Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board/Archive 8

message: I came across the Jan DzierÅ¼on article on the talk pages of other users and attempted to copyedit and clean up the namespace. I also posited some questions and ideas on the talk page, but it seems my edits are frowned upon. I do not anticipate being able to copyedit the article further, so I have removed it from my watchlist. I mention the article here because there has been recent dispute with it, and others might be able to provide their expertise. Olessi 23:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jan DzierÅ¼on 

message: Collection of archival Polish newspapers, online:  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Miodzio

message: Please consider the validity of the article horilka which is voted for deletion now. Although I voted "delete" basing on article content, I am aware that I am not an expert. Also there may be important information in Ukrainian, Polish or Russian langauge I cannot assess. 
I am posting this message on all slavic notice boards, because now the voting is participated mostly by amateurs far from horilka. Mukadderat 16:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horilka 

message: This image was recently deleted; it seems that the main concern was that we cannot use it under fair use because 'it is not important to the article'. See deletion debate and reply of the user who deleted it when I asked him for more explanation. I believe this is a very useful image - what do you think?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Image:Cios w Plecy Dziennik Chicagoski 19 Wrzesien 1939.jpg]]

message: I wanted to ask for help.  An anon ip has introduced a controversy section at Aleksander KwaÅniewski, and has provided sources for their statements.  In checking them, I realized that I'm having a hard time determining if the sites are reliable sources...me not being familiar enough with Polish media.  I'd appreciate if a few people could give me a quick read on whether these sites are indeed WP:RS quality or are more blogsnews and such.  The controversy section should be viewable in the history prior to my revert with the edit summary about "thanks for the sources..." here.
Thanks very much for any help you can give. Syrthiss 21:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ...done. Still, the inserted text needs some cleanup, language neutralizing, copyedit etc. --Beaumont (@) 18:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Aleksander KwaÅniewski]] 

message: A user, User:Mibelz has lately been behaving very uncivil, randomly forcing Jewish identities on several Polish figures (including Adam Mickiewicz among others), and calling people who oppose his citation-less and controversial edits "anti-Semitists." He has then recently added pratically every American politician with a Jewish ancestor to the list. The page is now semi-protected, so I have no power without going ahead and making a username, but that would just be WP:POINT on my part and I have too much of an ego to have go through that. Can somebody please get rid of these ridiculous entries? 141.213.211.83 23:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear anon, we will take a look at the situation. In the meantime, please consider registering.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of Polish Jews]]

message: Is it an accident and lack of oversight that the articles: Jan Olszewski, Conservative People's Party (Poland) and Catholic-National Movement use Warszawa refering to the Polish capital instead of Warsaw? It seems to me a violation of WP:NC but I don't care enough to go and edit these articles. So I am just bringing up the issue here for someone to take a look. --Irpen 01:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing these out, I fixed them.  If you find any more, please list them here, or better yet fix them yourself. Balcer 04:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Warszawa

message: Hi there, any idea what happened to those? I had them on my watchlist and I can't rememeber any VfD (though i could miss them). Szopen 09:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first didn't exist (so, probably a typo in the title) and the second was AfD'd and deleted. ÐÐ¸ÑÐ°13 11:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I saw VfD for both. It's a shame I missed them. It's also a shame that Piotrus, who nominated them, had not contacted me. I would happily provided the references, as both articles were based on literature (though I don't know what happened to later versions). I hadn't provided the references, since at the time when I wrote them, almost no article contained any refs. Szopen 13:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One more thing: Piotrus, please accept my apologisement. I am under a lot of stress recently and sometimes I choose my words unwisely. "Shame that Piotrus etc etc" was one of those words. Szopen 08:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

text: It's my understanding that admins can restore deleted pages. Appleseed (Talk) 13:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had also advertised both VfDs (or as they are now known, AfDs) on this noticeboard (it pays to check it more often). But yes, there is always Wikipedia:Request for undeletion. I can also paste the contents of the deleted articles onto your (sub)userpage if you want to present an updated versions before undeletion discussion.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you Piotrus. I guess the second option would be better. Because of private problems I will be unable to do anything untill January. Of course I mean the versions before some editor started to put some references to "Daglingers" thingie Szopen 08:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Scandinavian connections to Mieszko I]] and [[Connection between Poles and Vandals]] 

