Talk:Anti-Polish sentiment/Archive 7

message: I changed some comments about Steinbach to small print in the "Schmidt" section above, and reproduce them here.  I hope I did not make a mistake with the attributions.-- Austrian 21:03, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You are wrong on all points- Erica Stainbach is a member of a very large organisation visitied by top German politicians, [...] -- User:Molobo  16:38, 6 September 2005
You cherrypicked and challenged two of Jonny's points jumping to another conclusion that he was wrong on all points. Who is Erica Stainbach? Let's check the German wikipedia. According to the German wikipedia, Nach anhaltender, äußerst kritischer Berichterstattung ist sie heute in Polen weit bekannter als in Deutschland. Eine Fotomontage des polnischen Nachrichtenmagazins Wprost präsentierte sie in SS-Uniform auf Kanzler Schröder reitend. (= After continuous, exceedingly critical reporting she is today more well-known in Poland than in Germany. A photomontage of the Polish news magazine Wprost presented her in SS-uniform riding on Chacellor Schröder.) Of course she has meet with top German politicians as one of almost 600 members of the German parliament. [...] -- NightBeAsT 20:51, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Steinbach didn't meet with Stroiber or Schroeder or Merkel in Parliament.All of those people come regularly to meetings of her organisations and make speeches to them.As to your "there is no harm in jokes" there is if it reinforces negative stereotypes that led to mass murder and genocide of Polish people by Germans.--Molobo 02:07, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

text: She is so unimportant that Merkel had given her support in her speeches.--Molobo 10:13, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Erika Steinbach]]

message: This article has been protected for ages.  I've unprotected and suggest that you all just try editing and see what happens. Works nine times out of ten. --Tony SidawayTalk 10:54, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Unprotected

message: Molobo has just reverted all the disputed claims concerning German and French "Anti-Polonism" despite an enormous amount of discussion and complete lack of support for his proposals. If anyone disagrees with Molobo's unannouncend but certainly not surprising move which cannot achieve anything other than plunging the article into another edit and revert wars, tell me so on this page. I'd like some feedback on (and possibly help with) more serious and defining steps in dispute resolution. Thank you.NightBeAsT 19:34, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the page is on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography for 3 days. Let's hope more people will join and react. I suggest also to concentrate on a single issue. Alx-pl D 19:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to end a fight against all the laws of reason 

message: The claims:
*Soviet propaganda that showed Polish Home Army accused of collaboration with Nazi Germany is present in Russian media.
*Polish contribution towards Allied effort in WW2 is disputed.
aren't still appropriately supported by sources while they should as these are accusations. The source that supports the claim:
*Russian policy makers have justified Molotov-Ribbentrop pact
contains no evidence that Putin said this in the context of hatered towards Polish nation.
The final source from Gazeta Wyborcza is an interesting evidence, but the content is slightly different. The main anti-Polish content is:
*the repetition of the lie about Polish concentration camps organised during the 1920 campaign
*insignificance of the Polish resistance movement during WW2
It is also worth mentioning that the site on which the information was presented is not representative for Russian media. On the other hand it is commonly regarded in Russia as the place where the official explanation of Putin's politics is presented. Alx-pl D 19:09, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Polonism in [[Russia]] 

message: This discussion Talk:Anti-Polonism/Archive_4 is still active. Alx-pl D 19:55, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I took seriously the suggestion from the anonymous edit and I found out that the main dictionary of Polish published by PWN ("Słownik języka polskiego"), at least in its on-line version, does not contain antypolonizm , similarly the encyclopedia of the publisher , and the dictionary of the words with foreign origin . The same holds for an on-line encyclopedia Wiem . Alx-pl D 18:30, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

text: The phrase concerning the dictionaries states to be precise that its Polish counterpart antypolonizm does not appear in Polish major dictionaries and encyclopedias either. The dictionary you found is a really minor dictionary the intended audience of which are librarians so inclusion of the information does not falsify the statement. Moreover, if the editors decided to add information about the dictionary status of the word in English and the dictionary status of the word in Polish is so peculiar, the information must be included to the article. Alx-pl D 14:35, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not understand on which basis the information about Polish major dictionaries has been removed. The dictionary Molobo mentions - "Słownik Języka Haseł Przedmiotowych Biblioteki Narodowej" - is not a major Polish dictionary. It is not a major Polish encyclopedia either. I don't deny that the library is a major institution, but this dictionary is simply directed for librarians and thus has no wider audience. Once more, the term does not occur in the dictionaries and encyclopedias I mentioned above. It also does not appear in paper sources like "Słownik Języka Polskiego" by PWN (I've checked the 1994 edition), "Słownik Wyrazów Obcych. Nowy" by PWN (I've checked the 1995 edition) and in the recently published (2005) "Encyklopedia Gazety Wyborczej" (the material in which is just a big encyclopedia corpus from PWN). As these are the dictionaries that really have wide audience and good respect, I don't see reason why this information should be removed from the article. Alx-pl D 19:20, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed 

message: Hope for the support of everybody, who is deeply ashamed about this Bullshit! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anti-Polonism Best greetings, Michal.
:I know there is precedents for stopping short VfD that have already occurred recently, but you should ask a disinterested admin to do so. No one involved should take it upon themselves to cut short a VfD. Marskell 15:02, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This one was not "recently". The issue is not precedents, but policy. Please read it carefully. On the other hand, groundless renominations may be treated as disruption and shut down. I suggest to let this one be, to reaffirm the position, but the third one will not go. mikka (t) 18:18, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: nominated for deletion again!