| This is but an archive. Please add new comments in new sections on my Talk page. Thanks in advance. Halibutt |
|---|
Thank you
Thank you for your compliment. I see you too, have been doing a great job on Wikipedia. Yes, I have started a few articles. Can't claim the Henryk Batuta article though. How about you? Dr. Dan 02:19, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
KOBRYN, BELARUS
In the article it says “First mentioned in 11th century”. Can you please indicate to us what reference was used for this statement.
Our information indicates that “Kobrin has been known since 1287” as indicated at http://www.brest-belarus.com/Kobrin.shtml and many other web sites that were found with a Google search.
Larry Schenker (Binenbaum) from Los Angeles, California, United States 19:33, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
An impression
This poem of Tuwim's is memorable. And I remember it.
Ucz się, dziecko, polskiej mowy
To przed domem, to są groby,
Małe groby, wielki cmentarz.
Taki jest twój elementarz.
Ustawiły się w szeregu
Czarne krzyże w brudnym sniegu
Na Warszawie mrok żałoby;
Ucz się pięknej polskiej mowy.
Well, I hope I remember it. --VKokielov 21:43, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Barnstar
!מזל טוב
from Izehar
Hi, I'm sorry your RFA wasn't successful, I'm sure you'll get it next time though. Take a barnstar for your active participation in the community, your 16,527 edits (!), and your contributions (of every variety). Izehar 16:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Henryk Lipszyc
Hello! ちぇしちです。Can you make the article for Henryk Lipszyc ([1]([2]) [3] [4]), the Ambassador of Poland to Japan(ambasador Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej w Tokio w latach 1991–1996). Un' a dank far sztetelech!
- Szejnherc-UB 06:48, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I worked all weekend on this article. It is not complete (I hope to make it the first Lithuania-related featured article), but the main part missing is about litas that circulated in the interwar period. Would you any sources about it? Because I could not find anything on the internet. I would greatly appreciate. Renata3 22:30, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- Also, please take a look at changes to Knutux map. Renata3 02:38, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- And it is now nominated. Renata3 17:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Geography of Poland discussion
Could you take a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography of Poland#Terminology? Logologist has begun renaming some of the voivodships (Lower Silesia to Dolny Śląsk), but I don't believe a clear consensus has been reached regarding terminology. Olessi 05:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Przypominam ci o tej sekcji, bo coś chyba nie korzystasz z niej?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
- Pretty please... like Battle of Grodno (1939)... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:01, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, Poland has the same structure as anywhere else according to Polish Armed Forces rank insignia! Generał brygady = Brig Gen and Generał dywizji = Maj Gen, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. Why should Generał brygady = Maj Gen when Poland has the standard four general officer ranks? -- Necrothesp 17:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Fair enough. Although it seems odd to me that the rankings should be one up. Was this ever official NATO policy? -- Necrothesp 17:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, having podporucznik and porucznik both designated OF-1 isn't a peculiarity at all. The UK and the USA have both ranks of Lieutenant (Lieutenant and Second Lieutenant in the UK) at OF-1 too, as do most other armies - it's because they do more or less the same job and so have been put on the same NATO grade. Re the general officer system though, it surprises me that a division would be commanded by a Lieutenant-General (if the rank names do indeed reflect the jobs the officers do). British divisions have always been commanded by Major-Generals, with Lt-Gens commanding Corps. NATO grades usually reflect the job someone does not the relative title they hold, so it wouldn't surprise me if a Polish one-star general was always considered OF-6 and a two-star general always considered OF-7, with a three star general considered OF-8/9 (as a British Sergeant is considered OR-5/6). -- Necrothesp 18:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Gediminas
I don't know why you were being rude about it. I moved only the inaccurate Gediminas, Duke of Lithuania to Gediminas of Lithuania. I never moved or tried to move Gediminas, Grand Duke of Lithuania. - Calgacus 21:37, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Ranks
- Please do not revert the proper version. It had been discussed for more than month and was located in Comparative military ranks of World War II/temp since the page was protected from editing. Now I copied the result of discussion in the article page. There is too many to correct in your improper version - table form, ranking, need add a number of strings, footnotes and many other.--Nixer 17:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Nixer seems to think that the current version of Comparative military ranks of World War II contains inaccuracies - do you know what he's talking about? I have just added the Greek WWII ranks and if I figure out the problem, I'll fix it, because he keeps reverting it (and removing the Polish ranks with it). Latinus 20:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, Nixer's been blocked for 72 hours for violating the 3RR on that article and I'm trying to get him to listen. Hopefully it'll work. Latinus 00:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Dobry tekst
Łatwiej zrozumieć zachownie i poglądy niektórych użytkowników na wiki: http://jazon.hist.uj.edu.pl/zjazd/materialy/falkowicz_pl.pdf Rosyjscy uczeni badali przede wszystkim polityczną historię Polski, często idąc śladami polskiej historiografii. Osiągnięciem tamtego okresu było potraktowanie najważniejszych wydarzeń w polskiej historii XV–XVIII w. (Reformacja, formowanie ustroju Polski szlacheckiej, unia lubelska, rozbiory Rzeczypospolitej) jako jednolitego procesu i ukazanie ich związków i wzajemnych wpływów. Takie podejście stosuje również współczesna historiografia – rosyjska i polska. Reformacja w Polsce rozpatrywana była na tle wydarzeń europejskich, przy czym liberałowie szukali jej powodów w sytuacji społeczno-politycznej, w gospodarce, a słowianofile uważali ją za protest „słowiańskiej duszy” przeciw katolicyzmowi. W zawarciu unii kościelnej widzieli oni walkę katolickiego i prawosławnego świata, akt narzuconej asymilacji prawosławnej szlachty Podpisanie unii lubelskiej traktowano jak końcowy etap formowania się państwa szlacheckiego. Polonofobi wiązali szczególny ustrój państwowy Polski, jego słabość i nieżyciowość z wpływem katolicyzmu na polską mentalność. --Molobo 22:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Ciekawe. Myślisz, że "Ż" się ucieszy, jak przetłumaczymy to na en-Wiki? ;p --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Update: to już jest na en-wiki, tylko interwiki nie było.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Italy additions
Best of luck with your addtions to Comparative military ranks of World War II. If you would, pleas remove the disputed rank "Komandor" from the German column. Tt1 has reinserted this rank over and over agian and has used sockpuppets to circumvent the 3RR. Thanks for your support! -Husnock 22:01, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Possibly unfree Image:Lechwalesa.JPG
Thuresson 23:04, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but I frankly fail to see why a couple of corrections affected your working on the article in any shape or form, since I changed nothing to do with the Italian or Polish ranks you were working on. -- Necrothesp 23:52, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry if it caused problems, but I'm getting sick of certain people (not you) continually adding nonexistent and inaccurate ranks to that article despite endless discussion on the subject on the talk page, and I just revert them if I see them. -- Necrothesp 00:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
my RfA
Thanks. I have not decided yet, if I want another attempt, so you may have an a opportunity to vote on my RfA in a future.
Speaking about administration, have you seen Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#The evil sociopath, or, DreamGuy: time to put a stop to smear campaign and [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Elonka mess. User:Elonka is the author of Raphael Kalinowski (that I somehow edited with her) and a number of other (mostly Poland-related) articles.
