User talk:MyMoloboaccount

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, MyMoloboaccount. You have new messages at OwenBlacker's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, MyMoloboaccount. You have new messages at Virago250's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Contents

Welcome Back[edit]

Glad too see that you are back, your contributions are appreciated--Woogie10w (talk) 01:20, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Weber and racism[edit]

I suggest we keep this to Talk:Max Weber, where I suggest you repost your comment from my talk page. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:46, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you so much for the link! Regarding your remark about the work of Polish historians, I'll would like to bring in some work by Polish historians (which are unfortunately not always available in English as much as one might like), so given my linguistic limitations, if you know of any work that has been translated into English that you can recommend, I'll be very interested. Changing the topic, I'll like to discuss with you in confidence for reasons that I will make clear some concerns on my part about some sinister going-ons around here. I'll e-mail you in the next couple of days, if that is Ok. Thank you again, and please have a wonderful day!--A.S. Brown (talk) 00:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Monitor. WikiProject Poland Newsletter: Issue 1 (April 2011)[edit]

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • April 2011
For our freedom and yours

Welcome to our first issue of WikiProject Poland newsletter, the Monitor (named after the first Polish newspaper).

Our Project has been operational since 1 June, 2005, and also serves as the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board. I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions. We hope you will join us in them, if you haven't done so already! Unlike many other WikiProjects, we are quite active; in this year alone about 40 threads have been started on our discussion page, and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised.

In addition to a lively encyclopedic, Poland-related, English-language discussion forum, we have numerous useful tools that can be of use to you - and that you could help us maintain and develop:

This is not all; on our page you can find a list of useful templates (including userboxes), awards and other tools!

With all that said, how about you join our discussions at WT:POLAND? Surely, there must be something you could help others with, or perhaps you are in need of assistance yourself?

You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a [member link] at WikiProject Poland. • Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

moving pages[edit]

Well, it's you who moved the page without a prior discussion, knowing about the different views about it. HerkusMonte (talk) 11:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Do you actually understand the different definitions of Pomerania in Poland and Germany? The scholary books on the subject (e.g. Meier) don't use your "original name", but who cares, it's just another hoax on wikipedia. Have a nice day. HerkusMonte (talk) 11:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011[edit]

One of your recent edits violates the established policy of doublenaming places sharing a German-Polish history as defined in the well known Gdansk vote.

For Gdansk and other locations that share a history between Germany and Poland, the first reference of one name in an article should also include a reference to other names, e.g. Danzig (now Gdańsk, Poland) or Gdańsk (Danzig).

Contrary to these principles you removed the alternative names mentioned in brackets. Please restore the proper names in accordance with the Gdansk vote as

Persistent reverts against community consensus despite multiple warnings may be dealt with according to the rules in Wikipedia:Dealing with vandalism.

Thanks. HerkusMonte (talk) 12:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

No shared history in the section mentioned. Hence no double naming just like in other articles about these locations where we only use Polish names-see 1988 Polish strikes for example where only Polish names are used, since no shared history exists. Or Euro 2012 where no Germanized names are used either. Or Adoptation of Christianity by Mieszko were we also don't use Germanizied versions of Polish names.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

As the lead section of Pomerania during the High Middle Ages describes it:
Starting in the High Middle Ages, a large influx of German settlers and the introduction of German law, custom, and Low German language gradually turned most of the area into a German one.
Thus the article obviously covers a period of shared history. Unfortunately you preferred to remove further names in violation of the Gdansk vote [1]. Please don’t continue this behaviour as violations of this policy might be treated as vandalism. HerkusMonte (talk) 13:03, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
So you are going to remove "Szczecin" from AG Vulcan Stettin, Stoewer etc. as there was nothing Polish about these companies. Your misinterpretation of the Gd. vote is remarkable. HerkusMonte (talk) 13:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
"They had Polish workers", Oh I see. I know someone working for a Polish company in Warsaw, didn't know that's enough to Germanize the respective articles. Seriously, that's absurd. HerkusMonte (talk)

As already explained above the Gdansk vote is absolutely clear about the usage of alternate names in brackets, you might take it to WP:3O. HerkusMonte (talk) 18:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Heads-up re. Roman numerals[edit]

I was reading Talk:Szczecin and noticed your (in my opinion, correct) suggestion that Polish sources be used in an article about a Polish city. However, you mentioned something about "XX century" history. You might not realize that this is not how centuries are described in English. Centuries are always numbered in Arabic numerals or words - "20th century" or "twentieth century", but never "XX century". I've been told by other Polish editors that this quirk isn't mentioned in English courses taught at Polish schools or universities, so it can trip up even the most careful editor.

Roman numerals have very limited uses in the anglosphere. You can't be confident that the average anglophone will even understand a Roman numeral, let alone use one. (These days the only place you see them outside the US is on very old clocks and buildings and in monarchs' names, such as Queen Elizabeth II. In the US you see them in the Super Bowl title and, sometimes, in proper names - but in the latter case they rarely get past III.) Good luck! --NellieBly (talk) 23:42, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem; English is sometimes very strange. --NellieBly (talk) 23:49, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Stop Do not delete/refactor other editor's threads on the Administrator's noticeboard. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit at AN/I[edit]

I'm not sure what you were trying to do with your edit at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, but you deleted large portions of several discussions. I've reverted this edit and restored about 160k of text in the process. —C.Fred (talk) 14:01, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edit to ANI[edit]

Hi, this edit by you wiped a lot of other contributors edits from the page - so I have reverted you. You may wish to re-introduce your edit again. Cheers, LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

If I may make a suggestion, when posting to ANI or similar high trafficked pages; when you have composed your comment instead of pressing "Save page" instead highlight your text, save it to your clipboard and press "cancel". Then again hit the edit function and paste your comment into the correct place and then hit "Save page". Hopefully the less elapsed time will mean that you will not create a situation where other editors comments are lost. Cheers, LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:46, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Brier[edit]

Brier is an expert on Polish-German relations and currently working at the German Historical Institute in Warsaw. The source is published by the University of Munich and very detailed. I don't see a reason not to use it. HerkusMonte (talk) 16:16, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Brier finished his studies in 2001 and worked at the Center for International Realtions in Warsaw in 2002-2003.[2] I don't have more detailed informations about him. HerkusMonte (talk) 16:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I’m sure you know how to deal with sources you consider unreliable, a simple deletion is not the right way. However, WP:RS gives just examples of reliable sources. WP:SOURCES explains it more detailed:

"Where available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources (...). But they are not the only reliable sources in such areas. Material from reliable non-academic sources may also be used, (...) Other reliable sources include university-level (...) books published by respected publishing houses. Electronic media may also be used, subject to the same criteria."

