User talk:Nihil novi

When you write a message here, I will respond to it here. Likewise, when I write a message on your Talk page, I will watch that page for your response. That will maintain continuity of discussion.

Polish war films

Hi, it's me, Varlaam (talk).
I have been working a lot on my other page recently, List of films based on war books. I have been finding a lot of relevant Polish films. Wajda. Movies based on Sienkiewicz.

But I'm not expert in this area. Maybe if you?? took a quick look??? you would notice some things???? that were missing.

It's just an idea, if you are not too busy. And it might be fun!

Thanks, Varlaam (talk) 02:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll certainly keep it in mind.

My compliments on your expert work with "Assassinations in fiction." Nihil novi (talk) 03:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Łazienki Park renamed to Royal Baths ???

I see the article on Łazienki has been renamed (by you?? not sure). I lived in Warsaw for 5 years and never heard the name 'Royal Baths' applied to it in the expat English community. English language guidebooks (at least the ones I have) call it Łazienki or 'Royal Łazienki'. Is there some source for the 'Royal Baths' name? I understand it is a translation, but it doesn't strike me as common usage. What do you think? (ps your username reminds me of the phrase 'nic nowego nic dobrego' - how one of my colleagues often answered the morning 'co słychać?' itd.) Stumps (talk) 14:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I follow your point. The rendering of foreign names in English-language contexts does often pose quandaries: to leave the name in its original form, or to translate it—and if so, how? At one extreme, one might render a Chinese name into "English" in its original Chinese characters; at the other extreme, one might render, say, a female Chinese name in "literal" English translation as "Golden Flower." An intermediate approach is Romanized transcription, e.g., "Mao Zedong."

"Park Łazienkowski" or "Baths Park"?

"Ogród Saski" or "Saxon Garden"?

"Pałac Kultury" or "Palace of Culture"?

"Pałac Prezydencki" or "Presidential Palace"?

"Pałac pod Czterema Wiatrami" or "Palace of the Four Winds"?

"Pałac pod Blachą" or "Copper-Roof Palace?

"Kościół św. Krzyża" or "Holy Cross Church"?

It is hard to expect non-Poles to remember, much less to pronounce, the original Polish names. It in no way nullifies the authentic Polish name, to offer Anglophones an English interpretation. Nihil novi (talk) 07:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Canaletto

I have conducted a review of this article which has a large number of issues which need attention. I have delisted it. The reassessment is at Talk:Canaletto/GA1. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Scouts Cross

I have reverted your name change, article titles don't end in a period. I have also reverted your recent edits as they go against WPScouting MoS. Scouting is always capitalized in this sense in English. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 07:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Władysław Heinrich

On July 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Władysław Heinrich, 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) 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 03:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Józef Gołuchowski

Re. the above article and your other contributions on Polish philosophers, I have been enormously instructed and intrigued by your work. Keep it up! You are a first class Wikipedian & scholar. Orthorhombic (talk) 16:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks; nice to hear from you! At university I fantasized auditing any class that intrigued me—an impracticable aspiration. Years later, I thought I might be happy helping edit a general-interest magazine. Wikipedia has enabled me in a way to fulfill these inclinations, and I endeavor to cultivate a few small plots of the common garden. Your own experience may have been similar. Nihil novi (talk) 06:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Dewikilinking

Have you noticed that the things you have dewikilinked in History of the world are themselves questionable turns of phrase? Abductive (talk) 06:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the links you've put in! I've delinked only two. "East Coast of the United States", for Europe's "Atlantic seaboard", is an error. "Sedentary lifestyle" was a poor original choice of term for "settled lifestyle". Nihil novi (talk) 06:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that people refer to Europe's Atlantic coast as "Atlantic seaboard". That term is confined to the US and (weirdly) South Africa. A Google image search shows that nicely. Abductive (talk) 07:08, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

My Webster's defines "seaboard" as "land near or bordering on the sea; seacoast. adj., bordering on the sea." But if you feel strongly against "seaboard" in the European context, I won't object strenuously to substituting "Atlantic seacoast states"—though "seaboard" does somehow sound to me less frivolous. Nihil novi (talk) 07:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I've cut the Gordian knot and simply deleted "seaboard". Nihil novi (talk) 07:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Good solution, that article seems to be difficult to manage. Abductive (talk) 08:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Your links are a helpful contribution. Nihil novi (talk) 08:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm testing out this tool I discovered. It is handy for finding articles to potentially link to, but I need to look more closely at its suggestions. Abductive (talk) 08:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Category:French people of Polish descent

Nihil novi: Please go to Chopin's talk page where I left a comment stating my disagreement on Chopin included in category of French people of Polish descent. Pozdrawiam, Frania W. (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Stuff we talked about

• Jacek Dukaj - Ice (Dukaj novel), Inne pieśni, and here's a passage I translated
• Jacek Kaczmarski - check youtube for his stuff
• Free culture / Baen's Bar

--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the leads. A couple for you:

• Tom Lehrer
• Eternal return

What was Littlepage's first name?

