User talk:Volunteer Marek/Archives/2009/June

Re:Stefan Knapp's photo

Not necessarily :( Let me play devil's advocate. Here's a good question for you: what license would you like to use? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, two possible choices - either UK ordinary copyright in which case it's a no go since it's got to be 70 years. Or US copyright under "Anything published before January 1, 1964 and not renewed is in the public domain" - but then how would you know? This is always what gets me about these copyright issues. Also it says that "A work by the US federal Government is in the public domain." which I take it to mean that if this was a US Air Force photo rather than RAF then it could be used. I don't know how it works. The website says that the photo comes "ze zbiorów pana Pawła Sokołowskiego", who apparently runs the "official" site: [1]. Does that mean that if I write Sokołowski and get his ok, then I can use it?radek (talk) 01:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Molobo SPI

I have responded here User talk:AdjustShift#Explanation. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 03:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Responded again, thank you. -- Avi (talk) 03:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Communism

Hi Radeksz, you used a POV template in Communism but did not clearly stated why. Please discuss it on the talk pages of the article. Best,--Ioannes Pragensis (talk) 08:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

3RR at historical truth commission

You seem to have broken 3RR at Historical Truth Commission. Maybe you should self-revert your last? Offliner (talk) 19:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - though I think two of those reverts were copy vio removals.radek (talk) 20:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

As I've learned, no reverts are safe. Report copyvio to Wikipedia:Copyright problems - better safe then sorry. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Danuta Siedzikówna

I think this can be DYKed... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I think so too - should the credit go to User:Anna Tertel?radek (talk) 21:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

More than one user can be credited, see my recent dyk nom for Madajczyk, still visible at T:TDYK. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:26, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Police, PL

Why do you keep reverting?! Please provide your rationale. If you think I deleted something, read carefully and you will find that this is not the case. If you don't like "Soviet and Polish town", make the Soviet period an extra section - I just had them together to avoid tiny sectins. Skäpperöd (talk) 15:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

What is OR or POV about splitting the history in "German town" and "Polish town"? Do you dispute the town was German before 1945, Soviet until 1946 (partially 1947) and Polish thereafter? And that the whole population, administration etc pp - just about everything - changed after WWII (which justifies different sections)? Skäpperöd (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

A source that Police is a Polish town? You must be kidding. Every map would be a source. What exactly does upset you so much? I really don't get it. Skäpperöd (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

No, a source which calls it "a Soviet town", or "German town" for that matter. Splitting up the history like that is definitely OR or at least synth.radek (talk) 16:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok let's unravel this. The town was German before 1945, what is OR calling it a "German town"? The town was Soviet in the WWII aftermath, what is OR calling it a "Soviet town"? The town subsequently was handed over to Poland, wahat is OR calling it a "Polish town"? Maybe one could change "Soviet" in "Soviet administered", because it was not actually part of the Soviet Union. Skäpperöd (talk) 16:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

What are the criteria used to decide whether something is a "German town"? Why not a "Pomeranian town"? Also, usually people named "Bogisław" are not really German. Splitting up like that, besides being OR, which just generate the usual ethnic conflict.radek (talk) 16:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, you say Bogislaw doesn't sound German, so the town could not have been either, and I guess this is your problem. While your observation is right, your conclusion is not. Bogislaw is not a usual German name, but a Slavic Pomeranian name. And looking at the Pomeranian dynasty (House of Pomerania), you will find that most of its members are named either Bogislaw, Wartislaw, Barnim, or Otto. Does that make them Slavs? And if you try to determine the ethnicity by looking at their family tree, you will find all neighboring countries involved. Does that make them Poles, Danes, Mecklenburgians? And even if the duke was an ethnic Slavic Pomeranian (which he was not), does that make his duchy and his townspeople ethnic Slavic Pomeranians? It is undisputed that these dukes themselves initiated the process that led to the German settlement of the area and the assimilation of the remaining Wends. All the towns in the Duchy of Pomerania were founded as German towns - German settlers, Germanized Wends, German town law, German language etc pp. You must understand that there is no conflict in being a German duke with Pomeranian roots and a Pomeranian name. Skäpperöd (talk) 17:50, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

But this is exactly why we shouldn't label the town as "a German town"; a Slavic Pomeranian name, he ethnicity by looking at their family tree, you will find all neighboring countries involved, etc. You're making this argument better than I did.radek (talk) 18:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

