|
-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus talk 22:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I have extracted this passage of yours: The twins were also criticized by Lech Wałęsa who qualified them as humans without the necessary format[1].Suddeutsche Zeitung's analysis claims, however, that President's indignation made visible a well-known mental asymetry phenomenon in Polish-German relations; the asymetry meaning there a relatively low level of knowledge about Poles and some historical German prejudices against the neighbor nation [2]. I found those clauses unsuitable. The first is just a deprecative opinion and there are always a deluge of those.
The second is not "Suddeutsche Zeitung's analysis". They published several articles to it and this article or let's say editorial is more about jokes. Their apt analysis came weeks before. http://www.sueddeutsche.de/,polm1/ausland/artikel/985/79906/ What'S the "however" doing in there? Is the editorial trying to say that the taz article was showing a low level of knowledge about Poles and it was a historical German prejudice? Or that all of a sudden the taz article made visible those things as if by magic. The edtorial's headline made it loud and clear. The next Pole-joke is sure to come, that would make an editorial about Pole-jokes newsworthy. But it hadn't by then and before the editorial deadline would be missed some other connections to current events had to be made in its place. These would be so foolish, however, that it was better not to specify them. --Goethe 11:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I am pretty sure anybody, not only admins, can view Recent Changes (visible in the first toolbox to the left). I am not an admin on pl wiki but I can easily access Specjalna:Recentchanges. And yes, the text you quoted from pl wiki is somewhat misleading - but the article from Rzecz was about en wiki anyway.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus talk 00:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I am pretty sure that Miłosz did collaborate on translations of Herbert. I remember being fairly impressed with his translations, and noting how he even put in an explanatory reference to a Sŀowacki quote relevant to one of the poems, a note which is absent in the Polish editions of Herbert, presumably because the reference is clear enough to Polish poetry readers. In general I recall finding more to quibble with in the Carpenter versions. Stumps 22:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:LechKACZYNSKI1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi ... I don't 100 percent understand the footnote and quotation you've added to the Herbert article .. is this quoting something Herbert he himself said? And where does the 'Meeting' (spotkania?) fit in? Did Odra print speeches from a conference? Who is the translation by? I like the quote ... I simply want to understand who said it or wrote it and where it was printed. Pozdrawiam. Stumps 07:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi Beaumont/Stumps, do you happen to have a full translation of this speech? Apparently you both master the polish language very well (igniting my envy..). Could you contact me if you can provide any further translation of this piece? Thanks. LocusBeatus 01:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Since you commented on the article's talk page in the past, I thought you may want to take a look at the FAC review. Your comments, as that of a person familiar with the article, would certainly be appreciated.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 02:48, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 03:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
The vandalizers and anti-vandalizers know how to keep eachother busy, isn't it?--Daanschr 13:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
--Allen3 talk 16:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
The Exceptional Newcomer Award | ||
Since you have joined our community in June, you have continued to contribute extensivly to content and discussions. For your great assistance I, Piotrus, award you The Exceptional Newcomer Award. Keep up the good job! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC) |
Could you add languages known to your userpage? It would be quite useful for such items. And as I can see your French is better than mine, could you see if there is anything in French article about Katyn that could be added to ours? They have some interested footnotes about Nuremberg, but it would take me too long to translate them - rozumiem piąte przez dziesiąte :>-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Part of my objection in putting in these "foreign" toponyms, regards their being put in the leads of the articles. Relevant "historical" information is not objectionable to me being put into any article. The operative word being "relevant". For a while some were justifying such inclusions as trivial as quoting a novel written in the 19th century, mentioning the toponym as being the basis for putting it it the lead. Since you are opting for a historical perspective, can I count on your objectivity, and see if you will put the Lithuanian toponyms in the article leads of Lublin Union of Lublin, and Krakow (Capital of the Jagiellons)? Then we can discuss this some more, if you like. Dr. Dan 17:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