Your "Black Oceans" reads well, though I wonder whether it shouldn't be "Monad Wars" rather than "Monads Wars"? It would be interesting to compare your text with Jacek Dukaj's original. Nihil novi (talk) 07:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

That would be Louis Littlepage. Thanks for the note about the Polish Institute; shame that the Polish Review is not online. I may consider writing something for them for my CV, but if they are not free online, I consider such an effort mostly wasted compared to the impact of writing another Wikipedia article. If you know the editors, perhaps you can ask them to consider switching to the open publishing system? PS. This is also why I prefer the Sarmatian Review - it may not be freely licensed, but at least it's free to read online.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Most journals are now online, although many are not free. Since there are many open publishing journals out there, it has proven to be a viable economic model, although a lot of older academicians and editors, particularly those who don't really understand what the Internet is, are opposing the idea of free online publishing. I believe that the non-free ones are both a dying breed and a treason to the science ideal of being for the public (see open publishing for details). I could certainly consider helping out, but whether they would consider a mere graduate student for an editor - I doubt it. And no, I have not recently talked to Professor Gromada (I vaguely recall I might have tried to email him over some issue in the past). As I haven't published anything scholarly on Poland, I very much doubt it I have ever showed on his radar (and the same holds true for Wikipedia - and most academics out there... but that's another issue). PS. I've just read your email - thanks for mentioning me to him, if he does contact me I'll be more than happy to correspond with him, and explain the advantages of a free online publication to him. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Madeleine Masson

On August 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Madeleine Masson, 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) 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.

Orlady (talk) 20:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Chrystian Piotr Aigner

On August 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chrystian Piotr Aigner, 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) 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.

NW (Talk) 17:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Move

I noticed you finally settled established determined the name of the commission that settled established determined place names... [1] Much appreciated. Skäpperöd (talk) 23:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate the many constructive contributions that you made to the discussion. Only the participation of more than one individual with an excellent command of English could have overcome the reservations of native-Polish Wikipedians. Thanks for your well-informed and public-spirited participation! Nihil novi (talk) 23:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for AVA Radio Company

On September 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article AVA Radio Company, 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) 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.

Shubinator (talk) 12:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Edward Fokczyński

Seems dykable, too. Go for it! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:42, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

"... that Edward Fokczyński knew that Poland had solved Germany's Enigma ciphers, but kept the secret before being worked and starved to death at Sachsenhausen?"

The alternative would be:

"... that Edward Fokczyński, co-director of the AVA Radio Company, which worked for Poland's Cipher Bureau, had a 4th-grade education?"

Nihil novi (talk) 06:33, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Friendly reminder

While reverting ([2]) please add a comment in the edit summary and/or comment on talk. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Edward Fokczyński

On October 2, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Edward Fokczyński, 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) 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.

—Ed (talk • contribs) 12:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Kordian

Perhaps you'd be interested in helping me expand this article? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you have good sources that will provide in-line citations? Of materials at my disposal, Miłosz's History of Polish Literature is too general and presupposes ignorance of Polish literature; while my Polish-language histories assume a good general knowledge and tend to be too detailed. The one is amateurish, the others—over-professional.

The Polish Wikipedia article might make a start, but—as is often the case with the Polish Wikipedia--has no in-line citations.

If you can expand your article, I could copy-edit it.

Thanks for the suggestion about the Edward Fokczyński DYK. Nihil novi (talk) 02:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I know expanded Kordian to DYK. I would, actually, like to improve Juliusz Słowacki to GA (he was a patron of my high school), but while I think I can do a good job with his biography, I am not very knowledgeable in the issues of Polish literature and philosophy. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:00, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I've copy-edited Kordian. Please check whether I've inadvertently distorted your intent. Nice article. Good luck! Nihil novi (talk) 08:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I'll add GAing Słowacki to my list of things to do :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit conflict?

