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.
On June 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Black Procession, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
While I have not asked you to remember every copyvio you have committed, we seem to disagree about where the burden of repair lies. You have quickly repaired these yourself in the past [4], [5], but you are now taking a different approach (Feel free to fix [6]). Could you explain why you addressed these problems so quickly in the previous cases, but do not now feel obligated to repair them yourself? Novickas (talk) 23:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here are a couple more from the same source: [7], [8]. If you don't see yourself as having the time to address these problems within, say, a week after they are identified, I could adopt a policy of posting them at the copyright problems pages instead. Novickas (talk) 19:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jerzy Radziwiłł article: As a member of Radziwiłł family, like his predecessors Jerzy also managed to increase his estate, which after his death was inherited by his only son Mikołaj "the Red" Radziwiłł. He had two daughters, of which the younger Barbara Radziwiłł became mistress and later queen to King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania Zygmunt II August, which greatly strengthened the Radziwiłł family's position in Poland and Lithuania.
Source: [9] Like his predecessors, Jerzy also managed to increase his estate, which after his death was inherited by his only son Mikolaj IV Rudy (the Red). Of Jerzy's two daughters, the younger Barbara (*1520, †1551) became mistress and later queen to King Zygmunt II August of Poland, thus greatly enhancing the family's position in Lithuania. Diff of insertion: [10]
Mikołaj "the Black" Radziwiłł article: He provided financial support for the printing of the first complete Polish translation of the Bible in 1563, colporated works written in defense of the Reformed faith, financed a magnificent church and college in Vilnius, supported educated Protestants, and in various other ways fostered the Calvinist faith.
Source: [11] ] He financed the printing of the first Polish translation of the Bible (in 1563), diffused works written in defense of the Reformed faith, erected a magnificent church and college at Vilnius, supported learned Protestants, and in many other ways fostered the Calvinist faith. Diff of insertion: [12]Novickas (talk) 19:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding this comment. Could you point out in which way the evidence I provided is "extremely poor"? Every diff is a revert, and thus evidence of edit warring. Or do you claim otherwise? Edit warring is something Digwuren was blocked for earlier. Offliner (talk) 18:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An earlier comment from you: [13]. Could you please provide diffs of "continuing harassment of Digwuren by Offliner"? When have I started "baseless threads" about him? Or, when had I indeed started a single thread about him before that one at WP:AN, or the one at Tiptoety's talk page (where asked me to take to matter to WP:AN)? Please provide evidence for your accusations. Offliner (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you still think my evidence was "extremely poor"[14]? Please also provide evidence for accusations such as this. Remember, baseless accusations constitute personal attacks per WP:NPA, and admins are expected to behave according to the highest standards. Offliner (talk) 14:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please answer my question above (how many times must I still ask?)
An earlier comment from you: [15]. Could you please provide diffs of "continuing harassment of Digwuren by Offliner"? When have I started "baseless threads" about him? Or, when had I indeed started a single thread about him before that one at WP:AN, or the one at Tiptoety's talk page (where asked me to take to matter to WP:AN)? Please provide evidence for your accusations. Offliner (talk) 16:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Eastern Europe
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Eastern Europe and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Piotrus, there is agreement among me and users Jacurek and Radeksz to do an afd for "spieprzaj dziadu" [16] Not sure if you agree with the deletion, but if you do would you set up the afd? I have no idea how to and neither does Jacurek (he said to ask you), and honestly I don't really care to learn :) Ostap19:27, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea, this article should be deleted. A whole article dedicated to one insignificant quotation. What do you say? Tymek (talk) 03:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for 1923 Kraków riot
On June 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1923 Kraków riot, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Sorry for intervening here, but can someone please move this comment about me back? The relevant ArbCom case [17] tells that:
For the purpose of imposing sanctions under this provision, an administrator will be considered "uninvolved" if he or she is not engaged in a current, direct, personal conflict on the topic with the user receiving sanctions.
