User talk:Staszek Lem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

/shortlist

"Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for that rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge"

Polish Constitutional crisis[edit]

Per WP:RM#CM obviously controversial moves should be discussed first and not moved until a WP:CONSENSUS is reached, please respect this policy. HerkusMonte (talk) 08:20, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Diplomacy[edit]

Peace Barnstar 6.png The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Staszek Lem, with much pleasure, you are awarded this Barnstar for your even-handedness and fairness in trying to resolve peacefully, conflicts on Wikipedia! -- Poeticbent talk 05:10, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Pilot Pirx[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Google Street View in Africa[edit]

I'm unsure what your objectives are regarding the removal of the information indicating what coverage certain countries and territories have. Clearing unreferenced information is good, but I think you have gone a little overboard. Maybe doing some research and adding references before doing something hasty would have been better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hesky10 (talkcontribs) 23:40, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I have also noticed you have removed large chunks from the google street view in Asia and Europe pages. I must protest at these changes and say they are not beneficial to users, you now have to navigate so much text to find the information you want, which you didn't need to do before as the page was split by country who had coverage of varying amounts and you could skip to a certain country/territory.

I hope I'm not the only person who preferred the previous layout which was here, and in the Asia and Europe pages respectively, and hopefully I have given enough reason for you to change them back to how they were previously. Hesky10 (talk) 23:49, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

@Hesky10: I am disinclined to acquiesce your request (means "No!"). Wikipedia has certain policies which were militantly ignored by "Google Earth" sockpuppets. They were given quite some time to clean their act. Staszek Lem (talk) 03:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer, I'm sure I will get used to the layout changes in time! Hesky10 (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

You have removed the entire list of places covered by Google Street View in Europe and Google Street View in Asia. But the list of covered places had references. On https://www.google.com/maps you can see that listed places are covered or not. This reference was maybe not properly formatted, but that should have been fixed.--BIL (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
@BIL: A software output is not a valid reference. It is called original research Staszek Lem (talk) 18:19, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The output of Google Streetview is not original research. The output of Google Streetview counts as source for what the content of Google Streetview is. Please describe where in WP:NOR this is described. All of the internet is software output.--BIL (talk) 21:01, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 ::@BIL: Not not everything on internet is software output. Anyway, if you want to waste your time and make a catalog of Google Street View, I will no longer object, as long as you will provide a valid reference for each and every item. How long will it take for you? Staszek Lem (talk) 22:12, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
At least for the list of included areas in Streetview, it must be accepted that it is referenced by Streetview itself. The list of introductions by date is more doubtful as Streetview itself does not include this info directly. So for the latter list I won't really try to revert any deletions.--BIL (talk) 22:29, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Beast fable[edit]

Panchatantra is mentioned prominently in Beast fable -- in fact, it constitutes one of this article's few referenced statements. And Beast fable occurs in {{Panchatantra}}. Isn't this sufficient justification for the template to appear in the article? Phil wink (talk) 23:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Phil wink: Navboxes are used to navigate across articles which constitute immediate coverage of the topic in question. "beast fable" is a generic term. We don't include "panchatantra" template into India article, do we? Panchatantra is mentioned prominently in Beast fable simply because this article is severely underdeveloped. Likewise we don't include {{Aesop}} and others into "beast fable", because this would be upside-down hierarchy. The "immediate coverage" criterion is crucial, otherwise we will have some articles mightily littered by marginally relevant templates. 00:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

best AfD nom ever...[edit]

for Sanathdeva Murutenge. :-) -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 07:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Primary sources guidelines[edit]

Here is the direct link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_primary_and_secondary_sources#.22Secondary.22_is_not_another_way_to_spell_.22good.22 Articles in journals are often not free to read full text. Don't delete such self-published sources. thx. I have purposefully found primary sources that are free with full text. --Asterixf2 (talk) 08:50, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

This looks like a direct link to wp:FRINGE, if not nonsense. See more at your User talk:Asterixf2 - DVdm (talk) 09:20, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Information icon Hello, I'm Asterixf2. I noticed that you removed topically-relevant content from Entropic force. However, Wikipedia is not censored to remove content that might be considered objectionable. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.--Asterixf2 (talk) 15:56, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

