User talk:Piotrus: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:31, 26 September 2007

You have the right to stay informed. Exercise it by reading the Wikipedia Signpost today.

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:Piotrus/Archive 18. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

"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! 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.

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.

"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! Thank you.

DYK (24 August)

Did you know? was updated. On 24 August, 2007, a fact from the article Jakub Karol Parnas, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Open Source Directory

PreTender submitted eve-wiki to the CCP fansite list months ago and I've tried again and also on the Open Directory project. Can you help?
Leave me a message at eve-wiki.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alatari (talk • contribs) 04:54, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia weekly interview

Hi there, I noticed that you are an extremly high contributor to FA and was wondering if you would like to be interviewed for an upcoming episode of Wikipedia Weekly? I would be interested in talking about why you are involved in WP, what areas are you specifically involved in, the Polish wikipedia community and their specific issues. Does this sound interesting? I hope to hear from you soon. Witty Lama 12:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we record over Skype so you would need that program and a headset microphone. I'm fairly flexible with times but I'm in Australia (10 hours ahead of polish time I believe). Is tomorrow (sunday) ok? Witty Lama 17:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I worked out that I'm 8 hours ahead of Polish time (if you are indeed in Poland), so 10:00 Sunday for you is 18:00 Sunday for me. If you can be available for half an hour that's fine. I'll see you there! What's your skype name? Witty Lama 01:46, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so if you're in eastern US 10am would mean midnight for me. That's ok for me. Are you up for that - 10am sunday Eastern US time? Witty Lama 05:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Has it happened yet? The lama should have paired you with Ghirla.....well, we need take #2. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Ep is now up and going. Enjoy. Witty Lama 06:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Czyński

Hello Piotrus. My Polish being effectively non-existent, can you tell me if pl:Jan Czyński was in Paris in the 1830s. I assume so - "great emigration" I did understand. I'm trying to figure out if he is the person who co-authored a book called Le Roi des Paysans (published in Paris in 1838). My Belgian source calls this person Jean Czynski. Many thanks in advance! Angus McLellan (Talk) 08:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colour me impressed! Thanks for that. Trawling through the BNF catalogue has confirmed that he was indeed my Jean Czynski. Thanks again and all the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 19 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Piłsudski's Mound, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 19:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GAC

What a refreshing thought.[1] --Poeticbent talk 02:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of respect for WP:UE

That where real disruptions lies. M0RD00R 18:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kiev

Just renominate it - and I think you might title the nomination Kiev 2 - there should be details on the page.--daniel folsom 01:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Enlightenment Template

Hi! Terribly sorry to spam you, but, remembering your interest in the Template:Enlightenment, I thought you might be interested to know that I have started a discussion on the inclusion criteria; it would be great if you came over to Template talk:Enlightenment to take part. --AVIosad^(talk) 13:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Something for you I guess

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democracy#Why_no_mention_of_Poland.3F --HanzoHattori 19:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

fair use

Hi Piotrus, is still fair use in apply ? I have an article without image where is not possible to obtain public domain image. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 10:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question for you

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodryg Dunin 2. Is it possible to obtain a text and or translation of the article referring to him? If you will check the history of this and related articles, you will see why there is a certain skepticism about both the accuracy of the facts related and the extent to which he encyclopedia article supports them. DGG (talk) 04:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Polish version has been on the talkpage since January 2006. --El on ka 06:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Antoni Julian Nowowiejski

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Antoni Julian Nowowiejski, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Porcupine (prickle me!) 19:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Antoni Julian Nowowiejski

Antoni Julian Nowowiejski, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Antoni Julian Nowowiejski satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antoni Julian Nowowiejski and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Antoni Julian Nowowiejski during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Porcupine (prickle me!) 19:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know

On 24 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jan Czyński, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 00:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		For your input at Digwuren RFAR and overall actions to protect the values of Wikipedia. People like you make the difference! Suva Чего? 08:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well Estonians story is simple. Most of them came when the Russian media attack started against Estonia during the Bronze soldier of Tallinn incident. Some articles were really horrible at the time, Estonian flag under Estonia was replaced with nazi german one all the time, etc. Many editors came in. Some old editors were drawn into the spin, etc. The first sock/meatpuppetry accusations came from the fact that estonian editors were quite same minded. Estonian media gave detailed updates on situation and many people like myself were also in the center of the situation so saw the incidents with their own eyes. So there was not much room for debate if someone wrote that the soldier was dismantled sawn to pieces peed on or what ever as we knew it wasn't and thats why we all reverted that. So as people knew something for sure they ofcourse acted the same.

When the so called Established Editors came into frame the things got more serious and they tried to eliminate some opposing editors. They succeeded on some cases. Mostly humble editors who were here before to edit encyclopedia not to battle. Others didn't give up so easily. Now as the things have cooled down a bit, the editors are quite hard working and Estonia related articles are better than they have ever been.

Estonian (and now Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish, etc.) editors are also observing each others work to assist where necessary. It's sometimes happens that they also meet at AFD's and other votes for similar reason. Some editors are also available on #wikipedia channel so we have held discussions there. I can't speak for other editors because I don't know, but I don't have any sockpuppets and I don't think any other one has any either.

The RFCU process makes me a bit sad. I shuffled over some old RFCU cases and the methodology they use seems like extremely unreliable. It seems they use some very mean statistics in style: 1) Assuming every 1000000th person in world is editing english wikipedia. 2) Assuming estonia has 1.4m people. 3) Estonia can have 14 wikipedians. 4) As the threshold is already exceeded, every new wikipedian must be a sockpuppet of the earlier editors. Suva Чего? 15:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suva's point regarding information dissemination speed is very interesting.

