Jump to content

User talk:Piotrus/Archive 35

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37→Archive 40

Geocodes

I have now done another interwiki geocoding run for Polish location articles using live database data, and copied around 1000 new sets of coordinates from pl: to the corresponding en: articles. -- The Anome (talk) 16:40, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure

You are invited to participate in the Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure which is expected to close in a little over a week. If you have received this message, it is because it appears that you participated in the 2009 AC RfC, and your contributions indicate that you are currently active on Wikipedia. Ncmvocalist (talk) 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey I was wondering if you could help me out with my citations, taking them from MLA to acceptable wikipedia cites. Joko123nm (talk) 08:21, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

Signpost comments

Hi. In case you haven't been following, there have been a few replies to the thread at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-10-25/In the news. Just fyi. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 17:45, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Polish heritage registers

Dzień dobry! I have a question for you, regarding something I encountered while I was in Warsaw last month, and was wondering if you could help me find some information about it.

I noticed historical labels on a couple of buildings in the Stare Miasto which stated that they have been included on the "National Historical Register of Poland" or something similar; at least one of them also had a plaque attached to it that looked like this. I did a Google search using those terms, but couldn't find anything out; would you happen to know a.) what the Polish name for the register is, and b.) if there's some kind of database of properties online? If it's possible, I'd like to begin compiling a list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Historic sites, and get it included in the list of recognized heritage registers. Once I do, I'll leave a note with WP:POLAND, so that y'all can contribute if you want (which would probably help, as I don't speak Polish very well. :-) )

Dziękuję!. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:04, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I thought it was. But then, we don't use it here in the US, so it's unfamiliar to me. (But then again, don't we do everything differently? :-) ) Thanks for the advice - I'll pop over there. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:23, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

dzieki za nagrode, ale chcialbym zebys przekopiowal to na moja strone w zakladke Awards:)--marekchelsea (talk) 18:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Perspective on AfD

I thought your perspective might be helpful at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mojżesz David Kirszbraun. The argument to keep seems compelling enough for me to withdraw the nomination, but I'd like your opinion. Best, Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:28, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've withdrawn the nomination. Best, Sławomir Biały (talk) 15:55, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 October newsletter

The 2010 WikiCup is over! It has been a long journey, but what has been achieved is impressive: combined, participants have produced over seventy featured articles, over five hundred good articles, over fifty featured lists, over one thousand one hundred "did you know" entries, in addition to various other pieces of recognised content. A full list (which has yet to be updated to reflect the scores in the final round) can be found here. Perhaps more importantly, we have our winner! The 2010 WikiCup champion is Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), with an unbelievable 4220 points in the final round. Second place goes to New Orleans TonyTheTiger (submissions), with 2260, and third to New South Wales Casliber (submissions), with 560. Congratulations to our other four finalists – White Shadows (submissions), William S. Saturn (submissions), Connecticut Staxringold (submissions) and Colombia ThinkBlue (submissions). Also, congratulations to Hungary Sasata (submissions), who withdrew from the competition with an impressive 2685 points earlier in this round.

Prizes will also be going to those who claimed the most points for different types of content in a single round. It was decided that the prizes would be awarded for those with the highest in a round, rather than overall, so that the finalists did not have an unfair advantage. Winning the featured article prize is New South Wales Casliber (submissions), for five featured articles in round 4. Winning the good article prize is Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for eighty-one good articles in round 5. Winning the featured list prize is Connecticut Staxringold (submissions), for six featured lists in round 1. Winning the picture and sound award is Jujutacular (submissions), for four featured pictures in round 3. Winning the topic award is Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for forty-seven articles in various good topics in round 5. Winning the "did you know" award is New Orleans TonyTheTiger (submissions), for over one hundred did you knows is round 5. Finally, winning the in the news award is Republic of Ireland Candlewicke (submissions), for nineteen articles in the news in round three.

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Pomnik - kotwica

Cześć,

proszę opisz ten plik - sprzątam kategorię [1] i natknąłem się na to. Pozdrawiam ToSter (talk) 11:03, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK clarification

Hi, I responded to your request at Template talk:Did you know. Sadly, I don't think this article meets the criteria. The Interior(Talk) 18:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

hey piotrus. I have passed your request on to one of the admins active on DYK. I understand the excitement an new editor feels when nominating a DYK, as I was one very recently. Will update you here. The Interior(Talk) 22:43, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
In response to your note, here is the link to the message I sent to the admin, who has not responded at this point. If you wish to raise the issue to a wider forum, WT:DYK is the place (a very busy place at the moment). As an aside, I have seen the rules waived for missing the deadline by a few days, but not weeks, as is the case in question. As a new reviewer, influenced by the heavy scrutiny DYK is under right now, I simply don't feel comfortable making this exemption myself. Another, very Bold, option, is to go to T:TDYK, and exempt it yourself, using the rationale you listed on my talk. Anyways, hopefully we can resolve this, The Interior(Talk) 21:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Also see Additional Rules, specifically D:9, as a rationale. The Interior(Talk) 21:03, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

students to mentor

Per recent discussions on the Ambassadors list, we're going to try out assigning mentors to some of the students that don't have one, beginning with Media, Politics & Power in the Digital Age. Would you be willing to mentor User:MPPJess, User:olinparker, and User:JacqueBee?

If so, please introduce yourself to each of them, perhaps along these lines:

"Hi! I'm Piotrus, and I've been assigned as your mentor. (If you'd rather choose your own mentor or don't want one, just let me know; you can request a different mentor from this list of Online Ambassadors.)

I'll keep an eye on your edits as you work on Wikipedia for your class, and try to pitch in where I can. If you'd like any help or advice, please let me know."