[3]? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:14, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't know what happened. Please restore your content.

Has it in fact been decided that the scope of your activities is to be restricted? (I find it difficult to closely follow all the Byzantine politics at Wikipedia.) If so, it would be a great loss, and not just for Polish-related sectors.

On the other hand, Władysław Tatarkiewicz recounts in his autobiography that, when a rival got him ousted from his chair at Warsaw University, it turned out to be a blessing in disguise because it enabled Tatarkiewicz to complete and publish several of his major works.

I would appreciate it if you would keep me posted. Nihil novi (talk) 23:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Not yet. Thank you for your kind words so far, it really helps me to know that there are still those who appreciate my work. On the subject of byzantine politics, have you seen my creation from few months back on byzantinism? :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate the Byzantinism article.

You have created a very respectable, solid body of work on Wikipedia. Think what you must accomplish if you devote comparable time and effort to composing original works of scholarship for publication in other venues! Nihil novi (talk) 11:02, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Message from Masterpiece2000

Hi Nihil novi. I am back on wikipedia. Glad to know that you have created an archive. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 19:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Good to hear from you! Welcome back! Nihil novi (talk) 23:43, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 17:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Minor sabotage

I've chosen mały sabotaż as my newest DYK. Any thoughts on the correct name of that article? If yes, please comment at Talk:Minor sabotage to keep the discussion in one place. Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Copernicus monument

Thanks for the help, I've nominated it at DYK - perhaps you can come up with a different hook? See Template_talk:Did_you_know#Nicolaus_Copernicus_Monument_in_Warsaw. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:11, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

It's a good hook. The best alternative, I think, would have referred to the Polish underground's World War II minor-sabotage operation. Either choice makes a strong hook.

Thanks for writing the article. It is very worthwhile, especially in view of the current campaign by some Germans to retroactively grant Copernicus German citizenship. Nihil novi (talk) 19:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The minor sabotage hook was used recently when that article was DYKed (see Talk:Minor sabotage). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:48, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw

Hello! Your submission of Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ♠ B.s.n. ♥R.N. 09:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC) ♠ B.s.n. ♥R.N. 09:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Edelman

Instead of reverting with no edit summaries, could you please discuss on the talk page? Thanks, —Ed (talk • contribs) 05:47, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw

On October 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw, 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) 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.

JamieS93 07:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Zamojski Academy

Needs merging. It would be nice to expand it and DYK it... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:14, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, early on I didn't know you had started an article on the Zamojski Academy.

I've transferred some material into the new article from the earlier one, and added some more. I think it would be good to keep the new title.

The article would probably need more information, to qualify for DYK. Do you have access to some?

Congratulations on your fine "Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw" article and DYK! Nihil novi (talk) 00:15, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Your title is better; unfortunately I no longer have the power to move it. Try listing it at non-controversial WP:RMs. I will see if I can expand it over the next few days. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 07:26, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

If I am not mistaken, what is needed is to delete "Akademia Zamojska." How does one accomplish that? Nihil novi (talk) 09:08, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

What is needed is a merge, redirect and then a history merge :) I'll list it where it needs to be be for admin attention. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:50, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

If you used Encyklopedia Polski or PWN in the article, please indicate where with footnotes. General references become obsolete as soon as we are adding inlines; hence I am moving them to further reading (but without page numbers they are almost useless anyway). I am adding a lot of external links / further reading, I hope you can use them to further expand the article (I may not have time to do more right away). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:38, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I did provide pagination in the in-line citations. Please see "notes." Nihil novi (talk) 21:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

My bad :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nominated for DYK, hook here (feel free to suggest alts). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Stephen Mizwa

A tag has been placed on Stephen Mizwa 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 person or group of people, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RaseaC (talk) 12:34, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Toruń

On November 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Toruń, 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) 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.

— Jake Wartenberg 05:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Zamojski Academy

On November 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zamojski Academy, 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) 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.

— Jake Wartenberg 05:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Krystyna Skarbek

Hi, I noticed you removed my most recent image descriptions from under the photographs without adding anything of yours.[4] I'm not sure if words I selected were the best, but there was a reason I put these descriptions there. When I glanced at the article for the first time, there was nothing under the b/w photographs to explain why they illustrate this particular article at all, and it bothered me. Please note that according to Wikipedia:Captions guideline: "Along with the title, the lead, and section headings, captions are the most commonly read words in an article ". Captions help to establish the most immediate points of reference, i.e.: whether the face belongs to her husband, or to her assassin? Giving just names of these individuals, especially the first one: a man with peripheral significance in Skarbek's life, was not informative enough.

And also, I would appreciate if you refrained from reverting my improvements in formatting. According to our style guideline a single section "Notes and references" is quite OK and it does not have to be split in two, per Wikipedia:Layout#Standard appendices and descriptions. This is a matter of visual proportions for me as a designer, because fewer appendix sections at the bottom of the article make the Table of Content a lot more comprehensive. Thanks. --Poeticbent talk 17:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

A little less arrogance on your part would be helpful. You, for example, caption Kopański as "chief of staff" in a period when he was not yet in that post. You also originally captioned Voigt as "the SIS contact," when he was certainly not the world's only SIS contact. Combining "notes" and "references" as a single "Notes and references" is not only unnecessary—indeed, pointless—but makes the table of contents ungainly. Nihil novi (talk) 05:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Delfina Potocka

This would have to be one of the least useful reversions I've seen in quite some time. Maybe I should explain my original edit:

• In the parentheses in the lead, after the name, it's standard practice to have:
  • the vital dates alone, or
  • the dates followed by the names of the places,
  • but not the names of the places followed by the dates.

• In the paragraph starting "Potocka's friendships ...", we have Chopin and Krasiński each mentioned twice. If anything, a link to their articles should occur at their first mention - but only their second mention is linked. However, they're both linked earlier on in the same section, so there's no justification for any links to their articles in this paragraph.

• In my browser, the "D flat" is split over 2 lines, so it reads initially as "Waltz in D". I rectified that.

Was there anything there that was so objectionable? Really? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 23:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I've reversed back to your changes. Personally, I like birth and death dates linked in the lead, rather than separated by geographical entities. Nihil novi (talk) 01:47, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Me too. I like your changes, to which I've added just a few tweaks. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 02:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Parable

Not sure why you are rm referenced material to parable without explanation. In the future when you delete referenced material it is better to explain why you are doing this or discuss it on the talk page. Otherwise, some editors may conclude that it it vandalism. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 12:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Calling a parable a kind of analogy seems pointless, since the same could be said of just about any literary genre. Nihil novi (talk) 07:24, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Chopin

I'm willing to be broad-minded and flexible on this matter, but I would appreciate a logical explanation as to why an individual born in Poland to a Polish mother and French father, and who then emigrated to France, and who then acquired French citizenship, would not qualify as a Polish-French composer? Thanks. Dr. Dan (talk) 03:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

See the article's "Nationalism" section. See also "Mikołaj Chopin" on how Chopin's father viewed his own nationality, after he had assimilated to Polish language and culture. (He did not speak to his family in French, and Chopin never fully mastered the French language.) Chopin took out French citizenship purely as a matter of convenience, living in France and not wanting to return to a Poland ruled by the partitioning powers. Nihil novi (talk) 04:13, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

All well and good, but as I've mentioned before Idi Amin was not Scottish, nor King of Scotland. Dr. Dan (talk) 04:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

But Chopin did not identify himself as French, and drew his musical inspiration principally from Polish folk music. Nihil novi (talk) 04:39, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

As I stated earlier, I'm willing to be broad-minded and flexible on this matter. Your response... (he)"drew his musical inspiration principally from Polish folk music"...,"took out French citizenship purely as a matter of convenience"...,..."Chopin did not identify himself as French"... Nicolas Chopin "did not speak to his family in French" are all stretches bordering on opinions. Can any of those statements be attributed to Chopin? Again, I would appreciate a logical explanation as to why an individual born in Poland to a Polish mother and French father, and who then emigrated to France, and who then acquired French citizenship, would not qualify as a Polish-French composer? Please understand I am very well aware that Poland was dear to Chopin and was very important to him. It doesn't negate the fact that he was half French, nor that he spent half of his life in France. This is more of a case similar to Marie Curie or Joseph Conrad than to Jan Dzierzon or Copernicus. Dr. Dan (talk) 05:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Nihil novi & Dr. Dan, My apologies for barging in, but I came here to leave a note to Nihil novi & came upon your conversation. I have one question: when did Chopin "acquire" French citizenship? Has anyone come up with a copy of his naturalisation papers? If so, I really would like to see it, because I believe (please read comment I left at talk page [5]) that he had dual nationality at birth, thus did not need to "acquire" French nationality. *