Estonia is a relatively small country, with about three or four -- depending on the criteria -- primary population centres. If anything significant happens in any of them, a significant percentage of Estonia's populations would be able to see it, the local news would be all over it, and if national news gets interested, can arrive within hours. Thus, it's customary that Estonian news is operative, has redundancy -- because multiple news sources often report on the same events -- and can be easily backed up with eyewitness accounts.

Russian Federation, on the other hand, is the largest -- area-wise -- country on Earth, with numerous timezones and hundreds of major population centres in it. Most of newsworthy events in Russia, unless they happen in Moscow or Sankt Petersburg, would have only a very limited percentage of the whole population as direct eyewitnesses, and due to the great distances and poor infrastructure, it's prohibitively expensive to send a national reporter residing in, say, Yaroslav, to Vladivostok to cover something as insignificant as, say, a riot. Accordingly, it's customary that Russian news makes use of division of labour region-wise, and depends on relatively long chains of newswire relays, with only limited redundancy. The resulting lack of redundancy allows the Chinese telephone effect to creep in rather readily.

Even if we would put away purely cultural issues, such difference is, to some degree, dictated by the economics and infrastructure.

Accordingly, when an internationally interesting event in Estonia happens, it's only natural that news-following Estonians have a relatively similar -- and relatively factual -- overview of it, close to real time, but Russian news coverings deviate in various ways, and thus, Russian folks would have many different views. This is not a virtue; it's a sign of news inefficiency. Διγυρεν_{Εμπροσ!} 18:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Antoni Julian Nowowiejski

Hi, I closed AFD as a non-admin due to the obvious keep consensus. Happy editing. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 22:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

btw I also borrowed "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! Thank you." from your talk page if you don't mind. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 23:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and a question: Poland-related noticeboard

Thank your for awarding me a badge of honour for my contributions related to Poland. And also for an invitation to join the Poland/Poland-related WP noticeboard. I have a question related to the latter:
What additional rights/duties does the membership of the said noticeboard confer, on top of what every common, or garden variety, WP editor can/cannot/should/shouldn't do? I an not a natural 'joiner', so unless there is some 'value added' (value for the community and/or for me) in the membership, I'll stay, and carry on contributing occasionally, as a freelance outsider.--Jotel 12:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 25 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1919 Polish coup attempt, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 13:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools

Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools. This is most likely because when you were copying scripts into yout monobook you accidentaly copied their category. Since your monobook is not a tool itself, please remove this category from it (like this). If you intend for your monobook to be a tool, please consider creating a subpage with a more descriptive name, and moving the category there. Thank you, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 23:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late response as I have been on vacaction. My monobook doesn't have any category tags. It is quite short and I even did a word search in the edit screen.--BirgitteSB 16:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for figuring that out. I think I have fixed it.--BirgitteSB 18:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

interview

Dzien dobry! I just heard your interview on Wikipedia Weekly! :) I especially liked your statement that civility rules need to be enforced more effectively, somehow. I completely agree that incivility and general obnoxiousness is the biggest on-wiki problem we have to deal with...

Also, it was just neat to hear your voice! :) K. Lásztocska 18:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SIP39

I've gone through the article trying to get it back into shape. I didn't feel I could cut that large chunk of material that was added to the lead, because even though the information was all covered and reffed in the article already, it is properly reffed and the editor took care over it. So I've put it in a note for the time being.

One problem I haven't solved is that someone added Soviet casualty figures to the lead. Nothing wrong with that in principle, but the figures were only from one source (which they took from our infobox). I have not yet been able to think of a way of summarising the varied figures for Russian casualties pithily (and good expression is essential; blocks of figures tramelled with ifs and buts are alienating to readers). For the time being, therefore, I've cut both Polish and Soviet figures from the lead; but this is unsatisfactory because the PoW figures are still there, sitting uncomfortably now. If you can think of a way to express both sets of figures briefly and accurately for the lead, please do so. In this, I think the article is a victim of its own success because, unlike books (which seem to choose the particular set of figures which suit their bent), it tries to inform the readers of the whole range of different possible figures. This is invaluable and unique but is not easy to summarise in the lead.qp10qp 04:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 26 September, 2007, a fact from the article Bykivnia, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 13:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello, when you split up the articles on the Wołyń Voivodeship, one of them read Wołyń Voivodeship (1921–1919). I moved to Wołyń Voivodeship (1918-1939), which are the dates given in the article, but I hope I didn't mess anything up. Perhaps you go look over what I did and make sure. Thanks, Ostap 20:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you can fix it here: [2] where it reads (1921-1919). Thank you. Ostap 20:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typos are the worst arent they? Thanks again, Ostap 20:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 240: / Line 240: @@
 to [[Wołyń Voivodeship (1918-1939)]], which are the dates given in the article, but I hope I didn't mess anything up.  Perhaps you go look over what I did and make sure.  Thanks, [[User:Ostap R|Ostap]] 20:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 :Maybe you can fix it here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wo%C5%82y%C5%84_Voivodeship] where it reads (1921-1919). Thank you.  [[User:Ostap R|Ostap]] 20:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
+::Typos are the worst arent they? Thanks again, [[User:Ostap R|Ostap]] 20:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)