message: Dear editors, you may have noticed that all of today's contributions to the fundraiser will be matched.  So if you were planning on supporting the object of our addiction, today is a good day to do it! Happy editing, Appleseed (Talk) 20:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call!-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important notice 

message: Any comments how to improve the Armia Krajowa article will be appreciated (see also it's talk for some ongoing discusions), there are currently some cite needed tags and an NPOV one.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Peer_review#Armia_Krajowa]]

message: Renaming debate - proposed name include 'Polish-Russian War (1605-1618)]], ['Polish intervention in Russia', 'Polish-Lithuanian intervention in Time of Trouble', and others. Comments appreciated.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Talk:PolishâMuscovite War (1605â1618)]]

message: The Warsaw Public Library has BolesÅaw Prus' jubilee portrait, painted by Antoni KamieÅski in 1897, in celebration of Prus' 50th birthday and 25 years in journalism.  It's a very attractive likeness that reflects his personality, and would be useful for Wikipedia, which doesn't seem to have it.  Could someone take a full-length photograph of it, and another of just the head and shoulders, and place them in the Commons?  logologist|Talk 11:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if User:Halibutt was not on wikibreak, he would be the best candidate. Barring that, who else is from Warsaw? Hmmm, I think we should contact the pl wiki with a request...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  13:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's Christmas/Hanukkah time and I won't be available until after January 3rd. If you won't be able to find anyone to do the job, just remind me of it. //Halibutt 15:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[BolesÅaw Prus]]' [[jubilee]] [[portrait]]

message: Most articles on Polish and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth politicians, generals, entrepreneurs, writers, artists, historians, mathematicians, scientists, philosophers, etc., have no photograph or portrait of their subject.  Perhaps some of our photography-capable colleagues could take a digital camera along on visits to museums and libraries and snap targets of opportunity?  (The same would hold for historical monuments, cityscapes and the like.)
We owe a debt of gratitude to colleagues who have done this in the past, preventing the situation from being even worse than it is.  logologist|Talk 01:39, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Iconography]] [[shortage]]

message: Following instructions...
Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland redirect created.
Created :Category:Poland-related articles by quality
*Created :Category:FA-Class Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:A-Class Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:GA-Class Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:B-Class Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:Start-Class Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:Stub-Class Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:Unassessed-Class Poland-related articles
Created :Category:Poland-related articles by importance
*Created :Category:Top-importance Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:High-importance Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:Mid-importance Poland-related articles
*Created :Category:No-importance Poland-related articles
:Template:WikiProject Poland created.
Article tagging: started
You can help by tagging articles with:
 

Read more about the project at Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Assessment
Notes: if a project is tagged with MILHIST banner, add |Polish-task-force= yes
Brought to you by: -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  14:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poland joins [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia 1.0]] 

message: Let's break an opÅatek - sign here if you read this forum and like the holidays :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Like it very much. :} - Darwinek 21:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

text: WesoÅych ÅwiÄt! :-) Appleseed (Talk) 00:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

text: WesoÅych ÅwiÄt! :-) --Beaumont (@) 22:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hate holidays /me and my gf will not be seing each other for 3 days in a row/, but what the heck, all the best to you :) //Halibutt 15:35, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

text: WesoÅych ÅwiÄt! :) Jacek Kendysz 16:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WesoÅych ÅwiÄt!

message: Hello,
there is a new page for the translation from polish into english.
This page is yours, please help to improve it.
If you have any question, leave a message on Wikipedia talk:Translation
Jmfayard 11:50, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Translation]] 

message: Despite efforts to find sources for several flagged personalities on List of Polish Jews to support they are Polish and Jewish, no references could be found as of yet. Perhaps there are references in the Polish language, unaccessible to the normal reference-hunter. If so, the name can be re-added with said referece. However, it was made very clear and direct that if no references could be found by the coming of the new year the names would be removed per WP:V etc. This has since been done on List of Polish Jews and reverted on the basis of "POV edit" - whatever that means. Can it please be made clear that unless references exist to show that these personalities are Polish and Jewish, they cannot remain on the list with a  flag indefinitely? 141.213.67.46 19:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dubious Entries on List of Polish Jews

