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.
Sorry I missed this one - I was expecting to have Internet access over the long weekend, but the computer had enough viruses to make that pretty much impossible. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On April 5, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Double-barreled question, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
I was not aware of that. Lately I have expanded the Demographics of Europe template a little bit, adding pages for Slovenia and Bulgaria. You may change the Poland thing back if you think that's best. (LAz17 (talk) 04:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)).[reply]
DYK for univariate analysis
On April 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article univariate analysis, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On April 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article biosocial criminology, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
I am pleased to report that the March coordinator elections have concluded, and that 15 members have been selected to serve as coordinators from April to September. Special congratulations go to AustralianRupert, Dank, MisterBee1966, NativeForeigner, Patar knight, and Ranger Steve, all of whom are newly elected coordinators. As we start this new tranche we welcome all returning coordinators, and wish those who decided not to stand for reelection luck as they move on to new things.
In other election news, a motion made to extend the coordinator tranche from its current six-month term to one full year gained consensus from the election participants. This will take effect in September, during the next election cycle. For the IX Coordinator Tranche, TomStar81 (Talk) 05:02, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In May 2008 a small group of editors, operating from a page in Cam's userspace, began work on improving Wikipedia's articles relating to the pivotal Second World War Battle of Normandy that took place in northern France between 6 June and the end of August 1944. Milhist has now adopted this collaboration as our third special project. The aim of Operation Normandy is to bring all core topics—official operations, battles, and the invasion beaches—to featured status by the 70th anniversary of D-Day on 6 June 2014. More information can be found on the project page; any interested editors are most welcome to sign up and help us meet this challenging goal!
Our Henry Allingham World War I Contest ended on 11 March with the following results: in first place was Sturmvogel 66; in second place was Ian Rose; in third place was Dana boomer; and the finalists were Abraham, B.S., Carcharoth, and XavierGreen. The contest produced an incredible 238 recognised article improvements, of which 6 were Featured articles, 13 were A-Class articles and 22 were Good articles. In addition 43 newly created or expanded articles were successfully submitted for the 'Did you know' section on Wikipedia's main page. Our warmest congratulations go to the medallists and finalists, and our grateful thanks go to all participants and particularly to Eurocopter for organizing the contest.
Would you like to get more involved in the project? There are many open tasks that could use your help. The project's review department is always in need of input at peer reviews, A-class reviews, FACs and FARs; these can be found here. Also, the project maintains a list of deletion debates for military-related articles that have been nominated for deletion; project members are encouraged to provide their opinions in this forum so that consensus can be established. Finally, if content creation is more what you are looking for, each of the project's 48 task forces maintains a list of requested articles.
Your comments are invited in the following ongoing project discussions:
Pre-emptive disambiguation. Since 2006 our in-house style guide has recommended disambiguating the titles of articles about military units whether another article of the same name exists or not. The continued need for this practice is under discussion.
Nick-D in recognition of his long and distinguished service as a coordinator of this project from February 2008 to March 2010; sterling efforts on "big picture" subjects, including ten featured articles; and his tireless participation in discussion and review.
Sturmvogel 66 in recognition of his distinguished service as a coordinator of this project, extraordinary performance within the Henry Allingham World War I Contest and other extremely valuable contributions to the project.
Editorial: Translating article writing to real life
I (Ed) am a college student in the United States, and as part of attaining my desired degree, I chose to take a course in Arab-Islamic history. We began in the early 600s and spent some time on the origins of the Islamic conquering of the Sassanid Empire and partial takeover of the Byzantine Empire (c. 634–750). From there, we have moved through the various ages of history, and the class recently began discussing the Ottoman Empire and other Islamic regions of more recent times.
As we began discussing the Ottoman Empire's role in the First World War, our professor mentioned that they were blockading the Bosphorus, using it as a chokepoint to cut off needed supplies traveling to Russia's only warm-water port, Sevastopol. An astute classmate, realizing this meant the use of warships, wondered what naval technology was like during this time. The professor turned and asked me to answer the question, as he knew I had been studying naval history and believed that I knew more about the subject.
The point of this anecdote is not to boast, but to provoke some thought. By virtue of the research Wikipedia writers must do to write complete, referenced articles, many of us are acquiring knowledge in specialized topics that can surpass even learned scholars. Wikipedia might even provoke some of us into becoming learned scholars through the subjects we find here. To profile one such case, take a look at Parsecboy.