From your userpage: Most people assume the fights are going to be the left versus the right, but it always is the reasonable versus the jerks. - oh, that's so true... :) And thanks for your comments at my RfC. It's always nice to see that one is not alone or going crazy...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 21:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi Beaumont, regarding the vandalism you reverted at Terry Nutkins, good spot. Not sure if you fully scanned the wording of the vandalism, stating that a living person engages in "child rape" is unacceptable, clearly you revert a lot of vandalism (and long may ye be praised for that) so I appreciate you might not have the time to report every infraction you come across. I've indef blocked the IP until such time as they assert future good behaviour. Cheers, Deizio talk 16:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Please move Lysy's comments that I responded to as well, so that the "entire" picture is presented in a more accurate context. Dr. Dan 14:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
To push one or other side suggestions in the middle of argument, as you did in Kaunas article, is very rude and unprofessional. Wait until discussion is over, because behavior which you demonstrated, do not contribute to finding best solution. M.K. 21:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me that the Poland article was vandalized and that an anonymous user was trying to fix it. I occasionally misinterpet nonsense as the real facts, and you are right, I should go slower when reverting vandalism. Thanks for telling me earlier. Also, an edit is not vandalism when the bad edit was put there unintentionally.--PrestonH | talk | contribs | editor review | 18:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying the edit in Poland. Happy editing.--PrestonH | talk | contribs | editor review | 17:11, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
I am sorry to tell you that ru-sib has degenerated into a hate-speech site that promotes ethnic hatred and physical violence against non-chosen nations. You can find details at the meta-vote and user talk:A4. Please do not restore links to it. Hopefully it will either get cleansed from hatred or closed soon. --Irpen 19:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
It's a vandalism, provided by some russian users, nothing more. They can't understand differennce between external link and interwiki. The same vandalism you could see here - Ingria. --A4 18:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Lots of good intentions flying around, but not much in the way of useful stuff. Here is a nice template I found to organize your sure-to-grow collections of awards :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 13:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
|
These are not opinions. This is the basis of the dispute as provided by the nominator. You are wrong to assume that anybody may add there some diffs ad infinitum. Piotrus is not the nominator, so he cannot add anything to the list. If he adds something, I am free to remove it. Please consult RfAr rules before edit warring. Best, Ghirla -трёп- 16:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Ghirla and Piotr have agreed to try mediation with me. JzG who initiated the arbitration request has asked the committee to give this a chance to work. If you'd like to provide input your comments are welocme at User talk:Durova/Mediation/Input. Do you object to (at least trying) this alternative to arbitration? DurovaCharge! 23:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus-Ghirla. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus-Ghirla/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus-Ghirla/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srikeit 05:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Just wanted to let you know that you can change 'thru' to 'through' if you want, but the actual title of the page cited is "Routes 41 thru 60". Thanks! —Rob (talk) 21:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Just because the Communists call it something doesn't make it true. they also renamed Königsberg to Kaliningrad, but Kalinin never stepped foot in Königsberg. Especially true since we are talking about people who are known for their naming of anyone famous from the land they now own as being of their group.
--Jadger 21:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Thought you'd enjoy translating this to fr wiki, I am constantly puzzled it has not even a stub on him...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 04:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Beamont:
please stop vandalizing the List of Ukrainians. The text at the top of this list clearly states its scope:
This is a partial list of famous or notable people of who are ethnically Ukrainian, speak/write in the Ukrainian language, were important to the development of Ukraine culturally or politically, or who were born on today's Ukrainian territory. In the interest of fairness and accuracy, a minority of persons of mixed or foreign heritage have their respective ancestries credited.
Thus, acknowledging the Lviv mathematicians as Ukrainian (or Ukrainian and Polish) is within the scope and the intention of the List of Ukrainians.
You also made numerous chauvinistic remarks (e.g. attacking the Ukrainian wikipedia). Please stop this kind of behavior, as it severely undermines the spirit of this project. Behave European.
Re: [3] - what about adding it to Mieszko?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I have to admit I don't know much about the region current history. Perhaps you can offer some comments at a related RFI involving User:LUCPOL? PS. And if you look down you will see one involving me and some of our 'friends'...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Silesia - bo to jest nowa oficjalna nazwa proponowanego związku aktualnie powstaje. Dlatego też, zawiesiłem rozbudowę tego artykułu na pl.wikipedii, en.wikipedii i innych do póki nie powstanie. Domyślam się co chcesz zrobić - zmienić artykuł na en.wikipedii do poziomu pl.wikipedii, ale nie wiem czy to teraz (w styczniu 2007) ma jakiś sens. "Silesia" może powstać praktycznie lada chwila (choć to tylko zgadywanka), a jak powstanie to i na pl.wikipedii i na en.wikipedii przywrócony zostanie układ strony przez nowymi poprawkami. Nie zapominaj też, co było głównym powodem zmiany artykułu na pl.wikipedii. Tym powodem było tylko to, że ówczas GZM jeszcze nie powstał, a już tam był spis teatrów, komunikacji miejskiej itp. Ale inni wikipedyści są tego samego zdania co ja - nic nie stoi na przeszkodzie pisać o teatrach czy komunikacji, kiedy ten organizm administracyjny już powstanie. Więc rób co chcesz na en.wikipedii, mówię tylko że za późno się tym zacząłeś zajmować. Pozdrawiam. LUCPOL 12:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC) PS: Usuń twój wpis [4], ponieważ wpisałeś go w nieodpowiednim miejscu. Ja próbuję jak najszybciej!!! zakończyć konflikt z tym użytkownikiem, a ty tym tekstem rozpoczynasz dyskusję nad artykułem. Pomyliłeś miejsca, ten tekst wpisz w dyskusję artykułu. Jeśli nie usuniesz tego tekstu w ciągu (do) 4-6h, sam będę zmuszony to zrobić. LUCPOL 12:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Ze słownikiem w ręku trochę zrozumiałem, ale czytać po angielsku nie potrafię a pisać bezbłędnie wogóle nie potrafię. Tu jest dyskusja dotycząca starej treści artykułu - [5]. Zobacz sobie komentarze głosów przeciw: głównie chodzi o to, że artykuł pisze jak o istniejącym GZM-ie (choć go jeszcze nie ma) oraz to, że GZM to planowany twór (pisali to przeciwnicy "czasu przyszłego" na Wikipedii). Jakie są prawdziwe zadania Silesii? Większość z nich jest wypisana w artykule na pl.wikipedii. Linki (źródła) również tam są. Na en.wikipedii źródła zostały usunięte przez wandala R9tgokunks (ten, który zrobił mi RFI). Inne źródła są w internecie i w prasie. Dalej twojego tekstu nie zrozumiałem, nie wiem czy o to chodzi ale odpowiem: różnice pomiędzy starym GZM a Silesią (po kilku miesiącach) są tylko dwie: nazwa oraz większa integracja (z naciskiem na utworzenie największej w Polsce metropolii). Odpowiedź na inne pytania: Tak, to ma być jednostka administracyjna (w sejmie RP trwają m.in. dyskusje nad wprowadzeniem tzw. "ustawy aglomeracyjnej", która m.in. upodmiotowi "Silesię"). Na w/w SDU oraz według w/w tekstu widać, że kompletnie nie rozumiesz co to GZM, traktujuesz to jak związki typu "miasta bliźniacze" czy coś, co jest oczywistym błędem. I co ciekawe - tylko u ciebie zauważyłem taką opinie na temat GZM. Wracając do tematu: na końcu napisałeś (co rozumuję następująco): "Mój komentować RFI jest zamierzony, by zatrzymać aktualną dyskusję i skupić się na prawdziwym zagadnieniu. Czuć się swobodnie , by skomentować..." - a mianowicie: przypomnę jeszcze raz, że nie potrafię języka angielskiego. Czuć się swobodnie?!? Dla mnie te RFI to czysty koszmar, przez ostatnie dwa dni łykam tabletki uspokojające (poważnie), bo mnie doprowadza do szału to, że R9tgokunks zrobił dla mnie RFI, ładuje tam linki które nie są wandalizmem (ani jeden), pisząc jak o wandalizmie (sam przeczytaj te całe RFI to się przekonasz). Zaśmieca RFI kilkuset linkami z moimi loginami na innych wikipediach itp. Nie mam możliwości obrony, napisałem dwa teksty, które Piotrus (po jakimś czasie) przetłumaczył na język angielski. Nikt nie chce mi pomóc (prosiłem Piotrusa ale on nie ma czasu). Kogo mam poprosić (po polsku), aby ktoś opomniał R9tgokunks aby nie manipulował na RFI, aby wykreślił lub wyciął nieaktualne lub wyjaśnione sprawy. Kogo? Ja chcę te RFI zakończyć jak najszybciej, choćby dziś. Jestem w stanie zrobić wszystko aby usunięto te RFI natychmiast. Ja już poprostu nie wyrabiam nerwowo... a ty tu piszesz takie rzeczy?!? I dlatego proszę Cię, usuń swój komentarz z tej strony. Niech dyskusja na temat "Silesii" odbędzie się gdzie indziej np. na dyskusji tego artykułu lub na innej stronie nie związanej z moją osobą. Proszę, uszanuj moją wolę. PS. To jest en.wikipedia, ale na mojej dyskusji pisz tylko po polsku lub śląsku, bo ja angielskiego nie potrafię (większość tekstów to zgaduję lub nie wiem o co w nich chodzi lub w części zacharowuję się na śmierć przy słowniku języka angielskiego). LUCPOL 13:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks for you enters into Jan Dzierzon article--131.104.218.46 17:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
There is other reason I am appreciated. I was systematically provoked and persecuted by a few individuals. Seems to me I was too emotional or not smart enough with those trolls. You support for the historical facts in Jan Dzierzon article give me release. It stopped the aggressive folks. As a relatively new user and busy with common live projects I can not study the Wikipedia roles quickly and very effectively. However if I can do something for you I offer my help. My e-mail is andrewserafin@hotmail.com.--131.104.218.46 21:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Jogaila, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.
You're not listed, but you can add yourself if you like. Beats voting, Angus McLellan (Talk) 01:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
You forgot to sign your support vote on the survey. I signed it for you FIO, but it's not gonna count.Space Cadet 13:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
--TomasBat (Talk) 13:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Odnośnie GZM, kiedy już powstanie: najprawdopodobniej artykuł ten (na wszystkich wikipediach) będzie wzorowany na artykule Unii Europejskiej. Czyli będą osobne sekcje takie jak osobne artykuły UE np. History of the European Union (Historia), Geography of the European Union (Geografia), European Union member states (podział), Politics of the European Union (Polityka), Economy of the European Union (Gospodarka), Education in the European Union (Edukacja) itd, itd. Poprostu UE podobnie jak GZM to jawne granice, ludność, dany obszar posiadający swoje dobra itd. Myślę, że większość osób jest podobnego zdania. Owszem, przyznam jedno - artykuł GZM musi mieć odpowiednie sekcje: cele, polityka, powstanie GZM, zarządzanie itp, ale również sekcje dotyczące co jest na obszarze tego administracyjnego obszaru miejskiego, uczelnie, zabytki, gospodarka, sport, ekologia i inne. Piszę to, gdyż miałeś kiedyś odmienne zdanie na ten temat. Mam nadzieję, że ci dobrze wszystko wyjaśniłem. LUCPOL 23:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Beaumont. Can you please enfore some type of major clean up on that list? A few months ago a huge amount of Americans, Israelis, and Canadians of distant or questionable Polish heritage were added to the list, including Joe Lieberman, Russ Feingold, Geddy Lee, and more recently Adrien Brody, Scarlett Johansson, Richard Feynman and many others. Attempts were made to try to find sources that say there people were "Polish Jews" as is laid out right in the title of the list, but a group of users with WP:OWN issues guarded the list from all attempts to try to standardize it to the likes of all other lists like it. Now, the list is chock-full of ridiculous entries based solely on the fact that many of these people may have had a Polish-Jewish parent or grandparent. It needs some serious help and I clearly can't do it alone. 141.213.210.76 17:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Snowball effect does play a large role in my views (think also about why Nupedia failed. I just can't see any fork overtaking Wikipedia; bottom line is that there is only room for definite collection of information on the net (with the exception that if Wiki does something not notable and throws it away (fictional stuff like Memory Alpha or non-encyclopedic, others can scavenge it ;p). Citizendium has a nice idea but it is nothing more then a WikiProject with overblown ego (i.e. started on another website instead of Wikipedia namespace): since it's licences under GFDL too, there is nothing stopping Wikipedia from taking anything CZ develops - so while I can see a CZ community working on high quality articles, people will look for content on larger Wikipedia, and CZ will be nothing more then a quality-articles-creation wikiproject (like several others we have). That's, at least, my crystal ball take on the matter :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 13:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Some things that French Wikipedians would probably be intereste in may be French Military Mission to Poland, Blue Army and Franco-Polish Military Alliance - at least those three come to my mind immediatly.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
As you may have noticed, I have checked out the discussion on the List of Ukrainians article, adding a comment Well, what this anon guy is doing, man this is crazy And yet he is calling us Poles chauvinists Tymek 04:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Mibelz has been doing the same thing on List of Polish Jews as well as List of Ukrainians - adding names of people from every which nationality and claiming they are Polish Jews. Tried removing Scarlett Johansson and Richard Feynman from the list but the same excuse was given as the one on List of Ukrainians. Also, I'm puzzled by his creation of List of Galician Jews; an odd subdivision of territory/ethnicity, mixing Ukrainians and Poles into one list. LeszekB 18:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (Talk) 20:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
The FA promotions/failures are normally handled by a bot so are almost instantaneous from the moment that Raul654 does the promotions, but Gimmetrow, who runs it is on a wikibreak, which is why it didn't get done until I went round doing it by hand yesterday. It's impossible to tell if you go directly to the FAC nomination page, but you can tell by looking at Wikipedia:Goings-on (which lists the promotions and date). If the article listing is missing from WP:FAC and isn't listed at Goings on, then that probably means the FAC has failed, but you can check for certain by going to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations and checking the log for the month. Anything in there has failed. Yomanganitalk 15:30, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I know you rarely visit anymore :( but I hope you would like to do some editing of this new article I created; maybe translate a stub into fr and pl wikis?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
When I found some great sources for that subject, I just had to write another DYK :) Enjoy. PS. Based on the numbers, it seems that half of this army was recruited from French Polonia, but I can't find a statement about that for a citation... I found also something about 'elusively Polish resistance units in France', founded from the soldiers after battle in France, but again, can't find anything specific. Maybe in French? Mine is too poor for searching :( -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 15:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2007-07-30/Citizendium analysis.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Compare Maxime_Weygand#Weygand_in_Poland and fr:Maxime_Weygand#Pologne. If my French is correct, the fr wiki makes some uncited claims that Waygand might have actually done something? Or are they talking about the junior officers? The latter would be more correct; indeed, de Gaulle distinguished himself, for example.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 00:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)