She was originally blocked indefinitely without warning with the statement that she contributed nothing to Wikipedia, just annoys another user. I am not sure about the second part of the statement, but the first seems to be obviously incorrect to me. abakharev 01:37, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if you want to look on my new RfA, it is here: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alex Bakharev 2. Please feel free to vote anyway you like abakharev 23:55, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Pact
Thanks for the kudos. I wrote the article because I thought Ghirlandajo might actually take up Piotrus' suggestion and write the article himself. I shudder to think what would have been in it then, and it would have taken some time and a dozen edit wars to make it NPOV. This way we will hopefully avoid this. Starting a companion article on the Soviet-Polish Non-Aggression Pact is also a good idea. What we really need though is a comprehensive article on Polish foreign policy in the interwar period. That would be the perfect place to discuss the careful balancing act in relations with USSR and Germany that Poland tried to perform in the interwar years. Balcer 06:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- Your help is needed with Soviet-Polish non-aggression pact. I assume you have access to the references you listed. Could you settle this issue of whether USSR denounced the pact in October, 1938? That does not seem credible to me, as I can't find anything about this. Balcer 23:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Hey there....
Congratulations, Halibutt/Archive12! Your user page has been nominated for the Esperanza User Page Award! Five judges will look over your user page and award it 1-10 points in four categories:
- Attractiveness: general layout, considering colour scheme and/or use of tables if applicable
- Usefulness: links to subpages or editing aids, helpful information
- Interesting-ness: quirky, unique, captivating, or funny content
- General niceness: at the judges' discretion
But first, you must be chosen as a finalist. If your user page is chosen as one of the five finalists, you'll have the chance to win an award created just for having a great user page!
More information can be found on this page.
KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 19:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hi there Halibutt. No need to worry about your userpage being designed by Blankfaze, many of the userpages listed there were not designed by the users themselves. We've all made alterations, which will make the pages stand out from the other nominees. I've also noticed that yours does indeed differ somewhat from other pages. The award program, for want of a better word, runs weekly, so Blankfaze and anybody else you may wish to nominate can be nominated before long. So, to conclude, dont worry about it, but thank you for your honesty. Yours in editing Banez 20:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
User:Tt1 and Comparative Ranks
Tt1 appears to be reverting your work on Comparative military ranks of World War II. I reverted to the last "good version", but he prompty reverted this change to the last edition that he had edited. I can'ttell what info now is good versus bad regarding your changes. I suggest that you take a look and remove the disputed material. If Tt1 reverts again, he will be blocked for Three Revert Rule violation. -Husnock 20:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- I've reported him for a 3RRvio, but no admin seems to have checked it yet. Latinus 20:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- I have used my authority as an admin to declare the user(s) making these nonsense reverts as a vandal. No more messing around with this guy, he will be blocked on site if he continues this kind of behavior. Feel free to improve the article without fear from these vandals. -Husnock 06:11, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, Halibutt
Re: Table
If the TOC is messing up the archive table, then try adding __TOC__ where you'd like the table of contents to appear. I think {{TOCleft}} or {{TOCright}} work nicely as well. Sango123 (talk) 21:37, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article ORP Conrad, which you recently created, has been 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. |
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Podhale rifles, which you recently created, has been 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. |
Nagórski: jest, mozesz tez robis self-nomy.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 13:58, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Jan Stanisław Jankowski, which you recently created, has been 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. |
Ponowna próba
Wymazania informacji o zbrodniach popełnionych przez żółnierzy niemieckich podczas Kampanii Wrześniowej, tym razem w artykule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_17th_Infantry_Division --Molobo 22:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
WikiSzopka 2003
Dobrze, że na Twojej stronie był link do tej szopki, bo większego idiotyzmu na wiki jeszcze nie widziałem... Pietras1988 TALK 17:11, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
PS Widzę, że więcej czasu spędzasz na en wiki niż u nas. Uważam Cię za zdrajcę. Pietras1988 TALK 17:11, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Ja nie jestem wyzywany od głupców, ale wiele osób mnie nie lubi, bo jestem trollem. Na pl wiki najbardziej mnie wkurza, że ja mam grubo ponad 7k edycji, a adminami są niektórzy, którzy mają nawet 1,2k. Według mnie powinieneś przemyśleć powrót na pl wiki, bo w końcu jak zauważyłem byłeś tu już w 2003 roku. Pietras1988 TALK 17:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, ale widzę, że na pl wiki mieli rację obrażając Cię, bo wypowiadasz się jak normalne 0. Pietras1988 TALK 17:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Witaj, Halibutt. Piszę z polskiej wiki. Nie zwracaj na Pietrasa uwagi, najpierw mówi, że uważa cię za zdrajcę, poczym kopiuje twoje oświadczenie i ucieka od nas. A ja myślę, że lepiej, żebyś ty wrócił niż on... Pozdrawiam! Michał P. 20:42, 4 February 2006 (UTC) (fr, ro, pl)
Polish attitude
Hi, this may seem like a rather irrelevant question, but I'd just like to know. What is the attitude, in Poland today, towards Western Europe and the USA? Friendly, mistrustful, apathetic... Latinus 19:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Pozdrawiam
Cześć. Czytałem ostatnio jakieś anty-polskie teksty głównie od rosyjskich wikipedystów. Jestem zbulwersowany z tego ile anty-polskości można usłyszeć w tym projekcie od różnych rasistów. Chcę powiedzieć, że jeśli będziesz miał kiedykolwiek jakiś problem z ruskimi albo będzie potrzebny mój głos w jakimś głosowaniu, to daj mi proszę wiedzieć. Dzisiaj przypadkowo znalazłem ten okropny redirect o polskiej inwazji do Czechosłowacji, już głosowałem. Jako obywatel RC, ale głównie jako Polak czuję obowiązek bronić polskości w sytuacji, gdy jest to konieczne. Jak może pamiętasz, jestem Polakiem ze Zaolzia, studentem uniwersytetu (politologia). Przez letnie wakacje mam w planie popracować trochę nad artykułami dotyczącymi Zaolzia, tak jak masakra w Żywocicach w 1944 roku, kiedy to AKowiec zastrzelił w pubie niemieckiego oficera. Później naziści otoczyli wioskę i pomordowali ponad 40 mężczyzn, głównie Polaków, kilku Czechów i Żydów. Zaolziaków jest corocznie mniej, asymilacja jest naturalna, więc myślę, że jest ważne poszerzyć spektrum artykułów o Zaolziu. Trzymaj się mocno! - Darwinek 20:20, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:106 0665 t.jpg
|
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:106 0665 t.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 20:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Jan Nagórski, which you recently created, has been 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. |
- Hi, Halibutt. Nice job on this new article. I enjoyed the read, thanks a lot! —Cleared as filed. 00:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Polecam
http://www.iskry.com.pl/fragmenty/polacy-kreml.rtf Szczególnie ciekawe jak Rosjanie opisują rzeż Pragi w podręcznikach szkolnych: Rzeź Pragi do dziś dnia jest zresztą tuszowana w rosyjskich podręcznikach historii. W jednym z ostatnich (Moskwa 2000 r., dla klasy X, pióra Buganowa i Zyrianowa) z wielkim zdziwieniem przeczytałem, iż po wzięciu szturmem Pragi „humanitarny (?) stosunek rosyjskiego generała (Suworowa) do pokonanych” doprowadził do rychłej kapitulacji lewobrzeżnej Warszawy. Ponieważ Suworow nie mógł się pogodzić z polityką represji i kontrybucji stosowaną wobec Polaków przez Katarzynę II, popadł w niełaskę i został odwołany do Petersburga. --Molobo 11:58, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Comparative ranks
