This is an archive of past discussions about User:Piotrus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The Wikipedia Guild of Copy-Editors invites you to participate in the November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive will begin on 1 November at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on 30 November at 23:59 (UTC). The goal for this drive is to reduce the backlog by 10% (approximately 500 articles). We hope to focus our efforts on the oldest three months (January, February, and March 2009) and the newest three months (September, October, and November 2010) of articles in the queue.
Sign-up has already begun at the November drive page, and will be open throughout the drive. If you have any questions or concerns, please leave a message on the drive's talk page.
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants, some of which are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
Wow, you are such an example of a helpful Wikipedian Piotrus!
I appreciate the welcome, and thank you for your awesome contributions to the Wikipedia effort--thanks again!
216.38.130.164 (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2010
Hi Piotrus, it looks to me that the only book available on Google Books was printed in 1867, which makes it a bit boring for me to read it and its authority a bit ambiguous for recentism concerns :). Sorry, in these days I've not enough to time to look for first-hand sources in Italian, maybe you can begin with the polish inline references. Grazie! --Dans (talk) 18:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
It's the Collegio Celana (Celana High School) [1], in today's municipality of Caprino Bergamasco in Val San Martino (St.Martin's Valley): an ecclesiastic seminar (for the Milan Bishopry) founded by Carlo Borromeo in 1579, for long one of the best boarding schools in the Region. It was transformed in a laic institution in Napoleon times and came back being a private catholic schooling institution in 1910. Ciao! :) (PS: Thanks for the DYK hint, I'll work on the Italy–Poland relations and see what can come out of it)--Dans (talk) 01:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
for pushing me with the Zouaves article, it ended up getting a very respectable 13k hits [3]. There was also some spillover from it to the January Uprising article [4]. Volunteer Marek 18:34, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
re your comments at AE
About what it would take to make me think you've had a profound change of heart - you asked if I could be more precise - it doesn't lend itself to precision, but expansion is possible. Here's a couple of things. Since you asked. One, you could ask this user, publicly, to review your recent activities and ask if he now sees the change he wanted to see. [5] You didn't communicate with him at the time, but he might be willing to give his interpretation. He seems widely respected and has no personal dog in this fight. Two, back off from all your recent filings - IMO the community is better off that way, spare us. Three, use the PL noticeboard in dubious areas till March. Four, your frequent invocations of AGF/forgive/forget put the burden on us, where I don't think it belongs, given your history. You'll have lots of chances to show rather than tell after March. Five, tell us you'll scrutinize your PL-related edits for copyvios after the topic ban goes away. You seem to have done a good job of cleaning your non-PL-related copyvios but I worry that some remain in PL topics.
Your edits to Battle of Grunwald - which fell off the bottom of my watchlist while I was on vacation - how could you possibly not see those as venturing into ethnic dispute territory? Sorry, but those edits could be seen as tactical, because it's happened before - you make minor edits/improvements, someone notices and objects, gets sanctioned for bringing it up.
I disagree with your statement that no EEMLers have made personal comments to me. See [6]; an accusation of wikistalking is rather personal.
I skimmed your Morsels essay once, but don't plan to re-read it. Maybe this is down to a cultural difference - people in the US don't usually describe their own writings as 'wisdom' - I'd say doing so is the humorous premise that underlies the Deep Thoughts franchise. Yes, I know other sanctioned editors have written essays about how WP could be improved, I skim those with a grain of salt too. Novickas (talk) 21:48, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
I am not really familiar with Charles Matthew, and that being one of my very few interactions with him, his comment struck me as quite unfair and unbecoming a former arbitrator. Why do you suggest I ask him for a review? Why not Jan eissfeldt or Heimstern or Kontiski or Lysy or one of a number of other editors who commented there? Further, if somebody commented only once, I tend to assume they stumbled on the issue by accident, and are not very familiar with it. I don't really see a good reason to waste his time with asking for a review of my edits; I'd think there is enough of Arbitrators and editors interested in them to do so properly. Note that I have no problem with any editor reviewing my edits, Special:Contribution is public, after all. If you can present a good argument for why I should ask Charles for a review, I will likely to so.
The arguments for a review by Charles would be that he opposed your topic ban amendment; that another arb said he was swayed by both his and Deacon's statements; that he presided as an arb during some cases that involved you, and so (I presume) had gone over your history; and that I cited his opinion and you echoed it in your reply. You mention him by name here, I think the usual protocol is to inform him of this, especially since your comment was negative ('unprofessional').
He didn't inform me of his comments back then. But yes, you make valid points and now that you reminded me who he was I assume his comment must have been an exception (a bad day?) rather than a norm and I will consider acting on them. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
You've posted at his talk page, which is nice, but you didn't point him right here to where you described his comments as unprofessional and unfair. I.e. "I commented on your June 2010 post here" (diff). That is a very personal criticism of a fellow editor and IMHO you ought to make it easy for him to see it. Novickas (talk) 02:45, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I see no reason why this private discussion on my talk page should be advertised, but I thought about my choice of words and refactored it to be more neutral. Talk pages may not be googlable, but some words should be avoided in association with names, where they may indeed be taken out of context. You may want to refactor your own comments accordingly. After that, I'll once again ask you to consider focusing your attention on one of many aspects of this project that does not involve my person. Thank you, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:34, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Two. Everyone has the right to appeal and/or parole. Fortunately, wiki is not a dictatorship, and its DR system supports those concepts. Of course, appeals that occur too often could be seen as disruptive - but I see no indication that the arbitrators see my recent appeal as too frequent, or burdening them.
True, the system is forgiving of appeals. In this case, so far it's just me who sees all the sound and fury that followed this last amendment as counter-productive.
Three. Yes, I will do so, if the situation will not change.
Thanks, I think that would de-escalate the current conflicts.
Four. It takes two to tango, you know? Yes, AGF does place the burden on you, and if you are unhappy with it, well, this is indeed part of the problem we are having here.
The Assume Good Faith guideline is and probably always be a problem. There will always be tensions over its applications to previously banned or sanctioned users.
Five. Yes, it is my intention to fix any such problems as soon as I can. On that note, have you scrutinized your own edits and uploads?
Glad to hear that. I believe all my text contributions are OK; as I mentioned to MRG at some point, I got a lecture about text copyvios in the fourth grade; image issues are harder, but I think you've gone over them. There aren't many.
Yes, I assumed that after seeing that you had on Dec. 17 gone thru a number of my image uploads and tagged them with 'upload to Commons'. This link to your contributions will of course be short-lived [7]; but I think it's safe to say that you aren't usually interested in things like Boll Weevil eradication [8] or oil shale retorts [9].
Ah, yes, I probably stumbled upon your image uploads at some point; you may not be aware that some time ago I participated in the Polish Wikipedia project that moved almost all free images from pl wiki to Commons (and deleted the non-free ones), something we really need to doing on en wiki (there are so many problem images here, it boggles my mind). In many cases this involved reviewing all uploads of a specific editor. I really need to get around to doing more of this. I also think I never finished reviewing your uploads... could you make sure that all the ones I haven't tagged clearly state you are the author (or clarify why a free license is used)? In some cases, like File:Griffith Buck Rose Prairie Sunset.jpg, permission needs to be emailed to WP:OTRS. Let me know if you have any questions, I'd be happy to help you sort out any problems. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:01, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Six. Grundwald - IIRC I added a missing map. How on Earth is this anywhere near a battleground territory?
The issue is your editing of articles that could be construed as falling within Arbcom's ethnic dispute topic ban.
Seven. If you stop following certain users and criticizing them at every opportunity, I am sure wikistalking accusations will stop.
This doesn't addresss your statement at AE - that no one has ever commented on my edits in a personal way. I think the accusation of wikistalking, which you repeat, is quite personal. Novickas (talk) 23:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
I think I made it clear that the only time I discuss others is during DRs in reply to them discussing me. Do you think I have done differently in the past, let's say, a year? I'll gladly look into that and see if I made a comment I should apologize for. At the same time I'd like to ask why have you chosen to comment in most, if not all, EEML-related amendments and AE threads, and why have you chosen to concern yourself with edits of selected few editors with whom you had some DR disagreements in the past (such as me or Radek)? Do you believe that your participation in those discussions and your concern with our edits is beneficial to the project? Have you not considered how it may look to others? I am sure you are acting in good faith and with good intentions, but you know the proverb about the latter, right...? Anyway, it took me a while but I found a related essay, I hope you will not be offended by its rather frank title. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
The above still doesn't address the question of whether your statement that no EEMLer has made personal comments was correct.