I don’t know about Brier’s academic background at the time when he completed this study and whether it might be considered "scholary" per WP:RS. It is for sure on a university-level and it is published at the Bavarian State Library's and University of Munich’s digital library[3], a highly respected institution. If you disagree you might use the appropriate way to solve the problem. HerkusMonte (talk) 16:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

On behalf of WikiProject Poland[edit]

BoNM-Poland.png The Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class
On behalf of WikiProject Poland, for your your Poland-related contributions, I, Piotrus, award you this Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class. Czołem! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
this WikiAward was given to MyMoloboaccount by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk on 01:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you :)--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 09:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Maji Maji Rebellion[edit]

The Maji Maji Rebellion could be a project for you. The loss of life was at least 200k, far more than in Namibia. Don't blame me, my fathers parents were US citizens by then, they had renounced allegiance to the Kaiser.--Woogie10w (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I will look on that. The article on German colonial empire also needs expansion in the future.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 02:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Juliusz Karol Kunitzer[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Your 1RR violation[edit]

Your 1RR restriction is a necessary condition of your permaban being vacated. Today, you violated your 1RR restriction at Oder-Neisse line:

  • quote added [4]
  • your 1st revert [5]
  • quote restored with explanation [6]
  • your 2nd revert [7]

Skäpperöd (talk) 19:07, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but that is only one revert[8]. This was a major edit [9] not revert to a previous state before Herkus edit here[10]- I kept the parts about the speech by James F. Byrnes and information but without excessive quoting. Anyway I self-reverted here for safety[11] but missed the cut and past part. It is now restored. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Per WP:1RR, which applies in your case, it is considered a violation if you revert "actions of other editors, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material. It can involve as little as one word."
  • Your so-called self-revert [12] did not undo your 2nd revert [13], instead, the material was restored later by someone else [14].
  • Another necessary condition of your permaban being vacated is that you address any reverts you may perform on the article's talk page. You have failed to do so with either of the abovementioned reverts. Skäpperöd (talk) 19:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

You might want to correct your claims. I wasn't permabanned Skapperod, but subject to indefinite ban. These two are quite different-something I believe you know as experienced Wiki user. Also Moreschi stated that my condition is that you discuss all reverts you do make on the relevant talk page, not that I have to start discussions on relevant talk page but participate in discussions. Which I do-and for your comfort I started one even. But do AGF-I self reverted to avoid accusations of edit warring, but missed that the copy and paste section didn't click on my lousy mouse(In hindsight I shouldn't correct some minor changes at the same edit), also I think that my extensive explanations of edits are sufficient. But I will ask Moreschi for clarification. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 20:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

What "permaban"? The blocking of the previous account because it might have been hacked? Slandering users and insinuating things which are blatantly false only contributes to the battleground atmosphere in this area, not to mention that it's just not nice.Volunteer Marek (talk) 20:14, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Nationalists[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, MyMoloboaccount. You have new messages at HerkusMonte's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

June 2011[edit]

Please stop your baseless accusations of "manipulating" sources as you did here. As I already suggested at Talk:Zygmunt Wojciechowski#Manipulating sources?, we might discuss whether a summary is complete or needs further details. Your repeated accusations show a battleground mentality and are neither reasonable nor acceptable.

You are currently under editing restrictions as outlined here ("..if you make any comment deemed by an administrator to have been incivil, a personal attack, or an assumption of bad faith, you may be blocked for any time limit up to a week")

If you continue to accuse editors of a manipulative usage of sources I will take that as a repeated assumption of bad faith and incivility. HerkusMonte (talk) 17:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

July 2011[edit]

Your recent edit to Masuria violates the well known Gdańsk vote (For Gdansk and other locations that share a history between Germany and Poland, the first reference of one name in an article should also include a reference to other names, e.g. Danzig (now Gdańsk, Poland) or Gdańsk (Danzig)) as Masuria and the towns within for sure share a Polish-German history.

The Gdansk vote further continues:

Persistent reverts against community consensus despite multiple warnings may be dealt with according to the rules in Wikipedia:Dealing with vandalism.

Please respect this established community consensus. Thanks. HerkusMonte (talk) 05:59, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

No, in this case MMA's change is correct. G/D vote applies to historical naming and to ledes. Those names don't belong in that section of the Masuria article anymore than they belong here in List of cities and towns in Poland (and please don't try to make any WP:POINTY edits to that article). Quite simply, we use modern names. You can of course use historical German names in the history section. I'm going to revert that.Volunteer Marek (talk) 09:23, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

No it doesn't HK. For instance the articles about województwa in Poland don't have German names inserted, even if Warsaw was part of Germany under Nazis.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Manipulation[edit]

Once again I ask you to stop using the term "Manipualtion" whenever you might think a user has left out information you regard as important. The repeated usage of such a term is offensive and violates WP:AGF. HerkusMonte (talk) 18:31, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Czech photos[edit]

I recall you wrote once that Polish photos were allowed for free use up to a certain year. We all know German WWII photos taken by German photographers can be used. The query here is as to a photo-see:Talk:Reinhard Heydrich (File:The place where Reinhard Heydrich was killed.jpg Nominated for Deletion) taken after the assassination attempt. The photo is up for deletion. Do you know anything about Czech photos and whether they are up for free use, too? I think it should be kept, if it can be done. Kierzek (talk) 14:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

RE[edit]

Thanks for tip, I got many sources - Motyka, Kulińska, Poliszczuk, but not much time to do it;( Could you help with translation article pl:Grody Czerwieńskie, first of all section: membership. Cherven Towns is diffrent from Red Ruthenia. Redgards--Paweł5586 (talk) 06:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

September 2011[edit]

Your recent edit to Collegium Hosianum violates the well known Gdańsk vote (For Gdansk and other locations that share a history between Germany and Poland, the first reference of one name in an article should also include a reference to other names, e.g. Danzig (now Gdańsk, Poland) or Gdańsk (Danzig)) as Masuria and the towns within for sure share a Polish-German history.