message: Or a slightly delayed 'New Year' thought. In the past, some of us have troubles understanding our Lithuanian collegues; one of the issues was the matter of Polonization/Lithuanization of names (with Laurynas GuceviÄius being likely the most (in)famous case). I believe I have discovered a reason for some of the troubles we had; as expected, it is not because of one side bad faith but rather, a cultural misundertanding. It is common in Polish language to refer to people, especially modern, with little 'polonization' of their names; in some other cases, a first name may be polonized, but the surname will be left in orginal, and most of the other changes come from replacing letters not used in Polish language with Polish equivalents (x->ks, v->w). This is, however, not the case in Lithuanian language, which from what I can tell tries to 'naturalize' all foreign sounds. Hence: :pl:George W. Bush but :lt:DÅ¾ordÅ¾as V. BuÅ¡as, :pl:Bill Clinton but :lt:Viljamas Klintonas, :pl:Lionel Jospin but :lt:Lionelis Å½ospenas, :pl:Pittsburgh but :lt:Pitsburgas, :pl:Connecticut but :lt:Konektikutas, :lt:ManÄesteris, lt:Frankfurtas, lt:Josifas Stalinas, lt:Franklinas Ruzveltas, :lt:Fidelis Kastro, :lt:Izaokas Niutonas (note also :pl:Valdas Adamkus and :lt:Valdas Adamkus or :pl:Algirdas Brazauskas and :lt:Algirdas Brazauskas). Thus please remember that for our Lithuanian collegues seeing a non-Lithuanian name is twice as suprising as for us seeing Copernicus instead of Kopernik or Warsaw instead of Warszawa; please be kind when dealing with those issues, and try to avoid discussions of '-ization' but rather, stick to relevant WP policies (WP:UE being the most useful, and other WP:NC staying close behind).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you Piotrus, well put. For anyone not totally understanding the concept, consider Jerzy Waszyngton, in lieu of George Washington. Then again also consider that there are Lithuanian names which are not lithuanizations, like Jogaila, or polonizations of that name like JagieÅÅo. Or the lithuanization of WÅadysÅaw JagieÅÅo II, which would be Vladislovas Jogaila II. Thought I'd help out. Dr. Dan 03:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tiny nitpick, Dr.Dan: I think you meant :pl:George Washington, known in Lithuania as :lt:DÅ¾ordÅ¾as VaÅ¡ingtonas... BTW, can you tell me why Winston Churchill is at :lt:Winston Churchill and not :lt:Vinstonas ÄerÄilis? It kind of breaks the pattern...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither tiny nor a nitpick, P.P. However, I will grant you that for some reason (hopefully not related to some shame of the beautiful Polish language), I have noticed that Jerzy Waszington is being slowly relegated to the trash bin. Do check out the history of the Polish article and other aspects of Polish WP and you'll see this unfortunate evolution concerning Washington and Chicago, etc. I assume your informing our English speaking readers of the Lithuanian linguistic formulation of non-Lithuanian names has some point other than to waste their time. If that's the case, let's forget Jerzy Waszington for George Washington, for now, and Jerzy Matulewicz for Jurgis Matulaitis, and even Wit Stwosz for Veit Stoss. There's a "plethora" of other examples of Polonizations of non-Polish names that we could debate. And maybe even the other way around, I noticed your involved in the current Dzierzon matter. As for Churchill, I could care less what the Lithuanians call him on their WP entry. Much more concerned with how you call Elzbieta Rakuszanka on English WP. CzeÅÄ! Dr. Dan 20:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One day, Dr. Dan, you will master the skill of understanding what others wrote and writing yourself so others can understand you. May I suggest you come back to us at that time?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if I upset you. Sorry that my linguistic skills are not up to your satifaction. And most of all, sorry that my help concerning your "lecture" on the Lithuanian language was also not appreciated. Dr. Dan 02:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Something to consider

message: Seems like there is a new argument about 'war crimes of Armia Krajowa' and despite the recent subarticle created the Lithuanian subsection is growing again. It's quite interesting, and thanks to some similar past discussions we have managed to make this article a GA-level one, but more voices are always welcome, as we seem to be unable to reach consensus on some issues.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Talk:Armia Krajowa]]

message: If you're working on articles about Polish art or artists, take a look at this site.  It has a lot of high quality images to make your articles pretty. Appleseed (Talk) 22:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Art 

message: Or some other possibilites, RM at Talk:Krak%C3%B3w_grosh#Requested_move_to_Krak.C3.B3w_grosz_or_Cracow_grosz. With the background argument that KrakÃ³w should be moved to Cracow (or as some prefer, Krakau :>).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  KrakÃ³w grosz or Krakau groschen? 

message: Hi all, I choose Polish as an example language in reflexive verb article, but it needs some proofreading of Polish examples (online dictionaries don't help much for present-tense suffixes :-D). Thanks in advance. Dujaâº 21:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, done. Jacek Kendysz 00:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Reflexive verb]]: a brief translation needed 

message: Henryk GÃ³recki could use an audio sample and/or IPA pronunciation. Olessi 22:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Henryk GÃ³recki 

message: We should write something about the misconception and soviet era propaganda that the Polish-Soviet War was a part of that conflict. And something about the irony of the situation that PiÅsudski actually wanted the Communists to win. Mieciu K 16:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Since Polish-Soviet War is a pretty well referenced FA, perhaps there is material in the article that can be simply copied? Btw, did you know there indeed was a Polish intervention in the RCW? See 4th Rifle Division (Poland) and 5th Rifle Division (Poland). Sure, it was limited, and hardly a government initative, but how history meanders is really interesting...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interesting, and strange, where they simply trying to save their lives or were they fighting for a greater cause? That would explain the 12,000 Poles figure I found in the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War article. Mieciu K 18:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  From what I read their cause was Poland; in the east, they only wanted to survive (had to follow the chain of command, mostly Entente forces from the 'allied intervention'... or Whites), later when on grounds they considered Polish they fought for themselves, I think.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War]] 

message: Can someone take a look at the following articles:
* International Order of Saint Stanislaus
* Order of Saint Stanislaus
* Order of Saint Stanislaus (Oekrainian chapter of the International Order of Saint Stanislaus)
* The order of Saint Stanislaus. As issued by the head of the Imperial House of Romanov
* The order of Saint Stanislaus.(re)established in Polen in 1990
* The order of Saint Stanislaus.(re)established in the Republic of Poland in 1990
I'm not sure if they need to be merged or renamed. All I know is that looking at them makes my head hurt. Appleseed (Talk) 18:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ack! That's a rare mess :) Merge all and salt the earth after the last four redirects (delete).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of Saint Stanislaus 

message: I have moved this from new articles annoucements. Please help those two editors find a common ground.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Move and mediation request

message: I am at loss about the notability of this article about a polish play. A notability tag was removed without comment. Is Maciej Kowalewski notable? Could someone look at it? Thanks -- Chris 73 | Talk 19:43, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I prodded it, let's see what happens.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since a user is removing prod without any responce, I give you the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bomb (play).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks -- Chris 73 | Talk 20:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The Bomb (play)]] 

message: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boguslawa Cimoszko.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vanity cruft?

message: Right now the redirect Third Livonian War is pointing at Polish-Swedish wars.  What should it redirect to? Appleseed (Talk) 04:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: PolishâSwedish War (1600â1629). Which is another disambig, after the article I wrote was split of into subarticles some time ago, a decision I am not that happy about but...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  06:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third Livonian War 

message: Dev920 keep adding JarosÅaw KaczyÅski article to the :Category:LGBT people from Poland. Jogers (talk) 12:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My first reaction is LOL. Now, more seriously, the refs that are used to back up this rather amusing claim are somewhat dubious: gaycitynews.com, www.pinknews.co.uk and www.thegully.com - all three seem like a minor new sites with an evident POV. Per WP:BLP I'd suggest that unless such claims can be verified by more reliable sources, they are discarded based on not being reliable (failing to satisfy WP:RS). In any case, please comment in the discussion at article's talk.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  JarosÅaw KaczyÅski article 

message: Among requested articles about Poland is "Przemsyl" (no details given). I was going to remove it as a typo for PrzemyÅl but the word has disturbingly high number of ghits on .pl.  Could someone take a look and remove it if is really just a typo? Pavel Vozenilek 19:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Przemysl" it self is a "typo"/version without diacritics, but what was on authors mind... who knows Radomil talk 20:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Pl wiki has no article on 'Przemsyl' and I'd agree with Radomil that it's a poor typo.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Przemsyl]]? 