@Asterixf2: I did not "censor" anything. Please don't use warning templates the purpose of which you probably don't understand. Please write in your own words what you have in mind. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:33, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Vaxxed Drama[edit]

Your input would be appreciated Here. Thanks. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 21:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Victim feminism[edit]

Hi Staszek, I just want to ask you a couple questions, as I'm trying to assume good faith at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victim feminism. Why are you arguing so forcefully on a topic that you admittedly know very little about? You have taken a controversial political framing used by a certain segment of feminists and argued that it is just a classification system used by "some scholars". That is very misleading. The concepts that it represents are already covered on Wikipedia (under more neutrally titled articles such as gender feminism and radical feminism). What can I do to convince you that "victim feminism" is a politically biased term? Kaldari (talk) 19:48, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Citation needed in Military globalization[edit]

Military globalization is the increase of range within which military power can be projected through the progress of military organization and technology and the increasing strategic interrelation first of regional systems and later of the global system.{{}citation needed|date=April 2016}

Citation does not exist. I composed the opening section basing on the opening section in Globalization. Max. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxaxax (talkcontribs) 01:45, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Filing at 3RR[edit]

I know they've been removing all sorts of messages from their talk page, but it's generally a good idea to let a user know when you've nominated them at 3RR. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 20:09, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for your help with the Dmitry Polyakov article. As you said at the AfD, the user is alarmingly uncooperative. Bishonen | talk 15:47, 13 May 2016 (UTC).

Oława[edit]

It's simple for an ignorant to say: "Wild speculations"

at: http://sbb-music.jimdo.com

You may find countless links showing that those are not "speculations". But this demands deep understanding, time and will to do so !!!

By the way, some of the Iakšaku dynasty Spyra line were known as Pernus or Pernusius in Kraków, their tombs were in the St. Mary's Basilica, Kraków and their descendants were neighbours of the real Mr. Stanisław Lem - the famous novelist. One of them assisted Charles Vern Bender in preparing the Hollywood version of "Solaris" just 2 years before Mr. Lem passed away.

Also in Kraków at exactly 50⁰N/20⁰E there is a monument placed by one of them (probably in the 17th century).

Please study facts (there are many downloads including ancient documents at he sbb site) and restore to previous state.

This is the editor banned at WP:PERUNBAN. Doug Weller talk 19:34, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Please provide edit summaries[edit]

Given: [1], and other recent edits at Scientific dissent please provide edit summaries. They help the rest of us understand what you are contributing. Thank you. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 01:41, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Victor W. Marek[edit]

Thank you for bringing back the notability tag. Unfortunately, I have very little time to handle this case, but given the amount of time you spend on WP I believe you can find yourself plenty of evidence in accordance to Wikipedia:Notability (academics) in favour of keeping this person (one of maybe 10 most notable Polish living computer scientists, author of legendary, but written only in Polish, handbook Analiza kombinatoryczna) in en.wikipedia.org. alx-pl d 13:00, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Why do you think that my time is less valuable than yours? Staszek Lem (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Scientific dissent for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Scientific dissent is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scientific dissent until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: Google Street View[edit]

Look, you are the only one who wants to delete the article, that is not fair. I think we need a voting, but until that, the article has to be kept. For many years everybody accepts the article, edited very well, but now you call them "sockpuppets". How do you know they were sockpuppets? That is too subjective, in your mind, but we need facts. I ask for a voting and not just deletion because you want or think that is a "directory". Please, do not undo my contribution when I do the same. Excuse for my English, I'm not English language native speaker. --Humberto del Torrejón (talk) 20:45, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

You should wait for the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coverage of Google Street View before redirecting similar continent/country-level articles, such as Google Street View in the United States and Google Street View in Canada, to Google Street View. Pristino (talk) 07:28, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for reverting me at Ronda Rousey, I had on a silly browser extension, which I've disabled now. That is the only affected edit. Make91 (talk) 21:23, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

116 lbs is what she weighed at, and that information is from Sherdog. For non title fights there is 1 lb leeway so fighters often weigh exactly 1 lb over the limit. Make91 (talk) 21:31, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Moved post[edit]

