User talk:Kpalion/Archive 3

User Page	Talk	Awards and Credits	Travels	Sandbox	My Main Page	All Subpages

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Help with the King of Poland

Kpalion can you give more details about the following image you posted please: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:King_of_Poland.jpg
"King of Poland" in tournamental armour. Minature from Armorial equestre de la Toison d'Or, made circa 1435, during Władysław III's reign.
It is my understanding that the knights in the Armorial equestre de la Toison d'Or were all membres of the Order of the Toison d'Or. Is this true? Was Ladislau III a member of the Toison d'Or?

ThanksColombo.bz (talk) 23:19, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Seeking information on: Gustav von Netter von Kumarnsky (spelling?), Count of de Lodzia of Poland. He was made a Count by Kink Carol I. Can you give me guidance where I might locate information on this person?? Thank you!! Sincerely Debbie Meehlieb — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dots22 (talk • contribs) 12:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Polskie flagi

Z brakujących flag - są jeszcze bandery:

• PZŻ
• JKMW "Kotwica" pl:Grafika:Bandera jach MW.PNG
• YKP [1]

Jednak sytuacja prawna tych bander jest dość zawiła. Z jednej strony ustawodawca o nich "zapomniał" pisząc aktualne ustawy, z drugiej są nadal w użyciu opierając się na dawnych rozporządzeniach. Ciekawe czy w końcu ich status zostanie uregulowany... Radomil talk 21:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

LOTD proposal

You have nominated a recent WP:FLC. There have been two recent proposals to begin a List of the Day feature on the main page, which have both received majorities but have not been approved as overwhelming support sufficient for the main page. WP:LOTDP is a new proposal to try to get the ball rolling based on the original proposal. Voice your thoughts on its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Poland

As you could tell, I been working on the article somewhat recently. I think the article is pretty good so far, but I am do not believe this article is ready for FAC. One example is that I noticed a lot of bullets in the article, which is not good. There are no spelling issues, but I believe Tony1 is fixing the grammar. Gruntbrat (talk) 18:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and I do appreciate your help. So far I've been working on this article virtually alone and it's in bad want of a fresh look. I will welcome any further suggstions, additions or corrections from you and other editors. Of course, I will also review all edits to ensure the article remains factually accurate. — Kpalion^(talk) 21:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, that is fine, since I am not Polish nor I speak Polish. Gruntbrat (talk) 21:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Another thing, can the table at Flag_of_Poland#National_colors be shifted towards the right of the article? Gruntbrat (talk) 21:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I tried it and the result was that the right side of the article was too cluttered, especially if you hide the table of contents. — Kpalion^(talk) 21:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Another thing, I been working on trying to improve the SVG graphics at the Commons. Except for the white color background, does everything else at Image:Zscouttest.svg look decent? Gruntbrat (talk) 22:41, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Polish CoA in PNG

Polish CoA in SVG

I'm sorry, but not quite. I don't know much about creating vector graphics, but I think the biggest challenge is to render the fine, gradient shading of the eagle's feathers and crown in the coat of arms. Please compare these two images: Image:Coat of arms of Poland-official.png and Image:Herb Polski.svg. The SVG version uses only two colors, white and light gray, to recreate the whole spectrum of shades of gray you can see in the PNG version. This shading is not quite correct from the heraldic point of view (which is why SVG works fine for most other coats of arms, which have plain colors with no shading), but this is the official version and you can't really argue with it. Another error is the shape of the escutcheon, but that, I suppose, should be relatively easy to correct. Additionally, the shade of red should, preferably, be of the same shade as indicated in the footnote to the article about the Polish flag, i.e. #E9E8E7. — Kpalion^(talk) 00:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I can fix the escutcheon. Gruntbrat (talk) 01:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

That's fine, but I wonder, if it's worth your effort, if the shading will still look worse than in the PNG version? I mean, what's the point of using SVG for the sake of it, if PNG can do the trick better? — Kpalion^(talk) 01:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Because it has gotten to the point where PNG files are being phased out. I was talking to other Polish users on IRC (under the name Zscout370) and I asked them if an SVG version could be made. I was showed the image you display at the right. Plus, I intend to just improve the images so if we do decide to switch to SVG for everything, then we have something that is very close to what the official law has. I also just changed the eagle to the white that was legally asked for. Is the red correct or not? Gruntbrat (talk) 01:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm OK with replacing PNG files with SVG ones as long as we don't compromise factual accuracy. If we use images which are not as close to the official specimen as possible, then we're not being factually accurate. If it turns out we have to replace a good PNG image with a not-as-good SVG image, that will be a step backwards. I hope you do agree. — Kpalion^(talk) 15:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Since it is getting too confusing for me, I will just use my main account now. What I have done so far is I changed the background to match. I do admit it doesn't look great with the display you have to the right, since some of the elements at the top and bottom are being squished to some degree by the formatting. I will have a sandbox set up where the arms can be compared. Second, about this gradient that you speak of, it can be done, but it will be a tricky process. I am not the only SVG person around, but as I said that I am not Polish and I cannot read Polish to a good degree, that will hurt me a lot. The thing that I will ask you to do now is see if there is a certain set of colors I should use for the Polish coat of arms. I know the red and white is fixes, but is there a certain shade of gold or grey I need to use? Other than those, I just think the gradient issue is the last to solve. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Sandbox has been made at User:Zscout370/Sandbox. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Only white and red are numerically specified by law. The gold of the eagle's crown, beak and claws is not, and neither are the gradient shades of its plumage. One more thing: I just noticed that in the current SVG version, the three gems that should be on the ring of the crown are missing. — Kpalion^(talk) 23:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that myself, so I will do that now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Updated. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, one more thing. Sorry for being that picky, but those little details are quite important. In the five-pointed stars on the eagle's wings, two points should be shorter than the other three. It's the result of a compromise made in 1990 between regular five-pointed stars and trefoils. — Kpalion^(talk) 23:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Being nitpicky is not an issue here; getting it right is. I'll fix those stars now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 00:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Updated again. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 00:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Good job. I think the only thing that remains to be done is the gradient shading to give the eagle (and its crown) the 3D look of the official design. — Kpalion^(talk) 00:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

