Talk:The Sigismund Bell

message: Jacurek, I know that English is not your native language. Please consult a dictionary instead of a thesaurus before attempting to copy-edit a difficult topic that needed fine tuning grammatically, semantically, and historically, etc. The two countries were not  "integrated" in 1520, and the union came into force in 1569. As for your copy edit , ..."'(- ya.... this one is a very, very difficult one....Hmmmm perhaps "integrated" will reflect the picture more clearly. Yes... I think this is the best word to use in this case. All the best.)... it strikes me as hostile and sarcastic (despite your affectionate "all the best"). I'll just assume good faith and forget it, but really, your choice of wording in this case is quite inappropriate. It just doesn't fit. I'm not sure you're cut out for the task of copy-editing English. However if you need help, feel free to contact me. If you can think of something better we can use, let me know. As I said it's a tough one. Explaining the relationship between Lithuania and Poland prior to 1569, in one word. Dr. Dan (talk) 05:49, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sarcastic?.... not at all. I'm so sorry that you did get this impression.  In fact I think that sarcastic comments on the Wikipedia are very wrong. I know exactly how you felt because I came across editors who use sarcastic comments bordering with trolling almost all the time. It is very annoying to work with them. As far as the English language help....I think I will be fine but thanks for offer of help. Cheers.--Jacurek (talk) 06:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Integrated"

message: OK Dr. Dan, you're a native English speaker. I'm not. But are you sure that "the bell tolls" is incorrect? — Kpalion(talk) 22:07, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't say it's incorrect. Thought the alternative was a better nuance though. Dr. Dan (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  For whom the bell is tolled 

message: Due to the unfortunate lack of interest concerning our recent discussion at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language page, and here, I've come up with another suggestion. How does Zygmunt (bell) sound (no pun intended) for the article's title? It might be a solution in it gives the original Polish name "Zygmunt", describes what the entity is, and eliminates any need to revise the several more awkward alternatives (that includes the present title). Plus, it is already linked to this current title. It also prevents what you referred to as "forcing" a literal translation from Polish. Please take into consideration this more famous bell as opposed to John Brown Bell. No one actually refers to "Big Ben" as Big Ben Bell. That's what brought me into this discussion in the first place. Dr. Dan (talk) 21:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: hmm doesn't Big Ben refer to the clock tower? Anyway your proposal makes sense.  Dr. Loosmark  00:25, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it's the nickname for the bell itself. I suppose after time there was some commingling of the nickname of the bell with the clock or bell tower, but that's not accurate. Dr. Dan (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I'm not really opposed to Zygmunt (bell) as long as you'll make sure that the new name would be used consistently across the article, templates, other Wikimedia projects, etc. But I still don't see what's wrong with the current title and why it should be replaced with a different one. Sigismund Bell seems the best solution to me, per WP:UE. — Kpalion(talk) 22:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: All good points. Since I don't own this article, however, it wouldn't be up to me exclusively make sure that the new name would be used consistently across the article, templates, other Wikimedia projects, etc. Having forgotten some of the past acrimony revolving around WP:UE, perhaps Sigismund (bell) for all of the reasons that we agree about, seems the best solution here. Hugo (or was it actually Anthony Quinn) told us that Notre Dame's bell ringer Quasimodo was made deaf by the bell, "Big Marie", not Big Marie Bell. Dr. Dan (talk) 22:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sigismund (bell) is fine for me. If you think the benefit of moving the article there outweighs the cost of additional work required as a result of the move (nobody "owns" the article, but someone will have to do it), then go ahead. Afterwards I hope we can spend some more time improving the article itself instead of just moving it around the namespace. — Kpalion(talk) 00:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Possibility 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Sigismund Bell. 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/20101222024925/http://www.katedra-wawelska.pl/english/the_royal_sigismund_bell,54.html to http://www.katedra-wawelska.pl/english/the_royal_sigismund_bell,54.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101222024925/http://www.katedra-wawelska.pl/english/the_royal_sigismund_bell,54.html to http://www.katedra-wawelska.pl/english/the_royal_sigismund_bell,54.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) 03:13, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: FYI to all, since  is deprecated, I am converting the infobox over to . Most articles about bell's do not even have an infobox but I don't want to simply delete the infobox entirely. This seems like the most appropriate infobox to replace it with. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , please see my comment at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 November 11#Template:Geobox. — Kpalion(talk) 01:03, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  that was the wrong place to have the discussion. Obviously you are free to discuss the deletion of  but if you want to discuss the proper template for this this article you should do so here... Also note that this page was never using ... It infact was using  before I changed it here to facilitate better tracking as I converted the pages. I have no problem with creating a new template for bell articles and infact would encourage it. Most articles about bells don't have any infobox at all. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:08, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  do you have much template experience? I've got like 20 projects I'm working on right now... But I'd be more than happy to help you build a  or . I think this would make an excellent addition. Do you feel comfortable enough to do it yourself or do you want me to take the lead? No idea what your level of expertise is so please don't take that as me talking down to you! Happy to help. :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

text: I do have some experience with making templates, but I'm not sure I'm up-to-date with current trends (which is why the deprecation of geobox caught me by surprise). What would you suggest as the best template template to base the new, bell-specific template on? — Kpalion(talk) 11:38, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

text: , pinging you in case you didn't watchlist this page. — Kpalion(talk) 10:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  please ping me in the future! I do watch the page but it sometimes gets lost in my watchlist of 4,000+ pages. So here is what I would suggest. Let's do this together? The best base is going to be . What would be great is if you can start by providing me a list of parameters. What do you see as being the required elements to display in the infobox? I'll get something mocked up in the next few days. Does that sound good? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , I've created Draft:Bell infobox to have a place to talk about the template, as this doesn't apply to Sigismund Bell only. Please see my proposal at Draft talk:Bell infobox. I will try to invite more people to the discussion. — Kpalion(talk) 16:02, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  sounds like a plan. My 2 cents, I'd go ahead and just create . WE can work on it there. No need to confine it to the draftspace. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:21, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  in this case, please just move the draft into the template namespace, to preserve the discussion that is already on the talk page. — Kpalion(talk) 17:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I misunderstood! I thought you were actually building the template. I now see you are just discussing what parameters to use, etc. That is a great approach and should be a draft. So I don't really have any opinion on the parameters and all that. Why don't you focus on getting people who know stuff about bells in on the discussion. When you think you are in a good place to get something started, ping me and I'll build you a template. Does that work? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:00, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure! Let's wait a few days to see if I can gather some more ideas. Thanks a lot! — Kpalion(talk) 18:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Converting infobox