I will end once again by asking you to take the principle of WP:FORGET to heart. I hardly see how disengaging from this conflict will put a burden on you; rather, I'd expect it would lift a weight off your shoulders and free you to concentrate on other tasks, such as improving another article to FA and so on.
It's quite unlikely that we will ever agree on this and could spend many bytes. I'd prefer to save the energy for discussing content issues later. Novickas (talk) 00:49, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Here is one way you could demonstrate a change of heart - you may not care at this point, of course. Another editor submitted the François Rochebrune article to DYK. (Yes, I found this by following your edits, you commented on it.) It uses 19 references to republika.pl, which is as you know a free web hosting site. The author of the page, Bartek Rogalski, has no presence in Google books or Google scholar. Hence not a reliable source. Also, Google.com mentions that some sub-domains of republika hosted malicious software as recently as Jan. 23 (yesterday) [10] - 5 out of the 60 pages they tested over the past 3 months hosted malware. References from this site don't belong on WP. Do you need examples of the dreadful things people publish there? Here's one [11]. Please ask that this DYK nom be withdrawn until/unless its author(s) can replace the republika refs with reliable sources. Novickas (talk) 20:25, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh freakin a, Novickas that some really sleazy "guilt by insinuation" you're engaging in. As you say, "republika" is a web-hosting service. Whatever problems it may have, or whatever junk somebody put up on some page which is hosted by the web service which is completely unrelated to this topic has nothing to do with this article or the source itself. And the google analytics - I can't believe you actually went to the trouble of running that yourself just to find something somewhere just possible a little bit wrong with something however vaguely associated with Piotrus... no, actually I can believe it - does say "This site is not currently listed as suspicious." And then there's always RS. I'm sorry but at this point it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that you are merely stalking, harassing and attempting to humiliate Piotrus. Stop it. Volunteer Marek 20:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I think I'd like to give P a chance to respond. If he doesn't - but contributes elsewhere - I'll take it to the RS noticeboard. Novickas (talk) 21:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Because I am always willing to help when asked, I've ensured now that all proposed hooks are referenced with reliable sources, per DYK requirements. External websites are certainly not perfect references, but sometimes they are all we have. Of course, this is not a desirable situation, and such an article will not progress beyond B-class (at best) till sources are improved. To end, in this case, republika.pl, by itself, is not unreliable - it is just a hosting service. The article is hosted on pages of a local sports association, doesn't seem to have any controversial claims, and some facts are corroborated by more reliable sources. I doubt that RSN will tell you anything different.
That said, I'd appreciate it if you were to stop following me around, as I asked you several times prior. There is a point where such an approach stops looking very friendly, and I believe that our mutual relation could benefit from both of us trying to avoid commenting too much on one another. You are of course welcome to report problems with Poland-related articles to WT:POLAND, just try to avoid saying Piotrus-this or Piotrus-that. You know, discuss content, not editors. I will be more than happy to help out in various situations when asked here, too, but try to frame such requests for assistance so they don't contain veiled PAs or ABF (for example, in "may not care at this point" - I'd prefer if you'd avoid speculation on what I care about or don't).
I don't think free web hosts should be used as WP references at all and I think this is generally accepted - per WP:Reliable sources, 'Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight.' I take it you don't wish to bring this up at the DYK. BTW, feel free to nom any of my image uploads for deletion. Novickas (talk) 4:27 pm, Today (UTC−5)
Obviously, it is not a free web host which is being used as a reference, no more than the internet itself is being used as a reference. Volunteer Marek 22:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict) There is little to raise at DYK. You could remove all the poor refs, but the hooks are referenced, and articles can be DYKed without each non-hook sentence being referenced (although I do prefer to see everything referenced). It is not our custom (even if WP:V would suggest otherwise) to remove unreferenced content, and I think that given a choice between no refs and poor refs, poor refs are usually kept. As I said, this becomes important when we move from start/C class to B/GA. I am not sure what else could be said about this issue.
Regarding your images, I'd prefer to give you a change to fix them first. Perhaps at some future time I may find a will to look at your uploads again and give you a list of specific problems, particularly if you request me to do so (frankly, I'd prefer to avoid looking at your edits, particularly since I am asking you to focus less on following my person). For now as friendly comment, I just want to note that most if not all of your uploads I did not tag as Copy-to-Commons may have some issues that could result in the being deleted from Commons if they were moved there. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't really care much about my image uploads, like many WPians I had problems with the image rules; I don't see myself contesting any of them, would be happy to leave it for others to decide. Novickas (talk) 23:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
I got twenty bucks which says that the fact that we agree with each other here [13] will at some point in the next... let's say, one year... show up in some AE/ACappeal/ANI or one of those forums (if it pops at ArbCom/Req/Amend while I'm typing this I wouldn't be surprised either) as some kind of "damning" evidence along with overblown rhetoric about "EEML infrastructure" "sociological manipulation skills" "interest group subversion" or something even funnier. Anyway, I'll let the good people at RSN know. Volunteer Marek 00:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
On 26 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Francesco Nullo, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Francesco Nullo is commemorated in both Italy and Poland as a hero of those countries' struggle for independence? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Replied again. Perhaps it would be fine, without the 2nd clause in the 2nd suggestion, just mentioning the main issues? -- Cirt (talk) 23:14, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Graffiti in New York
On 27 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Graffiti in New York, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that public perception of graffiti in New York is slowly changing from an act of vandalism to a form of art? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
This nomination might have been pulled off the main page, only because of an inadequate reply to a comment that it was a split article which might not be expanded 5x times. To keep harmony at DYK, please don't neglect reviewer comments by saying "I will use the time to write another DYK instead". You are more than welcome to write another wikipedia article instead (of answering a comment), and I would respect that, but once you submit it to DYK, please try to follow some rules. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 00:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
PFHlai promoted your nomination regardless the comments by SmartSE, who was unhappy about it and asked to pull it off. I understand it is entirely a PFHlai's decision, and more of misunderstanding and of a confusing situation, just wish such things don't happen so often. Materialscientist (talk) 01:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
There's a page on it:wiki about him, with some sources, which unfortunately are not available online. There's a short bibliography on this website about the history of the town of Parma, run by the municipal library system (and therefore enough reliable, I'd say). Ciao,--Dans (talk) 19:47, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus, I understand your concerns, but I can find no better source now than the Parma library website. If you deem it not so relevant (I'd be doubtful too), just remove references to him. Bests,--Dans (talk) 22:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
In March of 1863 [Rustici] got to know of the Polish uprising against the Tsar Alexander II from Italy and of the departure of a group of volunteers, almost all from Bergamo, led by Francesco Nullo. On the night of March 29 he left Corniglio and began his trip to Poland [with them]. Nullo, with his legion, was ambushed in Galicia and died fighting with many of his men, while the prisoners were deported to Siberia. No other news is reported of him afterwards. :) --Dans (talk) 00:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
You'd think that people who study Weber this extensively would know how to cut down on the bureaucracy and red tape. But then again I guess Weber is very fond of bureaucracies and see them as highly efficient (in their ideal-type form, at least). Are you planning to be at the ASA this year anyway? I'm contemplating about whether or not to go, in my capacity as a (self-proclaimed) sociologist. Annie Lin (Campus Team Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 21:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
This is the first issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program newsletter. Please read it! It has important information about the the current wave of classes, instructions and advice, and other news about the ambassador program.
On 29 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Orda (structure), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that several ordas (hordes) originated on the Eurasian Steppe, including the famous Golden Horde? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by Hurricanehink (submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to Yellow Evan (submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, Miyagawa (submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and Jarry1250 (submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!
A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! 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 and The ed1722:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
On 2 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Grochowiska, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Battle of Grochowiska, one of the largest battles of the January Uprising, has been also described as the "most bloody" and a "Pyrrhic victory" for the Polish insurgents? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Sorry for the delay, but I'll not be able to help for a little while — here in southern Indiana, the ice is bad; I lost power at my house last night, so my only Internet connection is on campus, and I have class before long. I'll try to help when I can. Nyttend (talk) 17:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Internet is back. I'm somewhat confused about what you want — do you want me to do an entirely new review of the article? Nyttend (talk) 01:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Paprykarz szczeciński
On 3 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Paprykarz szczeciński, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Polish canned fish paste paprykarz szczeciński was inspired by an African dish? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 4 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Theory of generations, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that, according to the theory of generations, major historical events that occur in a generation's youth, determine the actions they take later in life? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 5 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zahra's Paradise, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the authors of the webcomicZahra's Paradise remain anonymous, for fear their coverage of recent Iranian events could endanger their relatives in Iran? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Piotrus, I notice that you appear to have accepted User:Lpdoyle's request to be his/her mentor, but you have not placed the mentee's name in your entry on Wikipedia:Online Ambassadors/Mentors, nor have you placed {{WAP student}} on Lpdoyle's user page. I thought I would check to make sure that you do plan to be Lpdoyle's mentor, as the user had also asked me (and Elekhh) to be his/her mentor. -- Donald Albury 11:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
On 6 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article World-system, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in world-system theory, sociologists debate whether two world-systems have ever existed during the same period? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
It was never "Podlachian" - we had this argument in 2008
It was never Podlachian, this is an argument that was resolved in 2008 to move it to Podlaskie. Now somebody switched it a little under a year ago. It needs to go back to what it is supposed to be. Podlachian was an EN:WP invention. Ajh1492 (talk) 12:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Suddenly Wiki format became completely chaotic on my browser-for example tags have no background colour in their space, the edit bar misses several buttons-do you have any idea what this might be?--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 20:30, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Jewish Community of Danzig
Could you please explain your reasons why you moved the article in a way that makes it impossible to move it back to the stable version for an average user? HerkusMonte (talk) 07:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
The result of the talk page discussion was obviously "no consensus", but that's not the point. It seems only administrators are able to move the page back and that's not the ususal way of moving a page. Why didn't you use the "normal" way to move a page? HerkusMonte (talk) 08:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus. I was going through uncat. stuff in the commons and found this drawing of someone named of Mikołaj Cebulka. He's on a list in one of your subpages. If you know who he is, could you categorize it? Thanks. The Interior(Talk) 05:28, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
With a good image, he definitely deserves an article. good luck, The Interior(Talk) 07:14, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Kofru->Korfu on Commons
You've got a spelling error in names of all your photos from Greece :) Lukasz Lukomski (talk) 17:39, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 13 February 2011
I think it would depend on what you're editing. For most articles think something like, "What is the article saying? What do the references say? Do they match each other?" Ask yourself if what is said can be verified by reading the book, watching the TV show, following the references/citations, whatever is necessary. Look at the words -- are they spelled correctly? Was the page written with good grammar? When you see mistakes, fix them. If you're unsure about anything or have questions, look on the discussion page to see if there is a section talking about it already and then respond there, or if nobody else has brought it up yet then start a new section. If you have any more questions, please respond on my talk page, or put the {{helpme}} template back up and someone else will be along to help you. :) Banaticus (talk) 22:32, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I think I don't have much else to add to Banaticus added, as long as we are being very general. Make sure you've done the WP:TUTORIAL - it's a good way to learn how to edit. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 06:17, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Salomea
I took a guess and I guessed wrong. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk 00:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Just thought it would be on your way. Thanks anyway. Smallbones (talk) 20:06, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Wikimedia Commons
Does the Polish Wikipedia allow links to Wikimedia Commons images? I am seeking to advise an editor who is translating English articles on Thomas Willing and other Philadelphians to the Russian Wikipedia, and she needs images there. It would appear that she is uploading images to the Russian Wikipedia, and I am suggesting links to Wikimedia Commons. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:48, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Prośba o wyjaśnienie.
Witam!
Stworzyliśmy w amerykańskiej Wikipedii stronę o polskim aforyście Andrzeju Majewskim. Z Pana uwag naniesionych na stronę wynika, że coś jest nie tak z redakcją lub z treścią. Szczerze mówiąc nie bardzo rozumiemy te zastrzeżenia. Może ze względu na ograniczoną znajomość niuansów j. angielskiego, a może ze względu na ograniczoną znajomość niuansów zasad samej Wikipedii amerykańskiej. Bylibyśmy bardzo wdzięczni, gdyby zechciał Pan po polsku w kilku zdaniach sprecyzować problem. Jest Pan polakiem i powinniśmy o to dbać, aby w świecie byli znani nie tylko polscy hydraulicy i "piłkarze", ale także nasi intelektualiści. W tej chwili w Wikipedii jest cały szereg notek biograficznych o np. różnych gwiazdeczkach porno i nikogo to nie razi i nikt tego nie kwestionuje ich "notability", natomiast notka o polskim pisarzu i wybitnym aforyście budzi Pana ostracyzm. Czy taka jest przyszłość Wikipedii? Nie wiem czy panu Majewskiemu brakuje do szczęścia notki w amerykańskiej Wikipedii, ale wiem, że nam Polakom przydałoby się na świecie trochę prestiżu związanego z naszymi wybitnymi twórcami. Jeśli nie zna Pan postaci pana Majewskiego wystarczy znaleźć na googlach informację o nim i jego twórczości. Jest na ten temat ok. 100 tysięcy stron internetowych, gdzie występuje jego twórczość. Osoba pana Majewskiego nie jest "znana z tego, że jest znana", tylko ze względu na jego twórczość aforystyczną i fotograficzną. Nie jest wprawdzie tak popularny w kręgach rozwrzeszczanych małolatów jak pani Doda - Rabczewska (podobno też członkini Mensy), ale w rankingu istotności twórczości w kręgach ludzi o ambicjach intelektualnych wygrywa. Wszystkie podane w notatce w Wikipedii fakty są prawdziwe i weryfikowalne w źródłach drukowanych, choćby w jego albumie "Ephemeralness of Eternity", który znajduje się m. in. w Bibliotece Kongresu US. Nota bene pan Majewski jest tak jak Pan członkiem Mensy i to także może Pan zweryfikować. Jest to dosyć bolesne, że Pan jako Polak podważa zasadność umieszczenia informacji o panu Majewskim w amerykańskiej Wikipedii. Umniejsza Pan bezzasadnie wiarygodność podanych przez nas źródeł w postaci książek oraz innych informacji na oficjalnych stronach różnych instytucji oraz rządowych. Jakie mogą być lepsze i bardziej wiarygodne źródła?
Reasumując chcielibyśmy Pana poprosić o poprawienie tego artykułu zgodnie z zasadami Wikipedii, skoro my nie potrafiliśmy im sprostać. Służymy wszelką pomocą faktograficzną i możemy także przysłać Panu najnowszą książkę pana Majewskiego, żeby mógł Pan czerpać z niej wiedzę. jeśli Pan może to bardzo proszę odpisać email na mój adres: ozyrion@op.pl
Z poważaniem
Artur Świdurski (81.190.213.132 (talk) 00:12, 17 February 2011 (UTC))
DYK for Tradition
On 17 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tradition, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that scholars estimate that it takes two or three generations for a tradition to emerge? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Thanks for brightening February on DYK Victuallers (talk) 06:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Paragraph cites
Just to re-iterate what was said on the DYK page - refing every sentence is generally considered bad form unless there's a specific reason for it. Using a ref on every sentence makes the articles difficult to read. Technically, for DYK all that needs to be reffed is the hook, the rest could be end-of-article footnotes. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
I see you tagged shadow mask, but there's no explanation why in either the checkin note or the talk page, and no cite neededs in the text itself. What is the problem with the references you want improved? Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:44, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
But as it has been pointed out, your objection is not correct. There is no need for a ref on every sentence, and doing so is generally considered bad form. I'm going to remove the tag, if you have specific objections about statements in the text that are not covered in the references, please tag those entries directly with cite-neededs so I can find and address them. Maury Markowitz (talk) 03:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I do indeed see this text in CITE now, because you just added it". I am inclined to believe you are doing so in bad faith, as other editors have also stated categorically that your take on this issue is incorrect. I am taking this issue to the talk page. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Alfredo Stroessner military.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 03:45, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Philadelphia Meetup
Because of a lack of specifics, you and I and user:smallbones are the three likely attendees for a Philadelphia meetup. I learn from visiting the hotel that they charge $9.95 per day for WiFi for guests, but there are two free Internet computers in the lobby for guests to use. Not much help there. My suggestions would be that we, plus anyone else we can recruit with specifics, meet in the lobby of the hotel on Friday or Saturday evening at 6 PM and go on to another place for dinner. Which evening, depending on your ESS attendance, would be better for you? I will look for some restaurant choices in walking distance, but some of them are very expensive. Let me know what you prefer. By posting specifics on the Philadelphia project page, we may find others to attend. --DThomsen8 (talk) 22:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
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) 16:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Krzysztof Matyjaszewski
Hello! Your submission of Krzysztof Matyjaszewski 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) 17:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I'd like to suggest an ALT1 hook; please see talk page. Yoninah (talk) 19:35, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Mentoring students: be sure to check in on them
This message is going out to all of the Online Ambassadors who are, or will be, serving as mentors this term.