The Gdansk vote further continues:

Persistent reverts against community consensus despite multiple warnings may be dealt with according to the rules in Wikipedia:Dealing with vandalism.

Please respect this established community consensus. Thanks. HerkusMonte (talk) 10:59, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

An amusing quote[edit]

See Georg_von_Vincke. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 21:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

You were reported on the Administrators' noticeboard[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

You might read the page you are posting to:. Before posting a grievance about a user here, please discuss the issue with them on their user talk page. If you would come here first and discussed it friendly matter, I would gladly correct what were some mistakes on my part, that is wrongly given page numbers in couple of cases. Also the page is not for content disputes.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 14:06, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

AfD of potential interest[edit]

Perhaps you could offer some insights at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/German Ost (East). It is closer to your area of expertise than to mine. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 23:33, 14 November 2011 (UTC) Thank you. I expressed my opinion. The author before made very good contributions in other aspects of Wiki, and this seems another one, although requiring a better name.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 23:04, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In Nowogard, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Grod (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:47, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Dear Molobo, thank you again for all your kind words and interesting ideas. It is nice to see that someone else out there who knows and cares about history. I see no problems at all with the clean war myth template, other the need for some references, and maybe a few stylistic changes here or there. Now, that I seeing the end of working the graveyard shift, and getting back to getting days again, that's a huge backload of things that I need to get caught up with around here. So, there a few other things that I wanted to get caught up, and then I'll make some changes There's all sorts of good sources one one can use for this subject, especially that book The Myth of The Eastern Front, which was the subject of such dispute on the Manstein talk page. The only limitation of that book is that it limited to the image of the Wehrmacht and its supposed "clean war" in the United States. But still it reveals much about how history was re-written and repackaged. Two great book on the subject of the "clean war" myth is Wehrmacht Myth, History Reality by Wolfram Wette and War Of Extermination: The German Military in World War II. In English, Christian Streit, Jürgen Förster, Omer Bartov, Richard J. Evans, Michael Burleigh, Lord Russell of Liverpool, Raul Hilberg, Ian Kershwa and Mark Mazower all strong on the subject. Mazower's book Inside Hitler's Greece has an entire chapter on the subject of Wehrmact crimes in Greece. Evans's book In Hitler's Shadow has an entire chapter devoted to blasting the "clean war" myth, which is somewhat depressing if one remembers that book was published in 1989, and still most people out there still believe in the "clean war". Rarely, has the discount between historians and popular memory been so large. Because of the Cold War, most historians in the West believed in the "clean war" in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, but nobody has believed in it since the 1980s, except at Wikipedia, where it still gets repeated ad nauseum.

The only suggestion that I might want to make is, and this something that I talked to you about in more detail later is to look at the reason why people are receptive to the "clean war" myth. You already hit the hammer upon the nail by noting two very good reasons for it. In Germany, there was and still is the nationalist need for a history that makes us feel good. Beyond that, there was the Cold War, which led and still leads some people to see the Wehrmacht as a "bulwark against Bolshevism" holding back the "Asiatic hordes". I might suggest one more reason for the "clean war" myth, and that is sex. The image of the Wehrmact as super-soldiers appeals to men who for whatever reason feel sexually inadequate and so they live out vivacious fantasies of masculinity and power by embracing the Wehrmact as a symbol of power. Having turned the Wehrmacht into manly heroes to allow them to live out a vivacious fantasy, these guys have no interest in hearing about genocide and war crimes by the Wehrmacht. But that is just a minor point. Thanks again for the kind words and keep up the good work!--A.S. Brown (talk) 03:17, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

January 2012[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#MyMoloboaccount regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HerkusMonte (talk) 17:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:Question[edit]

Please stop trolling, I already answered your questions at the talk page[15]. HerkusMonte (talk) 19:04, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Blockade of Germany[edit]

Hi. Here is a project you may want to include on your "to do list" The Blockade of Germany included the blockade of German occupied Poland. The 1928 German academic report on the blockade Deutschlands Gesundheitsverhältnisse unter dem Einfluss des Weltkrieges did not break out the deaths by region. Over 40 years ago older Germans( 80+) from Danzig and the east told me of the WW1 famine, a diet of apples and turnips!! They claimed Germans in the West were not as bad off as they were in the east. I wonder if the Prussian bureaucrats in Berlin were starving the Poles in order to feed Germany. What do Polish academic sources have to tell us on the WW1 blockade? Regards--Woogie10w (talk) 02:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Took your side[edit]

here (zap one step back to read the dirt).

[self-irony] I am german, and depending on the rotation of the earth, mostly i am closer to the left than to the right edge of the disk [/self-irony]. On the first view it is too much to analyze, whether you have the propagandistic bias that is criticised. I doubt that your politic of editing in wikipedia, and all of your arguments are always sound, as I doubt that for anybody else, including myself. And therefore, digging deeper, I found some of your arguments scientifically well supported. Therefore they have their own right in Wikipedia. In everyday life, with people in germany and in poland, I notice a tendency, to forget unpleasant historic facts, and to make friendship on the base of embellishing the own past. The opposite is neccessary: friendship on base of unpleasant historic reality. Though it sounds crazy.