Biophys, you may be topic banned from this area for disruptive editing, wikilawyering and battlezone tactics. I'm hardly convinced by your comments here. If anything, they convince me that you are part of the problem. Piotrus is the subject of arbitration findings subsequent to Digwuren. He is precluded from using sysop powers in EE disputes. JehochmanTalk21:57, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Subject of what? I am looking at Digwuren case and do not see any remedies about Piotrus. I am looking at the last EE ruling and see the following: "Piotrus is cautioned to avoid using his administrator powers or status in situations in which his involvement in an editing dispute is apparent.". What dispute? I do not even edit the same articles as Piotrus.Biophys (talk) 22:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not entirely certain what happened here, but I think there may be a misunderstanding. Piotrus hasn't been involved in any of the edit wars by this particular group and actually was cautioned in an entirely different area. I've spent the past day reviewing the topic area (I've got quite a bit more to work through) and I've only seen a single case of intersection; this appears to have been because the article briefly included a description of the EE Arb case (fka Piotrus2). Shellbabelfish23:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus was involved in edit warring in at least one of the articles that were subject of the AE reports [18][19]. Also, he has made a comment in every single noticeboard thread concerning this issue (if I recall correctly), often supporting the actions of Digwuren & Co., while strongly criticising me and others [20][21]. Piotrus has also appeared in some of the AfD discussions that are part of the dispute, for example [22][23][24], always voting in the same way as Digwuren. I don't think he is uninvolved. Offliner (talk) 23:15, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Shell, Piotrus has a clear history of alignment in this area towards one faction, even if he doesn't participate in many edit-wars in this specific topic-area. Everyone who knows this area is aware of this. That's not something that sets him up as an impartial adjudicator, and I'm sure he knows this. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus made a statement about issuing sanctions to me, and he has right to issue sanctions to me or to any other editor (like Offliner) with whom he "is not engaged in a current, direct, personal conflict on the topic" (see ruling by ArbCom above). It does not matter if he was involved in any disputes with other editors, as long as he was not involved in a conflict with me per both rulings. It appears that we edited a couple of the same articles with Piotrus (which I did not even knew or forget), but it does not matter.Biophys (talk) 01:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd presume the whole point of Piotrus intervening would be so that you wouldn't get sanctioned, or so they'd be lighter, and that outside admins wil be too naive to object. I'm of course renowned for my cynicism, and it is obviously just coincidence that you went to such lengths to defend each other in Piotrus 2, and that all your comments made in this mess favour each other. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 08:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jehochman. Deacon is not even trying to hide his dislike of Piotrus. I think help of some really uninvolved admins should be requested here. Tymek (talk) 15:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Professor, this is Laura Grimm from the Soc of the Family class. My username is Lngrimm. See you on Thursday! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lngrimm (talk • contribs)
Hey Professor, I'm Lenny Caric from your Soc. of the Family class, and my user name is in fact, Lenny Caric. This should be pretty uncomplicated for all.
Kaylee Petsch is username KayPet. I have added myself to group 2 and am waiting for my other group members to do so. I am also posting a diff of that edit for the extra credit. If I have done anything wrong please let me know, I am very unfamiliar with this.
Here is a link to the history of the page I edited, about the Lionsgate film Warrior, filmed in Pittsburgh.
Thanks
Chad Bruns
Silesian Uprisings
Please see the talk page at Silesian Uprisings. You have inserted copyrighted material. If you still lack time to address these problems, I can post it at the copyright problems page. Sincerely, Novickas (talk) 17:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Andrzej Walicki
Dear Piotrus, our wiki-relationship didn't started in a positive note, but let's move on.
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ceremonial marriage, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
Redundant: The contents of this page are covered just fine by the Marriage. Common-law marriage has its own page since it is a special case with a large amount of unique information. Ceremonial marriage is covered sufficiently by the Marriage article.
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.
: 632
: 82
: 6
: 22
You have the right to stay informed. Exercise it by reading the Wikipedia Signpost today.