And that is the sticking point (not with me, but with other users). I been shown many image of the coat of arms without this shading at all, so I have no idea what to do about it. It can be done, but it will be very tricky to do. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 00:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't speak for other users, but I would guess that they either didn't care much or they just pointed to what SVG image was available. As I wrote above, all I want is, for the sake of factual accuracy, to have an image that is as close to the official design (here's a scan of the attachment to the Coat of Arms Act) as possible. The shading is there to reflect the fact that the original design, made by Prof. Zygmunt Kamiński in 1927, was not a flat shield, but a relief. Unfortunately, Kamiński was an architect, not a heraldist, so this is not the only error (from a heraldic point of view) in Poland's current coat of arms. I don't know if you noticed, for example, that he carved out the crown with three fleurs-de-lys protruding out of the ring and then painted the entire crown gold – including spaces between the fleurs-de-lys – so you have to look really closely to actually discern these protrusions. — Kpalion^(talk) 01:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

And there is a lot of elements that I cannot see. There have been other attempts to do what you asked and came out with not so great results. I guess that is a problem of going from 3D to 2D. I tried to do the eagle's beak first, but the elements are not matching at all. I'm partially doing this because I am being screamed at for letting PNG's stand while SVG images are present. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you succeed in creating an SVG with the 3D look, that's great. But if you don't, then maybe we should look for a solution that would allow us to continue using PNGs without being screamed at. Like putting a comment on the SVG image pages that because of technical limitations of this graphics format they are not as factually accurate as their corresponding PNG versions. Otherwise we risk throwing the baby out with the bath water. — Kpalion^(talk) 01:34, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

And we could ask other artists to do the 3D look of the image. I pretty much done what I could with that image for right now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 21:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

You are the nominator of a WP:FL that was promoted in the last month. I am inviting you to participate in nominations and voting in a List of the Day experiment I am conducting at WP:LOTD.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Wesołych!

User:Piotrus and friends, in the midsts of Wigilia, wish you to enjoy this Christmas Eve!

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mpo-logo.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Mpo-logo.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Added fair use rationale.  Done — Kpalion^(talk) 23:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Krakow-banner.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Krakow-banner.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Tag changed to Template:Polishsymbol  Done — Kpalion^(talk) 23:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Krakow-coa.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Krakow-coa.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Tag changed to Template:Polishsymbol  Done — Kpalion^(talk) 23:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Krakow-seal.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Krakow-seal.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Tag changed to Template:Polishsymbol  Done — Kpalion^(talk) 23:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Polish national songs

Looking forward to the last red link in the Polish symbols template being filled! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:chandail de hockey

Hi. Thanks for the remider, although usually I would keep checking it. It is on my watchlist, but if I forget to check because I think the question has been left for a long time, then I might miss any potential replies. Also, the list of words without a liason/elison it so extensive! Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 23:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Jadwiga of Poland

Cześć. Akurat wpadłam na ten artykuł i nie bardzo potrafię zrozumieć, co tam robi szablon Template:History of Bosnia (i w ogóle co w tym szablonie robią obie węgierskie królewny - związki dość dalekie). Mój pisany angielski jest taki sobie (delikatnie mówiąc ;-)), więc wolałabym nie usuwać sama, bo trudno by mi było jasno wyłożyć powody działania - może zatem Ty byś się ew. tego podjął? Pozdrawiam. Gytha (talk) 11:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Usunąłem szablon z artykułu o św. Jadwidze i odnośnik do niego z szablonu. Poprosiłem też autora szablonu, żeby się opanował. — Kpalion^(talk) 20:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Dziękuję. Gytha (talk) 23:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Witaj,

Zauwazylem ze zmieniles moje "King of Poland" spowrotem do Queen. Jak wiemy, Jadwiga byla efektywnie Krolem, nie Krolowa Polski, gdyz w tych czasach Krolowa nie mogla rzadzic narodem polskim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.245.203 (talk) 01:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cracovia.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Cracovia.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Bishop of Kraków

A tag has been placed on Template:Bishop of Kraków requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Gord (Slavic settlement)

I see you have a history of working on the article Gord (Slavic settlement). I am looking at it from the project Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles where it is one of the longest {{unreferenced}} tagged articles that does not meet at least the barest minimum of verifiability. It has been tagged and completely without references since June 2006. It would be extremely helpful if you had some references you could add to the article to help support its verifiability and notability. Thanks for any help you can give. BirgitteSB 19:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

1 cent euro coin ...

... good changes. Can you please get the same changes done in the other euro coin pages? 7 more to go ... Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

 Done — Kpalion^(talk) 22:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, that was fast! Thanks! Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Iraq 2003 occupation.png

I noticed that the governorate borders in the 2003 occupation map do not coincide with the actual borders. For example, Anbar is split in half with the southern half joined to Karbala. Dahuk in the north also seems too big, while Kirkuk too small. You can see the difference quite clearly with the governorate map in commons:Atlas of Iraq. I'd fix it with the normal governorates map if I knew for sure that the zones coincided with governorates, but I'm not sure about this. If you can give me the source for the zone information then I can fix it up. Kelvinc (talk) 04:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Good work on the anthem infobox

I really think you have done a great job improving the anthem infobox, Kpalion. The biggest improvement was the color change on the title bar. I was considering doing something to it myself, but you chose a color that is far superior to any I could have selected. The other features are very nice as well, but we will have to put some work into modifying the infoboxes to see the full benefits of your work. TFCforever (talk) 12:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Kpalion, are you going to do this for all anthems, or only for European anthems? Inkan1969 (talk) 20:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean here. The infobox will work for all countries and anyone can put the infobox in an article on any country's anthem. — Kpalion^(talk) 21:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, so you're not going to put the infoboxes in all the anthem pages yourself, then? Inkan1969 (talk) 21:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

If I have time... Unless someone else does it before me. — Kpalion^(talk) 21:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Tuđman-request move

Hi

Could you involve into this discussion ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Franjo_Tu%C4%91man#Requested_move

--Anto (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Mazurek Dąbrowskiego

W ferworze walki zagubiłeś wytłumaczenie dlaczego Poznań się znalazł w hymnie. Nie chcę ci się wcinać podczas rekonstrukcji, ale dobrze by było abyś nie gubił informacji :) Radomil talk 22:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Resurgent discussion on pl Wiki about Polish flag colors

Hello. I realize that you mostly edit on the English Wikipedia, but as an editor who is not only interested in this topic but also one who has generated flag images, I think your considered opinion is needed on the Polish interwiki's talk page, what with the recent publication of a press article where the darkened white was reproduced in the internet press article independent of Wikipedian's calculations, therefore, changing the sourcing prospects considerably. Pozdrawiam, --Mareklug ^talk 20:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Faraon.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Faraon.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done — Kpalion^(talk) 21:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Requested article

National symbols of Poland from Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lists_of_basic_topics/Draft/List_of_basic_Poland_topics; I thought it fits your interests :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:45, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Summer!