Hi there! This is just a friendly reminder to check in on what your mentees are doing. If they've started making edits, take a look and help them out or do some example fixes for them, if they need it. And if they are doing good, let them know it!
If you aren't mentoring anyone yet, it looks like you will be soon; at least one large class is asking us to assign mentors for them, and students in a number of others haven't yet gotten to asking ambassadors to be their mentors, but may soon. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Anna Kańtoch. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Wit Szostak. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello Ambassador Piotrus! I'm also a campus ambassador, although probably not as active as you, and I am going to be nearby in March. Sigma Tau Delta, the International English Honor Society, is holding its annual convention in Pittsburgh from 23 to 27 March (see convention website) in the Wyndham downtown. I have organized a session on Wikipedia in the classroom ("Use and Abuse of Wikipedia in the Classroom" or something like that), and Sage Ross is the guest of honor. I was wondering if you were interested in coming by as well and sharing your experiences, and perhaps User:Llh19 is interested as well. The final schedule has not been drawn up yet, but our session will be on Thursday or Friday, since Sage can't make it on Saturday.
I'd love to see you there; I am sure that you will have some interesting observations to share with us, as a seasoned editor. For one thing, I've noticed that in trying to sell Wikipedia among my colleagues it helps to discuss the FA and GA process, which is basically, of course, peer-review. You have more than a few FAs and GAs to your credit; maybe this is something to share. Anyway, give it a thought. You're a geek, this is an English convention, sounds like a match made in heaven, no? Thanks, Dr Aaij (talk) 01:07, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll keep in touch. Dr Aaij (talk) 01:30, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Piotrus,
I am participating in a Public Policy project for a graduate level class in Economic Development. I am looking for a mentor in editing Wikipedia, and it seems like you have plenty of experience. Would you be available for mentoring as I write an article (regarding anti-Development social movements in Latin America)? Please let me know, and have a great day!
So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions) (first, with 487 points) and Hurricanehink (submissions) (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to Jarry1250 (submissions) for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.
Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.
Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! 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 and The ed17 23:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Do not know if this is the place for this, this is my first try at Wikipedia, but this is in reply to your question about the Lindskold stories "Promise Land" and "Ruthless"
First let me state up front that I'm the author of one of the David Weber Approved timelines that he has on his on site. The one I did is for internal chronological order and you can see that time line here: http://www.davidweber.net/files/downloads/honorverseTimeline2.pdf I haven't sent in an update yet for Mission of Honor or In Fire Forged but I can answer your point about these two stories. "Promised Land" the first of the two stories takes place a little before and during the first part of HotQ in 1901 PD. The second of the two stories Ruthless takes place after 1903 PD since it mentions the alliance between Manticore and Yeltsin. You can see this from the sample chapter, which is the story Ruthless, Baen provides for this book and is at Bookmark 572 and you can access from here: http://www.webscription.net/chapters/9781439134146/9781439134146.htm --Boballab (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
IRC invitation
Because I have noticed you commenting at the current RfC regarding Pending Changes, I wanted to invite you to the IRC channel for pending changes. If you are not customarily logged into the IRC, use this link. This under used resource can allow real time discussion at this particularly timely venture of the trial known as Pending Changes. Even if nothing can come from debating points there, at least this invitation is delivered with the best of intentions and good faith expectations. Kind regards. My76Strat 09:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Commission for Polish Relief 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! Orlady (talk) 20:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Online Ambassador Program
Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Mentor
I have been giving User talk:Alison intheair some advice on creating the article she needs for a course, but I see you are her mentor. Do you have any concerns with what I have been doing? --DThomsen8 (talk) 23:58, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
This is not covered in WP policy, it's more of a good faith issue. WP is full of completely unreferenced articles. I reserve cn for statements that look surprisng to me and I always do some searches first and take the time to put in any refs I do find. I don't add cn until I've done some research; I see this as good editing practice (altho it's been years since I've added anything more than a topic sentence without a souce) because otherwise 90 percent of the project would be littered with such. We rely on editors to look at assertions and go 'yeah, sounds familiar'.
Your addition of cn to Pilsudski family as Polish-Lithuanian doesn't fall into that category tho. There have been exhaustive discussions of this at the Josef Pilsudski talk page, and more recently, you edited and looked over the Polish-Lithuanian (adjective) article, so you were well aware of the references for it. You had several choices - leave it be as a widely acknowledged and easily found assertion; add the ref(s) at the Pilsudski article, the Polish-Lithuanian article, or the many Gbook sources; or put a cn in. The second choice would have improved WP, altho called for a few more seconds of effort than your cn choice did. Novickas (talk) 04:50, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
As you well know, nationality claims for some people are the prime reason they operate around here. I find quarrels over them annoying, and the best way to stop them, to add a citation. In some tedious cases, I will slap a cn tag and let others fix the problem, while I do something strange like write a new DYK. You added the citation, article improved, everybody wins. I really don't see the problem here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 05:32, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
The problem here is that I see my time as valuable too. I would prefer to spend it just now on adding sources to unreferenced BLPs. I'm asking that when you see an assertion that you know is sourced, and where, that you either let it be or add the source yourself. Novickas (talk) 17:47, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I will often cite things myself, but sometimes I have no time or will to do so, and this is where cn comes in. If you think this template should not be used, than this is something for TfD. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:50, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Do you disagree with my proposal - that you refrain from adding cn when you personally are aware of sourcing for an assertion? Novickas (talk) 18:35, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Such proposal such be pursued at WP:V or another place. Till the policy is changed and bars editors from using {{cn}} I will follow my judgement based on time and will available for me on whether to add a reference myself or add a cite request. PS. I am aware that some editors are using literature to push some POV, but this doesn't mean I am as good in finding that literature as they are. And this is NOT an invitation to further pointless discussion. Once again, I strongly suggest you contribute to encyclopedia instead of my talk page. Thank you, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Karl Marx, copyediting etc etc
Of course, thanks for bringing this to my attention. :D (Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:19, 5 March 2011 (UTC))
No problems on the revert, I was just going by what I presumed from the Wheen biography, but I could easily have been mistaken.(Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:32, 5 March 2011 (UTC))
Hello! Your submission of Vorwärts! 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! Also, you are listed twice in its credits section. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello. T:TDYK#Selection criteria states that articles must have a minimum of 1,500 characters of prose. Thanks! --Rosiestep (talk) 21:19, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Amber Coast
Hello! Your submission of Amber Coast 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! HerkusMonte (talk) 15:01, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. LoganTalkContributions 04:25, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. LoganTalkContributions 04:32, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
White Stork Polihs references
Hey Piotrus,
thanks for the polish folklore input on the White Stork article - I am just trying to fill out the references, but my dad was the last to speak Polish in my family :( - can you figure out the publisher and location of reference 126? cheers, Casliber (talk·contribs) 01:19, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi there. Thanks for reviewing Astronomical Complex for DKY?. I'm a bit of a newbie at this so didn't know about the character limit. Have increased this into the 1800 region now with loads of examples of complexes. It's much cooler page now and I'd be really grateful for a re-review. Thanks. Paul Bedson (talk) 18:48, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
I've had another go at this, improving the intro with a good deal more prose. Thanks for the suggestion. Looking even better now! Paul Bedson (talk) 19:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
On 14 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Amber Coast, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that about 90% of the world's amber production comes from the Amber Coast of the Sambia peninsula on the Baltic Sea? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Kubasik until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Tracer9999 (talk) 18:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
This is a quick message to all the ambassadors about marking and tracking which articles students are working on. For the classes working with the ambassador program, please look over any articles being worked on by students (in particular, any ones you are mentoring, but others who don't have mentors as well) and do these things:
Add {{WAP assignment | term = Spring 2011 }} to the articles' talk pages. (The other parameters of the {{WAP assignment}} template are helpful, so please add them as well, but the term = Spring 2011 one is most important.)
If the article is related to United States public policy, make sure the article the WikiProject banner is on the talk page: {{WikiProject United States Public Policy}}
Add Category:Article Feedback Pilot (a hidden category) to the article itself. The second phase of the Article Feedback Tool project has started, and this time we're trying to include all of the articles students are working on. Please test out the Article Feedback Tool, as well. The new version just deployed, so any bug reports or feedback will be appreciated by the tech team working on it.
And of course, don't forget to check in on the students, give them constructive feedback, praise them for positive contributions, award them {{The WikiPen}} if they are doing excellent work, and so on. And if you haven't done so, make sure any students you are mentoring are listed on your mentor profile.
How do I add an article to Polish military history task force for assessment?
--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 21:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I see. As you are participant of the Polish task force from what I can gather, could you assess this article for its level of significance for Polish military history? It's a battle about Kołobrzeg in which Polish soldiers allied to Napoleon made significant contribution
[14], and the Polish commander is now a patron in the city of one of the streets within it.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 21:41, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Vorwärts!
On 16 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vorwärts!, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 1833 newspaper Vorwärts!, edited by Karl Marx, has been described as the "most radical" European newspaper of its time? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Your recent Marx- related DYK are now featured on Portal:Germany. If you have more DYK related to Germany, feel free to place it there yourself. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Re: 1997 Central European flood
I responded at the DYK's entry. After the first notification (yours here), I don't normally notify a nominator again unless they had notified that they responded at DYK. Otherwise, I assume we are both looking at the page, as is usually the case. I could have made the same complaint against you with notifications.--NortyNort(Holla) 04:34, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Juliusz Słowacki you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Juliusz Słowacki for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
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) 22:32, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Polish cabarets
Hello Piotrus,
Thanks for the attention you've paid to my little corner. I'm a little concerned by your change of Polish cabarets to Polish cabaret performers, because most of the people I've written up were not performers - they were writers, directors, composers, bandleaders - so that's a misleading category for them. Also, if you remove the people from the "cabaret" category, all you're left with is some pretty decrepit little old buildings. A cabaret is nothing without the company that resides within it. what do you think? Jane Peppler (talk) 03:08, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, could you rename the new category "Polish cabaret musicians, performers, and directors" or "Polish cabaret personnel" maybe? I think it would be helpful to have them all together in one category, the way they worked, as a team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jane Peppler (talk • contribs) 03:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
OK, I gave it a try. Thanks! Jane Peppler (talk) 11:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Polski
Pisz w mojej dyskusji po polsku. Mieszkam w Londynie, ale wspolpracuje w tworzeniu artykułow z wikipedysta z Polski. Wtedy i on zrozumie co do mnie piszesz. Ja już mam swoje lata i nie jestem biegly w zawilosciach wikipedii--Mierzonka (talk) 20:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Mo Li Hua DYK
Hi Piotrus,
I approved your DYK of Mo Li Hua, but then someone pointed out to me that you are technically 50 words shy of a 5x expansion on the article. Do you think you could add a little more to it?
Hello! Your submission of Władysław Marian Jakowicki 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) 19:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey Piotrus, our panel, "Using and/or Abusing Wikipedia in the Classroom," is scheduled for Thursday 34 March, 12:30-1:50, Kings Garden North, at the Grand Wyndham Downtown hotel (see also http://www.englishconvention.org/sigmatd/conv/). Sage Ross is moderating. I'm meeting him for lunch before the session; if you wish to join, or if you need more detail, you can email me and we'll exchange information. I'd love to have you come; part of the session will be devoted to the Public Policy Project, and if you could talk about your experiences that would be great. Thanks, and I hope to see you Thursday! Dr Aaij (talk) 18:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 21 March 2011
This is the third issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed.
Where the courses are - A brief summary of how each of the 31 Public Policy Initiative courses are faring so far in the Spring 2011 term, as of 9-11 March. Feel free to add more detail.
Tracking students' articles - Make sure students' articles are tagged with {{WAP assignment}} on the talk pages, and have the newly improved Article Feedback Tool active.
Online Ambassadors logistics - If you don't have a Wikipedia Ambassador sweatshirt, now's your chance to get one! (Also, some other more mundane, but important, details.)
Steering committee preparing proposals - Look for discussions about two major proposals about the future ambassador program soon: the "Regional Ambassador" role, and elections for a new committee.
Hi Piotrus. While I'm not involved in the specific matter at issue, I didn't put my comments in the "uninvolved editors" section because Marek and I are both members of the Polish WikiProject and we have a friendly wiki-relationship. I don't want the focus of Marek's request to become whether I am uninvolved or not. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk 01:28, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I've added some alternative views and a little more info to the article. If the result is acceptable to you, this one is ready for review at DYK now. If not, let me know your concerns and we'll see if we can sort them out quickly. Gatoclass (talk) 03:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Piotrus, can you please reply so your DYK submission can be processed. If you have any issues with my edits I'm happy to discuss them. Gatoclass (talk) 23:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Help for improving article
Stumped on how to make the following improvements:
1) add unit conversion template, so the American feet can be meanigful to the metric using-world. - Don't know that template.
2) Category is missing date of establishment. - Is "1957 establishments in the United States" alright?
3) add assessment template(s) on talk. - Don't know those.
4) I see there are geo coordinates in the article - please use one of the geo coordinates templates so the article is linked to Google Maps and other tools. - Don't know where to find these?
5) is there an monument infobox? I think there is, this is worth checking. - I'll be glad to add one, but don't know where to find it. Is it considered a monument? I know it is a statue.
Great! Thanks for help. Just did some minor fixes for Reviewed with the "diff" link so another editor can see what you did, so you can get your DYK approved quickly.--Doug Coldwelltalk 20:26, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Added Info Box. Looks much better! Don't see any measurments, so don't understand using conversion template. Assessment template(s) I thought were used ONLY by another editor other that the one that wrote up the article initially. I thought it was for rating the quality of the article. Still stumped on this one.--Doug Coldwelltalk 21:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Wait! Wait! Wait! Found the measurment. When you work real close to an article you sometimes miss the obvious = fifteen.--Doug Coldwelltalk 21:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I think I am using all your suggestions now. Thanks for help.--Doug Coldwelltalk 22:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Your DYK submission
In Template talk:Did You Know moved created by line below Review line and perhaps a third party editor may notice it quicker to approive your DYK. If you don't like, you can always move it back.--Doug Coldwelltalk 14:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I guess that worked good - it just got approved!--Doug Coldwelltalk 15:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
On 27 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mo Li Hua, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Mo Li Hua (Jasmine Flower), a popular Chinese folk song used previously on many official occasions, was censored due to its association with the 2011 Chinese protests? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi Piotrus. Which resource talks for newcomers about the orange band for new messages? Does it also show how to read your messages when you receive more than one
since the last time you logged in? • Ling.Nut (talk) 11:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.
A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! 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 and The ed17 01:05, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm seeing some small, but productive, contributions on Browar Łomża and Łomża from two IPs in Northern New Jersey (Garfield). I left a thank you on the talk pages, but I'll be keeping an closer eye on the articles. Looking at the article history, there were IPs from the same range/same providers (Verizon and Cablevision) that contributed to Browar Łomża and Łomża and were in an edit war with BurgerSF in December 2010 over Warsaw. Not saying they are necessarily connected, but they have my attention. Ajh1492 (talk) 12:21, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
I am assuming so because of your posts to Wikiproject Poland. We have at BLPN an issue of a serious allegation against a living person and need some one to translate a source. The Resident Anthropologist(talk)•(contribs) 01:32, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus, I have reviewed Józef Światło for GA. I am placing the article "on hold", since there are many revisions needed to make it reach GA status. Regards,--12george1 (talk) 20:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Blaichman
You are bullying your way round BRD and have ignored what was said on the talk page for the controversy section. AJH & me both agreed something and you have gone on your merry way despite agreeing to a pause. Why? - Sitush (talk) 21:27, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Piotrus. You have new messages at Sitush's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Piotrus. You have new messages at Sitush's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello Piotrus. I see that you've listed Marx as a GA on your WikiCup submissions page. However, it seems that the article is a GA nominee on hold/awaiting review, not a finished GA. Is it the GA bot that hasn't done its job yet, or – something else? Just curious. Best, Eisfbnoretalk 19:27, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
[15]. I'm not all that happy with the article; I think it barely scratches the surface of the topic; and I'm not motivated by DKY-dom any more. Also, being US-born with roots in smaller, less-powerful nations like Lithuania and probably Poland, I don't like the use of the word 'nationalism'; I'm well aware it remains popular in academia, but the fact that it's so seldom found in descriptions of 'American', Canadian, or other large and powerful countries' national sentiments, that irks me. But if you want to pursue it as a DYK, go ahead. Novickas (talk) 00:58, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Piotrus. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page. Message added 23:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
File:Boston - metro 7.JPG on Commons
You've posted some fantastic images of the T on Commons. I'm currently going through the individual T line categories doing some cleanup - creating categories for stations with multiple images, requesting renames for images with generic names, stuff like that. I'm stymied, though, by one of your images - File:Boston - metro 7.JPG. The curving white roof supports are distinctive to Green Street and Roxbury Crossing, but I can't figure out which. I realize this was several years ago, but do you happen to remember which station it was? Thanks! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Ah well; it was worth the asking. I'll just have to take a ride down there next time I'm in Boston. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
UPDATE: I did manage to identify it. On the second window of the train, there's a reflection of a platform sign... flipping it around clearly reveals the "ROSS" of CROSSING. I thought they only did that on CSI... Pi.1415926535 (talk)
I'm attempting to address some of the issues raised in the (now withdrawn) FAR on a one-by-one basis. When you say "the critique of Batory does not seem that relevant to the article" which critique are you talking about? There seems to be little discussing him personally, even less in a negative fashion. Could you assist? Grandiose(me, talk, contribs) 19:22, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your message, I am back, but to a limited degree. Nevertheless, I will try to create some content here, I want to complete the Lesser Poland and 1938 in Poland articles, and then will see what next. Regards. Tymek (talk) 04:04, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to take part in a pilot study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 19:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Poland WW2 Casulaties
Hi I explained my changes @ Poland WW2 casualties. If you stll in Pittsburgh I can mail you a copy of Piesowicz, Kazimierz. Demographic effects of World War II. [Demograficzne skutki II wojny swiatowej.] Studia Demograficzne, No. 1/87, 1987. 103-36 pp. Warsaw, Poland. Give me your address.You may remember in 2009 I said I would improve my Polish, you are seeing the result of my efforts--Woogie10w (talk) 22:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
The page now reflects the current view in Poland, the previous version from 2007 was a cut and paste job I did in 2007, I still need to improve my Polish, that is why I wanted you to read Piesowicz, it is only 30 pages--Woogie10w (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to two votes
Dear Piotrus, I have noticed that you have spent some time helping with the article "2011 Chinese protests". Therefore I would like to inform you about two votes going on:
"Vote for renaming article to "Chinese Jasmine Revolution"" at the bottom of the page
Thank you very much for your valued opinion! Best, Waikiki lwt (talk) 07:49, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Re:Karl Marx
Sorry about my rubbish GA review. I'm not going to do any more for quite a while, so that should be alright. I see you have nominated the article again - and hope it passes this time. RcsprinterGimme a message 15:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
There is a new book from 2010 that does a study of influence of German thinking on colonialism and touches upon Weber's racism within the study:
[16]
It also contains interesting information that Weber had long time links to Germanization policy, including the fact that his father was partly responsible for the infamous Settlement Commission in Prussian occupied parts of Poland. Other interesting parts of the book quote Weber as saying that Poles weren't human before Prussian/German rule, have "dark urges for freedom" etc, etc.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Sure, no problem, I added another source. I hope that this will lead eventually to the expansion of the article and correction of inaccuracies. I can definitely expand the sub article about his role in politics, I agree that focusing too much on Poles wouldn't be of use in the main article. However I would separate this issue somewhat from overall racist beliefs he held.Why of course he was racist in his beliefs regarding Poles, they went further than that.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 20:30, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Checklist categories
WOSlinker is working on the tracking categories for B class checklists. Could you comment at [17] about what exactly you'd like to track, to make sure we implement the right thing? Thanks,— Carl (CBM · talk) 12:08, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Would you like to support moving the article from 'Nazi concentration camps' to 'Nazi-German concentration camps'?
The article Paweł Jasienica you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Paweł Jasienica for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I want to promote article Marek Sobieski (1628–1652) into Good Article, but I know that my English isn't good and I probably made some mistakes. May you check this article? Kmicic (talk) 20:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
I will use Polish WikiProject. Thanks for information. Kmicic (talk) 20:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for help. Kmicic (talk) 22:54, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Eveline/Ewelina Hańska
Hey there Piotrus.. I've finally finished the research for Ewelina Hańska, but I'm curious to get your take on the spelling of her name, one last time. A year ago I asked WP:Poland about changing the article to the most common spelling in English-language sources, Eveline. I made the move, but then an anonymous IP moved it back.
If I move it again, do you think it might be moved back by other folks wishing to see the standard Polish spelling as the title? I suppose I'm just thinking out loud here, but do you think we might have to semi-prot the page in the future? Does this come up with any other pages you know of? Scartol • Tok 14:10, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 22 April 2011
India pilot being organized now - Plans are currently underway for a pilot expansion of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program – in India! Hisham Mundol and other Wikimedia staff have begun recruiting Campus Ambassador candidates for Pune.
Document DYK, peer review and other milestone at the trophy case - If students you are working with (or any others you notice) are doing work that makes to DYK, is nominated for Good Article status, or is just solid content worth marking, then please help us document the students' success at the trophy case.
Changes to mailing list - A new low-volume mailing list, [Ambassador-announce-l], is being created. It will be reserved for key announcements and news, which we'd like all ambassadors to be subscribed to.
Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:36, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
GA review of Karl Marx
Hey, I've started a GA review of Karl Marx, it looks pretty good, but there are a few minor things to fix. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 15:23, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Treaty of the Three Black Eagles
FYI. In doing a rewrite, with inline citation, to the Löwenwolde's Treaty article, I found that there were two treaties, one in 1732 between Austria, Russia and Prussia, and a second agreement in 1733 between Austria, Russia and Saxony. Most sources ignore this distinction, as a result their treatment of the topic is sometimes confused. The major source that observes it, is: Ragsdale, Hugh (1993) Imperial Russian foreign policy Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, page 32–33. Because the article starts out with the "Alliance of the Three Black Eagles" I thought that it was better to place the article under Treaty of the Three Black Eagles with a specific section for the Löwenwolde's Treaty. --Bejnar (talk) 18:44, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:IPN logo.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:IPN logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:36, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Actually I think the logo is in fact used in the article on the IPN [18], per fair use. Perhaps the fact that it is inside an infobox is what makes it show up as "orphaned".Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh I see, there's two files. One is jpg one is png, one is used the other one is not. Probably just keep whichever one's better.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:25, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
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:
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.
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
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?
Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:21, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Narvik
1940 Narvik
The Strategic Picture. As Poland fell in September 1939, the French and British governments began planning for war with Germany and Italy. The allied military planners envisioned what was essentially a repeat of Germany’s WW I thrust into the Low Countries since it was widely believed that France’s right flank was secured by the Maginot Line and the Ardennes. This would prove to be a fatal mistake but by the spring of 1940 the combined Allied general staffs had their armies poised for a counter strike northward as soon as the Wehrmacht attacked Holland and Belgium. The German campaign, code named Fall Gelb or Operation Yellow, was launched the night of 9/10 May 1940 and proved to be a rout for the Germans. In less than six weeks they defeated four other European powers that had nine months to prepare and who had, essentially, quantitative parity in material and manpower with their opponent. Four Polish divisions of various strengths and two independent brigades would be caught up in the Battle of France.
Before Fall Gelb was launched against the West, Hitler decided he must first seize Denmark and Norway. The war’s spread to Scandinavia came about as a consequence of two separate factors: the export of iron ore to Germany from Sweden via Narvik, and the naval possibilities offered by Norway’s geographical position in the North Atlantic basin. German intentions first became clear when a Polish submarine attached to Britain’s Royal Navy torpedoed and sank a German troopship on April 8, 1940 as it was heading for Bergen. When the survivors were interviewed they revealed they were part of a larger force destined to “save” Norway from the British. Despite the Royal Navy’s attempts to intercept the invaders and strong resistance by the Norwegians, German seaborne and airborne troops successfully occupied most of the country by the end of April 1940.
The Allies had a copy of a confidential report from Fritz Thyssen to Hitler and Goering, in which the German steel industry leader noted that the determination of victory or defeat for Germany lay in the iron ore fields of northern Sweden. Narvik, warmed by the Gulf Stream, was ice-free the year around whereas the normal shipment points in Sweden were available only six months of the year. Churchill was adamant that Great Britain should deny Swedish iron ore from being shipped from Narvik to the German war machine. This is how it came about that a Polish infantry brigade sailed from France as part of a larger allied force to dislodge the Germans from that small distant port well north of the Arctic Circle.
First however, we need to trace the rebirth of the Polish Army in France in 1939-1940.
THE POLES ARRIVE IN FRANCE. France and Poland share a long history of mutual trust and friendship. France was the country of refuge for the emigre Polish intelligentsia during the many years that Poland lay divided and conquered. And Paris was the city of choice for Polish students and artists pursuing their dreams. Many Poles spoke French as a second language and Polish-French relations extended into many spheres of importance besides the cultural. In addition, Poles had emigrated to France in large numbers during the past decades, fleeing the poverty of what essentially was a rural agricultural homeland. It was only natural that as the end of the September Campaign neared, Poles would look to France as their next best hope.
Recall that in September 1939 as the German-Soviet onslaught reached its climax and as Poland's collapse appeared imminent, thousands of Polish combatants began slipping away to fight another day. Soon after Poland fell, a government-in-exile was formed in France and one of its functions was to establish a clandestine escape network spread across Europe. Couriers from France and England supplied money and documents that enabled tens of thousands of Poles to escape to freedom.
It is estimated that 50,000 made their way from Poland and internment camps in nearby countries to England and France where they fought for the allies during the Battle of France. To this number was added another 30,000 to 40,000 from Polish communities in France and volunteers from Britain and throughout the world, but primarily from the Polish émigré community in France itself. There were a reported one million Poles living in France at the time and that country had plans to draft upwards of 100,000 into their army by June 1940. Perhaps half that many were called up when the Germans attacked France.
Polish soldiers began to arrive on French shores in late 1939. They were issued old French uniforms from the First World War. Their rifles, also from the previous war, did not arrive until later in winter. Quartering the newly arrived troops was difficult. Some were housed in French barracks while many others had to make do with barns and dugouts. Military equipment of all sorts was scarce. Tanks for the armored brigade were not provided until fighting began in May. Pilots also waited in vain for airplanes. The British promised to help in the formation of fighter squadrons, but they too had few machines available.
On May 3,1940 the first Polish unit, the 1st Grenadier Division, paraded at Colombey-les-Belles (near Nancy) before President Raczkiewicz, General Sikorski, his staff, French officials and foreign ambassadors. Other units were still in various stages of formation; the best of them were pulled out to form the Podhalanska Rifle Brigade, which was to take part in the upcoming Norwegian campaign.
The Polish Army in France eventually consisted of four ordinary infantry divisions with firepower scarcely greater than that of the pre-war Polish divisions. Their operational independence in conditions of mobile warfare was a pure fiction. Nevertheless, in his broadcasts to occupied Poland, President Raczkiewicz tried to put as good a face as possible on the situation. He optimistically promised that his army would be generously equipped with all kinds of military equipment and would be granted the utmost operational independence. It was not to be in France in 1940.
Poles and the Narvik Operation. Even before the German attack on Norway, the British and the French were preparing for a military operation that would give them control over some of the most important towns, harbors and airfields on the western coast of Norway. The allied troops, mostly British, were already on stand-by and had even started to embark on merchant and naval vessels that were to transport them from the United Kingdom to Norway. Included in this armada were three Polish transatlantic liners: MS Sobieski, MS Chrobry and MS Batory. On April 15 Sobieski and Batory arrived in northern Norway at Harstad and Chrobry in Namsos bringing British troops and supplies. Polish destroyers ORP Burza, ORP Blyskawica and ORP Grom were part of the operation's naval escort. Burza, damaged during its crossing of the North Sea had to return to Scotland. Blyskawica and Grom arrived in Northern Norway and were used for patrolling the fiords. Burza arrived in northern Norway some time later and took part in the surveillance of the fiords. On May 4, while on duty north of Narvik, ORP Grom was hit in a bomber attack - she sank within minutes and fifty nine members of her crew lost their lives. Shortly thereafter, on May 15, the Poles lost another vessel - MS Chrobry, used as a troop carrier, was hit by German bombs while on her third sailing to Norway.
The major Polish unit participating in the Norwegian Campaign of 1940 was the Independent Highland Rifle Brigade (Samodzielna Brygada Strzelcow Podhalanskich) established in France on February 9, 1940, with Col. Zygmunt Bohusz-Szyszko in command. The officers were those of the Polish army officers corps who fought in the September Campaign. Some of the rank and file were also veterans from the campaign, however the majority were volunteers, the prewar Polish emigrants living in France. The Brigade was originally formed to help the Finns in the Soviet-Finnish War of 1939-1940. It was therefore equipped with winter gear and the troops had received training in winter warfare. When Norway was attacked on April 9, 1940 the almost five thousand man strong brigade was ready for action and the allied Supreme War Council decided that it should be part of the allied North-Western Expeditionary Force. The Brits had already established a base at Harstad near Narvik by the time the Poles sailed.
On April 23, 1940 the Brigade embarked at Brest and sailed to Greenock in Scotland. In organization, it consisted of two half-brigades of two battalions each. On April 30 the convoy set sail again heading for northern Norway. Initially the Poles were to disembark at Tromso, north of Narvik where the King had set up a provisional seat of government. They entered the harbor but then put to sea again where they wandered for two days, referring to themselves as the “ghost brigade”. The Norwegian authorities at Tromso were bitterly opposed to any suggestion that the Poles might help garrison the extreme north of Norway, where the Russian attitude was thought to be uncertain.
On the morning of May 9, the brigade landed at Harstad on the island of Hinnoy - it had to be ferried ashore by Norwegian fishing boats due to the lack of harbor facilities suitable for large vessels. Their equipment was interspersed in various other vessels and it took some time to sort out vehicles, ammunition and supplies that had been hastily loaded in Brest. The 1st and 2nd Battalions spread out on the island on guard for German intruders. The 3rd Battalion was shipped to Ballangen southwest of Narvik and the 4th Battalion north to Salangen, north of Narvik. Thus, the brigade was spread out over a distance of 35 miles. It had no tanks or artillery.
The Polish 2d Battalion was lifted to Lanvik on the 11th and 12. Their orders were to march overland and arrive on the rear of the town of Bjervnik where two French landings were scheduled on the 13th. It was an arduous fifteen miles to the scene of action. When they arrived, victory was already complete. The plan proposed by the commander of the French forces, General Antoine Bethouart, thus secured the northern pincer movement of the drive on Narvik.
