User talk:Plk/repository

Witaj! / Welcome!

Hello, Plk, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - Darwinek 09:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Britain

Hello! Thank you for your contribution to the Battle of Britain page. As you may know, there were many nationalities in the RAF and every now and again a person from one of those countries will add their nation's flag to the page. These edits are normally reverted. I have started a discussion on the talk page to see if we can find a better way of doing this, please add you opinion there so we can get it sorted out as soon as possible. You may notice that this is a problem for the BoB page in all languages.Mumby 23:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vandalism

Hello Plk,

Thank you for telling me about the vandalism, I hope you can understand my explanation. Right now, there is not enough vandalism for me to protect the page, which would stop IP-users from being able to vandalize it. There are some things you can do to stop the vandalism, though. When you see an IP-user who has vandalized, you can warn them on their talk page, by using the templates listed in that link. The instructions at that link should give you all the information you need. If the vandalism gets worse, you can either let me know or write something about it at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, where an administrator will take care of it. Let me know if you have any questions, or need anything explained better. -- Natalya 20:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Plk, I've also added the article to my watchlist, ta/wangi 23:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help.--Plk 23:18, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking to all the user(s) involved in the editing of the page, but to keep this from turning into an edit war, please try and discuss all changes at Talk:Poles first. By discussing first and editing second, hopefully it will be easier for everyone to work together. Thanks, -- Natalya 01:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poles

I have left a message on Sparspost's talk page reinforcing that a discussion needs to take place. A couple of notes for you, though:

Please don't refer to the changes that Sparspost and others prefer as "vandalism". Vandalism has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia and good faith edits are never considered vandalism. It seems to me that the version of the opening paragraph that you disagree with is being proposed in good faith.
I am not prepared to endorse any specific version of the opening paragraph. I have no personal opinion on which is "correct". My interest here is to stop the edit war and see that consensus is formed and applied.
One way out of the current impasse might be to appeal to Wikipedia's verifiability policy. It seems that there are two opinions being proposed about the meaning of Pole. Since both are just individual editors' opinions, neither can be said to be superior and both may fall into the category of original research. Consensus may form around a new form of words from a reliable and independent source outside of the editors involved. It won't guarantee to stop the debate, but it might help.

Good luck, Gwernol 20:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Khoi khoi 05:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit war at article Poles

You have participated in the recent edit war over the opening paragraph of the article Poles. The article has now been fully protected to prevent further edit warring. The only way to resolve this matter is for interested editors to discuss this matter. Please go to Talk:Poles#Continued_edit_war_over_opening_paragraph and express your opinion there. Please work with your fellow editors to reach a consensus wording that is properly cited and neutral. Thank you, Gwernol 12:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grüß Dich

Ich wollte nur anmerken, dass anscheinend ein gewisser Benutzer (ich denke du bist schlau genug selbst zu sehen, wer dies ist) Dich für eine Sockenpuppe hält. Viele Grüße--141.83.42.10 (talk) 00:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Szkopski has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Addi hockey 10 22:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what's going on here, it looked like since you were listed and you removed your name I reverted it. I'm sorry if this was a mistake, I only had good intentions. --Addi hockey 10 22:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

West Slavic/Silesian

Hi Plk. I am sorry about getting involved on the West Slavic languages article in the way I did. You revered me for restoring Silesian as a language but you must realise that the last two accounts to remove that piece were IPs and the summaries being provided looked very POV-fuelled. I see that for you as a Polish speaker, this is a sensitive area and not something I can comment advisedly on - since my region is the South Slavic lands! I know that Silesian is borderline and much of it is to do with local attitude which sadly (as we know in our region) can skirt the issue of common sense, I know how easily something is politicised. I think the article is in its best shape now as the controversy is marked. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 22:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]