Happy First Day of Summer!

A Beautiful Summer Field

Summer is a time for freshly grown fruits and vegetables.

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Summer 2008! Mifter (talk)







If you live in the Southern Hemisphere and are entering the season of Winter not Summer then I wish you a Happy First Day of Winter 2008!

Give this greeting to others by adding {{subst:First Day of Summer}} on their Talk Page.

Jak Czarniecki do Poznania

Zgadza się, Wybicki potraktował dzieje Czarnieckiego w "duchu oświeceniowym" i co nieco poprzestawiał aby lepiej się to mu układało. W każdym razie kanwą do "wracania się przez morze" jest owa przeprawa na Als, "do Poznania" - autor miał na myśli ową naradę z 26 listopada 1656. Kolejność Wybicki trochę nagiął. Jan Kazimierz spędził na poznańskim Zamku jeszcze zimę 1657/1658, podczas gdy Czarniecki wrócił dopiero w 1659 i to nie do samego Poznania, a do Mosiny (słyszałem też o wersji, że gdzie jest Poznań to wiedzą mniej więcej wszyscy Polacy, Mosina, aż tak znana już nie jest i dlatego większy Poznań trafił do hymnu;)). W każdym razie z Wielkopolski ruszył dalej aby "po szwedzkim zaborze" walczyć z Rosją. Radomil talk 20:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

P..S. Co więcej, Wybicki miał osobisty stosunek do Poznania, tu, jako 15-latek odbywał na Zamku Królewskim praktyki w sądzie rejonowym, który się tam że mieścił (a było to właśnie miejsce owej narady), a poza tym posiadał poza szlachectwem obywatelstwa miejskie: Poznania i Śremu. Po reformach Sejmu Wielkiego był też plenipotentem do Sejmu właśnie miast Wydziału Poznańskiego. Radomil talk 20:23, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Fête nationale du Québec article

I've put in a request to change Fête nationale du Québec to Saint Jean Baptiste Day. You may wish to join the discussion at the Talk Page--soulscanner (talk) 06:03, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Poland-dioceses.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Poland-dioceses.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 18:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

What the?...

I like it! ;-) RichardF (talk) 17:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Let me know when you're ready for some feedback. :-) RichardF (talk) 01:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Very impressive! :-) That said, it doesn't have a snowball's chance... ;-) I would say it's visually and organizationally dramatic, so it's probably too far out there to ever get implemented, but I still like it. Here are some personal reactions that don't amount to much.

• Starting at the center tab feels a bit disconcerting. My expectation, and a more familiar look, was to start at the left tab.
• Whenever inside box edges didn't align vertically, the page felt inconguous. Pick a vertical inside line and go with it.
• The outside frame and inside box padding differences drew my attention to the edges. Equal padding would help there.

Nice work! RichardF (talk) 19:41, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I like what you've got going! Is it still under construction? What work do you still need to do? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Moscow_Kremlin_2.jpg

File:Moscow Kremlin 2.jpg

Hallo,

You uploaded this image, stating its from nl:Image:Kremlin.jpg with GFDL, not giving the author. It was eventually copied to commons, again without mentioning the author. Was it yourself?

Thanks, --Ikar.us (talk) 11:33, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

nl: people could help speedily, so I'm going to nominate it for deletion here. --Ikar.us (talk) 12:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Main page redesign

Hello, Kpalion! Wikipedia:2008 main page redesign proposal was recently cleared of all design entries. You may want to re-enter your design(s), based on the details here. (You can see the old list of designs here). NOTE: A survey was conducted on what users wanted to see in the new main page, you can see the results here. NickPenguin_(contribs) 02:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK!

On 30 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polish order of precedence, 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.

Thank you for your contributions! ^o^ - Mailer Diablo 01:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Problem with castellans

I've created Castellans of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and there is a problem: sources state there were 49 lesser castellans (drążkowi) (here Gloger gives the number 49 but does not list them, he mentions some created after the union, presumably 50, 51, 52 and 53). But when we count our lists - including one in your PLC order of preference - I get 48. Reading Koneczy ([2]), I count 48... PS. Found a list! But the order is different, and konarscy are counted among the 49... grrr... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The number 49 for lesser castellans is correct. In your list at Castellans of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, you included inflancki, czernihowski, wendeński, dorpacki and parnawski among the lesser ones even though both Koneczny and Heleniusz list them among the greater castellans. Without those, and counting the three konarski ones, you'll get 51 - 5 + 3 = 49. The number of lesser castellans at Order of precedence in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, as well as in Koneczny, is also 49; you must have made a mistake counting them. Since lesser castellans were only from the old (pre-Lublin Union) parts of the Crown, their number didn't change unlike that of greater castellans. I don't see difference in the order between Gloger and Heleniusz either. — Kpalion^(talk) 16:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Could you add the appropriate corrections to Castellans of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth? Thanks.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Soviet republics.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Soviet republics.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 17:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Request for Rollback

Greetings Kpalion, I reviewed your request for rollback and have changed your user-rights to provide access to that feature. You now have rollback enabled. Please use it only for reverting obvious vandalism; otherwise, the tool may be removed. Kind regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 14:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Straw poll

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll in selecting five proposals before an RFC in which it will be against the current main page. You're input would be appreciated. ChyranandChloe (talk) 04:15, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Walka

Thanks for your reply at WP:RD, --Soman (talk) 10:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Polish municipal post

Your response to my Language Ref Desk query was greatly helpful, Kpalion! I do believe I'll post it to the Talk page of the List of mayors of Warsaw for the benefit of future readers. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 23:02, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Stanczyk pszoniak.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Stanczyk pszoniak.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Geniac (talk) 16:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done — Kpalion^(talk) 22:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

w:commons:File:Jagiellon Realm.png

Please see it. Regards. --Gustavo (talk) 02:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Contact

Hi, I want to send you an email but I don't know how... :o) Is there something like kpalion@wikipedia.org ? Thanks. Jasooon (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Polish national bird?