For Husnock and for Halibu. If you think that I -Tt1, Nixer, Alexr23 or others, that continue to think, but I not they. If I consider that in the certain cases I agree with them I have on this right. I and these users consider that we write correct data and you or others can disagree with them. But you cannot forbid to have to me the opinion.You many times ignored data proved by others too. About flags - in this table there should be official State flags or national flags. Not flag Polish army or Marine, and a national Polish flag. See Polish State flag and http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/pl-xx.html*w27. The Marshal of the USSR is equivalent to Admiral Flota between 1944-1955 and to equivalent OF-10 code and Marshal of the USSR was above than Admiral Flota rank between 1940-1944. Also in Italian ranks in the old version, there are mistakes and inexact equivalence, therefore I and others have corrected it. For an example: Contrammiraglio equivalent to Generale di Brigata and to OF-6. Where Generale di C.A. designato d'Armata, Ammiraglio di Squadra designato di Armata , Ammiraglio di Squadra con Incarichi Speciali, Generale di Corpo d'Armata con Incarichi Speciali, Generale di Squadra Aerea con Incarichi Speciali-all of them in OF-8 not writen. See http://www.regiamarina.net/ref/uniforms/ranks_us.htm, http://www.kotfsc.com/aviation/italynavyranks.htm, http://www.kotfsc.com/aviation/graphics/italyranks-main.jpg, http://www.esercito.difesa.it. Looking on written here the facts I believe that my changes exact were right also. I with you had only two disputable questions: 1) flags. 2) Polski Admirał floty and Generał Armii. If you do not agree with me about flags discuss this theme and can to change it, but please don't return all clause. All other data check up and they 100% exact. Data about Polski Admirał floty and Generał Armii I shall check up later. -Roitr 13:40, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
PUIdisputed
Please do not remove the "PUIdisputed" tags from images. As the tag clearly says: "If you don't want the file deleted, please provide explanatory information about the copyright status of this image. Please do not remove this notice while the question is being considered.". Instead you should respond at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. Thuresson 13:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Polszczyzna
I did not change a non-correct phrase into a correct one. I changed a correct one into a correct one. As you can probably see here the word "polszczyzna" is defined to be "język polski, mowa polska" so the meaning conveyed by the expression "język polski" is essentially the same. The difference lays only in the register of the expression. The word "polszczyzna" is from the "higher register" and is OK in books, essays etc. while the phrase "język polski" is from "neutral register" and is OK in everyday usage. Due to the fact, none of the titles of Polish language dictionaries mentioned in the Merlin bookshop category of Polish dictionaries uses the word "polszczyzna" whereas some use the phrase "język polski". As the language template is intended rather for everyday informative usage instead of being a part of a "higher register" text, I suggest to leave the template with the phrase "język polski". alx-pl D 15:44, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Concerning the style remark you gave in the edit summary, note that the most important style direction is to keep the balance between form and the stylistic context in which the phrase belongs ("Odpowiednie dać rzeczy słowo"). The stylistic guideline you refer to is again the rule used for essays not for informative texts. In particular, the stylistic guideline is to much descent not obeyed in Polish technical texts where it is more important to refer to precisely defined notions than to present rich vocabulary. Even in the world of essay texts the word "język" in conjunction with an adjunct after the word (which indicates that this is a separate notion and which usage is the subject of our argument) is very often used as repetition. You can consult for instance Korpus Języka Polskiego Wydawnictwa Naukowego PWN to see many cases of the usage which does not obey the non-repetition style rule: [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. Again, I don't deny that the style guideline you mentioned does not exist. I only state that in the context of the template this rule does not apply. alx-pl D 16:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Zaolzie
Czemu nie. Chociaż nie wiem, jak będzie mi wychodzić z czasem. Trzynastego lutego zaczyna mi się znów szkoła, oj trudno będzie w tym półroku. Jeśli nurtuje cię jakaś kwestia w sprawie Zaolzia albo Czech to śmiało pytaj. Ogólnie ostatnio zauważyłem, że w Polsce jakoś teraz moda na wszystko czeskie. - Darwinek 01:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Ja też służę pomocą, gdyby były jakieś pytania dot. tym razem polskiej części Śląska Cieszyńskiego :) Pozdrawióm D_T_G 13:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Vistula
Just makin sure no hasty reverts take place. Forgive me Father, for I have sinned.... Ksenon 23:14, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Alright, since youre a cultural anthropologist, you probably know better. Im a little wary of user:Molobo's silent revert policy, esp. when the info seemed 'legit'. Cheers Ksenon 02:21, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article SS Kościuszko, which you recently created, has been 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. |
--Gurubrahma 12:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Cześć Halibutt
Mam pytanie-czy może posiadasz mapkę pokazującą terytorium Polski podczas czasów Bolesława Krzywoustego i fragmentacji Polski ? Ewentualnie czy jest taka na Wiki ? Fajnie by było gdyby była wzorowana na szablonie map Polski jakie już utworzyłeś. Znalazłem na i taką mapę na commons ale nie jest najładniejsza i nie wiem jak ją skopiować na angielską. [17] Pozdrawiam. --Molobo 16:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
![[17]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Poland_Fragmentation_Period_map.jpg){kind=link}
Dobra, można stworzyć osobny opis euroregionu, choć zauważyłem, że na enwiki nie mają tego w zwyczaju. Skasowałem informacje, że rzeka Olza oddziela ten region od innych. Otóż ta rzeka ma przeogromne znaczenie dla tego regionu i wszystko można o niej powiedzieć, ale na pewno nie to że dzieli (nie licząc granicy państwowej wzdłuż niej ;). Dla Śląska Cieszyńskiego Olza jest tym czym dla całej Polski Wisła. Pieśń Płyniesz Olzo po dolinie Jana Kubisza (btw. pochodzącego z zaolziańskiej wsi, tej samej, z której pochodzi Jerzy Buzek) jest nieoficjalnym hymnem tego regionu. Zresztą każdy szanujący się tutejszy poeta ma w swoim repertuarze koniecznie dwa wiersze: pisane gwarą i o Olzie :) Potrafiłbyś to ubrać w ładne angielskie słowa i napisać to w definicji Cieszyn Silesia? Ja właśnie nie za bardzo. Pozdrawiam D T G 19:07, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
No personal attacks, please
Dear Halibutt, please behave yourself. When you call myself "your faithful shadow" you make a personal attack. If you accuse me of stalking, please read Wikipedia:Stalking, because stalking is a serious allegation that may lead to admin action. You should know by now that I am a WP:DYK regular and I check most announcements on that page to discover possible copyvios and stubs. Although your article on an obscure Warsaw park was created within hours after my starting Category:Parks in Russia and writing Summer Garden I didn't accuse you of stalking, do I? Please avoid personal attacks in future. --Ghirla | talk 16:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- No, Halibutt, it was not my intention to accuse you of anything or, for Gods sake, to offend you. As could be seen in the past very seldom do I follow your (former) ways of offending everyone around by assuming their bad will or calling them names. I'm really astonished that after the RfC you apparently stopped such behaviour and I'm really grateful for that. I merely noticed that you follow every article I create as closely as if you were my shadow. Nothing more, nothing less. Also, I don't see why posting a message on my talk page, open for everyone to see and comment, is labelled by you as conspiring but I'm sorry if your understanding of English made you feel that way. BTW, in case of future misunderstandings I reccomend checking the suspected terms in a dictionary, it would help us avoid many problems and grievances. --Ghirla | talk 16:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
That was advice, not conspiracy. I don't have a strong interest in editing those articles myself, but I think it would be nice if they were more balanced. Everyking 18:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Edward Wittig, which you recently created, has been 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. |
Edward Wittig
YOur article on this says he Socle was for WWI Airmen, but the caption to the photo says 1942. This doesn't make sense. Rlevse 13:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. I did some copyedit in the text and photo caption to make it clearer (I hope that's okay). In the caption I also changed a link to Allies of WWII to Allies of WWI, as it's a monument to WWI airmen.Rlevse 13:27, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Park Ujazdowski, which you recently created, has been 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. |
--Gurubrahma 17:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello, and I think you will be interested in this new initiative to gather people writing about 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. Thank you, Renata 04:23, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
I just created this new article. Would you please have a look over it for mistakes? Thanks. —Michael Z. 2006-02-13 23:28 Z
Uderz w stół...
