User talk:Szczeszek2035

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ruch Polska 2050 (August 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eternal Shadow was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ruch Polska 2050 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Ruch Polska 2050, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eternal Shadow Talk 17:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Szczeszek2035! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Eternal Shadow Talk 17:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Logoruchpolska2050.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Logoruchpolska2050.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LogoPL2050.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LogoPL2050.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:03, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

I used this image in a draft for the movements wiki page. I will add it back and hope you do not take it down. This image was emailed to me. Szczeszek2035 (talk) 12:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ruch Polska 2050 has been accepted

Ruch Polska 2050, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

(t · c) buidhe 03:31, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Nowa Solidarność moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Nowa Solidarność, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the prompts on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. ... discospinster _talk 15:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 Polish parliamentary election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civic Coalition. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:49, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of New Solidarity/Shared Poland

The article New Solidarity/Shared Poland has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per WP:NCORP. Could not locate reliable secondary sources to verify the notability of the subject.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Comatmebro (talk) 04:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of New Solidarity/Shared Poland

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on New Solidarity/Shared Poland requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, society, or group that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. — kashmīrī ^TALK 18:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of New Solidarity/Shared Poland for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article New Solidarity/Shared Poland is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Solidarity/Shared Poland until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — kashmīrī ^TALK 20:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

October 2020

Hello, I'm Piotrus. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Solidarity/Shared Poland that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. What is a "hańba" here is your attitude towards other volunteers. Nobody is getting paid to review your content, volunteers are overworked and backlogged. If you want your article to be published quicker, learn how to write good content so your work doesn't merit review, which creates backlogs and/or deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

The volunteers that are reviewing my content want it gone so I am clearly annoyed. Off coarse you don’t care cause I am just a username. I am sick of people like you thinking I am only a username, I am a person with feelings, everyone is against me, no one is on my side. I am done. Szczeszek2035 (talk) 01:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

No, you are a drama queen. Look, there are more than 50 articles removed from Wikipedia every single day. Browse here. Each of them has been written by someone, some by many editors. We are all here to maintain the quality of Wikipedia, otherwise it would have become unmanageable. The consensus is that product announcements, minor companies and organisations, small political groups or parties with no history, etc., should not clutter this project, because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. You have to live with it. If you edit for longer and start caring about Wikipedia's quality, you will certainly yourself nominate many similar articles for deletion. — kashmīrī ^TALK 11:27, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Tell me what’s so bad about my article? Szczeszek2035 (talk) 11:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Read the deletion discussion. Most argue that it is too soon for the group to have an article in an encyclopaedia. — kashmīrī ^TALK 11:32, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Why? Szczeszek2035 (talk) 11:33, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Because the group does not appear notable enough. Yes, online media confirm that it exists, but mere existence of a group or organisation is not sufficient for an encyclopaedia article. The group will have to become notable - for example, start playing an important role in Poland's politics, put own candidate in the Parliament, become a registered political party, etc. For now, it looks like a personal initiative with a limited reach and no guarantee whatsoever that it will at all exist in six months from now.[1] Way too early for an encylopaedia article. — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:14, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Poland 2050 is not a political party is that the next one of my articles you are targeting? Szczeszek2035 (talk) 14:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Absolutely, thanks for pointing out. Poland 2050 doesn't even have a pl-wiki page - it was deleted 3 months ago[2]. The difference is that Poland 2050 has existed for a bit longer; but sourcing is as bad. — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

It’s not my fault there is no PL wiki page as I have been working on the EN wikipage that kept getting declined. I am glad you have told me now you are going to try and delete it as well, Thank You. Szczeszek2035 (talk) 14:31, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

ANI discussion notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — kashmīrī ^TALK 15:39, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Your behavior at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Solidarity/Shared Poland

Hi, I noticed that you recently seemed upset at the fact that an article you created was nominated for deletion.

While I understand that you might be frustrated about it, expressing this frustration by attacking other editors is not allowed on Wikipedia. Instead try taking the comments made at the discussion to heart and wait until its subject starts being more notable. In the meantime you could try editing some other articles to help Wikipedia grow! Asartea ^{Trick | Treat} 16:37, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Well at least you understand I can be frustrated, I did apologise, but he also offended me emplying I was not “established” and I do not see anyone telling Kashmiri that he should not be offending anyone. Thank you for your understanding. Szczeszek2035 (talk) 16:46, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

As an observer, I saw kashmiri tell them they were defacing WP and crying about the removal, suggested they need emotional support [3], and called them a drama queen[4]. The personal attacks weren't one-sided and I wouldn't want to collaborate with someone that treated me that way. sootikins ^{(gaze/palaver)} 16:53, 30 October 2020 (UTC)