User talk:Piotrus

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.

Archive

Talk archives:

Reasons for my raising wikistress: Some general observations on Wikipedia governance being broken and good editors trampled by the system Wikipedia is a kawaii mistress :) I agree to the edit counter opt-in terms. Current RfAdminship RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report No RfXs since 12:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online Polish Armed Forces in the West I see you started Polish Armed Forces in the West about 3 years ago. How do you think the article is progressing? -Chumchum7 (talk) 16:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC) 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) Email activated. -Chumchum7 (talk) 17:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC) DYK for Popular referendum 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. Well done Victuallers (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)) 20:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC) Second Northern War Witam, 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) 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. Materialscientist (talk) 09:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC) A favor? 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) Thank you. The contributor is User talk:Waldemar smolarek art. The content has been previously published at [1]. I assume he could easily if he wanted put a licensing statement at that site. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:14, 11 April 2010 (UTC) 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) DYK nomination of Hollandsche Spectator Hello! Your submission of Hollandsche Spectator 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! JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 22:40, 11 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. 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) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soujdspo (talk • contribs) DYK for Complex question On April 12, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Complex 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. NW (Talk) 04:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC) DYK for Justus van Effen On April 14, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Justus van Effen, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the 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. Materialscientist (talk) 05:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC) re Merging AgRinceSocial Sci Res on Greatness with Greatness article hello Piotrus First, many thanks for your response: Your request for feedback Thanks for the message. I sense, and sympathise with, your frustration. As you have noticed, there are very few editors who regularly patrol WP:FEED and unless the subject of an article is pretty straightforward, the regulars get out of their depth very quickly. But I think I see a way forward. I will leave a message on the talk page of the Sociology Wikiproject asking for someone to take a look at your draft. It seems to be a pretty active project so someone should respond soon. So, please bear with us, and remember there is no deadline! – ukexpat (talk) 13:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC) Message left at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sociology#Request for review of draft article. – ukexpat (talk) 13:32, 31 March 2010 (UTC) I saw the request. First quick comment: you need a proper WP:LEAD section. Second: why not just merge your article into the pitful greatness article? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC) Second, i'm doing as you suggested, but have couple questions: 1) can i simply drop an entire section (useless in my opinion) of the existing greatness article, ie the "Naming Great" bit? 2) I need to get ok to reference a specific Lulu book as it is central to my article. How do i get such an ok?? again many thanks AgRince (talk) 09:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Auschwitz gate brama 1940s.jpg ⚠ Thanks for uploading File:Auschwitz gate brama 1940s.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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). If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Also, this seems to be a duplicate of Commons:File:Auschwitz gate in 1945.jpeg. howcheng {chat} 18:47, 14 April 2010 (UTC) re ok to reference a specific Lulu book Piotrus many txs again re: You asked: 1) can i simply drop an entire section (useless in my opinion) of the existing greatness article, ie the "Naming Great" bit? 2) I need to get ok to reference a specific Lulu book as it is central to my article. How do i get such an ok?? Re 1) I'd say yes - it is unreferenced anyway. You may want to move it to talk, perhaps somebody can salvage it later. Re 2) I don't understand your question - what ok do you need to get, from whom, and why? -- Piotrus re 2) I'm new to Wiki (this is my first article) but as i understand it Lulu.com is blacklisted (and rightfully so in my view for all their idiotic junk email promos), but i believe it is possible to use specific book ref on lulu (ie the Url for a particular book) with editorial approval at wiki. The relevant book in my case is the last one discussed in my article, ie Dorris 2009. should i just go ahead and give the Lulu Url for that book in my references and then deal with the editorial issue when and if it comes up, or is there somewhere i can request ok to use specific book ref on Lulu..? AgRince (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC) DYK for Hollandsche Spectator On April 15, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hollandsche Spectator, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the 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. Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC) The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010 Sanger allegations: Larry Sanger accuses Wikimedia of hosting illegal images News and notes: Studying German flagged revisions, French library agreement, German court case In the news: SCOTUS hopeful edited bio, criticism from article subject WikiProject report: WikiProject Motorcycling Features and admins: Approved this week Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC) DYK nomination for 'Human subject research legislation in the United States ' Hello! Your submission of Human subject research legislation in the United States 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! Mikenorton (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC) Proposed amendment to EEML topic ban This message is to notify you that I have asked ArbCom to modify the terms of your topic ban under WP:EEML. Please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Request to amend prior case: EEML. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)