...ciekawe, choć troche smutne. Kiedy na wschodzie się przejaśni? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
- Why not use English? Oh, and somebody please do something about your compatriot Molobo there. After his involvement the article is now worse than it was when I thought it was "POV". NOW it is really gross. --Irpen 00:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I entered information on arrests of political opponents, NKVD operations against Home Army, and added a chapter that needs to be done-treatment of Polish citizens under Soviet Occupation. I really don't know why you believe it is gross. --Molobo 00:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
History of Poland (1939–1945)
- CCed you a message I left at Piotrus' talk:
Please try to talk to Molobo. I repeatedly requested that from you and Halibutt with no result so fsr, unfortunately. Too bad that the Polish community refused to do anything at all with the extremist nationalist POV pushers. Is there a chance that this would change? As a counterexample, please take a look how the Ukrainian and Russian wikicommunities reacted to the improper behaviour of their compatriots and compare it to [18]. I hope you will change your mind at some point and will realize that such extremist POV pushers harm rather than help the coverage of Polish topics at Wikipedia. --Irpen 19:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- I responded at my talk, to preserve the context. Please watch my talk when you leave messages to me if you are unwilling to respond at your own talk. I think the context is important in communication. --Irpen 22:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I could agree
But I don't understand this: We add the {{maintained}} I wouldn't know how to use it.Would I have to use some special Wiki code ? I am not good at that. Anyway its not that I maintain something-its simply that Irpen deletes what I enter.He deletes without explanation information on executions of Home Army members. But we could try. As always the facts and history are behind me.Its worth much more then propaganda :) --Molobo 22:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think that the situation is that bad, I feel the article is improving. Although more users input will of course help - so I am looking forward towards your edits :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I am sorry but I don't agree with reverting the article. Please show me what major irreparable damage has been done to the article that would justify reverting it?? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- Sure. I have done some cleanup - and now I am off(line). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Tak.Poczekam :) --Molobo 23:46, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Polish annexations
I don't have the time or inclination at present to get involved in arguments about Polish history. For what it's worth "annex" is a general English term for adding the territory of another country to one's own country (or empire). It contains no judgement about whether the act is legal or not. Adam 06:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
The usuall
Brave attempts to stop West Slavic strategem ;) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Henryk_Sucharski&diff=39848830&oldid=39777800 --Molobo 07:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Skąd zaczerpnęłeś to zdjęcie? Czy raczej nie powinno być oznaczone {{PD-Poland}}? A.J. 16:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Z kolei to zdjęcie nie miało podanej licencji tam, skąd je brałeś...
Thanks for uploading Image:Ksawery Tartakower young.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. A.J. 16:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Grafiki Witkacego
Własność państwa to nie to samo co własność publiczna, przynajmniej wg. polskiego prawa. Znasz jakieś uregulowania prawne które o tym mówią? Jeśli nie, poruszę temat na naszym śmietniku, może ktoś coś będzie wiedział :). W razie jakby się okazało, że masz rację: wszystko mam skopiowane i z radością powstawiam ponownie. Pozdrawiam! A.J. 17:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Może z kolei im to zabraniają inne przepisy i powstaje sytuacja jak z psem ogrodnika... W każdym razie znalazłem paragraf, który by dopuszczał w takim przypadku liczenie okresu przedawnienia od daty powstania utworu, patrz: pl:Wikipedia:Kawiarenka pod Wesołym Encyklopedystą/Prawa do obrazów Witkacego, co pozwoliłoby swobodnie używać część grafik. W każdym razie narobiłem zamieszania ja osobiście, bo skrupulant straszny ze mnie, to nie jest żadna zorganizowana akcja. A.J. 17:56, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Tartakower
Ano zaglądam sobie do Duńczyków, a tam zero informacji o licencji: podana jest tylko jakaś strona, która już dawno nie działa. Sam obrazek raczej nie jest warty zachodu: bardziej mnie ciekawi pochodzenie tego dużego. A.J. 17:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- Jak nie pamiętasz, to trudno... Poprawiłem tylko licencję na Commons (bo tam ktoś dopisał old do PD) i jak się nikt nie czepnie, to sobie będzie. A.J. 18:01, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- Małe zdjęcie wciąż tam jest (poprawiłem interwiki) (a z geografii miałem słabe oceny ;). A.J. 18:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Award
Re:Kulturkampf
With inline citations, it should do much to move this revertoscution to another, better level. Great job. And tnx for adding that ref to PLC. But I am still waiting for rest of szabla translation ;p --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Henryk Sucharski, which you recently created, has been 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. |
--Gurubrahma 08:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
Because I will be on a Wikivacation on your actual birthday, the Happy Birthday Association is wishing you a happy birthday for today! JaredW 12:07, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
post-Russian Revolution states
- I did see your irony and understand the reason of it. I see nothing wrong with irony, as long as it is just a supplement to clea-cut arguments.
- My remark you quoted was entered after I four times wrote that all of you were attacking not what I was saying, but something else. Instead of repeating it for the fifth time I decided it is time to quesion the mental abilities of the opponents. If you genuinely don't understand what was the issue, I am happy to talk with you right here, since I don't really question your smartness.
- "In your honest opinion": before I start answering, let me ask you again: Did you read the charter of the category? Follow-up question: what does your objection have to do with the definition of the category as it is written in black letters?
mikka (t) 18:55, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- "the category is meant to prove some point". The category is plain and simple: to list pieces of former Russian Empire, which was destroyed by Russian Revolution. I still don't see any reasons how you arrived at your strange conclusion besides some ironic comments. I hope we shall continue the discussion in the category talk page. mikka (t) 02:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- Since you are refusing to explain your objections plainly, allow me to guess that you don't like the name of the category rather than its content. If this is so, and if you can suggest a better name, by all means. mikka (t) 04:27, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. How is it that I cannot edit sections in your talk page (I don't see the [edit] links for sections)? I have no this problem with other user talk pages. mikka (t) 19:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, please fix that - I have complained about this to you before.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:48, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
How do you feel about a new RFA?
I think enough time has elapsed since then for the new one to succeeded. Significant numbers of previous opponents/neutrals noted that they would consider supporting if for a few months you could prove that you are 'non-controversial' - something which I think has been done.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:47, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Copernicus-Polish astronomer of German origin
What do you think of this sentence? He was of Polish nationality and German ethnicity in modern terms- does the sentence reflect that? Just asking for an opinion; as I see you are rather level-headed. Ksenon 00:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- The subject is a rather tough nut to crack. Do you suggest we leave his nationality out? I figured that since the issue is such a strenous one, we do apply modern analysis and call it what it is, ending the historical dispute, even if it goes against the Zeitgeist of the XV c. Wonder what Copernicus wouldve said? Ksenon 02:52, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- He would probably say "Ja, ich bin Pole" :) A.J. 20:18, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Fight for userboxes
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Userbox debates - that's the best place right now. See also Wikipedia:Userboxes.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:33, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
A Western Sahara-related vote
===>Here Make your voice heard. Vote or die. And all that. -Justin (koavf), talk 20:33, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Happy birthday!
User:Jenmoa/birthday --User:Jenmoa 06:32, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Check this
As you are interested in history of the area and such, I thought you'd be interested in the ongoing vote at the talk page of the Rainiai executions article, which was previously named Rainiai massacre, but then renamed by user Ghirlandajo to the current name and now it is disputed; the vote is about which name for the article should stay. DeirYassin 09:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Request for edit summary
Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 35% for major edits and 88% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.)
This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear inpolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 03:32, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Islam
Pozdrawiam ponownie. Był byś może zainteresowany pomocą przy kreacji artykułu z serii "Islam by country", dotyczącego Polski? Czyli Islam in Poland. Chciałbym go stworzyć przy współpracy w jakimś Wikipedystą z Polski, który ma trochę pojęcie o sytuacji. - Darwinek 12:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Świetna praca. Gratuluję stworzenia świetnego artykułu. - Darwinek 19:25, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- Na pewno przydadzą się informacje o sytuacji w 20. wieku oraz może coś o tym, jak większość Polaków odbiera Islam, czy są tendencje islamofobiczne itp. Jak by nie było, piszę na uniwersytecie jedną pracę na temat Polski. Czy masz może pojęcie gdzie w internecie można znaleźć informacje dotyczące danych geograficznych Polski? Jak np. długość granic, lina brzegowa, miejscowości położone najdalej na wschód, zachód, północ i południe itd. ? - Darwinek 23:50, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Battle of Krasnobród, which you recently created, has been 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. |
--Gurubrahma 17:58, 23 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 mach, once more! abakharev 07:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
R 35
Hi Halibutt! Thank you for your most useful additions to the R 35 article. There is one point I feel puzzled about however. You added that the 1939 price had gone up by about ten times compared to the 1935 one. Was that a recalculation from the $37.000 dollar price? Or the other way around? And where did you find this number? There was rising inflation in France in the late thirties of course, but was it that bad? :o). Greetings, --MWAK 11:07, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Halibutt, thank you for the interesting information! The 190,000 FF price (for the complete hull only: the turret added another 100,000) is exact and comparable to many similar prices in other French tank contracts. Of course in 1935 there had been for many years a strong deflation of the dollar, making it very strong against the FF. This was from 1936 worsened by a deliberate French policy of devaluation (see: http://www.indiainfoline.com/mony/twen.html) until the FF was fixed against the dollar on 9 September 1939 at 43.8 to 1. These exchange rates didn't reflect internal value though: they were an artificial instrument to stimulate French exports. This explains how the French were able to produce the entire R 35 at about 500,000 FF in 1939: the real value of the materials and labour used was about $30,000, not $12,000. The FF was undervalued about 2.5 times! This seems incredible by today's standards but was sustainable because the French could obtain raw materials from their empire at production costs, not world market prices. As your data shows they did demand a realistic price from the Poles, in this case export stimulation apparently being of secondary concern :o). A sad consideration is that Germany, not having colonies, couldn't devaluate comparably, making Hitler anxious to find a foreign military solution to his domestic economic problems. Greetings --MWAK 20:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Halibutt, the changes you made to the article were excellent! However, I am still a bit puzzled by the fact the site you referred to seems to give a price of 1,400,000 FF for the entire tank. It also says "updated" behind the R 35 entry: could it be the 1,900,000 for the hull only is from an earlier version you read? Greetings, --MWAK 10:41, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Barnstar Ribbons - FYI
Wikipedia:Barnstar_and_award_proposals/Ribbons --evrik 21:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Islam in Poland, which you recently created, has been 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. |
--Gurubrahma 00:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Mapy polski
Widze, że zrobiłeś mapy administracyjne Polski. Czy znasz jakiś zestaw danych kartograwicznych zawierających informacje o granicach gmin, powiatów itp. Potrzebuje tego do automatycznej generacji map. Mogor 14:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Expulsion of Germans after World War II rewrite
User:L.A.F. had created Expulsion of Germans after World War II/new (there are few comments on its Talk). He was active weak ago, perhaps he gave up.
The page needs complete rewrite and then merciless policing, if any part of this is missing it is IMHO waste of time. Pavel Vozenilek 06:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Nie rozumiem
Twego oporu wobec faktów. 1-Nazwa Rahmel jest rezultatem niemieckiej agresji wobec Polski, nie jakiegoś przepływu historii. 2.Niemcy uznają także ludzi ze podbitych terenów za "wypędzonych". Dlaczego to kasujesz ? 3.Sam odpowiedz sobie pytanie czy przesiedleni członkowie NSDAP czy też Selbstchutz zasługują na nazywanie ich "ofiarami". 4.To nie przejdzie wogóle, ale-według prawnych definicji nie było wypędzania.Był transfer cywilinej populacji-gdyż odbywal się de facto w tej samej strefie okupacyjnej i dotyczył dwóch grup ludności. Zgodnie z międzynarodową terminologią to zmienia postać rzeczy i można mówić o transferze populacji. Choć oczywiście lata niemieckiej propagandy utrwaliły inne nazewnictwo. Oczywiście Centrum Wypędzeń nazywa Polaków którzy zostali wypędzeni z Wielkopolski w 1939 roku"deported" [19]: About 450,000 Poles were deported to the "Generalgouvernement". To tylko taka mała drobna uwaga co do działności tej miłej pani.
A tak przy okazji to jestem pochodzenia niemieckiego,w dzieciństwie bywałem w Austrii, Niemczech i świergotałem po niemiecku ;) Czasem śmieszy mnie jak Niemcy nazywają mnie Polskim nacjonalistą :)
Pozdrawiam.
--Molobo 19:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Molo....