Cordialement, Frania W. (talk) 04:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your eloquent clarification of Chopin's relationship to the Dziewanowski family. - Martin Kunert-Dziewanowski, representing the family —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkunert (talk • contribs) 04:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

A pleasure to have helped. We are all indebted for the correction concerning the circumstances of Chopin's acquaintance with Szafarnia—a very important episode in his life. Is your family by any chance related to the late historian Marian Kamil Dziewanowski? Nihil novi (talk) 06:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Copernicus

Please restore phrase about Polish students in German Natio. All Polish students even in Renaissance were joint to German Natio in all european universities (even Jan Kochanowski and Jan Zamoyski). References added above are misguiding inputing that German speaking people from Silesia and Prussia from Poland joint German natio. It was only geographical nor linguistic or national difference thanx Mathiasrex (talk) 09:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I suggest that you add substantive information such as this, rather than merely a sentence that, as phrased, only repeats the preceding sentence. If you have difficulty expressing your thought clearly in English, give me your thought in Polish and I'll render it into English. Nihil novi (talk) 09:27, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Why remove lesser's image of copernicus death? --DuKu (talk) 05:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Copernicus died after a stroke. Lesser shows him seated—which I can't picture, following an ultimately fatal stroke. Also, the crowd scene at his death-chair seems a bit contrived.

My preference is for art from Copernicus' time, or nearly so, and for architecture that he knew. Nihil novi (talk) 05:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for explanation. --DuKu (talk) 06:12, 2 February 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)

Thank you!

Thanks for reflinking and copy-editing that little spate of edits. I feel like I recognize your username from around here... (feel free to delete this section it's rather a waste of space) --Heyitspeter (talk) 10:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to De revolutionibus orbium coelestium‎... and for not reflexly condemning my little punctuation emendations. (A glance at my talk page will show that not everyone has been as indulgent as you!) Yes, I've been taking some interest in Copernicus. I look forward to seeing you around. Nihil novi (talk) 10:23, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I just wanted to reiterate the value of sourcing. If you have time to find explicit (in-text) citations as you make edits that'd be wonderful. The unsourced stuff isn't very helpful as they're often (not unreasonably) deleted, and those who do find sources will probably rewrite them (doubling time expended).--Heyitspeter (talk) 01:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

SF Meetup #11

In the area? You're invited to
San Francisco Meetup # 11
	Date: Saturday, February 6th, 2010
	Time: 15:00 (3PM)
	Place: WMFoundation offices
prev: Meetup 10 - next: Meetup 12

This is posted to the groups by request. Please sign up on the Invite list for future announcements. Thanks. --ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 23:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Legitimacy_(law)

Did you see the message I left in the talk page? Vistium (talk) 04:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Józef Gosławski (Polish sculptor)

Hello! I saw that you improved article about Chopin monument. I translated a part of article about his author from Polish Wikipedia. Can you look through a tables with competitions and exhibits? I don't speak English well, so I could make a few mistakes... TR (my talk) 14:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmm!

Nihil novi,

Do you have an alarm on Chopin's article that warns you of any visitor? My "age *of*" did not last very long!

do witz... --Frania W. (talk) 01:40, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The "of" was superfluous. Come to think of it, so is "age." Nihil novi (talk) 03:00, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

DYKs

I've nominated you for the DYK 25 award, as you qualify for it (I count 26 DYK creations/expansions on your user talk and archive) here. For future awards, you may want to collect your DYKs or notifications in a list on a separate subpage. Thank you for your hard work! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

That many? How time flies! Thank you. And welcome back! You have been missed. Nihil novi (talk) 03:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

		The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		Congratulations for reaching the milestone of 25 articles that you have created or expanded, appearing at "Did you know?" on the Main page. Great work, adding articles about notable Poles and more. Welcome to the WP:DYKLIST! Binksternet (talk) 13:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Biuro Szyfrów

As one of the primary editors of this article I wanted to let you know that someone submitted the Biuro Szyfrów article for GA. I reviewed the article, placed it on hold and left some comments on the talk page. Please let me know if you have any questions. --Kumioko (talk) 02:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Good job on all the fixes. I promoted the article today--Kumioko (talk) 02:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Enigma decryption after PC Bruno

My sources seem to imply that the Poles worked on other ciphers than Enigma after they left PC Bruno. What do your sources say?--TedColes (talk) 14:34, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I've placed some sources pertinent to this question in a new note #43 to "Biuro Szyfrów." I wish I had a definitive answer. Perhaps other sources may eventually resolve the question. Nihil novi (talk) 21:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

page blanking

If this was intentional, "your bad". You left no edit summary and for this type of edit you have to let other editors know what your doing. Mlpearc MESSAGE 05:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

My apologies. I hope the last edit summary to "Fables and Parables" will be satisfactory. Nihil novi (talk) 05:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

NC

Hi, I am afraid your latest entry is synthesis again because it relates one unrelated source, on the Polish Renaissance writers, to another, the absence of evidence for NC' Polish language skills, to come to the conclusion C. That is WP:Synthesis, see first sentence. What we rather need is a source which makes explicitly the connection between the low status of Polish in NC's days and the lack of evidence for NC having a command of Polish. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 00:25, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm having difficulty understanding what you're saying. The present note 37 is all from a single source: Mikoś.

As to synthesis, I don't see why the assertion that Copernicus knew Polish, which is made by several authors who have been cited, should be more a synthesis than the view that "German should be considered Copernicus' native language" because Toruń (Thorn) was predominantly German-speaking, because Copernicus wrote a letter in German to a German-speaking (and possibly non-Latin-fluent) Duke Albert, and because Copernicus joined the German natio (an organization open also to German-speaking non-Germans) at Bologna. Nihil novi (talk) 00:44, 12 April 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. Pomijanie zrodel polskich jest niedopuszczalne. Ci ktorzy chca zmieniac artykul powinni uznac ich 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)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kotniski" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soujdspo (talk • contribs) 02:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Takie jest rowniez moje przypuszczenie. Wyglada to na przywlaszczanie sobie cudzych luminarzy. Udaje sie dlatego, ze wiele osob bezkrytycznie przyjmuje statystyki oparte na falszowanej wczesniej historii. Nihil novi (talk) 02:59, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

My tutaj studiowalismy biografie Dzierzona od lat. Jesli nawet nie mamy jakiejs pozycji to ja potrafimy znalezdz w biblitekach uniwesyteckich w Ameryce czy Europie. Niestety zlosliwosc niektorych Niemcow blokuje nasze wysilki z naszego miasta i uniwersytetu. Wszystkich posadzaja o bycie Serafin'em i blokuja dostep wszytkim co chca dzialac zgodnie ze wspolna wiedza. Jesli potrzebujesz jakichkolwiek wiadomosci naukowych skontaktuj sie z nami przez erudra@hotmail.com

My mistake

Nihil novi,

When I read your revision at Chopin's article, I had not gone enough far back; so my comment was not accurate & I removed it. I left you an apology. I also removed anything (written by me) that did not make any sense anymore since based on a mistake.

Best regards,

--Frania W. (talk) 23:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Copernicus

This article is on my watchlist and I caught your recent edit [6]. Like yourself, I'm most interested in keeping this article factual and correct. You mentioned that you would appreciate being contacted should any mistakes be noted. Specifically you stated "Please let us know, should you find other errors, in that section of the article or elsewhere." Who is us? Thanks. Dr. Dan (talk) 05:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The collegial body of Wikipedia editors... and The New York Times, which made the mistake. Nihil novi (talk) 05:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Editing history - notice

I have brought up an issue regarding your editing history - and how I feel about your recent participation at nationality disputes - here [7]. Novickas (talk) 22:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Nihil, I believe you are a restart of User:Logologist. The applicable policy, WP:CLEANSTART, has changed since then. It now asks that you declare yourself when re-engaging in former disputes. Since Logologist engaged and !voted in Copernicus disputes [8] and you still engage there [9] [10] [11], I ask that you either 1) dispute here that you are Logo restarted, in which case I'll file an SPI; 2) withdraw from PL nationality issues.

Supposing I file the SPI and there's agreement that you're a restart of Logo. That opens another question, whether you ought to declare or withdraw from other disputes wrt to Polish nationality apart from Copernicus. You may feel that the wording of CLEANSTART is narrow enough to mean no more than the specific articles where Logo or their socks engaged in nationality issues. I would interpret it more broadly, but that's up to the community.

The least amount of fuss option: you state here that you'll withdraw from all such, leave the statement up for at least ten minutes, then delete this section if you wish. My part would be to not mention it again if you adhere to it. Novickas (talk) 14:23, 25 May 2010 (UTC)