After that, don't forget to update Wikipedia:Online Ambassadors/Mentors to list your mentees, and if you've reached your limit, move your entry down to the "additional ambassadors" section.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Are you up for a few more? The Political Economy of Technology and Science is looking for mentors on a per-article basis (with usually two students per article, but one mentor). If you've not reached your limit, please sign up as the mentor for Cap and dividend on the course page, and leave notes introducing yourself for the two students working on it (and update the mentors page). Thanks!--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:36, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you they should be writing stuff soon in sandbox, so I hope you will have a good experience, Sadads (talk) 17:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Gunpowder Plot was TFA yesterday, and thus cannot be at FAR today. I've left a comment to that effect on the FAR page. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 16:49, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Update on your student's DYK project

Hi piotrus. It looks like we have support for the extension on Film Studies. I have updated the author about one other small issue that needs clearing up. The Interior(Talk) 17:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Persondata

Powiedz mi do czego wlasciwie sluzy ta persondata bo ostatnio czesto mi dodaja to do moich artykulow--marekchelsea (talk) 09:56, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Dyk

Hi Piotr I sincerely apologize I did not act on the DYK page sooner but I disappointedly thought my deadline was missed and focused on other work. In terms of the source in question it was considered in the chosen hook; however, in choosing my hook I used information that I found widely accepted in the many sources I have used in my research and cited on my reflist. I refer to a book, specifically its introduction pg.1-8 (Film Studies Critical Approaches) that most explicitly details the information in the hook which I have now cited on the film studies page and the hook's sentence. Again I apologize for the late reply, the class and I really appreciate the work the wikiambassadors do for us, our grades:) and the community. I am especially greatful for you going to bat for me on DYK I just hope this was not in vain due to my idleness. From now on I do promise to check my wikitalk more often than I have been, now knowing that I may have missed the opportunity to make the main page. Thanks Joko123nm (talk) 01:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

Dear Piotrus,

About 3 weeks ago, you commented on the Editor Trends Study page and I am hoping that you are still interested in this project. We made some progress with writing Editor Trends Study/Software to conduct the analyzes. Currently, we are looking for some people that would enjoy help debugging / improving this tool. If you are interested then please let me know.

Best, Diederik Drdee (talk) 21:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Reply

Hey again, I'm really exited to see my article on the main page I think I might demand a celebration in class ha ha. I just wanted to make sure that I'm free to add on to my page up until its up. Also how will I know when its scheduled to go up. Should I just keep checking once it's on a queue? Thanks again. Joko123nm (talk) 01:39, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

RE: Objection to deletion of a discussion

The comments made by all in the discussion are still visible in Archive 1 of my talk page Barts1a (talk) 04:22, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

If it makes you feel better... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Barts1a&oldid=395855423
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Barts1a&oldid=395853036
As you can see: your contributions are still there and viewable. Barts1a (talk) 07:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Using a photo found on CreativeCommons

Hello,

I am a writer and would like to use an image found on CreativeCommons.org in an article. It is of a train at Busch Gardens Williamsburg.

I usually take my own photos but do not have a suitable one for this article. I am rather new at the whole Creative Commons thing and worry that I will use something I am not supposed to, so I always like to ask for permission.  :-)

If it is okay for me to use, please let me know how you would like to be attributed.

My email adress is sandyallen11@gmail.com.

Thanks for your assistance, Sandy Allen 24.125.28.189 (talk) 16:23, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Replied by email. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:27, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hammer's Slammers

I'm not sure what was gained by splitting up the "Hammer's Slammers" page. It seems like it's just confusing things, particularly when the new page has a link to a "next in series" that goes to a completely wrong book!

I'm also not sure why you did this with no prior discussion or indication. 192.91.171.42 (talk) 18:22, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I did that because it was confusing otherwise; a book is different from a book series. Generic series information such as "technology in the -verse" or list of books in the series belongs on the book series article, not in the first book of the series article. Such an obvious fix does not require discussion or indication, but you are welcome to start a discussion on the article's talk page. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:27, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

...so you're going to make a separate page for every book in the series, then? Obviously this is very important to you! 192.35.35.35 (talk) 21:02, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Jewish cemetery

Witam. Czy dałbyś radę wpisać do opisu zdjęcia, w jkiej miejscowości ten cmentarz się znajduje? Zdjęcie by dużo na tym zyskało. Chodzi mi o : [2]. Pozdrawiam --Piotr967 (talk) 09:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list

Resolved by motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:

Remedy 3 of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list ("Piotrus topic banned") is replaced with the following:

Piotrus (talk · contribs) is topic banned from articles about national, cultural, or ethnic disputes within Eastern Europe, their associated talk pages, and any process discussion about these topics until March 22, 2011 (the date on which the topic ban imposed in the original decision was to expire).

For the Arbitration Committee,
NW (Talk) 17:23, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Discuss this

WikiProject Pittsburgh

Hello Piotrus/Archive 35, this message is being sent on behalf of WikiProject Pittsburgh. You have previously signed up as a member and we are currently trying to determine any members that have become inactive or no longer care to be a member. If you still wish to be on the member list, please sign your name here. Thank you, on behalf of the project, Grsz11 17:40, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

German rail articles

The problem is that they are translations, and generally I haven't sighted the sources, although there is no reason to think they are not accurate. Also the German articles generally don't have the detailed citations required in English Wikipedia.--Grahame (talk) 23:51, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Barts1a/discussion1

Several contributors suggested moving this to your user space, Barts1a has no objection, so I have moved it to User:Piotrus/discussion1 and closed the MfD accordingly. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Online Ambassador selection process

Please share you views on the current version of the proposed Online Ambassador selection process, which the steering committee has recommended for adoption by the ambassadors program. Once we settle on a selection process, we can start recruiting more Online Ambassadors for next term (in which we will have more students, and the students will be more involved with mentors from early on).--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 15:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Wolne Miasto Kraków

Witam! Twoje hasło zostało wstawione do PANDA/lista]. Czy jesteś w stanie je poprawić tak by spełniało obecne standardy Artykułów na medal?.Jill Tarter (talk) 14:44, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

303 photos

Hi Piotrus,

I used the PD_Poland license because File:Dywizjon 303 4.jpg, another photo from the same source, used that license. If you don't think it's appropriate, I can change it. Let me know. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

DYK nomination of Zygmunt Padlewski

Hello! Your submission of Zygmunt Padlewski at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 16:16, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

My apologies

I should have restored the link like you did here.--Rockfang (talk) 04:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Zygmunt Padlewski

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

GOCE elections

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors

Elections are currently underway for our inaugural Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, Friday 1 December – 23:59 UTC, Tuesday 14 December. All GOCE members in good standing, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are six candidates vying for four positions. The candidate with the highest number of votes will become the Lead Coordinator, therefore, your vote really matters! Cast your vote today.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors via SMasters using AWB on 01:56, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Not my intention to provoke anyone, "Peace of Riga"

I just wanted to say that it wasn't my intention to provoke--I know it can easily come off as such through an open system like Wikipedia. I made those edits after having read repeatedly though Vakar (perhaps the earliest English-language history of Belarus) and Lubachko (another major history for English-speakers, and others like Zaprudnik, who quote him).

Again, I don't wish to establish a sort of "false equivalency" on the issue. And I had no intention of provoking or alienating. At the same time, I did find mention of Polish control of West Belarus somewhat lacking, even if it is only a further consideration of Peace of Riga. Lubachko and Vakar vividly describe it period in West Belarus, in many periods, violent and aggressive in its own right, and it seems fair to mention then (Zaprudnik's history, particularly before 1957, is heavily based on their works.) Again, the choice of words for Bereza Kartuska are a reflection of Lubachko's own words (in his narrative, it is literally described as "Concentration Camp", though he is speaking from the perspective of the Belarusians). The article for Bereza Kartuska likewise acknowledges that some consider it such a establishment. I do not wish to edit Lubachko's words any more than I must--and even then, should it be called "prison" or something else, deleting the whole addition seems like a poor solution.

I hope I haven't "stepped out of line", since I am obviously not anywhere near the veteran of this system, so I felt as though you deserved a wider explanation. I'm a Taiwanese national as well, so English is a second language (and I still make a few hic-ups), so I wanted to be cautious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChuangKai (talk • contribs) 06:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

FYI

[3] Offliner (talk) 07:48, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

Ships

You uploaded images of ships in Corfu. Unfortunately without the names of the ships. Ans you didn't give the source, so you may not be surprised when somebody will support deletion. Can you add source and names. I'l try to find the respective IMO numbers for the ships. --Stunteltje (talk) 21:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Katyn1941.JPG

I am glad that you trust that the photo is very real.

This place is Poland and the year is 1941. The victims are dressed in greatcoat. You must accept, that this is not the fake. The word "Katyn" is byword. All the murdered military in Poland in this period are to do with the Katyn massacre. If you do not see the to do with massacre of prisoners of war in Poland however, I entreat you to consult with anybody other in Wikipedia team about this simple questions: 1. Are the Nurenberg trial decisions is the fringe theory?! 2. Are the Nazi soldiers executing civilians on this foto? 3. Are the image's description is entirely sourceless? 4. Are in the number of murdered militaries in Katyn not have Polish and Soviet Jews? 5. Why the Wikipedia's opinion for the Katyn massacre is so firmly? (The national coat of arms in the document "decision of massacre" is in use from 1946). 6. Why so many times you change the reason for deletion of this foto?

Best regards, Santimento (talk) 22:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Planning for next term in the Wikipedia Ambassador Program

Hi Piotrus. We're trying to figure out how many students we can mentor next term and how many additional Online Ambassadors will be needed. Based on the revised plan for what participating courses will be like next term, I've sketched out what will be expected of mentors. Please look that over, and then go to the online ambassadors talk page to indicate much mentoring and other ambassador activities you'd like to do next term. Thanks!--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 18:11, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Christmas decorations

In WIKIMEDIA I found quite a number of photos of christmas decorations by you. While the objects are beautiful, the photos aren't; quite some of them are waaaayyyy out of focus. Could you take them again, please? Christmas is coming; I'm sure you still have your lovely objects and will use them this year... --Kauko56 (talk) 12:48, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Please reconsider

I am deeply disappointed that you should raise the spectre of the "original name". This Wikipedia is written in English, not German; in English, the English name is more correct - and the original name of Zurich is the Proto-Celtic word reflected in Turicum. whatever it may have been.Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:12, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your support and kind words in your voter guide, as well as for your other thoughtful observations. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:51, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement

You hereby be notified that an arbitration enforcement request has been filled against you [4]. --Dojarca (talk) 04:48, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for welcoming to wikiproject Poland. I look forward to helping improve the quality of articles relating to Poland. Have a nice day! --Piast93 (talk) 15:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Dziś do ciebie przyjść nie mogę

I was trying to find information about Dziś do ciebie przyjść nie mogę, but did not get very far. Perhaps you could help out. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 10:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

In Polish: [5], not sure if it's RS. Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:27, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd suggest WT:POLAND in the future, I never heard of it before. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 14:45, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Heh, you're showing your age. I think my grandma still has the original 78 (or other ultra outdated medium)of that song. Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:28, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Marek! Moving to Talk:Dziś do ciebie przyjść nie mogę. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 11:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

You're my mentor

I would like some help from you about my Cap and dividend article. In the last section i tried to cite a source but instead of creating a new source in the references section it linked it to a old source. Im not sure how. ~user:snyde2bd —Preceding undated comment added 01:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC).

Mentor for team of students

Hi, my name is James Fullerton, and I'm a teacher at Southern Lehigh Middle School in PA. Recently I've created a project that involves Wikipedia (WP) and small groups of students making a contribution to a WP article of their choosing, as long as the topic is related to the content of the course - being American Government, Civics, and Economics. For the past 4 weeks, students have become involved in the culture of WP, with many already narrowing in on a topic for their contribution. Here is the supportive material on Wikispaces (https://wikiedit.wikispaces.com/). Your assistance would be greatly appreciated! Would you be available to act as a mentor to a small group of students as they begin to offer additional content to an article of their interest? The team sizes are numbered between 5-7 students each. I will notify you as to who is in the teams with their WP user names. Jmfullerton (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Transport

Well, it was like three years ago. :) Anyways it seems it was empty back then. On the other hand, I think this category (as all Silesia categories) is quite problematic, since Silesia is nowadays divided between two countries, so these categories would group unrelated articles. - Darwinek (talk) 12:34, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Housing discrimination (United States)

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Student help request

Hi, I'm 7dteam (talk) 19:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC), a student attending Southern Lehigh Middle School. I am enrolled in Mr. James Fullerton's class, and am currently on the wiki-edit project he has assigned us. I have fellow group-mates with me that are assigned to the project with me. Our objective is to help and contribute to a wiki page on any topic that relates to our course this year in American Civics. We have decided as a group to work on the wiki page of bicameralism. We have been studying bicameralism for the past few days, and we believe we know enough to add even a little bit to the page. It seems though that we are unsure as how to add to a wiki page, and this is where your help would be greatly appreciated. You can reach us at 7dteam (talk) 19:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC) . Thanks!

Stefan Gembicki

Hi Piotrus,

I've deleted Stefan Gembicki as you requested. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Here you go:

Stefan Gembicki can refer to several members of the Gemicki family (from Gembice) of Nałęcz Coat of Arms:

Nomination for deletion of Template:Expand

Template:Expand has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 134.253.26.6 (talk) 22:45, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Activity of Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland members

Hello, Piotrus. You have new messages at Piast93's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Piast93 23:40, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for informing me about that discussion. At least you have some common courtesy.--Piast93 21:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much

Thank you Piotrus, for the Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class. Thank you for welcoming me into the WikiProject despite my prior assumption of bad faith against many of its members. I'm glad we have come so far since then.

Warm wishes for a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.

Due to your past contribution to Technological utopianism, you may currently want to help editing the Technological utopianism article because currently only one editor is contributing to the article. The Singularitarianism Article could also benefit from your help.

I feel Loremaster is editing Singularitarianism and Technological utopianism in a biased manner in accordance with his Save The Earth propaganda. Loremasters's ideology seems to verge towards Neo-Luddism. Here are the damming facts Loremaster has stated in discussion:

Loremaster says he is:

"...critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms."

Loremaster wants people to:

"...stop indulging in techno-utopian fantasies... ...so that we can all focus on energies on saving the planet."

Loremaster sees his editing as a 'fight' and he states:

"Although I am convinced that the world is in fact heading toward an ecological catastrophe, I think it can be averted and my optimism makes me want to fight to do do just that."

81.151.135.248 (talk) 11:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)JB

  1. LOL
  2. Despite the fact that I openly admit to being a technorealist who is critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms, I have let never this point of view influence any of my edits or reverts of the Technological utopianism or Singularitarianism articles. On the contrary, I am the person most responsible for expanding the former article with content some would argue is “pro-techno-utopian” (i.e. passages from James Hughes' book Citizen Cyborg).
  3. I find it disgusting that 81.151.135.248 would take comments I made out of context to falsely make it seem I see my editing of any article as part of my fight for the environment.
  4. In light of this outrageous act of bad faith, I will do everything in my power to get this jerk banned from Wikipedia.

--Loremaster (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ignas Jonynas

Hello! Your submission of Ignas Jonynas at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Thelmadatter (talk) 01:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

DYK for V-2 rocket facilities of World War II

Interesting article, which seems to me to meet the DYK criteria - however I've suggested a stronger hook that would require a couple of small modifications and additional references. I've also left a message to this effect on the talk page of the original author, Target for Today. Ivolocy (talk) 12:45, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

user page

Thanks for 'welcome mat'. I did not need to use it so far hence not creating one. My visits here will be probably not very frequent ones (time or constant lack of it). Good luck to all. I tried, rather unsuccessfully, to make some sense in the Adam Mickiewicz article but it seems to be beyond reason (therefore we have a new poet: Polish-Lithuanian). It is my personal pride that I detest Polish chauvinism, but even more aggressive ignorance. No nation is better than other - but it works both ways. What if poor Adas would have written "Żmudzi, ojczyzno moja" - he would be a Polish-Żmudzin poet? But I digress. the best in the Seasons, --Emanek (talk) 09:22, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Rhodes Monastery

Moni thani01.JPG is Moni Thari monastery, Laerma village Lindos (Laerma is a Municipal Department of Lindos Municipality) I'll change it and the others accordingly and put the pics into Category Laerma.Have a good Christmas Robert aka Notafly (talk) 20:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Sociology Newsletter: III (December 2010)

Sociology Project • News • December 2010
Spreading the meme since August 2006

The Sociology WikiProject third newsletter is out!

According to our April mini-census, we have 15 active members, 6 semi-active ones and 45 inactive. Out of those, 4 active, 3 semi-active and 1 inactive members have added themselves to corresponding categories since the mini-census. The next one is planned, roughly, for sometime next year. The membership list has been kept since 2004.

On that note, nobody has ever studied WikiProjects from the sociological perspective... if you are interesting in researching Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Research and wiki-research-l listerv.

Moving from research to teaching, did you know that many teachers and instructors are teaching classes with Wikipedia? This idea is getting support from the Wikimedia Foundation, and some really useful tools have been created recently. I have experience with that, having taught several undergad classes, so feel free to ask me questions on that!

And as long as I am talking about professional issues, if any of you is going to any sociological conferences, do post that to our project - perhaps other members are going there too?

In other news: the a automated to do listing reported in the April issue went down shortly afterwards, but seems to be on the path to reactivation. We still have an active tag and assess project, and comparing the numbers to the April report, we have identified about 350 more sociology-related articles (from 1,800 to 2,150) and assessed about 100 (from 1,300 to 1,400).

We now have a listing of most popular sociology-related pages. It is updated on the 1st of every month, starting with August, and reports which of our sociology-tagged articles are most frequently read. Of course, GIGO holds true, so after looking at it right now and trying to determine what is our most popular article, my first action was to shake my head and remove Criminal Minds (which, perhaps not too surprisingly, outranks all sociology articles in period tested). Second item I noticed it this month's Industrial Revolution, beating Criminal Minds, that moved from close to 30th position in August/September, to 9th in October and 2nd in November. If you'd like to discuss this or any other trends, please visit WT:SOCIOLOGY!

Finally, with the reactivation of Article Alerts, we are getting our own here. Bookmark that page so you can keep track of sociology related deletion debates, move debates, good and feature article discussions, and more.

Our first task force (Wikipedia:WikiProject Sociology/Social movements task force) was created (1 June 2010).

If you have basic or better graphic skills, our projects needs a dedicated barnstar (award) (currently the closest we can get is the Society Barnstar.

As always, I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Sociology page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions.

Authored by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 04:07, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a recipient of WikiProject Sociology Newsletter (Opt-out).

WikiProject Sociology for me

Hello. Thank you for your interesting. Sociology is one of the topics I'm interesting. So I'm interesting in receiving any newsletter from it, but not to make any article edit in en wikipedia for the near future. But I read some of them and I'm thinking about traslare some topics fot the el: wikipedia. Vchorozopoulos (talk) 23:47, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ignas Jonynas

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

battle of Lubrze

czolem Piotrusiu :) nie wiem jak zmienic tutul artykulu - a napisalem wstepny artykul o bitwie pod Lubrzem po angielsku http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batle_of_Lubrze , a z jakis powodow jest 'batle' zamiast 'battle' - pomocy prosze! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarioTW (talk • contribs) 22:53, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK Zakopane Style of architecture

Hello! Your submission of Zakopane Style of Architecture at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --Dbratland (talk) 02:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

invitation

Thanks - but after few attempts at rescuing Adam Mickiewicz from a colossal OR - it seems that reason escapes some of the editors on enwiki. My limited time is too precious for me to get involved in emotional debates devoid of logic. And I thought that plwiki is sometimes hard to work with. By the way - is the Polish-Lithuanian adjective spilling into Polish-Belarussian, Polish-Ukrainian and so on, or is it only specific to Lithuanian socio-political geography? yours, --Emanek (talk) 09:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

    • well, I am not so sure about the 'advacement' on enwiki.I just took a slow walk through certain subjects or bios - people like Narutowicz and so on (in regards to the comical disputes about Mickiewicz) - I can only say that I have found it bemusing at best. Anyhow - it may be the nature of the beast (wikipedia). best of luck, --Emanek (talk) 07:29, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Pobog coa blackwhite.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Pobog coa blackwhite.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 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 05:59, 31 December 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. Kelly hi! 05:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Year-end Report

Season's Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors

We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2010. Read all about these in the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report.

Highlights
  • Membership grows to 503 editors
  • 2,589 articles removed through four Backlog elimination drives
  • Our encounter with Jimbo Wales
  • Guild home pages reorganized and redesigned
  • Report on our inaugural elections
  • Guild Plans for 2011
  • New barnstars introduced
  • Requests page improved
  • Sign up for the January 2011 Backlog elimination drive!
Get your copy of the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report here On behalf of the Guild, we take this opportunity to wish you Season's Greetings and Happy New Year. See you in 2011!
– Your Coordinators: S Masters (lead), Diannaa, The Utahraptor, and Tea with toast.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for a violation of your topic ban on the page Battle of Komarów. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. Mkativerata (talk) 21:46, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

Your edit and talk page contribution to this article are in clear violation of your topic ban "from articles about national, cultural, or ethnic disputes within Eastern Europe". To enforce this topic ban you have been blocked for one week, noting that this violation occurred after a very specific warning. This block can be appealed by posting an appeal here, following which it will be moved over to WP:AE. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2011 WikiCup!

Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2011/Submissions/Piotrus

Hey, I have set your submission as a hidden comment- you cannot claim points for DYK articles until they have hit the main page. J Milburn (talk) 20:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Granted, that's why I hid the submission rather than removing it. That's how I did things back when I was taking part. J Milburn (talk) 21:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for V-2 rocket facilities of World War II

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 14:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement action appeal by Piotrus

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Piotrus (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

See detailed reasons below. Short version: I am topic banned "from articles about national, cultural, or ethnic disputes within Eastern Europe". I edited an uncontroversial article about a battle in Eastern Europe. Blocking admin thinks I violated my topic ban because all things military are clearly part of my topic ban. I believe I didn't.

I would like to ask you to consider this: which disputes was I banned from? I was banned from ETHNIC, NATIONAL and CULTURAL disputes. Not from ALL disputes. Nor from MILITARY ones. There is no word "MILITARY" in my topic ban. Hence I did not violate it.

I am open to discussing whether I should not edit military articles. Heck, I promise that I will abstain from them till neutral editors reach consensus on that issue (presumably, on AE). The block serves no purpose, if one wanted to warn me that somewhere in the ETHNIC, NATIONAL and CULTURAL disputes there are MILIARY disputes (and I have trouble seeing where), this could have been achieved with a simple warning - why the draconian one week block?

I thus believe that it is sufficiently clear that I did not violate the topic ban that I should be unblocked; at the same time I promise to avoid military-related articles pending discussion to determine if this is so. I have no desire to aggreviate the situation, I just wish to return to peaceful editing as soon as possible. Please review the procedural note below, though - I don't want to get any admin in trouble over unblocking me (the wiki bureaucracy gets more and more complex and unfriendly by the minute, it seems). Thank you, --User:Piotrus 00:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC) PS. I am blocked so I cannot notify the blocking admin with a diff, I emailed him and I see he has now copied the appeal to AE. Please note that my unblock request is separate, and related, and I don't believe it is procedurally invalidated by an ongoing AE discussion.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline—you know the drill AE blocks to contested at AE yadda yadda. Wait one while I copy your appeal over there. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:50, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hi Piotrus - I have unblocked you following your appeal here (reasons therein). Good luck in the Wikicup. --Mkativerata (talk) 01:23, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Happy New Year. I was absent when you sent me the note but it appears this was resolved not that much latter. I assume this is no longer a matter of urgency to look into? Ncmvocalist (talk) 03:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

7dteam- Thank you for your advice how to add a page, but I need to know how to add an article to a page. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7dteam (talk • contribs) 19:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

"Adopted" getting Białystok to B-Class

Need suggestions on what additional Białystok needs to get to B-Class. Been putting some heavy work into the top half of the article. I already know the culture / sport section needs some improvement since I haven't touched below the Industry section. Ajh1492 (talk) 23:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Ryszard Czerniawski

Hi, can you find a source or to for this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

??

Czy smakowała Ci ta gumowa kanapka z serem wczoraj? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrk91f (talk • contribs) 16:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

?? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Wydaje mi się że byliśmy na tym samym locie /LH 1357/ :-D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrk91f (talk • contribs) 13:16, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Calkiem prawdopodobne. Jak mnie znalazlas? :) Zapraszam do eksploracji Wikipedii, to ciekawe miejsce. Polecam m.in. WP:POLAND. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Monarch A321 Photo

Hello, I am going to see if I can find the registration of the Monarch A321 in corfu on Libhomeradar.org for you

--MKY661 (talk) 17:56, 9 January 2011

G-OZBG from Gatwick --MKY661 (talk) 18:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Are you talking about a picture I took? You may want to link it; and add the information to it if you haven't done so already. Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Help with using WP in a course

Piotrus,

I'm a faculty member at CMU, and will be using the improvement of relevant Wikipedia articles as an assignment in my Organizational Communications course this semester [[6]]. Since you are just down the street from us, would you be willing to schedule an orientation to Wikipedia with my class? Thanks. Bob Kraut Robertekraut (talk) 19:00, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for offering to help. If you were to give an in-class lecture, how much time should I schedule? I'll see if I can get in touch with you by email. Robertekraut (talk) 20:33, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

Study Platform on Interlocking Nationalism: Jarosław Żądło-Dąbrowski z Dąbrówki h. Radwan

SEE: SPIN -- Jarosław Żądło-Dąbrowski z Dąbrówki h. Radwan

You might want to take a look at that.  They're using my language directly from Wikipedia, which is what I'm trying to get through to you about his family background.


ALSO SEE: Study Platform on Interlocking Nationalism

Keep that in mind with your deletion nominations, particularly on seed articles.

I see the relevance of that particular article you twice nominated for deletion, but I'm not done yet.

Thanks.


And see User talk:Malik Shabazz#Thank You for Contacting Me for issues I see around User:Exxess/Żądło-Dąbrowski z Dąbrówki h. Radwan.

Other than that, the matter is behind me. -- Exxess (talk) 10:37, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Also see Ronald K. Hoeflin.  Those societies mentioned always fragment.  If you're smart, you'll understand why. -- Exxess (talk) 10:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Re your AE topic ban appeal

Sorry, but it strains credulity (mine, anyway) to believe that you didn't realize that the Adam Mickiewicz article was the subject of a dispute among Lithuanian and Polish editors with whom you are well-acquainted until the moment before you were going to hit save, as you state here [7]. (Quote: But moments before I was about to hit the save button, I realized that the article seems to be in the midst of an edit war related to the subject nationality...). (Recent article/talk page history: [8], [9]). You haven't edited the article since 2007 [10] and you must have thousands of other articles that need improvement on your watchlist.

You could have posted an article edit request to the PL noticeboard re this, as you have for many articles during the past few months.

In my view the A.M. part of your appeal demonstrates.. what to call it... a lack of forthcoming-ness. The remainder of the appeal, in which you speak of WP's losses from your lack of participation, that's a different story that others can think over.

If you remove the A.M. section I shan't contest your appeal, since lifting your topic ban now or in March doesn't make much difference in the long run. But I am concerned about that part - possibly the readers will take your assertion at face value without checking the article/talk page histories. You could either remove that section (since it hasn't been commented on there yet) or strike it. If you choose not to do either, I may bring it up at the AE appeal.

I'd prefer that we keep the conversation here, but if you'd rather have it on my talk page, that's OK by me - if so I'll post talkbacks. Novickas (talk) 21:03, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I knew about the nationality debate, of course, but I did not want to join it - I just wanted to fix a minor referencing problem, and moments before I hit the save button I realized that editing this article could be a topic ban violation (even through my edit had nothing to do with it). Perhaps this isn't clear in my request. I will clarify this in the request when I have a little more time (in a day or two); overall I think you have a point but I'll have to think how the wording could be clarified (if you want to suggest such a revised wording for me here to consider, please do so). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 09:22, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
The problem is, you say your topic ban has fuzzy boundaries, but acknowledge here that you knew the A.M. article was disputed. So you do know where the line is.
If I were in your shoes, I'd be staying well inside the line. Thereby sparing fellow editors the aggravation of evaluating my edits and incident reports - to me that's more important than the minor improvements you might have made during some of these toeing-the-line ventures. Clearly the community has found evaluation exhaustingly time-consuming and sometimes inconclusive. I wouldn't cite that as a reason for lifting my ban - I'd see the evaluation processes as an unfortunate waste of community resources. I'd try to show that I had helped resolve disputes using a venue open to me, which in your case would be the PL noticeboard. (Other relevant noticeboard notices pointing to the discussions there would certainly be OK by me too). To demonstrate my readiness to conduct open, honest business here. Novickas (talk) 17:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I acknowledge that I realized that the AM article could be seen as being a part of it, and that even making an uncontroversial edit to it could be seen as topic ban violation, if the topic ban would be interpreted by its letter, not the spirit. I am not sure at this point how I could improve my Amendment statement; as I said above you are welcome to suggest an alternative wording here (perhaps there is some unintended confusion in my current statement that I am not seeing?).
I very much agree about staying well inside the line. Because the line is so blurry, however, it is difficult: I've been trying to stay well inside it for the past months, but the results have been mixed, as I am sure you realize.
The fact that the community has to waste time analyzing my edits is certainly a problem; it is only part of a larger one stemming from well-meant but poorly design remedies. The fact that some editors had to waste their times carrying out edits I proposed on WT:POLAND, where I could've done those edits myself thus saving their time for more useful tasks is just one more problem. As things stand, the best way for me to avoid aggravating the situation is to avoid the EE area altogether, therefore voluntarily restricting myself beyond the intended level of remedies. I find this solution less than satisfactory, but perhaps necessary for the near future. The sooner we can move beyond those issues and return to the normal situation, the better. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't know what more I can say about this - having already said that I personally would know how to stay well inside the topic ban boundary. That's a really long way from your statement "Even if I do my best to adhere to the topic ban, I can still be harassed by battleground-minded editors...".
Because what you describe as a blurry boundary, I see as clear - to me, it then follows that you are writing about your impulses. We all have them. (And what follows from that is that you could find a mentor for the duration of the topic ban). Cost-benefit analysis. You say your forays into the borderlands have had a benefit: '...such reports seem to serve a useful function of identifying disruptive, battleground-minded editors...'. I say all AE filings are extremely disruptive and costly to the community at large; that you could have prevented yours; and that tagging the editors who filed the previous reports as disruptive, battleground-minded serves no useful long-term purpose.
Why do you dichotomously posit complete avoidance of EE topics as your alternative? You no longer need to ask others to do uncontroversial things, like article project tagging, DKY proposals, etc - that looks to me like the bulk of your past task requests. And you remain free to bring things up at the Poland Project page. Novickas (talk) 20:16, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
If you find yourself under a similar topic ban, which I hope will not happen, and are as active as I in creating content, which I do wish for, then we can talk about whether you'll find navigating the topic ban easier. Sure, we can all agree on some issues being totally uncontroversial and other being quite obviously so. Majority, however, are in those blurry waters. Since I tried to navigate them and didn't fair so well for various reasons, including the fact that different editors interpret it differently (proof being on AE) I am in no mood to try to navigate this minefield further. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
This dialogue doesn't seem to have gone well, from my point of view anyway. I posted at the AE request. I remain convinced that you could navigate the ban and that your thinking twice or thrice, or asking uninvolved editors or admins beforehand, would benefit WP by averting AE actions. You could post uncontroversial improvement suggestions to potentially disputed articles at my talk page. (I'd do the A.M. one if I understood what you meant). Novickas (talk) 20:00, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
So somebody else could report me for violating the ban? No, thanks. If I have to discuss those issues somewhere, I'll do so at WT:POLAND, as the previous amendment allows me to. Out of sheer curiosity, why do you think I should not edit those articles now but (presumably) will be able to do so from late March? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Um, if you post at my talk page about it first, and I say 'OK by me' or do it myself, and someone else then reports you to AE, I'll take the heat. You'd just have to trust me on that one, which you may of course not wish to do. (And I sometimes have family committments that prevent the speedy responses that WPians like). As to why March and not now - as I mentioned at AE, I think you have wikilawyered, but people can change. Novickas (talk) 21:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, the admins/arbitrators at AE determined that it wasn't me who was wikilawyering, but I do agree with you that those proceedings were a sad waste of time. Sadly, the only way - from my perspective - to avoid them in the future, is to avoid all EE topics, because things I thought were fine, to some, apparently, aren't. Anyway, if you want to fix the problem with the AM article, since in one of your recent comments you indicated the willingness to look into that issue, please consider moving the template I cite in my request to the references section. Hopefully this request of mine will not provoke undue dramu. Once you do so, please explain to me how is Wikipedia benefiting from this fix being delayed by days, if not weeks, and from you having to waste your time on this issue instead of doing something else... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:03, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
True, no one besides me has called it wikilawyering. I'm not really a fan of the term. It's out there as an essay WP:Wikilawyering but I don't like most of those. See, when I get a traffic ticket, I just pay the 75 bucks. After venting at home about how everyone else drives 72 mph, or how hard it was to see the 'No Left Turn 6-7 PM Mon-Fri' sign. The looks I get at home are enough to stop me from - er, wasting the judicial system's time on my own behalf. So I drive more carefully for another year or two. Which benefits the community. If not me or mine. In my view.
WRT to the Adam M edit. I'd have done it some time ago if it looked simple. Why does it need a template? Do you want that a general reference to the Catholic Encyclopedia be inserted, or does the article incorporate text from it? If it corporates PD text from there, it's a rather more time-sensitive issue than just adding it as a reference. It's otherwise quite well-referenced altho most of the article was copied from the 1911 Brit article. But I don't see it as high-priority ( i.e. worth engaging the WP judicial system) either way. Novickas (talk) 23:08, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
You are certainly in your rights to have a dissenting opinion, although I'd prefer if you considered WP:AGF and WP:FORGIVE in your interpretation and actions. Otherwise, even in best faith, one can fall into that trap - or cause others to think they had. With regards to wikilawyering, see my essays; in particular this one. With regards to your driving analogy, as all generalizations go, it is not very appropriate, in particular, because you are driving for yourself, not for the community. Imagine that you received a ticket while driving for the community (delivering free books to poor schoolchildren), and imagine that you did so in the world where traffic police is supposed to be subordinate to the book delivery company and supposed to have the good of the schoolchildren in its mind... :) Of course, that is not to say that you shouldn't have received some for of a warning or a ticket (delivering community goods is not an entitlement for breaking traffic rules), but there is a difference between a 75 bucks ticket and a 1000 buck one, or a suspension, right? Of course, this is also just a generalization one can poke holes with, so I'd suggest we stick to real facts (or just drop this line of discussion, as I feel it will achieve little else but waste our time in polemics).
WRT to AM, I just want to reference note to be in the right section. Eventually that stuff will need to be verified inline, of course, but the first step is having the note in the proper section, not somewhere at the bottom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:37, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, all analogies break down somewhere, so now might be a good time to stop. I still don't know what you want re the A.M. article tho. Shall I just insert the Catholic Ency's entry on AM as a general reference? Novickas (talk) 00:36, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
If by insert you mean move it, then yes. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 02:57, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