message: Hello fellow neighbours. :) Would you be interested in supporting/participating in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Czech Republic? I think it is much needed as there is no platform on EN Wiki concentrating on Czech articles. You can vote or comment here: . Have a nice day. :) - Darwinek 10:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggested the creation of Czech noticeboard some time ago. I strongly support users from that country (and possibly from Slovakia as well) working together. Unfortunatly my knowledge of that region is too limited to be able to offer any significant content help.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject 

message: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piotr Blass (third nomination). And slightly less interesting: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boguslawa Cimoszko.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting AfD 

message: See Portal_talk:Poland/New_article_announcements#User:AlexNewArtBot_-_New_Article_Bot. Rules: User:AlexNewArtBot/Poland. First run results: User:AlexNewArtBot/PolandLog. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New articles bot - help add/fix rules 

message: Hello. Can someone with better English than mine please help and translate lyrics in PÅyniesz Olzo po dolinie? It will be very much appreciated. I can buy you a Czech beer. :) - Darwinek 22:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help, please 

message: The unreferenced article Father of the Nation lists PiÅsudski for Poland.  Is this accurate? Appleseed (Talk) 17:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but for balance with regards to the length of Polish history, I have added Mieszko I who was the founder of the historical Polish state. Deuar 17:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: There was actually a dispute about this but the person adding the category to PiÅsudski article declined to take part in the discussion. I am neutral on this issue - we need references.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well mayby PiÅsudski is considered to be father of Polish nation in former KongresÃ³wka or Galicja, bu in ex-Prussian Partition he is surely not. Here he wasn't (and still isn't) popular person. Radomil talk 18:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nowadays we call it Greater Poland. :-) Why isn't he liked there? Appleseed (Talk) 19:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only in Grater Poland, also in Eastern Pommerania and Silesia. Here as fathers of independence are known persons like Dmowski (for his work during wwI, and vision of national state), Haller, Paderwski, Korfanty, Taczak, DowbÃ³r-MuÅnicki and so on. PiÅsudski is seen as person that doesn't care of Kresy Zachodnie. In our POV he was only interested in conquering "wild fields" of Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine instead fighting for Silesia or GdaÅsk. He is also disliked for his May Coup d'Etat. In Western Poland much more preferable was democracy, and apolitical army - model of state promoted by Haller and DowbÃ³r-MuÅnicki. Radomil talk 19:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. While personally I tend to have "Galician-like views" on him, I remeber some of these controversies. Generally, Endecja, one of major political forces then, didn't like him very much, so to speak. I do not think the label "Father of the nation" applies. The definition of the latter implies some kind of national consensus around the man in question (and it was not really the case, as the opposition was quite strong). Maybe Casimir the Great is a better candidate?--Beaumont (@) 21:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Other candidates could be: BolesÅaw Chrobry, Kazimierz Odnowiciel, PrzemysÅ II (I know, not well know, probably this eliminates him from list), WÅadysÅaw Åokietek and Tadeusz KoÅciuszko Radomil talk 22:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: II RP had many fathers, PiÅsudski IMHO is too controversial to be the one in this list. Beter to leave him... On the other hand KoÅciuszko could be good candidate for father of Modern Polish nation, he started, during insurection, to build nation of all citizens, not only nobles. Radomil talk 23:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not consider to this... Look at Iran, many controversial notable figures in very long hitory, like Khomeini, but only Cyrus as father of nation. Radomil talk 23:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Me too Radomil talk 00:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Me too --Beaumont (@) 10:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mieszko has a very distinct advantage â uncontroversial ;-) Deuar 12:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would vote for him too, but we need references. Appleseed (Talk) 16:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Father of the Nation]] 