Thanks for clearing that up for me. You might also want to check these article for factual inaccuracies regarding statements of Polish national birds:

• White_stork#Cultural associations (apparantly the White Stork is the national bird?)
• Ciconiiformes#Symbolism_of_storks (specifically the "Regional symbolism" bit)

-- OlEnglish (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done — Kpalion^(talk) 20:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Polish consorts

Hi, I am the Queen's Little Spy as you might know. Thanks for the help on the Judith incident. I think that there must have been a Judith of Hungary. But any way I wanted to ask you if you can tell me anything about Grzymislawa of Luck, the wife of Leszek I the White? I just need her birth, marriage, death date and the family or house she belongs to agnatically? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 03:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I also need the same thing for Ludmilla, the wife of Mieszko I Tanglefoot. Better yet, I wondering if you can help me correct mistake I might make in my article User:Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy/List of Polish consorts.

Grunwald Swords

Hi! Nice Wiki page! I posted some brief excerpts of two Jan Hus letters from the year 1411, which discuss the Battle of Grunwald. They're on the Grunwald Swords talk page. I'm not an expert on Polish history, so please use this source material as you see fit on the relevant articles. Thanks so much! --Dulcimerist (talk) 02:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Pan Twardowski.JPG)

Thanks for uploading File:Pan Twardowski.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland

Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland has awarded you a status of a honorary member (you have never officially joined the project by signing on its front page...). Thank you for your Poland-related encyclopedic contributions! Please consider officially joining the project by moving yourself from the "Honorary members" list to the "Active members" list here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Bo sie nigdy sam nie zapisales... ;p --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

National Personifications

Recently you removed 'Golden Bird' representation of India. The Golden Bird is a poetic description of India, esp. in ancient times India was known for its wealth, and not an actual animal or bird.

If this doesn't comply with standards of article then please discuss on article's talk. Till then i have undone the change —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.142.136.250 (talk) 06:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Mistake

I have moved Kpalion/Pan Tadeusz to User:Kpalion/sandbox. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Changes to the various "selected foo" templates

Thanks for improving those templates. When I first created them, they were very portal specific. As I looked more into the various portals, I realized that there were no general templates and I moved them into the main template name space. The changes you are making insure that the templates are more usable by the broader community.

--Jeremy (blah blah) 14:00, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Another good change on the "selected picture" template.--Jeremy (blah blah) 02:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Selected locations

I've nominated Kraków for GA, it is really close - perhaps you could copyedit the article? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Portal:Poland

Gratuluję i podziwiam. Albertus teolog (talk) 14:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Proszę o rade i ewentualną korekte: umiescilem w sekcji "events" wyniki polskich szybownikow (byly super), ale mistrzostwa swiata w ktorych startowali byly poza Polska. Sprowokowalo troche mnie do tego ze zobaczylem wyniki olimpijczykow :-) (mogly by byc lepsze). Nie mam nic przeciw usunieciu mojej edycji - nie jestem pewien czy mnie nie ponioslo... Szafranpl (talk) 11:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Polskie flagi na angielskiej wiki

Cześć.
Nie zakładałem swojego konta na angielskiej wiki, bo edytuję angielskie artykuły bardzo sporadycznie.
Jestem zdziwiony, że w artykule List of Polish flags jest tak dużo flag "niewypranych". Wiem, że problemy z odcieniami szarości pochodzą z ustawy o symbolach RP, ale wydaje mi się, że należy podejść do sprawy zdroworozsądkowo i umieścić flagi o rzeczywiście białej barwie (czyli całkiem "efowej" według współrzędnych RGBA ;) ).
Wspominałeś w dyskusji ww. artykułu o potrzebie sporządzenia flag dla statków morskich na oznaczenie pełnionej specjalnej służby państwowej.
Odwiedź proszę moją galerię na polskiej wiki. Jest tam kilka flag .svg, które mogą Cię zainteresować (również z angielskim opisem)
Pozdrawiam serdecznie - Mboro.
79.139.42.50 (talk) 18:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

pron-en

Actually, {{pron-en}} works just fine with external links. The only catch is that the link is red, which makes it look like it might not work. kwami (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Style guide for non-English blazons

I was just wondering if you are still tracking the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/Style guide for foreign blazons. Feel free to join in if you like. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 03:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

affricates

In banner of Poland, the IPA with the tie bar was incorrect: it linked i to t, rather than t to s. It's now t͡s; if that does not display properly for you, you may be using a Microsoft font that does not display the IPA correctly. That's one reason people got fed up with using tie bars: editors on IE or otherwise using MS fonts constantly introduce errors, because they can't see them correctly. kwami (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, on my screen it looks like tying s with ɛ, but let's leave it like this. I suppose that people who can read IPA will know that the bar should be above ts, even if it doesn't display exactly there for them. It's still better than no bar at all and I don't think we should sacrifice factual correctness because of technical difficulties. Especially that the difference between affricates and stop+fricative sequences is phonemic in Polish. Anyway, thanks for the correction. — Kpalion^(talk) 22:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Polish cochineal GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Polish cochineal for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since you are a main contributor of the article (determined based on this tool), I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Drawa National Park

Witam! Zmartwiłam się, że cofnął Pan (Pani?) moje poprawki na stronie Drawno National Park. Przymiotnik Drawski pochodzi od słowa Drawsko, zaś Drawieński od Drawy i Drawna, ale nazwa parku narodowego pochodzi od nazwy chronionej rzeki, a nie od mało znanego miasteczka Drawno. Zresztą na stronie internetowej DPN jest oficjalne tłumaczenie Drawa National Park. Bardzo proszę więc o pozostawienie moich poprawek tak jak były. Z pozdrowieniami Sylwia Ufnalska (talk) 10:02, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Seal move

What do you think of Seal (emblem)? Since you took part in the discussion before the move proposal, your thoughts would be valued in the current discussion. Thank you. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 12:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Efficiency of written languages

As a Hebrew speaker I amended a little bit in the hebrew translitration. HOOTmag (talk) 08:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

That little rollback symbol thingy

How do I get that tiny rollback symbol in the top right part of my user and talk pages? Ks0stm ^(T•C) 21:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Plica polonica

Danish King probably had a simple queue. See image above it was very good braided and very sympathetic queue. Mathiasrex (talk) 12:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Email

Hi Kpalion, Just just let you know I've sent you an email. Cheers, Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Your point well taken

I take your point, Kpalion, and have revised our respective responses to that RD/H query accordingly. While my intention was to encourage the OP and subsequent readers to actually view the page, I saw in retrospect (thanks to your intervention) that it might've come off offensive. Shall bear this in mind while buffing up my WP skills, evidently rusty as I return after a season's forced break. I appreciate your orientation and tacit guidance on this. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 09:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Add another hat to your collection, for a while?

