Talk:Aleksander Krzyżanowski

message: Irpen, could you explain what important references are deleted? Since the entire para is moved out of order it is hard to see specific changes. Please list them here and we can discuss them, I am sure we can reach a NPOV version here.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you bother actually to read the version to which you are reverting? Also, please explain what's wrong withh the version you dislike. If you disagree with Katyn's phrasing, rephrase it, I offered a couple of different versions. You disagree with all? Offer something else. Why you deleted the info? What overgeneralizing? Why the entire ref to Piotrowski is removed? Strange. --Irpen 06:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While you have indeed improved the Katyn version, I don't see any postivie changes in your version, you are basically adding out of context excerpts from Piotrowski which create an impression that AK collaboration with Nazis was something normal, instead of rare exceptions; even Piotrowski states so noting even those exceptions for the most part were Poles trying to doublecross the Germans (get intel, etc.) - yet your edits persist on mentioning only those exceptions (without saying there were exceptions). I find your attemps to smear the name of AK rather not fitting for such a good editor like you. Plus your earlier attempts to remove info on such things like Katyn or MRPact remind me of - no offence - Soviet censorship (I am sure censorship was not your intention, but even so removal of such info fits a certain pattern).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And of course Ghirla, The Revert Warrior, sees no reason to talk. Can you rein him in, Irpen?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Piotrus, first of all, I asked that you actually looked at the version you were reverting to. Piotrowski ref was not there. Just look at it. Now, you present my introduction of relevant and well-referenced info as an attempt to smear the AK. How is that so? Is there more relevant article for the details on the negotiantions between the subject of this very article and the Germans and the results of those negotiations. If so, mention it. A less detailed summmary is missing from AK's article but I will add it there. Or does that mean that you are insisting on a separate article titled as, say, Polish-Nazi cooperation in the Vilnius-Navahradak area? Also, his units were engaged in some controversial actions against Lithuanians. This info is slowly now making its way into an AK article. Should be added here as well. We are talkng here about an article on specific AK commander. Why are we censoring the info of what was done under his command? Finally, you reverted Ghirla without even an edit summary. And his revert was just the mirror of yours. Please don't follow on Halibutt's footsteps to revert non-vandalism with generic summaries (like "rollback" or "using popups"). That Halibutt ingores this request is no reason that others should. I will make some changes to this article right now. --Irpen 19:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Piotrus, I accept fully your expansion. I will go over it at due time but I have no intention to delete anything substantial. I am also open to what belongs where? As for Molobo's entry above, I don't see how it needs an answer. --Irpen 20:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took the liberty to remove the total dispute tag. As evidenced above, the problems Irpen has are not related to this article's factual accuracy, but to his general views on book reviews. As such, the matter could be better solved at book review, academic journal, or some better talk page. But even if the community followed Irpen's suggestion to dump all academic journals from wiki, this would not affect the factual accuracy or neutrality of this particular article. //Halibutt 12:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Instead of rv war, let's talk here 

message: Piotrus, do I take this edit as a sign that you choose to simply refuse to provide the direct reference to the book and insist that it is OK to cite one source through another source while the original source is available despite all I said above? --Irpen 02:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it's perfectly ok to do so, as long as the reader is given the exact path. //Halibutt 08:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I have explained myself above, Irpen. Please read my posts and reply to them, instead of starting new threads. As Halibutt wrote, it's a prefectly ok academic reference.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Honestly Piotrus, I don't understand at all what this fuss is about. If there is a direct reference, which additionally can be consulted online (contrary to the other ref), why bother with an indirect ref, therefore increasing the risk of interpretations? -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 20:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Because the review is enough according to WP:RS and WP:V and I don't have time to browse through the book to look for specific citation to replace it. If Irpen's can't find it, well, it's his view vs the academic review, and I don't need to repeat what is WP:V/WP:RS stance on that, do I?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Irpen, all there is too see is your attempt to dispute information which you do not like, even if backed with academic references. For the last time, academic review is perfectly acceptable source as per WP:RS.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Irpen, your refusal to address our points is telling even more. This is not an article about Piotrowski's book, this an article about something else and the review is a valid reference. Whether the author of the review read more in the book that there is too it or not is not of our concern, WP:V clearly states we are not to search for some ultimate truth, but concentrate on referencing article information with verifibable and reliable soruces, and the review fits that definition. If you disagree with that, find me a source that shows this review is not correct. EOT.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, it will be nice to see an argument other then 'I cannot find the fact in the book so an academic review of the book which mentions the fact I cannot verify in the book (which has some pages restricted on Google Print) cannot be used.'--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, just in case it isn't clear, I also support Ipren's search. But his lack of results does not invalidate the findings published in academic review.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Refusal to provide the ref to the book itself?

message: Hi, Maybe some one can help out here. In 1928 a Aleksander Krzyżanowski sailed for Poland in the Amsterdam Olympics. Is this the same person as mentioned in this article? Regards NED33 (talk) 12:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  1928 Olympics (Sailing) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Aleksander Krzyżanowski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070522074304/http://www.knss.uksw.edu.pl/index.php?nazwa=5_1 to http://www.knss.uksw.edu.pl/index.php?nazwa=5_1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120718034701/http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~sarmatia/406/262choda.html to http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~sarmatia/406/262choda.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:36, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Aleksander Krzyżanowski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927182636/http://www.naszawitryna.pl/jedwabne_en_103.html to http://www.naszawitryna.pl/jedwabne_en_103.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927205739/http://www.atgimimas.lt/ssi.php?id=1031308337&which=1&f_text= to http://www.atgimimas.lt/ssi.php?id=1031308337&which=1&f_text=
*Added  tag to http://www.voruta.lt/archyvas/105/750
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:15, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified