed would hold true even with your argument. As a result I think it would be best to add it back into the article. -Zomic13 (talk) 04:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm...

Hi PecoPeco - I guess? I just happened across your user entry somewhere in my watchlist. Are you confident that you are complying with username and sig policies? I'm not really sure who you are, and I'm not sure your sig is clickable in all the places it should be. Somewhat confused here, can you explain this a bit? Thanks. Franamax (talk) 08:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, I'm complying with all username policies. You're going to have to be more specific if you think I'm missing something I ought to be doing. Cheers!  --Peco! Peco!TALK 14:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It says:

Contributors are welcome to use usernames that are not spelled using the Latin alphabet, but should bear in mind that scripts of non-Latin languages (such as Arabic, Cyrillic, Chinese, Greek or Japanese) are illegible to most contributors to the English Wikipedia. To avoid confusion and aid navigation, users with such usernames are encouraged to use Latin characters in their signature and provide a corresponding redirect to their user page.
You've done that so you're fine. George D. Watson (Dendodge).TalkHelp 20:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification Dendodge. I wasn't too worried, just curious, you've cleared it up. PecoPeco, that is a pretty cool user name, does it have any partioular significance? Franamax (talk) 22:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia meetup

As someone who may live or work near Washington D.C., you may be interested - if you've not heard already - about the meetup scheduled for Saturday, May 17th, at Union Station. For details, please see Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 4.

You are receiving this automated message because your userpage appears in Category:Wikipedians in Maryland. MelonBot (STOP!) 19:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USC water polo photo

I moved a photo of a USC water polo player that you added to the Water polo article, and edited the caption to demonstrate information within the water polo equipment subsection. As it was originally, it is likely to become a focus for edit wars, multiple other vanity photos, etc, being added to the article. Captioned as it was, I suggest that it may be better located in an article about USC sports. - Regards, Ryanjo (talk) 14:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I'll leave it up to you about the best location of the photo within the article. The caption change was an attempt to a) add context, and b) make the photo generic enough to apply to a general article about Water polo. Thanks for the contribution. Ryanjo (talk) 00:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request to move article Swim Briefs incomplete

You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Swim Briefs to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:

  1. Added {{move|NewName}} at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article. This creates the required template for you there.
  2. Added {{subst:RMtalk|NewName|reason for move}} to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
  3. Added {{subst:RMlink|PageName|NewName|reason for move}} to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 03:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

W&M Selectivity

I've had issues with that person for a while. S/he keeps changing so that it doesn't say "highly selective," even though it says the same thing later on in the Admissions/Selectivity section later on in the page.