Since you take care of our Portal, could you for a while consider this? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:13, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Editable version of File:Kingdom_of_Galicia.png

Since i wanted to localize the above mentioned map of Galicia, i'd need an editable version of that file. Do you have any scalable vector graphics or similar that you could hand over to me ...? Thanks in advance! --murli (talk) 09:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The new great game

Where did you move the quotes to? You said you moved them, not just deleted. And why.

Got your reply. Sorry, I was dense. When I clicked on the link with WK: prefix I saw nothing, I see now that it is the whole other domain. I haven't used wikiquote before. Thanks.

Category:Lists of cardinals

Thanks for your question. I have moved a large amount of the content of this category into other categories which describe their common feature in a more useful way, e.g. cardinals by papal appointment & cardinals by suburbicarian diocese. I don't regard a category called "lists of xyz" as desirable as it brings together things whose only commonality is being lists rather than a meaningful commonality related to subject matter. My aim is to transfer all the remainder of this category into other categories so that it can ultimately be deleted. --The Sage of Stamford (talk) 21:10, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Sword of Justice

Why did you remove one of the meanings in https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Sword_of_Justice&curid=2692387&diff=330146808&oldid=329632758 ? --Gwern (contribs) 03:27 26 December 2009 (GMT)

Za przyjaźń!

Kpalion, I'm going to impose on our brand-new friendship to ask for a little more coaching on the pronounciation of this fine word, which I just can't get my tongue and lips around. With za'pʂɨjaʑɲ, I visited the IPA-for-Polish page; not surprisingly, I still have a couple of questions!

(1) In the IPA, did you miss the 'r' in 'prz'? (2) I don't get the vowel 'ɨ', do you have any other suggestions/guidance? I speak German, might it be close to something like ö or ü? (3) I think I understand ź and ń, but I have a hard time putting the "ny" sound at the end of a word, without having another vowel to follow.

Thanks for your suggestion and assistance - DaHorsesMouth (talk) 00:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

• 1) No, the "r" is not pronounced; psz is pronounced more or less as in "top shot". Several hundred years ago it would have been pronounced "przh", but later the "r" was dropped and the "zh" became unvoiced into "sh". Like in any other language, such spelling quirks are a great source of historical information for linguists and a pain in the neck for everybody else.
• 2) I think you can safely approximate the Polish "y" with the "i" in English "lick".
• 3) When making the regular "n" sound, you press the tip of your tounge against the front end of your hard palate. To make the "ń" sound, you have to press the middle of your tounge against the middle of your hard palate (see palatal consonant). If this is too difficult, you can substitute it with the regular "n".

I realize that przyjaźń is a pretty tough word for someone who doesn't speak any Polish (I wasn't aware whether you speak at least some Polish or none at all). Perhaps you might think of some other toasts and we'll see if they translate to something that is easier to pronounce. — Kpalion^(talk) 10:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that; I'll work on it. The only alternative that has come to mind is nearly the same: "To old friends". Would that have a few less consonant clusters in it? -- DaHorsesMouth (talk) 14:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

How about something a little more informal, like "To old buddies"? That would be Za starych kumpli! (Polish pronunciation: [za'starɨx 'kumplʲi]). The "r" is rolled here and the "ch" is pronounced as in Scottish loch. Kumpli is pronounced more or less as "KOOM-plee". It sounds only slightly less idiomatic to me and it should roll of the tounge somewhat better. — Kpalion^(talk) 14:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, between those alternatives I think I'm good. Plus, my wife has now discovered a colleague who speaks the language and can guide my pronounciation. Thanks much for your help! -- DaHorsesMouth (talk) 18:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Kpalion! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 16 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 34 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Grażyna Rabsztyn - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Yuriy Zbitnyev - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Oleksander Mykolayovych Yakovenko - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
4. Oleksandr Rzhavskyy - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
5. Mykola Rohozhynskyy - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
6. Volodymyr Nechyporuk - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
7. Vladyslav Kryvobokov - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
8. Roman Kozak - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
9. Dmytro Korchynskyy - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
10. Vitaliy Kononov - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

The Bell

Please be so kind as to take a peek at my suggestion at Talk:Sigismund Bell. Thanks. Dr. Dan (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Karkonosze#Poll_II

There has been a new and expanded preferential poll created on Talk:Karkonosze similar to the recent Ireland poll. The votes from the previous poll could unfortunately not be transferred over to the new system and you may need to recast your vote. I apologise for the inconvenience. —what a crazy random happenstance 04:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Szczerbiec

Ilustracja z roku 1968 podlega pod {{PD-Poland}}, bo została opublikowana przed majem 1993. Licencja obejmuje wszystkie fotografie. PWN nie jest wyjątkiem. Przykro mi, że muszę przypominać o tej oczywistości. Szczebrzeszynski (talk) 13:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Jan Nowak-Jeziorański

I saw your post on the RefDesk about this man - interesting story, but I can't understand why he would be smuggled in a British bomber. Who was he hiding from? The article about him doesn't mention this story, so I can't get any information from there. Cheers. --KageTora - (影虎) (A word...?) 13:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Cheers for the reply, Kpalion. The story makes more sense now. Thanks! I'd like to read a bit more about him, so I'll look around for any information on him. Thank you. --KageTora - (影虎) (A word...?) 04:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Grobowiec krolowej Jadwigi.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Grobowiec krolowej Jadwigi.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:03, 13 March 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 13:03, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Grobowiec krolowej Jadwigi.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Grobowiec krolowej Jadwigi.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 13:03, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Monity

Greetings, Kpalion, and thanks for your help with this translation query. You're most likely right about the spelling, as I suspected my ignorance of Polish would lead me to miss the handwritten irregularities (though I caught a superfluous capitalization). As for the context, I can only check about 20 hours from now when said colleague (a semiretired kibbutznikit) returns to the office. So I'll be glad to pursue the clarification then! -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 11:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/Article title

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/Article title. DrKiernan (talk) 09:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

LOT photo request

Hi! Now it is April. Is it more convenient for you to photograph the LOT Polish Airlines head office now?

I did try the press office, but it never responded.