ASA Annual Meeting 2011

Hi Piotr, this is Annie Lin from the Wikimedia Foundation - I work on the Public Policy Initiative as the Campus Team Coordinator, working closely with professors and Campus Ambassadors to encourage the use of Wikipedia as a teaching tool in university settings. Thank you for all your great contributions to the Initiative! I saw on WikiProject Sociology that you will be going to the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, and was wondering if you might be interested in this random idea I had, of potentially organizing/proposing a panel or roundtable at the Annual Meeting that would discuss the role of Wikipedia in academia, the role of technology in academia, or innovative approaches to teaching in general? I studied sociology at UC Berkeley and like to think of myself as a sociologist (at least at heart), and have gone to ASA annual meetings before and have some connections in the sociology academic world. Would this idea be something you're interested in? I think we've both had a lot of experience talking to academics about the idea of using Wikipedia as a teaching tool by this point, so the main work - if we were to attempt this - would be how to make this happen logistically (i.e. how to register or propose the idea). Let me know what you think? P.S. I also saw that User:Aetheling will be sitting on the panel at the ASA Annual Meeting, so I contacted him about this too. Annie Lin (Campus Team Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 22:20, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Please let me know when/if CITASA responds! If it helps at all, please let them know that this is an effort that has been picked up by professors at universities across the country (including Harvard, UC Berkeley, Georgetown, Syracuse U, Indiana U, University of Michigan, and many more), and that this has been covered by many major media outlets (including NPR, Chronicles of Higher Education, Newsweek, EduCause, and various local and school newspapers - see http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Public_Policy_Initiative under "Media coverage"). Not sure whether that would help at all, but worth a try. I am not currently an official student anywhere, so I probably have even less sway than you do, but I can certainly also poke around my connections. Let's keep each other in the loop about this? Annie Lin (Campus Team Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 02:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Just FYI: I discovered that the "Teaching & Learning" section of the ASA is organizing a session titled "Meeting Students Where They Live: Facebook, Twitter, Blogs and Wikis." I've just contacted another member of my team to see if there's any chance we could get a paper of some kind submitted before their deadline, which is coming up very soon. Not sure whether this would work out, but it's worth a try. If you don't mind, I'll also draft a message that you could tweak and send to the CITASA listserv? Annie Lin (Campus Team Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 03:23, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

History Flow Tool

Hi. I am PhD student at FUCAM university (Belgium) and I'm working on Wikipedia negociations with narrative approachs. I have the feeling History Flow tool (Viegas) would be useful for me but at this state it is'nt : no possibility to get the full history from articles. I've just seen you worked on this, trying to improve it. Did you get any results? Sorry for my poor english and thanks a lot! IntraLucide (talk) 11:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your information. I did not know Wiki-research Info Page. I'm sure it will help me :-) IntraLucide (talk) 09:04, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Restoration of merged pages

Thanks for warning about page merging, I've brought the issue to the attention of the project. --Dans (talk) 23:13, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sampling frame

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Automatic archiving

Do you know an automatic archiver which will leave stuff unarchived at a tag? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

photo competition

Not just 'not many'... no one expressed any interest. And given the fact that getting around Pittsburgh is likely to be a little bit crazy, what with the sports stuff going on, I think we need to scrap the photo competition.  :(

I saw your plea for a ride from Oakland, btw. I'm not sure how tight my schedule will be, but I'll give you a ride if I can. I'll email you tomorrow.--ragesoss (talk) 15:48, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

B-class reviews

Hi Piotrus. I'd be happy to comment on those pages. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that I haven't made any changes at 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash yet. The article is in the middle of a significant expansion (and improvement). I'll review it when it's finished. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Transhuman

Hello Piotrus. For many years, there are have been minor disputes about the etymology of the word “transhuman”. The Transhumanist FAQ of the World Transhumanist Association has always argued it goes back to FM-2030 (1966). However, some people dispute this by arguing that it goes to Julian Huxley (1957) or even Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1949). However, correct me if I am wrong, although Huxley and de Chardin used terms likes “transhumanity”, “transhumanism”, and “transhumanizing”, they never explicitly used the word “transhuman”. So my question is: Does coining and defining the words “transhumanity”, “transhumanism”, and “transhumanizing” automatically mean that you have coined and defined the word “transhuman” even when you have never explicitly used that word? I would appreciate any answer you can provide was posted on the Talk:Transhuman page. --Loremaster (talk) 03:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my talk page. --Loremaster (talk) 04:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Variable and attribute (research)

Materialscientist (talk) 06:03, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Pittsburgh

Aww you left a few minutes too early. Shell Kinney (mobile) (talk) 23:20, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Gunnersbury Cemetery

Hello! Your submission of Gunnersbury Cemetery at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mjroots (talk) 08:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I said there that I'd raise the issue on your talk page. The issue I have is that all internment are referenced to this webpage. On that page is a link headed 49 famous internments. The 49 are covered by three pages, each of which links to its own page, such as that for Tadeusz Bor-Komorowski. The individual list entries should really be referenced to the individual webpages, rather than being covered by the blanket ref. Mjroots (talk) 08:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Piotrus. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010



To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot (talk) 21:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Piotrus/Archive_35&oldid=1190137583"