message: Are there any paintings representing the Congress of Gniezno? I googled for images in English and Polish (zjazd gnieznienski) but found nothing. Appleseed (Talk) 16:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing comes to mind, nor were my search useful. A trip to Gniezno with a camera may be in order, and a local guide would be invaluable. I'd bet there are some semi-forgotten paintings, sculptures and similar objects, for example at Gniezno Cathedral.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for looking into this. I'm surprised at the dearth of artwork related to this event, especially since the article declares it "one of the more important events in Polish history". Appleseed (Talk) 23:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So... would anyone like to volunteer to take some photos in Gniezno? Appleseed (Talk) 03:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congress of Gniezno 

message: Can someone find a citation for this (mine) claim? It would be good if someone would write a short article about the Polish territorial acquisition (1938) to get rid of the misconception that the aquisition of the dispiuted teritories was done "together" with the III Reich. Mieciu K 11:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an article on Border conflicts between Poland and Czechoslovakia; unfortunatly it's unreferenced.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  14:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that article needs to be renamed.  How about Polish-Czechoslovak border conflicts? Appleseed (Talk) 15:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. And while we're on the subject of renaming, perhaps someone can think of a better title for The first game: December 18, 1921. Hungary - Poland 1-0. Appleseed (Talk) 15:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Talking to yourself, Apple? :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: qp10qp said that replying to oneself is the first sign of madness.  Should I be concerned? :-)  I only wish I could reply in the affirmative to my Congress of Gniezno question. Appleseed (Talk) 18:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to rename The first game: December 18, 1921. Hungary - Poland 1-0, you can do it, but I do not know what better title you can come up with. Tymek 20:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about Poland v Hungary (1921)? Appleseed (Talk) 20:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, then it would suggest that it was one of many friendlies. We have to emphasize this was the very first international of Poland. Otherwise there will always be someone wanting to delete it, just like Poland v Brazil (1938) Check out discussion on this page, I had a lot of problems with some users Tymek 20:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The significance of the game should be emphasized in the body of the article, not the title. Appleseed (Talk) 20:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: As a person from Zaolzie, I can say following. Argument of Polish-German cooperation in 1938 is bulshit. This argument was spread by Czech propaganda before the war and during the Communist era until 1989. Often "nicely" said as "fascist Beck's Poland" etc. Fact is that Poland didn't give a fock about Germany, they just took their chance - Munich Agreement. In Polish view Zaolzie should have been Polish already in 1920. - Darwinek 17:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think everyone who reads this board knows this.  However, it's important to be on the lookout for articles that spread such old propaganda and misinformation.  Not too long ago we saw WWII myths presented as fact (see the history of the "Tuchola Forest myth" redirect). Appleseed (Talk) 18:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Richard Watts in his book "Bitter Glory" accurately described all ins and outs of Polish-Czech conflict for Zaolzie in 1920s and 1930s. Should I put down some quotes from this book? Tymek 20:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would very much apreciate that. Mieciu K 20:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As soon as I have some time, I'll do it Tymek 20:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I checked the "Bitter Glory" book. He gives a very interesting insight about ways in which the Czechs gained control over Zaolzie and their tricks (they acted in a very dirty way). But before I add it - a question about copyrights? Anybody would answer? I do not want to waste my time, cause there's a lot of stuff on it. Tymek 22:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Copyright? The Polish Copyright Law Act of February 4, 1994 should answer some specific questions, in general if you are copying text as a means of scientific studies and as long as you reference it properly, keep the quotes at reasonable lenght nobody should complain. Mieciu K 15:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep. Quotes are always OK. Publishing long parts (~chapter+) is usually not.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Czechoslovakia 

message: See Talk:Jogaila for newest RM and User:Angusmclellan/Jogaila mediation for related mediation.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that the mediation request is now at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Jogaila. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 10:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  JagieÅÅo/Jogaila odyssey cnt.

message: We could use a naming convention to unify the articles about Polonias who currently use two naming conventions: Polish-somethings and Polish minority in...
*Polish American (note singular)
*Polish Australian (note singular)
*Polish Brazilian (note singular)
*Polish Canadians (note plural)
*Polish Germans (note plural)
vs
*Polish minority in the Czech Republic
*Polish minority in Lithuania
*Polish minority in Romania
*Polish minority in the Soviet Union
*Polish minority in United Kingdom (or should it be Polish minority in the United Kingdom?)
I'd suggest renaming all articles from the first group to 'Polish minority in...' variant, or consider renaming all of them to Polish Wikipedia style 'Polonia in...'. Also, personally I think that the term Polish-something - like Polish American - can and is also used to people of American descent living in Poland, or at least is close enough to be confusing. PS. There are some interesting articles missing about Polish minorities numbering 100 000+ (according to :pl:Polonia: Polish minority in Argentina (450 000), Polish minority in France (1 050 000), Polish minority in Italy (100 000), Polish minority in Russia (300 000), Polish minority in Ukraine (900 000), Polish minority in Belarus (900 000), Polish minority in Kazakhstan (100 000)...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, as for the RC, the name I used here is used officially by both sides. Also, if you would call the Pole from the RC "Polish-Czech" (polski Czech) you would be probably punched in the face by him :). I support the idea to rename it to "Polish minority in ...". - Darwinek 18:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polish minorities

message: Our German "friend" is back. Check out his latest wise move:  . - Darwinek 10:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deutschland 

message: There is currently a project designed to change ugly and monumental infobox for Polish cities. See talk page here. Your ideas are welcomed. - Darwinek 18:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: I would like to direct the attention of this notice board to the Hussar article. As I have mentioned several times in its talk page, the article is in a state of disarray, due to the fact that it describes two vastly different formations, with different equipment and tactics - which have the misfortune of sharing the same name in English. I propose to split the article, perhaps with cross references. However, I have both little experience in Wikipedia and little knowledge (not to mention little time) to conduct this correctly. Anybody up for this?
PS. Thanks for the notice, Appleseed :). Miki 19:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree tbat this page needs attention, and the cavalry and modern hussars should be split. Also, I believe we should work on the Polish Hussars which I believe presents a notable enough distinct formation to deserve its own article.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hussars 

message: Can you help me with this article? --Umedard Talk 21:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For starters, is :pl:Dom WÅoski w Krakowie the same as Montelupich prison?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Montelupich prison]] 

message: This article is currently a featured article candidate (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/T-26), could someone write a (sourced) paragraph evaluating the use of these tanks during the Polish defensive war (1939), the author somehow belives that soviet campaign was a failure(?) and T-26 tanks were in part somehow responsible for that. Mieciu K 17:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads up, I raised those issues in the FAC.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  02:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  T-26 FAC 

message: I've moved town KoziegÅowy to KoziegÅowy (Silesian Voivodeship). It is only town with that name, but it has only 2,493 inhabitants. Village with that name, in Greater Poland (the biggest village in Poland) has 10,755 inhabitants, so its ca. 4 times biger. Radomil talk 20:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good move, I had no idea about the relative significance of these places. Balcer 20:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: KoziegÅowy

message: This article (about a painter) is currently on VfD. Could someone take a look? TIA Pavel Vozenilek 11:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Catherine Karina Chmiel]] 

message: Could someone assist me with the name of the powiat directly East of the Warszawski Zachodni powiat? Thanks! Rarelibra 20:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like the city of Warsaw. See Masovian Voivodeship. Olessi 20:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I was looking HERE and it wasn't too helpful. Rarelibra 20:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of powiat?

message: Welcome, on Commons (here) are good location maps of cities in Poland. It will be great to change current maps in enWiki to these. Regards. Yarl.pl talk 13:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also the rather interesting :commons:Atlas of Poland. Also, it would be a good idea to move all maps from :Category:Maps of Poland to commons.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location maps 

message: If we were to believe some users, yes. Please see Talk:Ypatingasis bÅ«rys#Poles and Russians in YB?,  and if you can read Lithuanian, please help verify and translate the source used to back up this preposterous claim.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Things not always were as you would like to see them. And your tendency to use fancy words won't help here. Here is exact line, and translation . Have  good day.--Lokyz 15:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That one Lithuanian source claims that YB numbered a few Poles and Russians among their ranks might deserve a mention in YB article, but certainly gives no ground for a claim that Ponary massacre was carried by the Poles (and Russians).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ponary massacre]] carried by... Poles 

message: Anyone know who this medieval person is? I have a WP:RS I've been using from 1903 for anti-Judaism which mentions that "in Poland Pope Gregory XI stopped the crusade of Jan of Ryczywol." But I can't find a mention of this person anywhere else in English. Are there perhaps alternate spellings I'm missing? -- Kendrick7talk 23:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Jan of Ryczywol]] 