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I haven't forgotten about your request. I'm not in Warsaw now, but I'll take a picture at the nearest occasion, possibly next weekend. — Kpalion^(talk) 12:05, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you in advance :) WhisperToMe (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done, Commons:LOT — Kpalion^(talk) 18:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Krakow-seal.PNG

Thank you for uploading File:Krakow-seal.PNG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done — Kpalion^(talk) 09:55, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Krakow-banner.PNG

Thank you for uploading File:Krakow-banner.PNG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:50, 2 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:50, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done — Kpalion^(talk) 09:55, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

LOT head office

Thank you very much, Kpalion! These are incredibly helpful! I'll post them to the LOT Polish Airlines and Warsaw articles on EN, and corresponding articles on other Wikipedias. BTW LOT has a very beautiful building and premises WhisperToMe (talk) 20:35, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Saints in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Saints for a Signpost article to be published this month. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 06:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Józef Kowalczyk

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Just to let you know

I noticed a tiny typo in your userpage. In the leading sentence, the verb "to be" seems to have been accidentally omitted. I therefore ventured this most well-meant remark of mine. See you at the Refdesks! --Магьосник (talk) 13:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Elizabeth of Bosnia

Hello, Kpalion! I just wanted to notify you that I have finished adding page numbers to references in the article about Elizabeth of Bosnia. Cordially, Surtsicna (talk) 11:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Kovchitsy Vtoryye, Belarus

Many thanks, dear Kpalion, for your helpful and informative response to my recent Humanities RD query. I blush to admit that it hadn't occurred to me that something so useful as a degree sign used in geography actually belongs to math! Seriously, though, I'd like to do some work to bring that list of Belarusian righteous among nations into the English Wikipedia along with those of so many other countries. Let's see how far I get with my rudimentary and incomplete knowledge of Cyrillic and no handy English-language reference work in the library at my workplace that covers the Belarusians. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 22:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Selected Articles Template

Hi, I am working on a new portal for Qur'an, you can find it at Portal:Qur'an, the issue I am having is that the Selected Article Template that is in use keeps selecting an article that is not available. Since you are one of the editors who have worked on this template I thought you are a good candidate to help me. You can find the Selected Articles Subpage at Portal:Qur'an/Selected_article could you kindly have a look at it. NëŧΜǒńğer^{Peace Talks} 13:04, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Elizabeth of Bosnia/GA1

Hi, I see that User:Surtsicna has addressed all of your points in the review. Is there any reason why you have not closed it? –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:29, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Seeing as you have not addressed this for a full week after being notified, I'm going to consider the review abandoned and boldly promote the page myself. A shame, too, you gave a very helpful review. --erachima talk 08:11, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Poland

Hello Kpalion i saw your Beautiful portal looks great...I also do portals and maintain many...was wondering if you would like to use a more extensive coding for the Portal:Poland/box-header to show text to say there are other selections like in Portal:History of Canada/box-header..this is very easy to do..let me know if you would like me to do so ..or not..this is just something i have been doing to update the user friendless of portals... But see that this portal is all you so though i should let you decide :) ..This code will actually let you do alot more (you can pick the color of ever line) as seen on Portal:Nunavut .. All the best..if you like the idea just let me know!! Moxy (talk) 23:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Updating your map of Kazimierz

Hey Kpalion, thanks for making that handy map of Kazimierz. Could you add the Galicia Jewish Museum to it? The Museum is located on ul. Dajwór 18, just opposite the Old Synagogue. The coordinates are also on article page. Thanks, Nkrita (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Grunwald Swords

hi there,

I reverted your edits because you basically completely removed all the edits on the images I made, while stating "Reverted some changes...", which is clearly not the case. Infoboxes about weapons should be included and expanded upon, regardless if an image is available or not. Superfluous images that do not directly pertain to the object discussed should be left out, less one wants to junk the article. Feel free to discuss. sincerely Gryffindor (talk) 13:50, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

ps: Can you expand on this article maybe Muscovy Crown, by adding the translation from the Polish article and reference it? Then it could be nominated for DYK? Thanks. Gryffindor (talk) 13:57, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:POLAND#Participants_list

Would you like to add yourself to that list? You are listed as honorary instead of regular member due to your accomplishments and the fact you never bothered to add yourself to the list :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:46, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Hist central europe.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hist central europe.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Template National symbols of Poland

The colors that you have chosen are very 'glaring'. I believe that on Wikipedia so pushy style stressing national identity is embarrassing. The default colors were defined really in "good faith", long before either of us turned up as the editor of Wikipedia. Please visit the Poland#See also and start to expand the "Articles related to Poland". Now it just looks "cool" ... --Robsuper (talk) 17:44, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done — Kpalion^(talk) 18:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. --Robsuper (talk) 19:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Iraq 2003 occupation.png

Witaj. Czy mógłbyś dodać źródło na podstawie którego opracowałeś tę mapę? File:Iraq 2003 occupation.png. Dziękuję i pozdrawiam JDavid (talk) 17:15, 31 March 2011 (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) 21:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Flag of Poland

You MUST stop reverting my change. People have requested and reverted to the SVG flags, and people have requested and reverted to the PNGs in the official legal shades, which as photos show, even the Government of Poland doesn't follow (look at the pic of the flag flying from the Sejm building). This is a comprimise, that shows both. There is no valid reason not to show both the reality and the legality. Fry1989 (talk) 19:08, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Flag of Poland. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:27, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Poland similar flags

I am not sure this is the right place, but I wanted to suggest to add the Indonesian flag to the similar flags section in the Polish flag page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.208.111.158 (talk) 09:15, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

May 3rd Constitution Day

Since you are interested in Polish symbols, you may be interested in this new DYK of mine. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:07, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Konstytucja 3 Maja guide.jpg

You may want to take a look at Talk:Constitution of May 3, 1791 (painting), comment, cite your sources (that would be great) and think about updating your useful picture... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:58, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Excellent work. I wonder if the article could be Featured? Also, you may want to nominate your picture for Wikipedia:Featured pictures, or such (Commons has commons:Commons:Valued pictures, could be more appropriate). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 21:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Auxiliary sciences of history

Hi Kpalion: not sure what the etiquette is here, but I've replied to your comment on my talk page (and put the reference back in). - GrindtXX (talk) 22:28, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Pan Twardowski film.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Pan Twardowski film.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 00:11, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done — Kpalion^(talk) 22:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Herb

To jest rekonstrukcja herbu Korony Królestwa Polskiego (co jest zresztą zaznaczone) oparta na poświadczonych historycznie pzresłankach. Zobacz pieczęć majestatyczną Jagiełły [3] trzymaczem heraldycznym herbu Korony królestwa Polskiego jest Anioł. Od XIII wieku w zasadzie wszystkie herby z pieczęci są rekonstrukcją bo nawet nie mamy pewności jakie barwy miał Orzeł z pieczęci Przemysła II. [4]

Zresztą tego herbu z Aniołem użył Sławomir Leśniewski w swojej najnowszej książce Wielka Historia Polski [5], Mathiasrex (talk) 18:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

No więc zrewertuj ten herb. Mathiasrex (talk) 09:21, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I guess you're talking about this fantasy doodle. If it were an SVG rendering of King Premislaus's seal, it would be OK. If it were an SVG rendering of King Vladislaus II's majestic seal, it would also be OK. If it were an SVG rendering of any variant of the White Eagle that can be found in historical sources, that would be OK. But this one is not. It combines elements of Premislaus's seal (the shape of the eagle and the escutcheon), of Vladislaus's seal (the angel supporter) and possibly of some other seals (the ermine mantle), but the result is pure fantasy with no encyclopedic value. Now, please revert it to the correct version. Thank you. — Kpalion^(talk) 00:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Oil lamp icon.png needs authorship information

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Oil lamp icon.png appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

• If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|Kpalion/Archive 3}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
  or use the {{own}} template.

• If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:06, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Two swords icon.png needs authorship information

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Two swords icon.png appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

• If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|Kpalion/Archive 3}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
  or use the {{own}} template.

• If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Konstytucja 3 Maja guide.jpg

I am finishing expansion of this article, using another source to indentify some figures. Would you be interested in redoing your work, per the revised version of the article? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 22:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC)  Done

WP Poland in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Poland for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. I hope you'll take a few minutes and take part in this interview. It is a landmark for our project, and your participation is an important part of our little community! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 19:06, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Address of building

Hi! The LOT website says that 39, 17 Stycznia Street, Warsaw is the head office - But File:LOT 006.jpg says that this building is 42, 17 Stycznia Street, Warsaw. Is this 39, 17 Stycznia Street, Warsaw ? Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 00:40, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Ul. 17 Stycznia 39 is the old office building which you can see at File:LOT 003.jpg. I suppose the executives have moved offices to the new building at ul. 17 Stycznia 43, but the company has retained its old legal address at ul. 17 Stycznia 39. — Kpalion^(talk) 01:18, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! I'll check to see if there are sources that state the executives moved too, or that 17 Stycznia 39 is out of use WhisperToMe (talk) 01:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I submitted the question at pl:Wikipedia:Kawiarenka/Babel#LOT_Polish_offices WhisperToMe (talk) 01:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Sprawa pełnej nazwy Miasta i kwestia dat

Witaj! Przepraszam, że Ci tutaj "zaśmiecam" ale właśnie usunięty poraz kolejny został mój wpis :) w haśle krakow. Tym razem, chyba Ty go usunąłeś. Wiem, ze moj angielski jest koszmarny. Piszę więc po polsku. Ten tekst przesłalem też do drugiego z redaktorow Wikipedii. Powielanie legendy w końcu kiedyś staje się prawdą. Tak się stało właśnie z legendarną datą 1596, kiedy indziej podawaną jako 1609 a kiedy indziej jako 1612. Wielu Polaków poddaje się legendom :)

Po 1596 r. Insygnia władzy (koronne), skarbiec koronny, koronacje (czyli Sejmy Koronacyjne) i pogrzeby były nadal w Krakowie. Czyli dla ówczesnych, sprawy najważniejsze. Król wielokrotnie do Krakowa wracał i z niego wyjeżdżał. Jeśli ktoś myśli, że wszystko załatwil rok 1596 to jest w błędzie. Stąd tak wiele dat rozbieżnych (1596, 1609 itp). Do Krakowa słano nadal ambasadorów. Kraków w Umowach międzynarodowych był nadal miastem stołecznym np. w Umowie o obronie przed Turkami dwóch miast stołecznych Krakowa i Wiednia (a to już czasy Jana Sobieskiego, czyli tego, który sobie rezydował w Wilanowie).Poselstwo tureckie słano zresztą do Krakowa. W prawie międzynarodowym czy administracyjnym Stolica Państwa nie dzieli się na stolice i miasta rezydencjonalne. Termin Stolica Państwa jest desygnatem swojej rzeczywistości, miasto rezydencjonalne (rezydencja, czy jedna z rezydencji) króla to pojęcie odrębne. Jest sprawą oczywistą, że Warszawa w XVII w. uzyskała tytuł Miasto rezydencjalne Jego Królewskiej Mości - jest to fakt absolutnie bezsporny.. Jesli studiowałeś w Polsce np. prawo to jest taka książka, podręcznik do Prawa i Administracji i to chyba wydana jeszcze "za komuny", gdzie sprawa Miasta Rezydencjalnego i Stolicy Państwa była "oczywistą oczywistością". Stolica nie musi uzyskiwać takie tytułu, po cóż skoro jest niby stolicą? :)

Ponieważ niestety nie mam na to czasu, aby wertować książki (czego żałuje) to moze wejdź sobie proszę do hasła Wikipedii, z którym przecież nie mam nic wspólnego a mianowicie "Historia Warszawy". Tam pewnie kwestia tego nazewnictwa i tego co nioslo ono ze soba jest zasygnalizowana. Wraz z przypisami pewnie, bo dla historyków warszwawskich takze nie ma tajemnicy w omawianej kwestii. Janusz Tazbir przypomniał mi sie w tym momencie zresztą ... http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_Warszawy

Jeszcze niedawno na stronach Miasta Warszwy było to wylożone kawa na lawę (czyli Krakow stolicą do końca Zaborów). Usunęli chyba to ze swojej zakladki "historycznej" ale zmieniła się w ogóle zasadniczo ta strona. Powielanie stereotypów jest moim zdaniem szkodliwe. Historia, ta "czysta historia" i tak wie swoje. Mógłbym po prostu zapytać: podaj proszę akt prawny (na prxeniesienie stolicy). Dokładnie podobnie, jak mógłbym poprosić Cię o wskazanie Warszawy w Konstytucji niepodległej Rzeczypospolitej przesd 1952 rokiem. I tego też nie znajdziesz bo tego nie ma :). Przytoczysz mi wówczas jako pierwszą Konstytucję Stalinowską z 1952 r. bo tam dopeiro ukazała sie Warszawa ale to temat odrębny. Mam nadzieję, że jako Redaktor (?) tego hasła zainteresuje Cię omawiana kwestia i nie pójdziesz po najmniejszej linii oporu jednak czyli linii powtarzania bez dociekania.