Halibutt, I second your statement on Molobo's talk page, and am delighted to see that you are apparently beginning to reconsider your strangely cordial relationship with an editor like Molobo. I just wished you'd have the guts to make these points where Molobo made his and in English, rather than there and in Polish. This would help to overcome the impression that this is a kind of trench warfare between German and Polish editors. It would also help to dissipate the suspicion that your loyalty is to fellow Polish editors first, and to Wikipedia's overall objectivity second. --Thorsten1 21:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- Well I hardly expect Halibutt to engage in mass scale deletions of information about persecution of Poles by German state. I also don't think Halibutt thinks all Poles are either antisemites or liberals.
- --Molobo 21:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Czy orientujesz się
Jak wyglądała sprawa z wewnętrznymi cłami w Zaborze Rosyjskim ? O ile się orientuje to gdy Polskie przedsiębiorstwa zagroziły Rosyjskim w konkurencji władza carska zablokowała możliwość handlu z Rosją ? Wiesz może coś na ten temat ? Pamiętam że chyba kiedyś coś pisałeś na ten temat... --Molobo 00:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Polish military history
Excellent! I'm going to go through and clean up a bit to bring it into line with some of the other task forces; hopefully, there'll be some more interest in it soon. —Kirill Lokshin 02:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- A few questions:
- We've generally avoided wording like "created in part by" on the various notice tags, since that tends to cause resentment if placed on a page created by someone outside the project. Would it be possible to change the wording to something that doesn't necessarily claim credit for the page?
- Would there be any problems with retiring {{Infobox Polish Soldiers}} and {{Infobox Polish Soldiers Navy}} and replacing them with the newer {{Infobox Military Person}}?
- Thanks! —Kirill Lokshin 02:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- Keeping the templates is possible, of course. The other option would be to add the rank images to {{Infobox Military Person}}; we've made some attempts at this (Georg von Boeselager, for instance), but we can certainly make changes as needed. (I'd prefer to have a single template if possible, since that makes maintenance much easier.) —Kirill Lokshin 02:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- Another suggestion (let me know if you get fed up with these ;-): you may want to leave a note for the other members of the old project telling them about the new arrangement; I think at least a few are still active. (I'm surprised that Appleseed isn't listed, actually; I've seen him around doing a lot of cleanup on the Polish battle lists.) —Kirill Lokshin 03:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
That's a very clever way of doing it! It might take some work, but we could probably add something similar to the generic template as well; we just need a standard naming scheme for the various rank images, at least for major armies.
Great work on the article, by the way! —Kirill Lokshin 14:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Szymon Konarski, which you recently created, has been 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. |
--Gurubrahma 03:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Hey. I was wondering if you want to fix up User:Zscout370/Sandbox? I fixed the links, but I am not sure what else you have in mind. I just hope this revert war will be solved. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) Fair use policy 18:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Vice Admiral
Hi Halibutt. It's not possible to restore an undeleted image but you might want to look at this link and possibly other interwiki sites. Thanks Craigy (talk) 21:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
1. Korpus Polski - cos strasznie malo o nim informacji. Istnial w Wielkiej Brytanii i...? Jakos nie moge na szybko znalezc. Mozna stuba poprosic kiedys? :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Treaty of Welawa
Hello Halibutt! If you have free time, would you mind taking a look at Treaty of Welawa? There are disagreements there about the terms of the treaty and its relevance to the 20th century, and IMO the discussion could benefit from your input. Could you take a look at and see if anything there could be added to the English article(s)? Olessi 20:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Image formats
Hello. You left a comment on my talk page asking about the {{badJPEG}} template which I've applied to a few of your images. The reason behind this template is that most maps, diagrams, flags, line art, and other images with a few colors and many areas of a solid color are best saved in the PNG format (or better, the SVG format, if they are vector graphics). One problem with JPEG is that it introduces compression artifacts into the image, which show up as "fuzz." It's especially noticeable around sharp edges in the picture. For example, you can see the "fuzz" around the wings and in other places in Image:Herb Nieczuja.jpg. If a JPEG image is edited, and then saved again as a JPEG, even more compression artifacts are introduced. Every time an image is saved as a JPEG, the image quality decreases. The other problem with JPEG is that its compression algorithm performs poorly for areas with large blocks of color. The PNG compression algorithm, on the other hand, works much better for these types of images, and it saves the image exactly as it was created, without introducing any artifacts at all. JPEG was meant for photographs, and that's where it works best. It still causes the image to have compression artifacts, but in a photograph these artifacts are invisible to the human eye. The SVG format is best of all, if the image was originally drawn in a vector form.
In a nutshell, for images with a few colors and large areas of solid color, the PNG format will produce a higher-quality image with a smaller file size. So that's the purpose of the {{badJPEG}} template—to flag images that would be best saved in the SVG or PNG formats. There's another explanation of the differences between these formats at Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload. If you have any questions, please feel free to leave another note on my talk page. —Bkell 23:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, okay. I'm sorry, I guess I had you confused with User:Emax, who uploaded several JPEGs used on that page that should probably be PNGs. You're right, the banners of yours are fine. I've removed them from my page. I'm not sure why I had them on there in the first place. —Bkell 04:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Battle of Raszyn (1920)
I know nothing about the history of battles in eastern Europe so I figured I'd ask you about this. Battle of Raszyn (1920) is a redirect (that used to be an article) which is currently nominated for deletion. Due to lack of input, I was about to use my own judgment and delete it as non-useful because the target article, Battle of Radzymin (1920), does not mention "Raszyn", but then I noticed that the page had a significant article history. Your opinion on this would be much appreciated, thank you. — Mar. 3, '06 [19:42] <freakofnurxture|talk>
"Battles"
A little while ago we discussed the Polish-Boshevik War (lithuanian component, at the "end of a road in Poland"), and I mentioned that it had a more inconclusive end, rather than a Polish victory. You disagreed, and told me why. Today I was reviewing the Polish September Campaign, and came across the Battle of Krojanty, it claims the result to be inconclusive. Curious if you agree, that calling this skirmish a "battle" and the result being inconclusive. Ditto for the Battle of Krasnobród, that article gives the impression that this "battle" was actually a decisive Polish victory. Dr. Dan 20:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
What happenned to him after 1923? Dr. Dan 00:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Kiev Offensive
[20] probably needs looking at. What do you think?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Rename of List of POW camps in Germany
Why was this page renamed? It was intended to be Part of Lists of Prisoner-of-War Camps section in the Prisoner-of-war camp article. It was intended to cover all PoW camps in all conflicts - not just the Nazi run camps. While some camps were not physically located in Germany, they were in German occupied territory. I also thought that the Luftwaffe and the German Army ran a large number of the camps during WWII, and understood the the Gestapo ran the Nazi camps. Oldfarm 01:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Please revert the rename "List of Nazi WWII POW camps" -> "List of POW camps in Germany", as the article covers non-Nazi camps. Regards Oldfarm 02:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I can (sort of) understand the thinking behind the concentration camp rename, but the PoW camp article is a little different. I was trying to reference the location of the camp, not the timeframe or political situation at the time. As is is now, the title is incorrect. How do I go about getting the correct name on the subject?? Regards Oldfarm 03:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Mt Kosciuszko satellite image
Hi. I think you uploaded the Mt Kosciuszko satellite image in 2004. See my comments at Image_talk:Landsat_kosciuszko.jpg about an error in the labels on the image. Maybe you are able to correct the label and re-upload the image. Regards, Nurg 04:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
WILD WEASEL COMBAT AUDIO RECORDINGS,
I have discovered Wikipedia, and am impressed.