Then, on May 14th all British land forces in the Narvik area were released for the defense south in the Mo-Bodö area against the German Army advance pushing toward Narvik. General Bethouart was placed in command of all land forces in the Narvik area. His recent success at Bjerkvik had underlined the fact that the Frenchman was an expert in both mountain and winter warfare. Thus the assault on Narvik would be the direct concern of the French and Poles, in co-operation with the Norwegians, who readily agreed to transfer to General Bethouart command for the period of the operation their most appropriate battalion, one largely recruited from the Narvik area.
On May 15 and 16 two Polish battalions were transferred a short distance by sea to the area south of Narvik with the task of attacking German positions on the Ankenes Peninsula. Ankenes overlooked Narvik from the south and whoever held the steep massif dominated Narvik and the exit road eastwards to the Swedish border. Heavy fighting between the Germans and Poles took place on the bare mountains of the peninsula.
The main assault on German-occupied Narvik and surroundings took place during the night on May 27/28. The Polish brigade advanced relentlessly from the mountains south of the village of Ankenes. After heavy, often hand-to-hand combat, the Germans withdrew over the fiord on fishing boats toward Narvik. The Poles then turned east and, still under fire, advanced with the Beisfjord on their left. By the afternoon the Germans evacuated Narvik and set up a defensive line briefly near Sildvik. The first Polish troops entered liberated Narvik later in the day. In the center of the town they were met by the French and Norwegian troops coming from the north. The German units, under command of the already legendary Gen. Eduard Dietl, were forced to retreat eastwards toward the nearby Swedish border.
Total destruction of the German forces was only days away. Indeed, the Germans positioned trains on stand-by on the Swedish rail line just across the border for evacuation of their exhausted troops. But in light of the new developments in France, the allied Supreme War Council decided to withdraw the troops of the Narvik expedition. Before the Norwegian campaign was abandoned, however, it was decided to take Narvik, destroy the port facilities and disrupt as much of the rail line running to Sweden as time allowed; after this was accomplished all Allied troops would be evacuated. Once Narvik was taken and the vital ore carrying and handling facilities were destroyed, it was estimated that the Germans would be unable to use the port for a year.
The decision to withdraw the troops from Norway, although justified and necessary under the circumstances, shocked the Polish officers and soldiers - the destruction of the enemy was imminent and yet they were ordered to evacuate! Some of the Polish soldiers wept openly when saying goodbye to their astonished Norwegian comrades in arms. On June 8 the last soldiers of the Brigade left Norway, headed for war-torn France.
The Polish Independent Highland Rifle Brigade left ninety seven soldiers and officers buried in Norwegian soil. One hundred and ninety were wounded, some of them seriously. During the funeral ceremony at Haakvik, a Norwegian priest in his funeral oration promised that the Norwegians would never forget the sacrifice offered by the Poles.
For the Poles living in Poland and abroad, the name of Narvik and the history of the Norwegian Campaign of 1940 has a special place in their hearts. The name of Narvik is engraved on the Unknown Soldier's Grave in Warsaw. Several streets and places in Poland also bear the name of this town.
Unhappily, allied efforts to destroy port and rail facilities in order to deny German use of Narvik as an ore shipment point were not nearly as effective as thought. The time taken to reopen the bitterly contested iron-ore route proved to be nearer six months than the twelve which had been calculated. Ore shipments resumed January 1941 and, according to the Swedish iron company's records, altogether some 600,000 tons of ore left Narvik for Germany that year, rising to a rate of 1,800,000 tons per annum in the early months of 1943.
___________________
Submitted by: joebeben@gmail.com
Dear Joe. What am I supposed to do with that? If you'd like to add content to an article, please do so. It is simple, do the WP:TUTORIAL and you'll be able to edit yourself. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 23:49, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Specifically, it's the pipe | which separates [[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]] from [[User_talk:Piotrus|...]]. This pipe is being taken as a parameter separator within the {{bot bug}} template (as it would if used inside any template), so the talk page link, the closing </span> and closing </sub> are all being ignored because, as far as the template is concerned, they're not in any recognised parameter. This pipe therefore needs to be either recoded or omitted; I assume that you don't want to omit it, so if you were to amend this to | it should work. You can also shorten your sig a little bit by moving the outermost style= attribute to the <sub>...</sub> tag; this leaves the <span>...</span> without attributes, so that it can be removed:
you'll see that it looks just the same, but it won't break templates. It's 200 characters long, compared to your current sig which is 208 long. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:16, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
WikiCup 2011 April newsletter
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.
This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to Hurricanehink (submissions) and Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!
Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! 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 and The ed17 19:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
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) 04:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Wolodyjowski.png
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Wolodyjowski.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 07:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
The image was in the Wolodyjowski article but I removed it, sort of because as fair use, it really shouldn't be in there, but also cuz it didn't really fit in there. If an article on the old Wolodyjowski movie is created then the image can go in there. It could also probably go in the Tadeusz Łomnicki article.Volunteer Marek (talk) 08:07, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Katyn FAR
Nie wiem czy bede mial czas nad tym popracowac a rzeczywiscie wydaje sie ze nazbieralo sie roznych problemow od ostatniego review. Szkoda by bylo gdyby to bylo denominowane.Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Karl Marx is now a GA
Congratulations! -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:44, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
The Guild of Copy Editors – May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive
The Guild of Copy Editors invite you to participate in the May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive began on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). The goals of this backlog elimination drive are to eliminate as many articles as possible from the 2009 backlog and to reduce the overall backlog by 15%. ! NEW ! In an effort to encourage the final elimination of all 2009 articles, we will be tracking them on the leaderboard for this drive.
Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
You are receiving a copy of this newsletter as you are a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, or have participated in one of our drives. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add you name here. Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:57, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Is there a particular difference between the two versions that I should consider? Nihil novi (talk) 04:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Clan Wolf Banner.png
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Clan Wolf Banner.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Assistance
Hey Piotr, how's life been going? I have a question/need for assistance from you. I am assisting Janet Morris with her wikipedia page and we keep running into issue with an individual who is deleting all the SF & Fantasy stubs we're building for her by claiming she isn't an author of note. We're scrambling to dig up the references but a lot of her work was back in the 1980's, and we're trying to put a stop to the deletions before we can dig up all the references. How do we go about putting a stay of execution on everything while we try to everything wiki needs? It's only one guy in particular who seems to be a problem, but it's almost as though he's specifically tracking down every single book of Janet's to claim she is not a notable author. Thanks Piotr. Cordova829 (talk) 02:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 5 May 2011 02:39 UTC
Thanks Piotr. The articles in question are Dream Dancer, Cruiser Dreams, Earth Dreams, High Couch of Silistra and The Golden Sword. I wouldn't normally get involved in this but was specifically asked by my publisher to assist newer people not familiar with wiki guidelines, which is amusing because I'm still learning myself. This is a notable author, which I would assume means that any and all books she has written are notable books, correct? Cordova829 (talk) 14:26, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Again, thank you for your guidance and assistance. It's truly appreciated. Cordova829 (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Please help assess articles for Public Policy Initiative research
Hi Piotrus/Archive 36,
Your work as an Online Ambassador is making a big contribution to Wikipedia. Right now, we're trying to measure just how much student work improves the quality of Wikipedia. If you'd like contribute to this research and get a firsthand look at the quality improvement that is happening through the project, please sign up to assess articles. Assessment is happening now, just use the quantitative metric and start assessing! Your help would be hugely appreciated!
Hello! Your submission of World-system 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! Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 01:09, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Done :) --Dans (talk) 00:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
The Bushranger (submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by 
Hurricanehink (submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to 
Yellow Evan (submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, 
Miyagawa (submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and 
Jarry1250 (submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!
— Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
— Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Krzysztof Matyjaszewski 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) 17:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
The Bushranger (submissions) (first, with 487 points) and
Hurricanehink (submissions) (second, with 459), who stormed the first round.
Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to
Jarry1250 (submissions) for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to
Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Juliusz Słowacki for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.
Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to
Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!
![[8]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Boll_weevil_eradication.jpg&diff=402785945&oldid=309621554){kind=link}
![[9]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Kirk%27s_retort.jpg&diff=402785415&oldid=337699848){kind=link}
