From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Poland (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Countries (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
WikiProject Eastern Europe (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Eastern Europe, a WikiProject related to the nations of Eastern Europe.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Tourism section[edit]

Ok, the way I see it, there is no room to jam more pictures in the Tourism section, as User:Zugspitze2962 keeps doing. But ok, if the user is so bent on adding the aquarium image (as the most visited attraction in Sląsk), then the only way I can see it, is that the image of the Table Mountains is changed out. But, sure as heck we should not be removing Zamość or Malbork, for an aquarium. And, add a smart statement in the section about Wrocław and this aquarium. --E-960 (talk) 20:08, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Zoo Wroclaw is the most frequently visited attraction in Poland! Not only in Lower Silesia. Much more than a castle in Malbork.
So how is the most reasonable to add this photo. Photo Malbork Castle is the beginning of List of castles in Poland, to which the link is in the tourism department. Zugspitze2962 (talk) 20:52, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
See also: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WKS Śląsk Wrocław Poeticbent talk 20:56, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
At this point, I see that User:Zugspitze2962 despite effort to open up a forum to discuss and to perhaps accommodate some of his suggestion, keeps on edit warring, and disregarding reverts by several users. So, we should treat this a disruptive editing and close this thread. --E-960 (talk) 06:42, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

User E-960 persistently deletes the information that most fits the chapter on tourism and I see no reason to remove it. Zugspitze2962 (talk) 12:49, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

CSS bug?[edit]

This page displays very large scrolbars on both IE11 and Firefox. I can’t find the code that causes this, so i can’t remove it. � (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

FDI 2015[edit] Xx236 (talk) 09:52, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Inaccurate Statements About Gender Equality[edit]

This page makes a number of inaccurate statements about women's rights in Poland, historically and today. The authorities cited don't support the statements made on this.

Here are some other authorities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Women in Poland had more economic rights than in Western Europe according to the Napoleonic Code. Polish men were frequently at war or imprisoned, so the women had to act.
Is neutral and reliable or gender?Xx236 (talk) 07:46, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
THe author doesn't know history of Poland Women attained their highest numbers in Sejm (Poland’s Parliament) from 1980 to 1985 - the parliament did almost nothing 1982-1985 (martial law).Xx236 (talk) 11:02, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
boell This publication reflects the views only of the author, nothing about history.Xx236 (talk) 07:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Polish 1st Army[edit]

Polish 1st Army distinguished itself in the battles for Warsaw and Berlin - Battle of Kolberg (1945) too.
Warsaw is linked to Warsaw Uprising, the Army fought also the Battle of Studzianki. Xx236 (talk) 08:15, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2016[edit]

Poland is currently at 37 place by population. Not at 34, as it's now in article. (talk) 10:26, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Topher385 (talk) 10:45, 1 October 2016 (UTC)


Removed. Thread initiated for trolling purposes, and carried over to Talk:History of Poland (1939–45) article. --E-960 (talk) 15:38, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

University buildings[edit]

I would have to respectfully disagree with the assessment that: "none of these structures are more notable than the Kazimierz palace and Collegium". In Krakow, Collegium Maius, the proposed image [1], was build in the 15th century, it is the first university building in all of Poland. The current image of Collegium Novum, only show a structure that is just over a 100 years old, it serves as an admin building, and falls after other notable Jagiellonia University structures such as Collegium Nowodworskie [2].

As for Warsaw, the hallmark image of the university are the entrance gates and the surrounding buildings [3] (all you have to do is Google 'Warsaw University' and see all the pictures of the gates). Unfortunatly, there is no good image of that on Wiki Commons. So, I will say this, the proposed image of the new Physics Building [4] is a judgment call; perhaps we should also show a modern building which got quite a bit of recognition in the media becoming a new icon of the university's modernization efforts [5] and legitimately shows that universities in the country are not relics. --E-960 (talk) 08:04, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

-It is true about the Collegium Maius being the oldest and therefore more significant, but the Collegium Novum is more utilised and is in the front of the campus facing the street. But I am convinced with the argument you've stated. With Warsaw, however, although modernization is taking place, the old buildings, including the Kazimierz Palace and the Main Gate, are regarded as iconic in comparison to new buildings, such as the physics department. It is true that the images of the Main Gate are included in several articles about Warsaw and the University, therefore a change would be good. However the Kazimierz Palace currently houses the Warsaw University rectorate and is therefore the most important central building of the University. To sum up, I am not against the changes you made and you proved your point so I am not going to revert anything. Best Regards :) - Oliszydlowski (TALK) 18:44, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

  • Clearly, there's a misunderstanding here with regard to how universities differ from, let's say, swimming pools. The older university gets, the more reputation it has to show for it. Magnificent historic buildings with considerable heritage value are the best symbol of that tradition. Meanwhile, buildings which look like yesteryear swimming pools give no clue of the sort. Also, please consider the informative value of every image ahead of its (debatable) aesthetic qualities, because this is the general trend in all encyclopaedias. Also, Collegium Maius is not a part of a living university. It is a museum. Poeticbent talk 13:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Oliszydlowski, thank you for considering the arguments presented on this issue, by no means did I try to start a conflict with this topic, as your input is definitely very constructive to this page. :)
Poeticbent, again pls note that the discussion is still open... why the automatic revert? I stated that if more editors object to the changes the original items will be put back. Also, your swimming pool example got me lost… The theme that the new images try to convey and show; is the oldest university building in Poland (Collegium Maius), and one of the newest and most modern (Physics Building), this has more to do with showing historic/dynamic progress, than esthetics, or arguing if Collegium Maius is a university museum now or not. A classic stereotype about Poland is that everything is old and outdated, this change shows that this is not so, there is a real (not esthetic) mix of tradition and modernity side by side. --E-960 (talk) 17:26, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Pasteura 5.jpg
  • Tell it to people of the Cambridge University, will you? And don't pretend not to see the resemblance of your (now already twice reverted) replacement to a swimming pool complex. Please stop edit warring. Poeticbent talk 00:13, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, but your comments come across as just disruptive… What does Cambridge U. have to do with anything? And, what's up with the "swimming pool" references? The image is of the new Physics Facultie building, not a swimming pool facility. Here are more pictures from a news source documenting the new structure and how it looks inside and out [6] --E-960 (talk) 08:05, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
I said: "The older university gets, the more reputation it has to show for it. Magnificent historic buildings with considerable heritage value are the best symbol of that tradition." Your edit has been challenged and removed by multiple editors. Stop edit-warring. Poeticbent talk 19:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Poeticbent, your behavior is disruptive, and quite honestly it comes across as vandalism, first your sarcastically call the new building a "pool facility" and posted comments not based on merits just ridicule. Now, you are simply manipulating people's comments, when you said "Your edit has been challenged and removed by multiple editors". Not the case at all, after a positive debate which was settled until you re-opened it, please look at user Oliszydlowski comment: "To sum up, I am not against the changes you made and you proved your point so I am not going to revert anything. Best Regards :)". At this point, after reverting the images that were up for two weeks, it's you that is edit warring, and only you that objects. --E-960 (talk) 07:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Pls stop deleting my comments, this is vandalism plain and simple, everyone can see what I wrote and judge for themselves. --E-960 (talk) 15:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

South Korean Enterprises in Poland[edit]

   Many South Korean enterprises as well as other foreign companies have increasingly been entering into the polish market, and it may be assumed that two main reasons would be affected to make the choice to invest in Poland; first, it had geographical benefits surrounded by Germany and Russia which hold large consumer markets. Also, Poland bordered on the Baltic Sea, which is the substance of the trade in Northern European ocean. Second, the labor cost in Poland was relatively low compared to Korea. According to Eurostat, internal hourly labor rate in Poland was 7.4 euro (as of 2012) about 30% less than the Chec Republic and 10% less than Slovakia. In addition, the quality of the labor as well as its cheap price was one of the merits of investigation in Poland. Among the population aged 25 to 34, 41% of the youth at least got a bachelor’s degree, which is higher than the average of the European Union (EU), 35%, second highest among the middle-eastern Europe countries.   
   Daewoo International was one of the successful pioneer which expanded to the Polish market among South Korean companies. In the automobile industry, its lowering price strategy was effective; for example, Daewoo sold its middle-sized car (named Nexia) as the same price with the small cars in competing brands, such as Ford and Peugeot. For the small-sized car, Daewoo brought down its price as it did in auto markets in the other European countries. Likewise, other Korean companies, especially manufacturing and sales subsidiaries, buckled down to Polish market since 1993. It was impeded in the early 2000s as Korea was suffered by IMF at the end of the 1900s. However, as Poland became a member of EU in 2004, and its economy has been speedily increasing, the investigation and trade between Korea and Poland are also growing. 
   As well as an expansion of business in Poland, South Korean enterprises also tried to land a government project. For example, in 2003, KT and Daewoo International won a contract of a high-speed broadband network construction in Poland, a global project which Podlaskie state government ordered and was supported by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) to realize a “Digital Poland” project. After seven months, Mazowieckie state government also signed a contract with those two South Korean companies to establish the information super-highway network, and Korean government agency such as Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency (KOTRA) have promoted the cross-border contract for several years from searching information to awarding contract.  
   Recently, the effect of the Brexit is expected to cast over the burden on polish economy, since Britain had accounted for lots of share, and Poland has gained the most benefits from the EU fund. However, Poland is relatively safe without accepting refugees and EU funded projects are still emerging to develop Poland, which let polish market become more promising. Until 2013, Korea has invested to Poland more than 1 billion US dollars as cumulation, positioning a second largest investor in East Asia. As it is shown in the recent trend, the economic relationship between South Korea and Poland might post positive growth.
[1]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francis GM Song (talkcontribs) 14:14, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 


  1. ^ KOTRA. (2016). "폴란드 내 한국기업 진출 현황", (accessed November 13, 2016) 신주철 (2011). 1900년 전후 한국(인)과 폴란드·헝가리(인)의 상대 인식, 동유럽발칸연구 김종석 (2004). 체제 전환 이후 폴란드 정치 변동, 1997-2001, 국제지역연구 Political changes after the transformation in Poland(3): 1997-2001 박수형. (2013). “KT obtains 100 million USD worth Poland Internet network” October, 4 Sean Chung. (2013). “KT, Daewoo International Win Broadband Network Contract from Poland”, March 25 해외투자진출 정보포털. (2013). “폴란드 내 외국기업 투자 동향 및 우리기업 투자진출 전략”,721534&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&p_deps1=info&p_deps2=&oid=1131024170400777577. (accessed November 13, 2016) Eurostat. (2016). “Labour Cost Levels”, BAN Ki-moon. (2013). “World Investment Report 2013”, UNCTAD 해외투자진출 정보포털. (2016). “Brexit 사태에 따른 향후 폴란드 경제와 우리기업의 투자진출 전망”,721488&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL&p_deps1=pds&p_deps2=&oid=1161025173346294471 Frédérique Sachwald. (2001), “Going Multinational: The Korean Experience of Direct Investment”, Psychology Press Ewa Kaliszuk. (2016). "Chinese and South Korean investment in Poland: a comparative study", Taylor&Francis Online. pp 60-78.
  • I'm assuming this is a suggestion to add the above text to the article? --E-960 (talk) 07:51, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

King: Jesus Christ[edit]

That was a good one.Ernio48 (talk) 23:45, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah. Hysterically funny. Why didn't you revert it? There's a huge difference between inane vandalism and "funny": and it was about as funny as plastic vomit. Grow up. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:14, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Ernio48, not sure why an editor would condone offensive behavior with a new section/comment on the talk page? --E-960 (talk) 08:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Well, simple. /in article, someone reverts it and its gone as opposed to a new section on the talk page.Ernio48 (talk) 17:27, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
In other words, you're advocating the violation of WP:TALKNO in order to draw other people's attention to a vandal edit. You didn't bother reverting the edit, but have made a WP:POINT of retaining it for archiving. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:49, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Port of Gdynia[edit]

@Oliszydlowski, greetings, just wanted to raise a couple points regarding the new image selection in the Economy section. I would suggest that perhaps we should revert back to this image of the Port of Szczecin [7] for two reasons: First, the current image [8] is of the Sea Towers apartment high-rise overlooking the Port of Gdynia, and not quite of the actual port itself (if you look on a map, they are actually in two separate parts of town), which somewhat misses the point, while the original picture showed an actual shipyard in Szczecin. Second, there is no image that represents the area of Szczcin, while the Gdansk-Spopt-Gdynia area has an image of the medical university building. So, perhaps to highlight the West Pomeranian Voivodeship, and keep the image relevant to the economic activity of the maritime industry, we should return to the previous image. --E-960 (talk) 10:43, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

-I was considering making a talk discussion about the picture and ask whether it is suitable but since no one reverted my edit I thought it is ideal. I haven't noticed that Gdynia is mentioned twice so I think that going back to the previous image is alright. I would actually consider incorporating a new image of the Port of Szczecin into the article. Best Regards as always - Oliszydlowski 12:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps we can do a double image frame with both Szczecin and Gdynia, if you are able to find a Port of Gdynia image that is horizontal? This could solve the issue of which port is more noteworthy since both are actually pretty significant, one in the east the other in the west on the Baltic coast. --E-960 (talk) 12:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)