Beginning in May 2007, he came across a few essentially empty stubs on German battleship classes. Nearly 3 years later, he's written or collaborated on more than forty articles rated as good or higher, including over a dozen featured articles and a featured list; the majority relate to German warships. The work Parsecboy has done for Wikipedia has had a tremendous impact on his academic career: to complete his undergraduate degree, Parsecboy is currently writing an Honors Thesis that will analyze the British and German battlecruiser squadrons during the First World War. Parsecboy plans to attend graduate school and continue his research in the area, culminating in a dissertation. He comments that "without a doubt, I would not have had nearly as much knowledge and interest in the topic, nor would I have known where to begin researching if I had not become so involved with the topic here on Wikipedia."
The knowledge you acquire through writing Wikipedia articles will remain with you for the rest of your life. Try to find a way to use it to your advantage.
WikiProject Social movements or WikiProject Social reform
Hi, I have an interest in doing collaborative work that would fall under the umbrella of either social movements or social reform. I started looking around to see what was already in place and didn't see anything active now. I let a reply to your comment here. It explains my interest and the way I see it fitting under the umbrella of a new WikiProject related to social movements (or social reform). Would appreciate your thoughts. FloNight♥♥♥♥15:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not seeing any significant changes since I wrote the article. Btw, is there any reason you have not activated your wiki email? I may be able to send you some pdf materials if you have it active and want to expand that article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. This is the first time I've even heard of wiki email - that's my reason for not having activating it, which I shall do now. :-Chumchum7 (talk) 16:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
On April 9, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Popular referendum, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
ten artykuł został zgłoszony jako dobry. Tymczasem jest to wyjątkowo słaby artykuł z ewidentnymi błędami, nieustannym stosowaniem niemieckiego nazewnictwa miast i ziem. Na dodatek rola Polski w konflikcie jest minimalizowana lub pomijana, jak np. podanie, że wojska Rakoczego zostały pokonane przez "aliantów", że w Polsce zwyciężali głównie Tatarzy, że była to wojna szwedzko-duńska i rosyjsko-szwedzka, zaś Polacy ponosili same klęski za wyjątkiem bitew pod Warką i pod "Prostken". Ze swojej strony wpisałem drobne uwagi do dyskusji artykułu i zastopowałem głosowanie do poprawy. Na mechanizmach tutaj obowiązujących się nie znam, ale nie rozumiem dlaczego moi szwoleżerowie Gwardii nie zakwalifikowali się nigdzie, a ten gniot ma mieć miano "GOOD ARTICLE". Warto zwrócić uwagę na bibliografię artykułu, która wprost urąga zasadom: pierwsza pozycja dotyczy Piotra I Wielkiego, druga dotyczy wprawdzie dokładnie tej sprawy, ale z przypisów widać, że autor (Skandynam, jak mniemem) korzystał z pracy tegoż wprawdzie autora, ale znacznie wcześniejszej i ogólniejszej, ergo mało precyzyjnej. To trzeba albo poprawić, albo przegłosować na nie. Pozdrawiam serdecznie belissarius (talk) 02:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Gazette d'Amsterdam
On April 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gazette d'Amsterdam, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi, Piotr. I assume that you are fluent in Polish. Please forgive me if I'm wrong. :) I am dealing with a contributor who keeps recreating an article with copied content, and I'm wondering if there are language difficulties here. I can't know, because while the article has been deleted five times (and the content put in the article's talk page once, which has also been deleted, and in sandbox, which has been deleted twice), he doesn't talk about it. There's no doubt that there's a COI here, but I hate to block somebody for copyvios who could probably verify permission if he wanted to, and I'm wondering if there's maybe a language barrier. He's been blocked for three days; if you are up for it, would you mind explaining to him why and what he needs to do to verify permission for that content? --Moonriddengirl(talk)17:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, Piotr! Whether his problem is language related or something else, I hope he'll start communicating with us so we can work this one out. --Moonriddengirl(talk)22:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
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)
: 632
: 82
: 6
: 22
You have the right to stay informed. Exercise it by reading the Wikipedia Signpost today.
