User talk:Piotrus

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

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps (not signed with ~~~~) are archived manually when I get around to it.

"You have new messages" was designed for a purpose: letting people know you have replied to them. I do not watch your talk page and I will likely IGNORE your reply if it is not copied to my page, as I will not be aware that you replied! Oh, Template:Talkback is ok. Thank you.

Please add new comments in new sections if you are addressing a new issue. Please sign it by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Thanks in advance.

Archive

Talk archives:

Reasons for my raising wikistress: Some general observations on Wikipedia governance being broken and good editors trampled by the system Wikipedia is a kawaii mistress :) I agree to the edit counter opt-in terms. Current RfAdminship RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report No RfXs since 00:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online Battle of Warsaw Thanks for the DYK nomination, but it was much premature. I'm working on it, but it would take time to finish it properly. So far there's little on the actual battle there. //Halibutt 00:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC) Fixed that, if only temporarily. //Halibutt 07:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC) Ok, the first part of the article (down to and excluding September 7th) is pretty much ready. I'll add more info later as minor sources come, but the main thread of the story is there. Could you read it in your spare time? The to-do list includes extending the detailed story all the way to September 8th, notably including the details of September 7th fights and some more info on what happened on other, less important fronts. I will also include more sources to corroborate what my main source says (not that there were that many monographs of this battle anyway). Probably I will also write a tad more on why the hell did Polish commanders want to surrender from the very start. In any way, I guess I'd like to push it the way Warsaw Uprising (1794) went - that is up towards FA. I guess in a couple of years it will be de-featured again, but what the heck. Oh, and congrats on your "Kamienie na szaniec" :) //Halibutt 10:36, 24 August 2013 (UTC) DYK for Kosynierzy Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for August 24 Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rising '44. The Battle for Warsaw, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macmillan (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) 12:04, 24 August 2013 (UTC) Kościuszko While reading Gardner's bio of Kościuszko (linked to in external links) I came across a few items that seem important enough that are missing in the article. I know the Kościuszko article is still undergoing an FA review but still feel these things ought to be added. What are your thoughts? -- Gwillhickers 16:45, 25 August 2013 (UTC) In my travels I came across two publications in the public domain that cover Kościuszko rather well that I thought you might find interesting. They're available for download in their entirety in PDF form: (Note: Don't click on the red 'EBOOK-FREE' box, instead hover over it and then click on 'Download PDF'.) Memoir of Thaddeus Kosciuszko: Poland's hero and patriot, 1883 Somerset County Historical Quarterly, Volume 7, 1918 Enjoy. -- Gwillhickers 19:32, 25 August 2013 (UTC) Your GA nomination of Erving Goffman The article Erving Goffman you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Erving Goffman for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of DASonnenfeld -- DASonnenfeld (talk) 19:17, 25 August 2013 (UTC) The Signpost: 21 August 2013 In the media: Chelsea Manning, Box-office predictors, and 'Storming Wikipedia' Recent research: WikiSym 2013 retrospective WikiProject report: Loop-the-loop: Amusement Parks Traffic report: Reddit creep Featured content: WikiCup update, and the gardens of Finland News and notes: Looking ahead to Wiki Loves Monuments Technology report: Gallery improvements launch on Wikipedia Read this Signpost in full Single-page Unsubscribe EdwardsBot (talk) 07:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC) DYK for Battle of Warsaw (1831) Alex ShihTalk 12:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC) Talk: Donghak Peasant Revolution My own comments and yours have been written in the GA1 subpage. I have moved them to the main talk page. Please look at Talk:Donghak Peasant Revolution and revert if you dislike this move. Cheers. Pldx1 (talk) 16:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC) DYK for Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna Alex ShihTalk 00:04, 27 August 2013 (UTC) Your GA nomination of Józef Zajączek Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Józef Zajączek you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Sasata -- Sasata (talk) 01:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC) AfD Mohamed Temam The books you reference are just a listing of Algerian Artists. In fact the second book is just an updated 2011 version of the 2006 list. It seems someone decided to create articles on everyone who got listed in the book, which of course covers anyone who meets the Algerian Artist