I have little skill even in communicating on your web pages.
I need to find ENTHUSIASM for uploading my digital CD recordings for linkage to any one of your articles, such as F-105, Rolling Thunder, Wild Weasel, Ground Attack Aircraft etc.
I know you are all volunteers, sorry, but I can't do this without a detailed hands-on instruction.
And there is doubt. What is the point if the public, generally doesn't have an Ogg decoder.
George Metcalf metcalf12@earthlink.net
Widziałem, że ktoś próbował podważać encyklopedyczność tego klubu w dyskusji do hasła. Rozbudowałem dziś trochę jego definicję na plwiki i pomyślałem, że możesz być zainteresowany przetłumaczeniem tego. Tak na wszelki wypadek, gdyby ktoś dalej wątpił w sensowność umieszczania Hasmonei na wiki ;) Pozdrawiam, D T G 17:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
You might be interested
[21] --Molobo 12:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Votes
There are some new votes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography of Poland. Ausir 18:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)q
Cześć, nie znam się specjalnie na infoboxach, ale moim zdaniem przy s/s Kościuszko powinna być nie bandera MW a bandera jednostki pomocniczej MW 
. Pozdrawiam :) Radomil talk 20:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
NPA and POLMIL
As for NPA, try asking at that page talk - I have had (luckily) no experience with this. As for MILPOL, there are still many red battle links in campaignboxes, and many wars to expand (especially from the PLC time and before). The work is just beginning...--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:Warsaw Royal Castle 1944.jpg
|
|
hi Halibutt, the picture you have posted (I am assuming) unfortunately has no source, could you please provide it? thank you... Gryffindor 03:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC) ps:I have found other images that you have uploaded as well. Could you please provide the sources to each image, even if they are assumed to be fair use or whatever. All images need to have a source. Image:Uprising bank polski2.jpg, Image:Uprising defender.jpg, Image:KK Baczynski.gif, Image:Bach.jpg.
Question
Hi! I am going to send you my thoughts on the matters we were discussing last Sunday, the ones deleted by the edit conflict, very soon. In the mean time, I have a question of a different nature. Are there rules governing the edits and comments that people make on talk pages? For example, if you are arguing a point that is pretty much shown to be incorrect by my argument against you. Is it acceptable for you to come back next week, and delete my argument or comments, thereby leaving a totally different impression? Please understand that my questions are totally rhetorical and have nothing to do with you. Is it acceptable, to add after the discussion, insertions that may or may not change the editor's original meaning. Sometimes in between the lines, so to say? Insertions that cloud and confuse, and leads one off the main topic? Are there any kinds of rules governing, or even preventing this from happenning. Thanks, Dr. Dan 23:50, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging for Image:1Baon1PPLeg_Radom-Kielce_1944.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1Baon1PPLeg_Radom-Kielce_1944.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 08:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I noticed you edited this article. Is this the same as the "dill pickle" soup served in Polish restaurants in America. Or would that have another name in Polish? Rmhermen 17:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- To make it more confusing, I have seen recipes specifically calling for "Polish dill pickles". Rmhermen 17:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Your image
Why do you think the picture you've upload contitutes fair use to illustrate the armored car? It is surely not fair use for this purpose (while you can illustrate with this photo an article on Molotov-Ribbentrop pact).--Nixer 19:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- You are wrong with your undestanding of fair use policy. Please read Wikipedia:Fair_use. Non-commercial license does not make image acceptable to Wikipedia.--Nixer 07:29, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging for Image:1Comp_obwSambor_inspecDrohobycz_Burza.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1Comp_obwSambor_inspecDrohobycz_Burza.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 08:27, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Witkacy's images
CCed to Halibutt and Piotrus:
Gentlemen, could you please stop by occasionally at Witkacy's talk to check for new notices from copyright paranoia affected users and their bots. Not that I miss the fellow but many of his images are useful. I happened to have his page in my watchlist from old times and prompted by messages there fixed most of what I could fix. I think it will take you much less time to sort this out since you are much better aware of the copyright law as applied to PL images. Please consider adding his talk to your watchlist if you are interested in helping to keep his images alive the self-styled wikipedia copyright enforcers and their bots. --Irpen 22:20, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Podhalan_POWs.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Podhalan_POWs.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 11:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Grafika
Możesz powiedzieć skąd to wziąłeś i jaką to zdjęcie ma licencję? Pietras1988 TALK 13:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Ale można to usunąć czy jeszcze poczekać? Pietras1988 TALK 13:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Maps (Voivodships of Poland)
Hi,
Your maps are very nice. Can we please use the ones in the Voivodships of Poland article in Hungarian Wikipedia? One of our editors is translating that page now and he would love to have your maps on it.
regards,
Alensha 16:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! :) Alensha 21:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Voice Sample for Kurów
Can you please record a voice sample for the polish village Kurów? Thank you. Roeeyaron 23:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging for Image:1Comp_obwSambor_inspecDrohobycz_Burza2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1Comp_obwSambor_inspecDrohobycz_Burza2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 13:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Stern & Soviets
A nice job:) Czytalam Twoj tekst na "przyszlosci wikipedii", naprawde jest tak zle? Moze udaje mi sie nie dotykac tematow drazliwych, bo generalnie nie mam problemow edycyjnych. No, mniejsza z tym, jesli piszesz tak fajne rzeczy na ang., to siedz tutaj:-) pozdrawiam Ziel 19:47, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Ręce opadają
Tym razem Irpen próbuje w http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_contribution_to_World_War_II przedstawiać Świerczewskiego jako reprezentatywnego wobec Polskiej kontrybucji w II WŚ(a konkretnie jego defiladę w Moskwie). Oczywiście argumenty że jest to człowiek który mordował żołnierzy AK i wprowadzał stalinowskich reżim i jako taki raczej nie powinien służyć jako przykład Polskich żołnierzy w IIWŚ nie trafiają do niego-jego odpowiedzią jest że Polska "cenzuruje historię"(jakaś kolejna nowa teoria z Rosji). Jak chcesz się męczyć to zapraszam... --Molobo 00:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- It is sad that Molobo still refuses to use English at Wikipedia. The article's talk provides an explanation as well as my response to Piotrus at my own talk on a related matter. --Irpen 00:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Besides personal and regional pages I use english. --Molobo 00:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- It would be better for the project if Molobo was using English and edit summaries but that's a side issue. Halibutt, could you please reformat the table you made a while ago for the Polish contribution to WW2 article? Table's being too wide obstructs reading and editing. I would have done it myself, but I don't know how.
