User talk:Lysy

Open peer review

Thank you for forking the page Open peer review. Fences and windows (talk) 11:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Help

[1] --Koretek (talk) 12:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Coren ^(talk) 22:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Where are you?

Hi Lysy, I just want to say that you are missed here on Wikipedia. Hope you are OK and hope to see you back. I know, trolls are a real pain in the ..., but surely you can stand them. Life is full of trolls, and yet we live it. Tymek (talk) 04:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

polonized vs de-germanized at recovered territories article

Please excuse my revert, but Polonized fits much better. De-Germanisation implies to recreate the state before the Germanization (11th century), which was certainly not the case. The territories rather underwent Polonization: everything changed Polish (names, people, etc pp). Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

FYI

You were mentioned and thanked by Greg in his final remark (I just found about it today by accident). Read his post here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland

Congratulations. Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland has reviewed your contributions and decided you are an active member. Thank you for your encyclopedic contributions! But creating content by yourself is only part of the collaborative Wikipedia user experience, there is an active community of editors discussing how to better improve the Poland-related content; please consider joining our discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland. There are many editors who would like to work more closely with you, benefit from your insight, and help you with their experience! PS. Please also consider editing your entry in our participants list to state your areas of expertise/interest. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Fed. of Expellees

Hey,

I reverted two of your edits in the Federation of Expellees article. The Spiegel story was reflected differently by Polska and FAZ which is now sourced and in the "federation today" section, so the other paragraph you inserted (unintentionally) turned out to be be an unsourced POV fork. The second edit I reverted was about the Nazi Soviet population transfers. You are right that the Soviet Union did not occupy the Baltic states immediately after the pact and subsequent invasion of Poland, yet the Molotov Ribbentrop pact had defined the areas which were to be Soviet/Nazi controlled without leaving a territorial buffer. The "evacuation" of the Baltic Germans was made in apprehension of the Soviet take-over and only from those parts "assigned" (by Hitler/Ribbentrop and Stalin/Molotov) to the Soviet Union. The exact time of the actual military take-over was thereby unimportant. I hope you see my rationale, regards Skäpperöd (talk) 10:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is an interesting issue (though sort of a "dark" kind of interesting ...). Regarding the Baltic German and related resettlements, that is is covered in History of German settlement in Eastern Europe, but not in great detail. I recently developed Polish areas annexed by Nazi Germany, covering (at least partially) their temporary resettlement and the contemporary expulsions/deportations/murder of resident Poles and Jews. Also there are articles on the Baltic Germans themselves and the Nazi-Soviet population transfer, which for sure could need an expansion. So if you got time and sources .... Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 07:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tamka

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Tamka, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No cliam of importance

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. TurningWork (talk) 19:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Lysy, can you provide any reference supporting why this street is more historically signifigant than any other in warsaw, without sources to support it's importance, it's still potentially a deletion candidate. TurningWork (talk) 18:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Jochen Böhler

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Jochen Böhler. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

brutal mass murder

All murder is brutal, no? It's redundant and adds undue weight. The first sentence of the paragraph says its ethnic cleansing. Would "deadly aggression" not encompass not only the death but all actions that took place? Murder wasn't the only thing happening.--Львівське (talk) 08:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

"...the brutality of the UPA there is unparalleled in the 20th century in Europe" how can you honestly say that?

Double Memory

Your deletion in Massacres of Poles in Volhynia of Double Memory section is based on an invalid assumption that there was consensus for removal. Please re-read the talk section. The material is verified in a very reliable source. Please do not remove it again without discussion. Bobanni (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to get involved!