Na datach mi nie zależy. Nie mam z tym problemu. Prosiłbym Cię jeszcze tylko o jedno, jeśli mógłbyś to zrobić mianowicie o zmianę nazy pełnej Krakowa w haśle "Kraków" ponieważ jest wyssana z palca tak jak legenda 1596 roku. (składnia: Stołeczne Królewskie Miasto Kraków - to jest prawidłowa nazwa pełna Krakowa). Pisalem o tym wcześniej. I nie jest to nazwa ceremonialna (nie ma i nie moze o tym być nigdzie ani słowa. Dziwi mnie nota bene usuwanie moich przypisów w tym właśnie zakresie a cytowanie tegoż samego Statutu Miasta i z uporem maniakalnym pisanie nadal nazwy blędnej) ale nazwa pełna. Przypisy (Biuletyn Informacji Publicznej, Statut Miasta, czy Internetowy zbior aktów prawnych na stronie sejmowej) również podałem ale widzę, że to wszystko jest wycinane równo z glebą łącznie z przypisami, linkami do aktow prawnych. W innym przypadku powielana błędnie nazwa pełna tego Miasta stanie się w końcu quasiprawdziwa.

Pozdrawiam!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.79.232.18 (talk) 21:32, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Witaj również! Co do pełnej nazwy miasta – zgoda i przepraszam, że nie sprawdziłem, tylko wyciąłem razem z innymi zmianami. Rzeczywiście cytowane źródło podaje kolejność "Stołeczne Królewskie", a nie na odwrót. Już poprawiłem.

Natomiast jeśli chodzi o datę "przeniesienia stolicy", to mogę się tylko zgodzić co do tego, że sprawa nie jest łatwa, bo rzeczywiście do połowy XX wieku nie było żadnego aktu prawnego określającego, gdzie stolica się znajduje. Nie było też żadnego formalnego aktu przenoszącego stolicę z Krakowa do Warszawy, tak jak i nie było aktu przenoszącego stolicę z Gniezna do Krakowa. W tej sytuacji wyznacznikiem nie są zatem akty prawne, ale to, jakich sformułowań używają historycy. I cytować powinno się książki historyczne, a nie artykuły prasowe czy krótkie notki na stronach internetowych (żeby było jasne, wcale nie uważam, że obecnie podane w artykule "źródło", czyli zarchiwizowana strona przypadkowej jednostki UJ, jest dobre). Podobnie nie ma sensu powoływanie się na polską Wikipedię, która sama w sobie też nie jest wiarygodnym źródłem, o ile nie powołuje się na źródła zewnętrzne. Piszesz, że nie masz czasu wertować książki, ale obawiam się, że bez tego nie da się na poważnie poprawiać Wikipedii. Pozdrawiam — Kpalion^(talk) 00:14, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

---

Witaj ponownie a jednocześnie bardzo Ci dziękuję za naniesienie tej poprawki dotyczącej nazwy pełnej Krakowa. Oczywiście rozumiem złożoność sprawy związanej z datami i źródłem. Z Krakowem i Gnieznem to sprawa sądzę o tyle inna niż z Warszawą i Krakowem, że w tym drugim przypadku istnieje bezsporny fakt, iż Warszawa uzyskała oficjalna nazwę "Miasto rezydencjonalne Jego Królewskiej Mości". Miasto będące stolicą nie musi uzyskiwać jakiegoś marnego duplikatu stoleczności :) w formie nazwy. Innymi słowy uważam, że skoro jedno miasto jest stolicą państwa a drugie uzyskuje tytuł Miasta rezydencjonalnego osoby króla, to ten drugi fakt nie niweluje tego pierwszego. Historycy oczywiscie również wypowiadają się w tej sprawie (przy innej okazji np: http://www.focus.pl/historia/artykuly/zobacz/publikacje/szukanie-kozla-ofiarnego/nc/1/do-druku/1/ - o formalnej stolicy w tamtych czasach) albo w książkach, na które ostatnio faktycznie nie mam czasu :(, i bez których jak słusznie zauwazyłeś nie da się poprawiać Wikipedii :) Natomiast, przytaczając przykład hasło "historia Warszawy" bardziej myślałem o przypisach uzasadniajacych w tym haśle tezy o formalnej stoleczności Krakowa, i Warszawie jako Mieście Rezydencjonalnym JKM. Są to przypisy nawiazujące do papierowych, tradycyjnych źródeł historycznych. Sądzę, że prędzej czy później na pewno zaczną sie pojawiać odpowiednie linki. Głeboko w to wierzę a jeśli coś znajdę to na pewno to do hasła "Krakow" sprobuję "wrzucić" :) pomimo mojej bardzo łamanej angielszczyzny ;) Jeszcze raz Ci dziękuję za naniesienie tej poprawki i Pozdrawiam Cię Serdecznie! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.79.232.18 (talk) 01:52, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Constitution painting

We forgot to add one person to the legend. The women in a yellow dress between 20 and 17 that's Marianna, Dekert's daughter. To quote from the article: "He is accompanied by his daughter Marianna (in a yellow dress, facing away from the viewer) taking a prominent position near the king". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 04:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

She is not notable, but neither are some other figures, such as the anonymous Jew or priests. I think as long as they have been written about, such figures deserve a mention on the legend. Also, she is one of only four or so identified women there (compared to over thirty males). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 19:14, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I no longer have access to the printed publications referencing her, I am afraid. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 16:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Symbols template

See discussion here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 00:01, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

References needed (Szczerbiec)

This article needs some refs added for it to maintain its GA status. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:07, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

For FA, there is no better way then to nominate it. I think that the article may benefit from increased density of references - too often it seems to me you were relying on the "end-of-para" referencing. Without reading through it, the article does look pretty good. You may want to try MILHIST A-class review before a FA review. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 20:26, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

I was going through your GA review of Elizabeth of Bosnia and I thought - Kpalion deserved a baklava for all that help! So, here it is. Cheers :D Surtsicna (talk) 18:57, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Krakow-banner.PNG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Krakow-banner.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 09:25, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Polish names

Hi, you may not remember this edit but the subject has come up at WP:ANI, with whether those who remove these edits should be "warned". Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

		The Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class
		For your constant help with the Poland-related articles and issues, on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland, I award you the Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd class. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
		this WikiAward was given to Kpalion by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here on 17:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC)