User talk:Alden Jones

User talk:Alden Jones/archiwe 1

I'm leaving wikipedia. The End. Don't ask why. Alden or talk with Alden 17:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

If you have some business, please contact on en wikiquote

Editwar

Poprawiłem błąd techniczny związany z userboxem (za co podziękowałeś mi na privie), a później Kuminal to zrevertował. Visor (talk) 11:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Moim zdaniem jednak ten userbox był dobrze zrobiony (wiem co mówię, jestem po informatyce), więc nie wiem czemu Visor rewertuje coś na czym się najwyraźniej nie zna. Kuminal (talk) 12:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Nie trzeba być po informatyce żeby stwierdzić, że w tej wersji coś jest nie tak z userboxem inkluzjonisty ;) Visor (talk) 17:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Renata (talk) 13:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

If you don't calm down, I will have no other choice but to block you for a day or two for 3 revert rule violation and personal attacks. Commenting on specific users, their education or intelligence level is completely unacceptable. Please take a break to clear out your mind. This is your last warning. Renata (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Harassment

Please review Wikipedia:Harassment, specifically user space harassment. Continuing to restore this material to the user's talk page is problematic with regards to that behavioral guideline. Note that continuing such behavior will lead to blocks for disruption. (Also, please be advised that there is an open conversation about this matter at the administrator's noticeboard/incidents.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree with users above. Restoring your message repeatedly is not good. I suggest you concentrate on writing content instead of trying to discuss things with editors like M.K.

Musze sie zgodzic z tymi komentarzami powyzej. Zostawiles mu wiadomosc raz, odtwarzanie jej jest w tak samo zlym stylu jak jego usuwanie - a nawet gorszym. Skoncentruj sie na pisaniu artykulow, nie ma co dyskutowac z M.K.

--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

--Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:18, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Hello. You were blocked for attempting to harass another user, just as the blocking notice indicates. You were warned that continuing to restore material to user's talk pages was against the guideline and that persistence would lead to a block for disruption. So it did. Please stop. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe User:M.K is an administrator. However, even if he is, it might be considered prudent of him to leave it for somebody else to address. I have no idea what your history with M.K. might be or the source of your conflict. Anyway, I have his page watchlisted for now to be sure that the disruption doesn't continue. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

e-mail address

Hey! My e-mail (and also MSN) address is xander.harris69@hotmail.com Who are you xD Wax69 (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Official propose

Thank you but no. I already have to much work :) / Dzięki, ale nie. Już teraz mam za dużo roboty :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree

The AK article should be closed for a moment to let the discussion evolve.--Molobo (talk) 09:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Windows Vista Embedded

Hello Warren, Windows Vista Embedded article hasn't sources, so I please you about help with this article, because, it isn't believable article, if hasn't sources. Alden or talk with Alden 07:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Alden, sorry it took me a while to get back to you on this... it looks like some progress has been made in figuring out what is going on with Vista Embedded. I was a bit skeptical myself but Microsoft has recently made some announcements about it and User:Soumyasch and I have talked about how to move forward. Have a look at our talk pages for that conversation, and some links to potentially useful sources. Any further help you can render with getting things organised would be great. :-) -/- Warren 00:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Your entry on WP:FACE

Hi Alden. I'm sending this message to every user who has an entry on Wikipedia's Facebook but whose picture is currently not visible for some reason. As I explained on Wikipedia talk:Facebook#Removal of empty spaces, I will remove these entries within a week unless a user inserts a picture into it. However, you have stated on this page that you are currently away, and that you will be back in May. As I do not consider it very nice to remove a user from the facebook without him/her being aware of it, I will not remove your name yet. Cheers, Face 13:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC) PS: My name is a coincidence.

Ok then, in simple English: go to this page: Wikipedia:Facebook. As you can see, you are on that page, but you do not have an image. If you want to stay on the facebook, you should have some sort of image. Do you want to stay on that page, or should I remove you? Cheers, Face 22:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Fear: Anti-Semitism in Poland after Auschwitz‎

Why are you deleting reliably sourced text. do you realize that this is an article about a book, and you are deleting quotes from that book? Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 21:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a quote from the book, which a reliable source describes as the author's summary of the book. The fact that yuo don't like what the author says is zero gruonds for censoring it. Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 21:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Discuss it on the article talk page. Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 21:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

Gamaliel (talk) 21:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Would you care to explain...

...what this revert was? Did you actually look at what you were reverting? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 13:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I reverted it, because version by Tymek was better than other version behind version Piotrus, and Molobo. By the way - I can't said why did I revert --- this my business, so please don't more ask about it me, because I won't answer on your questions about my reverts. Please you should learn Polish history - maybe then you're going to understand it, because I think that you can't understand and you're unhelpful editor. Alden or talk with Alden 14:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

In other words, you didn't actually look at the edit; you were just edit warring. I didn't remove, add, or change any content other than a duplicated piece of text that was seriously breaking the formatting -- in particular the references. Blind reverts of that sort are the worst sort of edit warring. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 14:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, we encourage users to discuss their edits by using talk pages. I notice that on two contentious articles you have recently reverted editors while not using the talk page. And when a respected, long-standing user asks you to explain your revert, you have rudely replied to him and refused to discuss the matter. This is not "your business", as you put it, this is the business of Wikipedia, and here on Wikipedia we collaborate and discuss this business with other editors. In the future, when you involve yourself in edit wars, please use the talk page to discuss controversial reverts. Gamaliel (talk) 17:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Your recent message

I have removed your personal attack from my talk page. I note that Wikipedia is not racist and it allows people of any race or ethnicity to edit any article. I also note the policy Wikipedia:No personal attacks. If you persist in your personal attacks against myself or any other editor, you are subject to blocking for disruption. Gamaliel (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This is your final warning. Restore your attack again or attack any other editor and you will be blocked. Gamaliel (talk) 20:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. Gamaliel (talk) 20:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I am endorsing Gamaliel's warning. Tylko trolle nazywają innych trollami, zachowuj się albo dostaniesz bloka.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Howard Webb

Yes I reverted this edit because it does not add anything notable. Every referee who makes a crucial decision affecting one team or other will upset one set of fans. In this case I suspect quite a few Polish Fans. But that is not notable and the existing content which has been referenced reflects this already. Its not a matter of finding a citation to make your edit valid Tmol42 (talk) 22:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I have again reverted. Please check this reference already provided here With all due respect I think you need to reflect on this Tmol42 (talk) 22:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Truce of Vilna

Alden Jones, lets be reasonable. You have come off a 48 hour block and you immediately start revert warring. If you keep edit warring you will be blocked again, for a longer time. Please use the talk page and explain your reverts. Ostap 22:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, come on. Next time just explain why you are reverting. Ostap 20:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Reverting

Alden, you've already been blocked for sterile edit warring. It appears that you're not showing any signs of stopping. A wholesale revert like this with no discussion is not helpful. Consider this a final warning: unless you stop sterile edit warring and start discussing, you will be blocked. Khoikhoi 06:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Please don't back to r3r at Truce of Vilna. So I can't understand why you've just backed to it. Yes you're wrtting true, edit wars are bad. But I've reverted it for requests one of user EN-Wiki. And please: don't say about block for me - if you can't block me, because in this situation block would be trolling. Alden or talk with Alden 19:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Revert wars are evil. Could you please be more specific, who was that user that did ask you for a favor?--Lokyz (talk) 19:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Why are you asking who user pleased me about revert? I can't say who is pleasing me about revert, because it's mystery of correspondention. Do not ask more about it. Alden or talk with Alden 06:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Please create content

Alden, please consider creating content. I told you several times you can contribute much to this project by writing. Reverts should not be your primary activity.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Would you help me?

Yes, Alden, I will be happy to help you with content creation. I will add your sandbox to my watchlist.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:19, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tznkai (talk) 15:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The remedies that have been adopted are as follows;

• Should Alden Jones (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) resume editing Wikipedia, he shall be assigned a volunteer mentor, who will be asked to assist him in understanding and following policy and community practice to a sufficient level that additional sanctions will not be necessary.
• Alden Jones (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is limited to one revert per page per week, with the exception of simple vandalism; and is required to discuss all content reverts on the relevant talk page. Should he violate this restriction, he may be blocked by any administrator as provided in the enforcement ruling below.
• Boodlesthecat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.
• Deacon of Pndapetzim (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished to avoid edit-warring.
• Greg park avenue (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.
• Irpen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is urged to avoid interacting directly with or commenting about Piotrus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) under any circumstances, except for any necessary commentary in the course of bona fide dispute resolution.
• Irpen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is limited to one revert per page per week, with the exception of simple vandalism; and is required to discuss all content reverts on the relevant talk page. Should he violate this restriction, he may be blocked by any administrator as provided in the enforcement ruling below.
• Lokyz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished to avoid edit-warring.
• Should Lokyz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) make any comment deemed by an administrator to have been incivil, a personal attack, or an assumption of bad faith, he may be blocked by any administrator as provided in the enforcement ruling below.
• Piotrus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is urged to avoid interacting directly with or commenting about Irpen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) under any circumstances, except for any necessary commentary in the course of bona fide dispute resolution.
• Piotrus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is cautioned to avoid using his administrator powers or status in situations in which his involvement in an editing dispute is apparent.
• Piotrus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished to avoid edit-warring.
• Poeticbent (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) shall be assigned one or more volunteer mentors, who will be asked to assist him in understanding and following policy and community practice to a sufficient level that additional sanctions will not be necessary.
• Relata_refero (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished to avoid edit-warring.
• Editors are reminded that when editing in subject areas of bitter and long-standing real-world conflict, it is all the more important to comply with Wikipedia policies such as assuming good faith of all editors including those on the other side of the real-world disputes, writing with a neutral point of view, remaining civil and avoiding personal attacks, utilizing reliable sources for contentious or disputed assertions, and resorting to dispute resolution where necessary. Wikipedia cannot solve any of the national, ethnic, historical, or cultural disputes that exists among the nations and peoples of Eastern Europe or any other real-world conflict. What Wikipedia can do is aspire to provide neutral, encyclopedic coverage about the areas of dispute and the peoples involved in it, which may lead to a broader understanding of the issues and the positions of all parties to the conflict. The contributions of all good-faith editors on these articles who contribute with this goal in mind are appreciated.
• Editors who find it difficult to edit a particular article or topic from a neutral point of view and adhere to other Wikipedia policies are counseled that they may sometimes need or wish to step away temporarily from that article or subject area. Sometimes, editors in this position may best devote some of their knowledge, interest, and effort to creating or editing other articles that may relate to the same broad subject-matter as the dispute, but are less immediately contentious. For example, an editor whose ethnicity, cultural heritage, or personal interests relate to Group X and who finds himself or herself caught up in edit-warring on an article about a recent war between Group X and Group Y, may wish to disengage from that article for a time and instead focus on a different aspect of the history, civilization, and cultural heritage of Group X.
• Administrators who utilize the #wikipedia-en-admins IRC channel (or other IRC channels in which Wikipedia-related matters are discussed) are reminded that while the #admins channel has legitimate purposes, they should bear in mind whenever using it:

(A) That discussing an issue on IRC necessarily excludes those editors who do not use IRC from the discussion (and excludes almost all non-administrators from the discussion if it takes place in #wikipedia-en-admins), and therefore, such IRC discussion is never the equivalent of on-wiki discussion or dispute resolution;

(B) That the practice of off-wiki "block-shopping" is strongly deprecated, and that except where there is an urgent situation and no reasonable administrator could disagree with an immediate block (e.g., ongoing blatant or pagemove vandalism or ongoing serious BLP violations), the appropriate response for an administrator asked on IRC to block an editor is to refer the requester to the appropriate on-wiki noticeboard; and

(C) That even though the relationship between the "wikipedia" IRC channels and Wikipedia remains ambiguous, any incidents of personal attacks or crass behavior in #wikipedia-en-admins are unwelcome and reflect adversely on all users of the channel.

• Following the conclusion of this case, the Committee will open a general request for comments regarding the arbitration enforcement process, particularly where general sanctions are concerned. Having received such comments, the Committee will consider instituting suitable reforms to the enforcement process.
• Following the conclusion of this case, the Committee will convene a community discussion for the purpose of developing proposed reforms to the content dispute resolution process.
• Following the conclusion of this case, the Committee will publish guides to presenting evidence and using the workshop page.

Please see the above link to read the full case.

For the Arbitration Committee,

Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 10:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Alden Jones! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 514 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Andrzej Polkowski - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Monitor. WikiProject Poland Newsletter: Issue 1 (April 2011)

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • April 2011 For our freedom and yours Welcome to our first issue of WikiProject Poland newsletter, the Monitor (named after the first Polish newspaper). Our Project has been operational since 1 June, 2005, and also serves as the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board. I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions. We hope you will join us in them, if you haven't done so already! Unlike many other WikiProjects, we are quite active; in this year alone about 40 threads have been started on our discussion page, and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised. In addition to a lively encyclopedic, Poland-related, English-language discussion forum, we have numerous useful tools that can be of use to you - and that you could help us maintain and develop: we have an active assessment department. As of now, our project has tagged almost 80,000 pages as Poland-related, out of which 1,500 still need a quality assessment, and 20,000, importance assessment. we have also begun B-class quality reviews on our talk page, and if our activity increases, hopefully we will be able to institute our own A-class quality reviews. As of now, we have about 500 C-class articles in need of a B-class review. If you'd like to help with them, instructions for doing B-class reviews are to be found in point 10 of our assessment FAQ. once an article is assessed it will appear in our article alerts and news feed, which provides information on which Poland-related articles are considered for deletion, move, or are undergoing a Good or Featured review. Watchlisting that feed, in addition to watchlisting our project's main page, is a good way to make sure you stay up to date on most Poland-related discussions. you can also see detailed deletion discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland (which is another good place to watchlist!) also, those articles will be included in our cleanup listing, which allows us to see which top-importance articles are in need for attention, and so on newly created Poland-related articles are listed here. They need to be reviewed, often cleaned-up, and its creators may need to be welcomed and invited to our project we are maintaining a Portal:Poland automated Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Popular pages lists the most popular Poland-related pages from the previous month(s) This is not all; on our page you can find a list of useful templates (including userboxes), awards and other tools! With all that said, how about you join our discussions at WT:POLAND? Surely, there must be something you could help others with, or perhaps you are in need of assistance yourself? You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a [member link] at WikiProject Poland. • Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:15, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • January 2014 • Issue II

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • January 2014 • Issue II For our freedom and yours Welcome to the second issue of WikiProject Poland newsletter, the Monitor (named after the first Polish newspaper). Our Project has been operational since 1 June, 2005, and also serves as the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board. I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions. We hope you will join us in them, if you haven't done so already! Unlike many other WikiProjects, we are quite active; we get close to a hundred discussion threads each year and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised. Last year we were featured in the Signpost, and our interviewer was amazed at our activity. In the end, however, even as active as we are, we are just a tiny group - you can easily become one of our core members! In addition to a lively encyclopedic, Poland-related, English-language discussion forum, we have numerous useful tools that can be of use to you - and that you could help us maintain and develop: we have an active assessment department. As of now, our project has tagged almost 83,000 pages as Poland-related - that's an improvement of over 3,000 new pages since the last newsletter. Out of which 30 still need a quality assessment, and 2,000, importance assessment. We have done a lot to clear the backlog here (3 years ago those numbers were 1,500 and 20,000, respectively). Can you help assess a few pages? assessing articles is as easy as filling in the class= and importance= parameters on the talk page in the {{WPPOLAND|class=|importance=}} template. See here for a how-to guide. once an article has an assessment template, it will appear in our article alerts and news feed, which provides information on which Poland-related articles are considered for deletion, move, or are undergoing a Good or Featured review. Watchlisting that feed, in addition to watchlisting our project's main page, is a good way to make sure you stay up to date on most Poland-related discussions. you can also see detailed deletion discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland (which is a good place to watchlist if you just want to stay up to date on possible deletions of Poland-related content) we have also begun B-class quality reviews on our talk page, and if our activity increases, hopefully we will be able to institute our own A-class quality reviews. As of now, we have about 500 C-class articles in need of a B-class review. If you'd like to help with them, instructions for doing B-class reviews are to be found in point 10 of our assessment FAQ. In addition to this automated list, you are also encouraged to help review articles from our B-class reviews requested list found here. also, those articles will be included in our cleanup listing, which allows us to see which top-importance articles are in need for attention, and so on. We have tens of thousands articles in need of cleanup there, so if you ever need something to do, just look at this gigantic list. (I am currently reviewing the articles tagged with notability, either proving them notable or nominating for deletion; there are still several dozens left if you want to help!). did you know that newly created Poland-related articles are listed here. They need to be reviewed, often cleaned-up, occasionally nominated for deletion, and their creators may need to be welcomed and invited to our project if they show promise as new authors of Poland-related content. we are maintaining a Portal:Poland automated Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Popular pages lists the most popular Poland-related pages from the previous month(s) Breaking news: we are looking for a Wikipedian in Residence for the New York City area. See Wikipedia:GLAM/Józef Piłsudski Institute of America for details. This is not all; on our page you can find a list of useful templates (including userboxes), awards and other tools! With all that said, how about you join our discussions at WT:POLAND? Surely, there must be something you could help others with, or perhaps you are in need of assistance yourself? It took me three years to finish this issue. Feel free to help out getting the next one before 2017 by being more active in WikiProject management :) You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a member at WikiProject Poland. Please remove yourself from the mailing list to prevent receiving future mailings. Newsletter prepared by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here and sent by Technical 13 (talk) using the Mass message system.