Hi, I moved your WT:FRINGE post to Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#A_fringe_case_of_.22fringe.22. That's the place where particular articles are brought for discussion, while the focus of WT:FRINGE is just the WP:FRINGE guideline itself. Best, Manul ~ talk 23:41, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Heraldic family[edit]

Greetings! I just saw Your input on question rased and we post in same time. So You could go back to page and see what is posted! Best regards and thank You for Your input! camdan (talk) 21:51, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
I invite You to discussion about question raised on Wikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry camdan (talk) 14:40, 10 August 2016 (CEST)
Do You have time tio help to improive some art.? Its lot of work to be done here to make it all on acceptable level. I will do "Polish heraldry on FA level" as I have done it before on pl:wiki, then we have art. "Heraldic clan" - it need to stick to the subject and explain the origin of the term and finally "Polish Clans" - here, necessary to work in team since subject is big and very difficult. Unless we wish to write art. that consist many errors and forward those errors to the reader. camdan (talk) 20:52, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Look, I dont want to cause problems or waste time. Just to point out few things. When I write about old publication like Kutrzeba's, I dont mean that its all wrong - in fact he have done lot of great work. However, narration and conclutions are old. Science go fast now, there is cooperation between all European scientiest to find the truth, also DNA technics add a lot of value. Six years ago, when I created the art. "Clan of Ostoja", the narration is different than today, and art need now to be rewriten in some sections because narration is not of what we know today. Soon we will know if Rollo was Danish or Norwegian (DNA tests) and also about the origin of Piast and origin of population of Greater Poland (DNA project). Indications tell that we might rerwrite entire history of slavic population in Poland. Problems with sources and to correct huge amount of errors - Uruski is completely dissmissed as academic cource and as reliable source. Boniecki is a mess - part of his work is correct and part is not, how on earth can onyone tell what is correct and what is not without checking original sources? What I mean is that we can use different sources and forward narration that is false. And people tend to believe in what is written and not question becasue of lack of knowledge. Like the list of names in Gajs work. This guy is a fantom, I just cant believe that he make all of this without having mental break down (actually he have been close few time). But...its still just a list, he dont verify if the documents is false or not because its not possible for him to do as he would need 200 years to do that. When Bajor created DNA project of Rurikid lines, only 4 years ago origin was not clear, conclutions questioned but today indications are much stronger and its close to consensus. In same way, article "Polish heraldry" need to be rewritten using also more modern sources but there is problem with new publications since its expensive to publish a book and not many are interested in subject of heraldry. Its not easy! You read a book, a source and You dont know if it is correct interpretation or not. We are actually in the middle of huge fog, we see and understand very little. And You can read history 30 years on academic level and only what you get is more questions raised than before. To make good article, we all need to understand the problem and cooperate, discuss and find best possible way to forward as correect narration as possible. camdan (talk) 10:20, 13 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.150.197.196 (talk)

laser welding equipment[edit]

I broke the laser welding equipment section into two sections - one for CAM and one for lasers -- I hope it is clear at what I am getting at....added more information and refs.--Tornwaily (talk) 12:39, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Scientific dissent for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Scientific dissent is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scientific dissent (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. jps (talk) 02:37, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Staszek Lem. You have new messages at Tianderni's talk page.
Message added 18:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tianderni (talk) 18:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

SpotOption and Banc de Binary[edit]

SpotOption itself says that Banc De Binary is one of its "brands".[2]. John Nagle (talk) 21:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

@Nagle: I am not sure this comment is addressed to me. At least I didn't ask any questions about them. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:39, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
That was in reference to your edit at [3] with edit comment "Regulation: different company; no sources cited describe their "collaboration)". Although that connection probably should be sourced better. Don't worry about it. John Nagle (talk) 06:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Polish heraldry[edit]

Hello. Im working with art. to improve it adding citations, sources and also trying to imnprove it to be at GA level. I would much appreciate any kind of help form Your side. Aa well as with improving art. Heraldic clan. Best regards, camdan (talk) 04:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jaguar (microarchitecture)[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jaguar (microarchitecture). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)