No. Does the "ethnic background" of the Russian tsar or the English king make these persons themselves non-Russian / non-English, and does that make their towns and their people non-Russian / non-English? Skäpperöd (talk) 18:06, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Obviously people and towns are two different things. As you point out yourself, the matter is a lot more complicated then just the fact that some German people lived there. And, for example, a Welsh town, is still more or less a Welsh town, even if the British King is a German. Basically, these kinds of labels are to be avoided because they generate these kind of discussions due to their ORish nature and provoke ethnic edit warring.radek (talk) 18:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Who else lived there besides Germans? Your Wales argument does not match the situation. The Welsh nobility did not decide to call in English settlers to found English towns. Skäpperöd (talk) 18:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

It depends which period you're talking about (within the greater pre-1945 period) and which source you ask. radek (talk) 18:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

All modern mainstream sources agree that the population was German, consisting of German settlers and their descendants, Germanized Wends, additionally a few Danes and if you want to seperate the Dutch from the Germans, you would have to include Dutch and Flemish, too. All mainstream modern sources agree that the evolving population and the Griffin dynasty spoke Low German and was subject to German law, except for some rural areas where the Wendish element prevailed for awhile. See Buchholz (German) and Piskorski (Polish), the leading experts, for the most recent and most detailed "History of Pomerania" books. Both experts are in close contact btw and acknowledge that the Cold War is long over. Skäpperöd (talk) 18:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

What does this have to do with the Cold War?radek (talk) 18:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Sigh

Niedźwiedzia przysługa. And the culprit seems to be inactive now... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:03, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Argh. I can get on it in a day or two, after I give my students finals and grade'em.radek (talk) 17:05, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Kolberg/Kolobrzeg

You are reverting me just for the sake of it, right? Thietmar lived around the year 1000. How could he possibly mention a town founded centuries later? He mentioned the Pomeranian stronghold at modern Budzistowo, not the town founded during the Ostsiedlung. Skäpperöd (talk) 18:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

No, and I resent the accusation. You decided to edit a series of articles on Polish towns almost simultaneously and basically in the same way (de-Polonize, re-Germanize them). Why are you surprised that your multiple changes, made without discussion on talk, are being reverted (and not just by myself but by other editors as well)? And yes, Thietmar mentioned the town that was already there. The granting of Lubeck law to the later settlement is already discussed in the text.radek (talk) 18:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

You did not address my point. The German town Kolberg was founded in open range some kilometers away from the Pomeranian stronghold, which was then renamed Old Kolberg. It is not the same town. Thietmar lived 200+ years before the town was founded. And no, I did not de-Polonize anything. Skäpperöd (talk) 18:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Stefan Knapp

On June 8, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stefan Knapp, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Royalbroil 03:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Copyright cleanup

Thanks so much for helping out at User:Moonriddengirl/Contribution check Martim33! Your checks are very helpful. Normally, when I'm done fixing an article, I just delete it from the list. It's good working with you, – Quadell ^(talk) 02:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Danuta Siedzikówna

On June 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Danuta Siedzikówna, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 17:28, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Maybe getting a little paranoid...

...but since now you can get accused of something and blocked based on "secret evidence" that you aren't allowed to see, I just want to note that I was the first one to use the edit summary rvt usual anon monkey business [2], and that these edits by another anon [3] are not me, nor do I know who that person is. I assume they saw my edit summary and just thought that calling the regular disruptive edits which make their appearance like clockwork on Poland related articles by anon 70.... "usual monkey business" was funny. Thank you.radek (talk) 19:08, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Lucas Welfare Cost of Fluctuations

On June 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lucas Welfare Cost of Fluctuations, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wizardman 02:35, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I wanted you to know I appreciated your statements on the 3RR notice board. It appears I still have much to learn regarding the policies and guidelines. To that end I have decided to relinquish rollback and return to manual editing for the near future. I want to earn the trust of editors in general; that desire is stronger with regard to those, like yourself, that have gone out of their way to help and support me. See ya 'round Tiderolls 00:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Lublin Ghetto

Ladnie ci zrobilem? A na pl mnie zbanowali. --Ostateczny Krach Systemu Korporacji (talk) 01:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

reminder

remember when you said this? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spieprzaj dziadu!. Ostap 15:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Lublin Ghetto

Thank you for your note. It's an interesting article. Frankly, I'm surprised Wikipedia didn't have an article about the ghetto previously. Thanks for taking care of that. :-) — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 03:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:AE

Hi, Skäpperöd just started another WP:AE against me and he also mentioned you and Jacurek.. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Loosmark (talk) 17:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)