qualification. Caffeyw (talk) 08:46, 27 August 2013 (UTC) Your comments on my talk page vs. your comments on Battle of France I have left almost exactly same reply on my own talk page, in response to the nice messages you left there, once I discovered your quite different commentary on the talk page of Battle of France. To wit... I don't understand your apparent two-faced approach to communicating with me, Piotrus. While you are polite and enthusiastic in this comment here on my talk page, on the talk page of the Battle of France article your comments can be interpreted as hostile, dismissive and uncouth (ex. raging that you are "fed up" with my actions, when I have no idea who you are, and to the best of my recollection, have never interacted with you). Will this be your standard means of communicating with me in the future? Because if so, I'd prefer to have no contact with you whatsoever, as the lack of civility in your doublespeak is off-putting and the disrespect and hostility you manifest away from my talk page, after having left two nice, civil, respectful messages, creates an uncomfortable and schizophrenic virtual climate in which I do not feel safe interacting with you. Azx2 20:56, 27 August 2013 (UTC) Template:LGBT in Japan Yaoi has nothing to do with LGBT. Yaoi is culture of the heterosexuals. It is inappropriate to write in Template:LGBT in Japan. ヤオイ(Yaoi)は1970年代の日本で、異性愛女性に生み出されたものです。ja:森鴎外の娘のja:森茉莉が、書いたのが一番最初ですが。基本的にヤオイは異性愛者の文化です。ゲイ男性の多くはヤオイは読みません。 Yaoi was produced in Japan of the 1970s by a heterosexually oriented woman. It is Mori Mari first to have written. Yaoi is culture of the heterosexuals. Most of gay men do not read Yaoi. It has nothing to do with the culture of LGBT. Yaoi is a cltures of the heterosexuals, by the heterosexuals, for the heterosexuals. It isn't related topic. Yaio is an imaginary product of the hetero woman. It is different from the real homosexual. source:「オトコノコのためのボーイフレド」（1986,Japan）P72[1].--Leoxaq (talk) 03:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC) awards I replied on my talk p. DGG ( talk ) 03:10, 28 August 2013 (UTC) I expect you will sendit to AfD . DGG ( talk ) 00:19, 29 August 2013 (UTC) Million Award The Million Award For your contributions to bring Karl Marx (estimated annual readership: 2,038,000) and Marie Curie (estimated annual readership: 1,541,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment--not many editors do this list once, much less twice--and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:50, 28 August 2013 (UTC) The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox: This editor won the Million Award for bringing Karl Marx to Good Article status. This editor won the Million Award for bringing Marie Curie to Good Article status. If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers and all best, -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:50, 28 August 2013 (UTC) Hi Hi Piotrus, I did not know that you were watching my talk page (well I do now). I did mention you by name, but it was not a request for you to do a GAN review, it was suggestion that perhaps one of your nominations could be reviewed. Pyrotec (talk) 17:02, 28 August 2013 (UTC) Thanks for that information. I did not know about Echo, now that I do I'll have to be more carefull about linking names. But just to return to the early point of mine. For background info: I tend to review nominations that interest me and/or are in a topic that interests me and might have been sitting in the nomination queue for some time. I've reviewed two of your nominations in the last twelve months and you do seem to have a long wait for reviews. The rest should be fairly clear from the thread on my talkpage (otherwise you can ignore it). Pyrotec (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2013 (UTC) WikiCup 2013 August newsletter This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are: Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated. Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total. Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic. Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2. Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing. We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Piotrus (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), Dana boomer (submissions), Status (submissions), Ed! (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition. This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation. Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:45, 29 August 2013 (UTC) Piotrus, I screwed up. The original version of this newsletter stated that you were in the final, because I interpreted a message on J Milburn's talk page as Adam Cuerden wanting to withdraw, when he was really hoping to purposely tie with you so both could advance. Unfortunately, this isn't possible—there can be only eight in the final round. My deepest apologies. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:12, 29 August 2013 (UTC) Congratulations!  The Military History A-Class Medal  On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History WikiProject, I hereby award you the A-Class Medal for your outstanding work on Stanisław Koniecpolski, Tadeusz Kościuszko, and Casimir Pulaski. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:40, 29 August 2013 (UTC)