As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 23:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI

Talk:Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II#Shocked. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Komański, Siekierka

O co chodzi? Przecież to źródło oparte na zeznaniach świadków wydarzeń opublikowanych w karcie. Na ich książki powołuje się np. Motyka w Ukraińskiej partyzantce. Jeśli masz jakieś do nich zastrzeżenia to powiedz jakie a nie usuwaj bez słowa ich jako źródła. Są na pewno dobrym źródłem bo opartym bezpośrednio na świadkach.--Paweł5586 (talk) 09:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Jak sobie wyobrażasz badania obu stron w obecnej sytuacji na Ukrainie w ogóle negowane są zbrodnie? Kto w nich by uczestniczył nacjonaliści z Tarnopola którzy mają tam 35% poparcia i protestowali przeciw Hucie Pieniackiej? Siekierka i Komański są pionierami w tej kwestii, ale to nie przyczyna by ich negować. Póki nie ma lepszych opracowań, należy się na nich oprzeć, tak jak Motyka. Siemaszko też była krytykowana za 60 tys na Wołyniu itd. a obecnie ta liczba jest uznana powszechnie. Weź też pod uwagę że większość ukraińskich historyków tak i jak rosyjskich wybiela swoich. Pozdrawiam serdecznie--Paweł5586 (talk) 20:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

FAR of Invasion of Poland (1939)

I have nominated Invasion of Poland (1939) for Featured article review due to a number of, hopefully, resolvable issues that exist in the article. --Labattblueboy (talk) 02:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

May I ask why you undid my edit to the article? It was made in good faith to remove material that failed with regards to 1c of the feature article criteria and I suspect POV. In the future please do not reinsert material unless cited. --Labattblueboy (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I can understand your reservation but the content was largely uncited and didn't appear to make a whole lot of sense. This being said, I certain want to work cooperatively in improving the article, or moreso maintaining its FA level. If my future edits step on any toes please let me know. --Labattblueboy (talk) 16:45, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Polish civilian per cent casualties - OK, "about" is good. However, if you have no exact figures, we can rely on good ref in World_War_II_casualties. Alandeus (talk) 17:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Mediation

A mediation case has been opened regarding the Polish-Ukranian WWII dispute. I have picked up that case. Here's the link:

Polish-Ukranian WWII disputes.

If you choose not to participate, please tell me on my talk page. Thanks! :-) Xavexgoem (talk) 00:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Lysy! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 696 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Ludwik Dorn - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Orest Subtelny - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Ihor Ilyushin - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Karkonosze#Poll_II

There has been a new and expanded preferential poll created on Talk:Karkonosze similar to the recent Ireland poll. The votes from the previous poll could unfortunately not be transferred over to the new system and you may need to recast your vote. I apologise for the inconvenience. —what a crazy random happenstance 04:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Jan Dzierzon

Imie i nazwisko Dzierzona zostalo zmieniona na Johann Dzierzon, to jest pisownia niemiecka. Britanica podaje Jan Dzierżoń (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/175400/Jan-Dzierzon) i tak powinno byc. Rowniez tu (http://bees.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=bees;idno=5017629) angielskie tlumaczenie pracy Dzierzona podaje Dzierżon, Jan. Czy skontaktowales sie z museum w Kluczborku, albo przeczytales dowody i fotokopie w podanych pracach Brozka, Gladysza i ks. Mazaka? Pomijanie zrodel polskich jest niedopuszczalne. Ci ktorzy chca zmieniac artykul powinni uznac wage zrodel polskich wage a nie lawirowac na drugorzednych przekladach i niepelnych zrodlach. Podane tez sa wspolczesne artykuly w prasie polskiej i napisane przez Polakow. Trzeba je wniesc do tekstu. Niech chociaz bedzie widoczne ze spoleczenstwo polskie ma silne zdanie na ten temat. Podaje Ci e-mail jezeli chcesz powaznie pracowac bez udzialu szpiegow: erudra@hotmail.com. --Soujdspo (talk) 22:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

---

Bierz zawsze pod uwage ze: 1) w okresie Bismarck'a zniemczano imiona celowo 2) Poszukiwania liczbowe zapisu imion na internecie sa falszywka - autorzy wtedy i dzisiaj powtarzaja to co zostalo zniemczone i wprowadzone w pismie, clowo, przez nieuwage lub niewiedze. Jedyna droga czy jego imie powinno byc pisane Jahann czy Jan jest stwierdzenie ze Dzierzon uwazal sie za Polaka i kultywowal polskos, i tak jest zgodnie z dokumentami opisanymi w pracach Brozka, Gladysza i ks. Mazaka etc. --Soujdspo (talk) 02:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC) --Soujdspo (talk) 02:33, 12 April 2010 (UTC)