There are convincing reasons, to treat nazi comparisons as an „unsubject” in internet communication. Nevertheless, I understand your remarks about bad jokes and propaganda, when you tried to defend yourself. The dilemma is, such comparisons, when you want to speak the truth, and want to communicate about the subject in a way that leads to somewhere, need another level of language to work, than you have used. I believe we share the category, whether someone acts humanfriendly or not. The mobbing propaganda against you is absolutely intolerable not only from this point of view. Best wishes, --fluss (talk) 12:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC) small addition --fluss (talk) 15:48, 7 January 2012 (UTC) I concentrate on content, long time ago I realized that this wiki off topic debates about editors are usually waste of time and lead to nothing productive, so most of the tiem I don't even read it these days..--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 07:36, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Kingdom of Poland (1916–1918), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dąbrowa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Linka's Death[edit]

"Lekarze orzekli nie mniej ni więcej tylko raka, nie zważając na ogólne kontuzje, opowiedzieli się za koniecznością operacji. Operacja się odbyła, podobno otwarto jamę brzuszną i zaszyto z powrotem z powodu beznadziejnego stanu. Jakaś życzliwa ręka podała mu bezpośrednio po zabiegu alkohol do picia. Ostatnią wolą umierającego była prośba do żony, aby pochowała go w Olsztynie, gdyż wiedział że w Wawrochach nie spoczywałby w spokoju. Zmarł 29 marca 1920 roku w Olsztynie. Tam również został pochowany i od 1973 roku przy al. Wojska Polskiego ma swój pomnik."

My Polish is rudimental but I think the source says that he died after an unsuccessful cancer surgery. HerkusMonte (talk) 12:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Please quote what you mean. I think the first sentence says he was tortured, not murdered. The source describes that he was sent to a hospital because of his injuries but died of cancer, regardless of the treatment before. HerkusMonte (talk) 12:33, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Well, that would contradict the detailed version as quoted above. HerkusMonte (talk) 12:40, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Nope, because the cancer was lethal. HerkusMonte (talk) 12:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
"Lekarze orzekli nie mniej ni więcej tylko raka, nie zważając na ogólne kontuzje, opowiedzieli się za koniecznością operacji. Operacja się odbyła, podobno otwarto jamę brzuszną i zaszyto z powrotem z powodu beznadziejnego stanu." HerkusMonte (talk) 12:53, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry that our text apprehension differs that much, but I still think that the source clearly states that he died "regardless of his injuries" because his cancer surgery was unsuccessful. HerkusMonte (talk) 12:59, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
I have asked Tymek for a translation. HerkusMonte (talk) 13:24, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Considering that Tymek is known to be in heavy dispute with me that is a surprising choice Herkus.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Propaganda[edit]

No, both the German and the Polish side established an immense "public relation" campaign. In political context such a campaign is usually described as "Propaganda" and that headline was established long ago. The violent atmosphere was however a result of such propaganda and that's why it belongs to that section. What I don't think is helpful is to mention only German activities under a topic named "Propaganda" while the Polish campaign is presented as an attempt of Masurians to join Poland. In fact the Polish campaign had only very limited support from within Masuria (though I'm sure we disagree on that). HerkusMonte (talk) 13:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC) P.S. I have to take a break for a while, so I'm not going to answer your questions for some hours.

Mittenheide[edit]

You do realise that Turosl is a very small village in the middle of nowhere and a rise from 500 to 1,000 is highly unlikely (and OR to write something like that). Any reader might judge on his own which information is more likely. HerkusMonte (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

There's nothing ORish to mention the official number of inhabitants 3 years earlier compared to Partisans claims. It's you who tries to claim an immense rise of populace. However, Good Night HerkusMonte (talk) 19:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Please respect Gdańsk vote[edit]

Your edits at East Prussian plebiscite violate the Gdańsk vote. In the pre-war timeperiod we use German names (modern Polish names in brackets) Contrary to these rules you added (only) the Polonized versions of the names. Please restore the proper names in accordance with the Gdansk vote.

Also remember that: Persistent reverts against community consensus despite multiple warnings may be dealt with according to the rules in Wikipedia:Dealing with vandalism.

Thanks in advance. HerkusMonte (talk) 12:11, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Giżycko, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grod (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Gdańsk vote violation[edit]

Your latest edits at Masuria violates the Gdańsk vote. Please restore the proper names in accordance with the Gdansk vote.

Also remember that: Persistent reverts against community consensus despite multiple warnings may be dealt with according to the rules in Wikipedia:Dealing with vandalism. HerkusMonte (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:CLAIM[edit]

Could you please recognize WP:CLAIM. HerkusMonte (talk) 17:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Please watch your edits.[edit]

Please watch your edits, this was unacceptable refactoring of other's comments and damaged the page archive. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

lice feeders[edit]

I'm trying to finish up this article [16], though I'm a bit short on time. The article itself is mostly about Weigl's institute in Lwow and the lice feeders, like Banach and Herbert, who survived the war by working there. However, the article would be missing a good chunk of relevant info if it didn't talk about OTHER experiments on typhus, as carried out by the Nazis in concentration and death camps. If you know of good sources on the topic, I'd appreciate if you could add some info to it - there's a hidden "Typhus experiments on human subjects in German concentration camps" section that could use expanding. Thanks.VolunteerMarek 09:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey[edit]

Peace dove.svg

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite


Hello MyMoloboaccount. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.


You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Teutonic takeover of Danzig (Gdańsk) and B-class[edit]

This article to which you contributed is almost B-class, but needs a few cite requests addressed. If they aren't, we will have to downgrade it to C-class. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 15:45, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

AE[edit]

[17]

Close the AE complaint by agreement?[edit]

Please see User talk:Volunteer Marek#Close by agreement?. Any such deal would also need your participation. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:27, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Friedrich Meinecke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Posen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:15, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Restrictions lifted[edit]

I have determined that there is consensus to remove your restrictions imposed in 2008. In the future, please be sure to avoid the issues that led to those sanctions. -- King of ♠ 06:34, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Anti-Slavic sentiment[edit]

Please compare the numbers of dead Czechs vs. dead Poles or dead Kroatians vs. dead Serbs.Xx236 (talk) 07:44, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Friedrich Meinecke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Posen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Maschke[edit]