- I read your version on Soviet rule and I will comment on it separately. Personally, I think it should not be posted in the article in its current form, but of course I can't prevent you from doing that while I would rather polish it separately in order not to provoke new fights regarding other places of the History article. Fights aren't bad by themselves, by that editors loose temper and edit the article and talk pages in haste renders the development impossible. Maybe you could consider posting it as a separate article for now, where it could be edited to an agreeable form rather than directly into the broader article where it would just stir up a hornet's nest. As a reminder, to preserve the context of the discussions, please don't jump between talk pages. If you answer here, I will see it as I wrote on the top of my talk page. --Irpen 04:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Photos of AK murderers
See here: http://www.ipn.gov.pl/bep_wystawy_lublin_chelm.html To z tego okresu pochodzi słynny dekret o ochronie państwa, na podstawie którego groziła kara śmierci z jedenastu artykułów, w tym za posiadanie radioodbiornika bez zezwolenia. Wyroki śmierci zatwierdzali generałowie: Karol Świerczewski i Michał Rola-Żymierski. Nowa władza całkowicie opierała się na ACz, której liczebność szacuje się w tym czasie na terenie „Polski Lubelskiej” na ok. 2,5 mln żołnierzy. Na podstawie zawartego 26 lipca 1944 r. porozumienia PKWN oddawał obywateli polskich pod jurysdykcję wojskowych władz sowieckich. Swobodnie działały tu sowieckie organa bezpieczeństwa oraz kontrwywiad. Nad wszystkim czuwał pełnomocnik sowieckiego dowództwa gen. Nikołaj Bułganin. Jednocześnie jeszcze w sierpniu został wydany dekret o ustanowieniu Milicji Obywatelskiej oraz dekret o mobilizacji do utworzonego Wojska Polskiego z połączenia armii Berlinga i Armii Ludowej. Obie struktury były kierowane m.in. do zwalczania oporu przeciwko PKWN. --Molobo 02:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
http://www.zwoje-scrolls.com/zwoje19/text11p.htm STALINOWSKI TERROR KOMUNISTYCZNY W POLSCE W tzw. Ludowym Wojsku Polskim (LWP), do którego wcielano ludzi z przymusowego poboru, wśród nich żołnierzy AK, rozpoczęło sie polowanie na AKowców. Setki żołnierzy stanęło przed sądami wojennymi, oskarżonych o zdradę lub dezercję, niekiedy zresztą prawdziwą dezercję. Zamek w Lublinie stał się znowu katownią, jaką był za okupacji niemieckiej. Posypały się wyroki śmierci. Zatwierdzali je polscy generałowie - Rola-Żymirski, Berling, Świerczewski, Bukojemski. Zamek w Lublinie stał się katownią, taką jaką był pod okupacją niemiecką. Tracono żołnierzy LWP i AKowców z lasów. Jednym z nich był np. cichociemny Rossiecki, oskarżony o próbę zamachu na Edwarda Osóbkę-Morawskiego. Tylko od połowy listopada do połowy grudnia stracono w Lublinie 35 żołnierzy, byłych AKowców a od stycznia do lipca 1945 - 38.
Wymordowano setki AKowców w Rzeszowskiem, Lubelskiem, Białostockiem. Jeszcze niedawno, w ostatnich latach, odkryto na tych terenach masowe groby. Aresztowano, stracono lub zesłano szereg oficerów AK i przedstawicieli Delegatury Rządu, którzy ujawniali się wobec wkraczającej armii sowieckiej i LWP. W sumie ponad 60 tysięcy Akowców zesłano w głąb Rosji do obozów Gułagu, głównie w okolice Uralu, ale także i na daleką Syberię. Zesłano gen. Kazimierza Tumidajskiego (dowódcę Okręgu Lubelskiego AK), który potem zmarł w obozie w Diagilewie koło Riazania w Rosji. Niektórzy z wywiezionych AKowców, wrócili w roku 1947, inni w 1956, a inni nie wrócili nigdy, zostając na, a właściwie w nieludzkiej ziemi. --Molobo 12:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I hope you see now why photos of those people aren't proper representation of Polish contribution in WW2. Anyway some of them weren't in Poland before 1944(well since 1920, Świerczewski fought against Poland on the side of Bolsheviks) --Molobo 12:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Re:History of Poland & Soviet
I believe in trial by fire: put it in mainspace, take criticism and work from there. Things kept in userspace rarely grow fast or well.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:10, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong, but given the conditions on Wiki I rather doubt any mention of Soviet atrocities will surive for long(even discussion is deleted if it shows examples of them). Of course we are still at 1941...Polska Lubelska(1944) is another interesting subject... --Molobo 17:25, 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 21:32, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
LDKmember
Could you please take look on edits by User:LDKmember: list. If they are valid please put {{welcome}} on the Talk, otherwise some warning. It is kind a distressing to see lot of edits without feedback. TIA Pavel Vozenilek 02:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm. Perhaps you (I mean Polish board etc) can implement a home grown article classification. Version of an article that looks complete, unbiased (yeah, I know), free of spam and nonsense would be selected. A template would put a box into upper right corner saying "this article has endorsed version [here]".
- Such feature is planned for WikiMedia but it is doubtful when it will appear (if ever) and whether it be be useable in the practice. Pavel Vozenilek 03:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Soviet treatment
I actually have first hand witness descriptions about what happened in Polish educational system under Soviet occupation from http://www.osw.waw.pl/, in one of their published books. I could give you information about that next week if you desire(or send it to you on Friday by email). Of course it's rather different from Irpens praise of Soviet activities. It describes in detail what changes were made in teaching, how Polish students were treated, and what was the attituded of population towards new rules and teachers, as well as having some direct memoirs reflecting the atmosphere. --Molobo 12:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Jasienski
Jasienski po przyjezdzie do ZSRS (:)) zostal redaktorem jakiegos polskojezycznego pisemka literackiego stworzonego de facto tylko dla niego. Nigdy sie nim z reszta nie zajmowal, bo nie mial czasu- zaliczlal wyjazdy propagandowe po zachodnich Sowietach (byl tez wsrod Sybirakow). Zaczal wtedy pisac po rosyjsku, choc nie bylo to pochwalane (sic!) przez jego sowieckich gospodarzy, bo chcieli zeby lepiej docieral do Polakow po obu stronach granicy. Z tego co wiem byla to glownie proza i jakies kilkadziesiat propagandowych glownie wierszy. Bardzo niskiego lotu z reszta...V1t 13:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Czy byłbyś na tyle miły
Nie jestem w stanie zbytnio opanować wgrywania zdjęć na Wiki. Czy byłbyś na tyle miły i mógłbyś wgrać te zdjęcia (niektóre zdjęcia z tej strony już wgrywałeś):
Potrzebne są mi do artykułu i byłbym wdzięczny za pomoc. --Molobo 22:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Dzięki ! :) --Molobo 23:31, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
The madness
Of the monstrous invention of Saxony Poland continues: Danzig Research Society, perhaps we should add that Paris belongs to Polish France(we had one king there didn't we ) ? --Molobo 02:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging for Image:1Comp_obwSambor_inspecDrohobycz_Burza3.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1Comp_obwSambor_inspecDrohobycz_Burza3.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 20:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Molobo
As you and Piotrus not only refuse to moderate Molobo's trolling and pestering, but give him every encouragement possible, I have to moderate him myself using the only language he understands well enough. By the way, do other editors a favor and archive this page: it takes awfully long to load. --Ghirla -трёп- 17:13, 17 March 2006 (UTC)