Talk:Pszczyna

Tongue twister

It would be nice to have a citation that for use of this town instead of the one listed in the article on the poem itself. More important would be to have the twister and translation. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of my changes

I cannot understand why my changes from 20th of January got reverted. I had references for them and f.e. it's a fact, that the city voted mainly for Germany in 1921 unlike the county (I added both informations). In this form the article is POV and I'm not sure, if the municipal website of Pszczyna is the best source for historical informations. Greetings --PetrusSilesius (talk) 18:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo PetrusSilesius You are surprised. You assume that this is an English wikipedia, because that's what it seems to be at first glance and because it calls itself ENglish wikipedia - But it is not - While it is often written in broken or partially English, a number of names, places and histories are totally flooded and overwhelmed by a group of none-english native speakers, who as some reasonable english-language speakers have already observed "will not let facts stand in their way at all". You will not find too much in the history section, that is objective, fair, let along factual. MfG 24 Jan 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.133.64.78 (talk) 04:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-added the informations (we also discussed these facts on German Wikipedia) - I hope they will not be deleted at once...--PetrusSilesius (talk) 18:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal homepages are not acceptable on Wikipedia as source of information.--Molobo (talk) 03:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear anon, just be bold and help out with making Wikipedia a better source of knowledge, instead of bashing it in your broken English. Tymek (talk) 00:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@Molobo: I've the impression, that in your opinion only informations are acceptable sources which seem to confirm your myth of Pszczyna being an always 100% Polish fortress against the bad Germans. I wanted to outline that the history of the city was far more complicated - but I see myself bared from "making Wikipedia a better source of knowledge". In this form the article contains lots of mistakes (f.e. in 1921 a Pszczyna "Powiat" not existed and throughout the article Pszczyna County is equated with the city of Pszczyna). My changes were referenced and f.e. looking at the site of Kulturwerk Schlesien, you will realize that this isn't a "personal homepage" and you will find sources for the text - in contrast to the municipal website, where not even an author is named. PetrusSilesius (talk) 12:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As my comment on Poeticbent's talk page was deleted unanswered and also here no discussion is developing I list my changes and restore them in the article:

1.) German Ostsiedlung - have a look at my source or a historical atlas

2.) "In 1829 Poles comprised 94,3 % of its [city of Pszczyna] population." according to the given source this number concerns the whole county.

3.)"During the 1921 Silesian plebiscite, according to original document by Central Statistical Office, there were 105,744 Polish-speaking persons in Pszczyna powiat and only 16,464 speaking German." No, this numbers are for the year 1910 - I've added the 1900 census (86,6% Poles in the county) and linked it with these numbers of 1910 census (86,0% Poles in the county).

4.) I added the plebiscite result for Pszczyna city which looking at the structure of the population is very realistic.

Greetings PetrusSilesius (talk) 12:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted falsfication of source

Nowhere in the text does Datner name the Polish mass murdered by Germans as 'soldiers'. --Molobo (talk) 23:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pszczyna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:27, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Pless" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Pless. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 23#Pless until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:11, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]