Maschke is the source that was cited by historians in the US to refute James Bacque, in any case the work of the Maschke commission was confirmed by Overmans. Do you have a source that says the Maschke figures are tainted?--Woogie10w (talk) 20:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The German historian Rüdiger Overmans puts the number of German POWs dead in the Soviet captivity at 1.0 million. Based on his research Overmans believes that the deaths of 363,000 dead POW in Soviet captivity can be confirmed be the files of Deutsche Dienststelle (WASt), he maintains that it seems entirely plausible, while not provable, that 700,000 German military personnel listed with the missing actually died in Soviet custody--Woogie10w (talk) 01:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

92,000 surrendered at Stalingrad, only 5,000 returned home.--Woogie10w (talk) 01:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

The issue is not really about the numbers but how the 1.0 million missing POWs became an issue West German politics. Maschke's commission was set up to investigate the fate of the missing. Maschke concluded that the men were dead during the war, not being held as slave labor in the USSR. --Woogie10w (talk) 02:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kołobrzeg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Subhuman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Erich Keyser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:27, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pelplin may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Apropos Untermensch-article[edit]

Hello Moloboaccount
You deleted a lot of information that I added to the article. I don't know about any banned English Patriot Man that you mentioned; as you can see I'm adding information from Germany. No suspicion please.
Simply for the sake of truth I added quotations and verifiable information that helps paint a true, a correct picture and correct common errors. Of course it's easy to simply delete information if it does not fit into one's idea. I think it's a pity and does not help truth to do so.
Let the Wikipedia-reader decide whether citizenship / ethnicity matters. I'm sure it's a false impression to say that Nazis considered Slavs subhuman (before reading more and more sources I shared the common idea considering this; not any longer) -- and I do not delete information -- I add verifiable information. Don't you think that's a better way to approach truth? Sincerely, 79.230.143.69 (talk) 09:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC) You are using original research(please read on this rule in wikipedia), synthesis and author connected to revisionism. Please read on Wikipedia:Reliable Sources. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 09:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Master-race article and the Junge Freiheit[edit]

I just saw that you also removed information that I added to the „master race” article. Without giving a source / a reason / an explanation you maintain that the Junge Freiheit would not be reliable.
I just added information to the Junge Freiheit article by adding a quotation that the Jewish writer Ephraim Kishon said in an interview with the newspaper.
Prof. Dr. Elliot Neaman who teaches at the University of San Francisco also regularly writes for the Junge Freiheit. The information I added to the Wikipedia article was written by Dr. Stefan Scheil. Why do you simply delete it?
Sincerely, 79.230.143.69 (talk) 12:08, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Second try for a discussion[edit]

Do you doubt that Slavs were recruited for the Waffen-SS?
Do you doubt that the Wikipedia reader can decide for himself how to judge a statement from the very same pamphlet that actually is already quoted in this very article? You simply remove it.
You seem to be very sure that those secondary sources that you added were correct -– then for the sake of truth -– provide original sources, primary sources! Why not substantiate what you deem true, but instead remove information you don't want readers to know?
You insult me and accuse me of falsely presenting a wrong picture! By doing what? Adding verifiable primary sources!
I also added information to the Junge Freiheit article -- are you going to remove it?
You simply claim that Dr. Stefan Scheil can't be trusted and remove a quotation from a primary source, that he provided. No substatiation for your claim. Let's try to handle this decently. I think you err, but I do not simply erase what you added.
Sincerely, 79.230.185.191 (talk) 22:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerd_Schultze-Rhonhof In recent years, Schultze-Rhonhof published works on the history of the Causes of World War II in Europe. In this context, in May 2006 he and historians Stefan Scheil and Walter Post took part in a conference organized by the publishers Wigbert Grabert and Gert Sudholt (which are assessed as extreme right by Verfassungsschutz, the German Federal Agency for Internal Security).

Hitler's War in the East, 1941-1945: A Critical Assessment - Page 4084 "Revisionist work, such as Stefan Scheil's Fiinfplus Zwei, and idem, 1940/41, continue to be the historiographical exception"

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Scheil Scheil nahm wiederholt an Veranstaltungen teil, die auch von Rechtsextremisten ausgerichtet werden. Er war neben Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof und Walter Post Hauptreferent auf der Tagung Wollte Hitler den Krieg? vom 6. Mai 2006, die die Herausgeber der geschichtsrevisionistischen Zeitschriften „Deutsche Geschichte – Europa und die Welt“ (Druffel & Vowinckel-Verlag) und „Deutschland in Geschichte und Gegenwart“ (Grabert Verlag) organisiert hatten.[5] Er nahm an der Jahrestagung des von Dietmar Munier gegründeten Schulvereins zur Förderung der Russlanddeutschen in Ostpreußen vom 3. bis 5. April 2009 teil,[6] und verfasste 2009 einen Beitrag für das vom rechtsextremen Druffel & Vowinckel-Verlag herausgegebene Sonderheft Deutsche Geschichte.[7] German wikipedia mentions several other points like blaming Allies for war and other activities in far right and revisionism. Enough said. He is not an acceptable source. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 09:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Heinz Wolf[edit]

I added a disambig. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:54, 22 June 2013 (UTC) Thank you! --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 17:22, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Silesia[edit]

No consensus has been reached. Two editors, Piotrus and I, have proposed a link to Nazi war crimes, and you want the text you have written, variations of which are appearing on numerous other articles. Until a consensus is reached any edits you make are subject to revision. It would be best to leave the text as is until a consensus is reached or seek alternative forms of dispute resolution. Rsloch (talk) 14:40, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Please stop adding material you know to be disputed to get past the agreed desire for a consensus. I'm asking you this privately here not on the talk page to avoid any antagonism. Rsloch (talk) 15:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
You wrote '...the Jewish population of Silesia was subjected to Nazi genocide with executions performed by Einsatzgruppe z. B.V led by Udo von Woyrsch either placed in ghettos or expelled to the General Government and Einsatzgruppe I led by Bruno Streckenbach' Could you explain why that doesn't need editing?Rsloch (talk) 19:59, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Your edits[edit]

You've been adding things willy nilly all day, oddly just after I've made edits, and I've had to do a clean up. Please be more careful. On Forster I said in the notes I would welcome the addition of extra material on massacres Forster was responsible for. Your additions do though need editing before inclusion and should be in the right sections ie massacres in a massacres section, Germanization in the Germanization section. The massacres at Piaśnica deserve their own section and can not be viewed as 'minor'. Rsloch (talk) 20:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Silesia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Between May 5 and June 17, 20,000 Silesian Jews were deported to Birkenau to be gassed. .}</ref> and during August 1942 10,000 to 13,000 Silesian Jews were murdered by gassing at Auschwitz.<

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Evening[edit]

This is an attempt to avoid the need to take this further. You have always, wrongly, assumed some partisan motive for my edits. Bar terminology we only really disagreed on where the mass murder of Silesia's Jewish population occurred. It's a question of fact made moot if you add Auschwitz to Silesia as seems to be the consensus on the article. Not really a reason to launch into an attack on another article's talk page. So here's an idea, you and I robustly but civilly edit each other's material as usual but agree that we have both in the past been prats towards each other and we're leaving that behind. Agreed? Rsloch (talk) 20:34, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Something being sourced does not preclude it from being edited or removed. I have tried to explain every edit in the summary, and you are welcome to ask for more detail. Rsloch (talk) 22:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

ref breakage?[edit]

This edit of yours had big gaps and other strangeness inside refs. See if my "fix" was close to what you intended or not. Dicklyon (talk) 00:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kołobrzeg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Subhuman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:45, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 7th Panzer Division (Wehrmacht) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • , in Hew Strachan and Holger Afflerbach (eds.), How Fighting Ends. A History of Surrender (Oxford University Press 2012, page 332

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Carl Maria Splett may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • during the war there was hardly any disapproval in Polish society towards sentencing Splett<ref>[http://www.tygodnik.com.pl/numer/2746/listyspletta362000.html</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:57, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

cześć![edit]

You will find this Russian website interesting «Скепсис» [18] My Russian is fair so I use Google translate for the text I dont understand. Regards --Woogie10w (talk) 12:19, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Masuria[edit]

You are perpetrating totally biased and unbalanced post war Polish propaganda here deswigned to try and justify the Polish annexation of Most of Eat Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia after WW2.

Edits to RD[edit]

I had to remove fist part of [19] as unreferenced (feel free to restore it w/ a ref). Second part seems incomplete: what about Little Poland? Masovia? Lower Silesia? Kresy? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

re: [20] - I suggest summarizing this or simply moving to Regency Kingdom of Poland. I don't think Dmowski article needs any discussion of the Regency Kingdom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

Talk:History_of_Poland#Extermination_of_Jews_and_Poles. Seems like something you'd like to answer. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:08, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments about neoslavism. You may also want to look at Template:Did you know nominations/Polish nationalism. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:29, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Slavs were Aryan too[edit]

Hi, I have came to your talk page because I have seen that several of my edits into pages around Nazism, Nazism and race, the Nazis view on other people besides Germans and Hitler's own political beliefs.

I see that further up on your talk page titled "Second try for a discussion" somebody else has had this problem with you and which is why I have came to your talk page to try and resolve this problem.

I typed in "Nazis Slavs Aryan race" into Google Books and found on the first few pages the exact books that you cited as 'evidence' that they were regarded as non-Aryan, the sources you provided do not actually go in line with Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and the Wikipedia:Verifiability when citing sources.

There is overwhelming evidence that they regarded as "Aryan" as the Germans were. In fact, even Alfred Rosenberg acknowledged the Slavs as Aryan (although in his mind - lesser than Germans) and complained about the treatment Slavs and other non-Jews were receiving by the Nazis in occupied territory. The Aryan Certificate said Slavs were Aryan, the Nuremberg Laws did not effect the Slavs. The Ahnenpass mentions both Czechs and Poles (both Slavs) as examples of Aryans.

After the invasion of Poland in 1939 the streets were straight away rounded into the "Aryan Side" and the "Jewish Side" and any Poles that helped Jews by forging them "Aryan Papers" to pretend to be ethnic Poles were given the death penalty. After the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 the Russians were regarded as "Aryan" and were encouraged to fight against the Jewish Bolsheviks, even in Ukraine, Hitler was seen as "liberator from the Communists" and many Slavic SS divisions were formed to fight against Bolshevism.

The definition of "Aryan" was so loosely used that it could be used in many different ways such as: German, Germanic, Nordic, European, etc etc. Under the definition of "Aryan" by the Nazi racialists the Slavs WERE accepted as Aryan and were never racially discriminated against as all Europeans were racially equal - even by Nazis standards. It was when they used the term Aryan to mean the "Germanic race" was when Slavic peoples, Celtic peoples and others were not accepted as Aryan.

Even the term untermenschen aka subhumans was never directly applied to Slavs, yet many authors of books continue to repeat the Slavs = untermenschen myth. Please use your translator and visit this site http://actualhistory.ru/race_theory_origins--198.58.112.253 (talk) 14:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Please discuss in talk pages and simply stop reverting[edit]

You are refusing to co-operate with me but are simply taking out chunks of info on pages and editing to them how you want to and ignoring the talk pace of the article.

Can you please actually resolve this with me instead of simply reporting me as a sockpuppet in which I am not?

I am simply using Wikipedia and sticking to the rules which you are not, you seem to be ignoring all what is shown to you and mis-reading words and then reverting back to your version whilst reporting me which is wrong and outrageous.

Firstly, "volk" under Nazi terminology could mean "race" "European" or "Germanic" so Slavs could also be accepted in the "volk" like others, please see Volk#Nazi_era for further information.

You are seeming to forget that the sources you are showing is using the term Aryan as the 'master race' or 'Germanic people' this is not what the Nazis always used the term as, all non-Jewish Europeans were Aryans INCLUDING the Slavs.

Please go to the talk page of the master race here Talk:Master_race#Slavs_were_Aryans_but_not_part_of_the_Herrenvolk I have tried two attempts to co-operate with you about this and you are ignoring this. Please stop.--198.58.112.253 (talk) 08:10, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Recent edit on the folk page[edit]

You have made a recent contribution to the Folk page and put "Thus the term Volk refered in the vision of Nazis to the entirety of German nation" and the source as Literature and Film in the Third Reich but I Googled that book and found no way you can access it directly, may you show me the source fully please? I have made a section Talk:Folk#MyMoloboaccount_recent_new_edit to see what others users say as in my opinion it is irrelevant already mentioned such as the Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer the Volk in this slogan translates to nation, i.e the German nation which is what you edited and added into the article...?

I also see on a sidenote you have done this because of the Master race debate me and you have had although you have left atm unedited again, the term "volk" could mean several things and your recent new edit is just covering what is also mentioned in the article already. Any reason why you emphasized it so much apart from the fact that the Aryan description of all non-Jewish members of the European Volk meant more than just Germanic people has upset you?

Also, your page claims you to be of German and Polish descent, surely you should be aware of the "Aryan Side" in Poland after the invasion of Poland in 1939 such as Ghettos_in_Nazi-occupied_Europe#Aryan_side (there is also other articles on Wiki that mention the Aryan Side) which was mostly of ethnic Poles and the other end was the "Jewish Side" and many Jews tried to forge "Aryan papers" pretending to be ethnic Poles i.e Aryan to avoid persecution and any Poles found helping Jews were subject to the death penalty instantly, why do you deny this?--198.58.112.253 (talk) 18:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Unregistered Editor[edit]

The unregistered editor doesn't appear to be a sockpuppet, based on comments at WP:SPI. Please discuss on article talk page or go to dispute resolution. The unregistered editor has complained at the Help Desk, but that discussion has been closed with a caution to watch for the incoming boomerang. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Boomerang came back. The IP address wasn't on the same continent as the blocked user, but that is because the IP address was an open proxy. Since the IP address was an open proxy, it should have been blocked even if it wasn't being used by a sockpuppet. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Also, English Patriot Man is in England, but doesn't appear to be English, as he doesn't seem capable of writing Standard British English (or any national variety of Standard Written English). Robert McClenon (talk) 00:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the update!--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

re: Can this be copied in some way?[edit]

Yes, it is public domain (1910) map so we can add it to Commons. Would you like me to do so? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Zoomified file[edit]

I successfully saved the zoomified file you requested from [21]. Can you give me a filename to upload it under, the license/PD reason, and the {{information}} fields? Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:40, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, MyMoloboaccount. You have new messages at Jackmcbarn's talk page.
Message added 12:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jackmcbarn (talk) 12:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

re: Question.[edit]

The easiest thing is to request at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion to have an article temporarily undeleted and userfied in your userspace. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:20, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Józef Beck may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • [[Soviet Union]]. He rejected Hitler's demands for annexation of Polish territories in [[Pomorze]] ([[Pomerania]], that would cut off Polish access to the sea and its main trade route, effectively

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:03, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Axis powers may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • upheld its agreement to abandon assimilation of Germans.ref name="Richard Blanke 1939. P. 215"/>;at the same time Hitler during a secret meeting of Reich Chancellery informed military officials

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:58, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Agnes Miegel may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Blackbourn page 158</ref> In August 1944, in the final stages of World War II, she was named by [[Adolf Hitler] as "outstanding national asset" in the special list of the most important German

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • January 2014 • Issue II[edit]

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • January 2014 • Issue II
For our freedom and yours

Welcome to the second issue of WikiProject Poland newsletter, the Monitor (named after the first Polish newspaper).

Our Project has been operational since 1 June, 2005, and also serves as the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board. I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions. We hope you will join us in them, if you haven't done so already! Unlike many other WikiProjects, we are quite active; we get close to a hundred discussion threads each year and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised. Last year we were featured in the Signpost, and our interviewer was amazed at our activity. In the end, however, even as active as we are, we are just a tiny group - you can easily become one of our core members!

In addition to a lively encyclopedic, Poland-related, English-language discussion forum, we have numerous useful tools that can be of use to you - and that you could help us maintain and develop:

  • we have an active assessment department. As of now, our project has tagged almost 83,000 pages as Poland-related - that's an improvement of over 3,000 new pages since the last newsletter. Out of which 30 still need a quality assessment, and 2,000, importance assessment. We have done a lot to clear the backlog here (3 years ago those numbers were 1,500 and 20,000, respectively). Can you help assess a few pages?
    • assessing articles is as easy as filling in the class= and importance= parameters on the talk page in the {{WPPOLAND|class=|importance=}} template. See here for a how-to guide.
  • once an article has an assessment template, it will appear in our article alerts and news feed, which provides information on which Poland-related articles are considered for deletion, move, or are undergoing a Good or Featured review. Watchlisting that feed, in addition to watchlisting our project's main page, is a good way to make sure you stay up to date on most Poland-related discussions.
  • you can also see detailed deletion discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland (which is a good place to watchlist if you just want to stay up to date on possible deletions of Poland-related content)
  • we have also begun B-class quality reviews on our talk page, and if our activity increases, hopefully we will be able to institute our own A-class quality reviews. As of now, we have about 500 C-class articles in need of a B-class review. If you'd like to help with them, instructions for doing B-class reviews are to be found in point 10 of our assessment FAQ. In addition to this automated list, you are also encouraged to help review articles from our B-class reviews requested list found here.
  • also, those articles will be included in our cleanup listing, which allows us to see which top-importance articles are in need for attention, and so on. We have tens of thousands articles in need of cleanup there, so if you ever need something to do, just look at this gigantic list. (I am currently reviewing the articles tagged with notability, either proving them notable or nominating for deletion; there are still several dozens left if you want to help!).
  • did you know that newly created Poland-related articles are listed here. They need to be reviewed, often cleaned-up, occasionally nominated for deletion, and their creators may need to be welcomed and invited to our project if they show promise as new authors of Poland-related content.
  • we are maintaining a Portal:Poland
  • automated Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Popular pages lists the most popular Poland-related pages from the previous month(s)
  • Breaking news: we are looking for a Wikipedian in Residence for the New York City area. See Wikipedia:GLAM/Józef Piłsudski Institute of America for details.

This is not all; on our page you can find a list of useful templates (including userboxes), awards and other tools!


With all that said, how about you join our discussions at WT:POLAND? Surely, there must be something you could help others with, or perhaps you are in need of assistance yourself?

It took me three years to finish this issue. Feel free to help out getting the next one before 2017 by being more active in WikiProject management :)

You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a member at WikiProject Poland.
Please remove yourself from the mailing list to prevent receiving future mailings.
Newsletter prepared by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here and sent by Technical 13 (talk) using the Mass message system.

February 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ulrich von Hassell may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Resistance, the Underground and Assassination Plots, 1938-1945 by Michael C. Thomsett page 147 1997)</ref>.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ahnenpass may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • = 1 January 1990 | publisher = Walter de Gruyter | isbn = 978-3-11-091484-9 | page = 447}}</ref>}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:05, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edits[edit]

Okay MyMoloboaccount, I see you have accused me of being s sockpuppet because some other now apparent banned user has questioned about Slavs being Aryans by the Nazis. Well, if you take a look on the several related articles such as on the Racial policy of Nazi Germany or the Nazism talk pages there is others who have questioned this.

Your recent edits of:

Master race article - [22], [23], [24], [25].

Racism in Poland article: [26], [27].

Aryan race article: [28].

Strike me as being somewhat parallel to those of others who I've had a dispute over and has now went way further than I had imagined. It seems rather a coincidence or not that the user Yatzhek first had the "advice" of Tobby72 and now you have been commenting on the investigation article talk page and then you have started making edits which are related to the dispute.

In regards to Slavs as Aryans, there is overwhelming evidence that the Nazis did regard the Slavic population as Aryans the same as Germans. I'm aware that some authors and historians do say that examples of "non-Aryans" were Jews, Gypsies, Slavs. However, in regards to the Slavs there is actually no evidence to support this as Slavs as pointed out were used as examples, they were eligible for Reich citizenship and they were not subject to any discrimination against them by the Nuremberg Laws like the Jews, Gypsies and others such as blacks. Thankfully and rightfully so many authors and historians do state the truth about Slavs and they were Aryans. It should be no big deal about this I don't see why it bothers you to accept this fact when all the evidence is there for you to see.

Let's look at your edits:

Master race - can you show me anywhere in Nazi terminology that Slavs were given the non-Aryan status?

Racism in Poland - can you please tell me where anywhere says Poles were not part of the Aryan race and where in Mein Kampf Hitler says that Poles were not Aryan (chapter and page please)?

Aryan race article - the status of the Poles is not what the page is discussing, why is there any need for it to be there?--Windows66 (talk) 11:11, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Instead of actually ignoring me, it would be best to cooperate. My recent edit on here on the Ahnenpass page is reliable. Your recent revert here is confusing me, how is the sourced paper "controversial" and how is what you put as a source considered reliable? You may want to check out WP:V.--Windows66 (talk) 11:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

English Patriot Man / Windows66[edit]

Hi MyMoloboaccount! You have been accused of being my sock.[29] -- Tobby72 (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

All what I can say is that I'm not MyMoloboaccount, nor Yatzhek, and any check will confirm this. Windows66 is obvious sock puppet per WP:DUCK, wasting my time for several weeks. -- Tobby72 (talk) 10:25, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Volk ohne Raum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Subhuman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Please take note of content and talk page behavioural issues[edit]

I've left comments for you here and here. As a matter of courtesy, I would ask that you respond to the query left for you 3 days earlier on the relevant page before continuing to use article talk pages in the same, tendentious fashion. I am anticipating a rational and civil response there ASAP. Thank you for attention. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:45, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Volksliste[edit]

Hi, based on my understanding of a source published in West Germany, Menschen und Grenzen by Alfred Bohmann. I believe the Volksliste figures include about 300,000 ethnic Germans resettled in Poland. Bohmann's presentation of the Volksliste figures shows that cat A & B totaled 710,000 persons, he then goes on to describe the resettlement of 287,000 ethnic Germans in Poland. To me this implies that 710,000 persons from pre-war Poland were in Cat A/B, not the 1 million that appears in the sources cited here on Wikipedia. Alfred Bohmann was an SS officer during the war and a well known supporter of the expellees in post war West Germany. If this is the case, the number of ethnic Germans in prewar Poland has been overstated in historical literature. I need your help. What do Polish sources tell us about the classification of persons on the Volksliste? --Woogie10w (talk) 15:50, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for getting back to me. It seems more than likely to me that the figure of 1 million Germans in Cat A/B Volkslisten includes 280,000 Germans re-settled there in 1940-41, based on Alfred Bohmann's study. I was hoping that Polish historians would have caught this. BTW Alfred Bohmann was quite frank in his description of the mass murder of the Jews, which indicates to me he no longer was supporter of the Nazis after the war. There is a German translation of Madajczyk, I need to order it. Anyway I am reading Die Vertreibung im deutschen Erinnern. Legenden, Mythos, Geschichte, I would not be surprised if it is translated into Polish and Czech.--Woogie10w (talk) 10:07, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I requested the book at the New York Public Library. They replied, Your request for Organizacja i przebieg wysiedle ludnoci niemieckiej z Polski w latach 1945-1949 / Pawel Kacprzak. was successful. Stay tuned, I may need your help for translation, my Polish is so-so.--Woogie10w (talk) 10:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I saw the book, Kacprzak did not mention this. West German sources claimed that there were 1.2 to 1.371 million ethnic Germans in pre-war Poland. Alfred Bohmann's study puts the number at 711,000 in cat A/B on the Volkslist, in a separate section he then goes on to detail the 280,000 Germans re-settled there in 1940-41. To me it seems that the the figure of 1 million Germans in Cat A/B Volkslisten cited in historical literature includes the re-settlers. I am surprised that Polish historians have never caught this.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

these guys are very well armed and trained, maybe police defectors?[edit]

Wikipedia nie jest klubem dyskusyjnym. Xx236 (talk) 11:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)