message: History of Poland (1945â1989) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 21:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Poland (1945â1989) FAR

message: A reminder that it is an interesting page to watchlist.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland]]

message: See Talk:Zebrzydowski's Rokosz - RM for movement to Zebrzydowski Rebellion.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rokosz move

message: Every town in Poland now has an article (well, almost every town, as I am guessing a few are still missing from that list for one reason or another).  
Most of these articles are still stubs.  Please help with improving them, by expanding those about towns in your area, for starters.  Balcer 21:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of cities in Poland]] 

message: ChciaÅbym zaprosiÄ wszystkich do nowootwartego: Wikipedia:WikiProject Silesia. Mam nadziejÄ Å¼e ktoÅ wpisze siÄ na listÄ uÅ¼ytkownikÃ³w i coÅ czasem poedytuje zwiÄzanego ze ÅlÄskiem :) LUCPOL 23:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Silesia]]

message: Hope you fogive me for a little OT spam, but it's quite amazing :) The Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year competition has reached the second and final round.  For the second round, which lasts through Wednesday, February 28, the 321 pictures on the shortlist have been narrowed to the top 11 (due to a tie).  Users with at least 100 edits on any local project or Commons can vote on their favorite of the 11 photos.  The finalists can be seen and voted upon here.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Commons Picture of the Year competition

message: A few days ago, the article on Roman PolaÅski was moved to Roman Polanski after a discussion in which no Polish editors took part. I wish to call your attention to this fact and to state that I strongly believe it should be moved back to PolaÅski (unless it can be shown he has legally changed his name). What say you? Biruitorul 02:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought there was a discussion on that... at least I thought I asked somewhere somebody for sources on n vs Å in this case. In either case, I suggest comparing popularity of those two variants, as well as which is preffered by the subject, and acting on the basis of hard data.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone has evidence that the subject still spells his name "Roman PolaÅski" then I'd be happy to see it kept at that location. However his personal website does not use the diacritical, nor has he used it in movie credits. This is the English-language Wikipedia, so the most common usage in this language should be used, not the usage in Polish. -Will Beback Â· â  Â· 01:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polanski?

message: I belive a better name would be Polish Legions (Napoleonic period) or just Polish Legions (Napoleon). Comments appreciated on Talk:Polish Legions in Italy.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename [[Polish Legions in Italy]]

message: Extermination camp#Post war currently this article seems to imply that the Poles/Polish goverment had something to hide. After reading this question i was so frustrated that I added some new info to the Extermination camp, educating people why nazi extermination camps were built in Poland seems to be a very difficult task. Mieciu K 18:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extermination camps in occupied Poland 

message: This one liner is currently on PROD. Could someone take a look if it is, by a chance, expandable? Pavel Vozenilek 21:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Krzysztof Klicki]] 

message: Could someone please check out this person (WÅodzimierz StoÅ¼ek) and determine whether he was Polish-Ukrainian? Looks like he was only Polish, the very fact that he lived in Lwow does not mean anything about his Ukrainian roots. Does anyone know? Or are the Ukrainians adding Poles to their list? âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by Tymek (talk â¢ contribs).
:Of course they are. Interesting examples include Stefan Banach, Hugo Steinhaus, Feliks BaraÅski, and Adam Rotfeld (the latter was particularly puzzling - his parents were executed by Ukrainians, yet  pushed him on that list...). A reason is the highly  misleading header putting essentially all kind of people just slightly related to Ukraine as Ukrainians. In particular this includes those born in LwÃ³w at the time it was called LwÃ³w... I argued for more precision (e.g. separate subsections at the very least), but it was again reverted by Mibelz and recently reedited by our favorite anon 67.180.something (still vandalizing Banach, Steinhaus etc) to be as arbitrary as possible. I've just reverted some names, but definitely this is not the end. I think interested editors could add this article to their watchlists. --Beaumont (@) 19:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's first clean up our mess, shall we?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish-Ukrainian? 

message: It's that time of the year again. Polonization is growing, painfully. More comments would be appreciated, particulary to explain to some readers that 100-year old Russian/Soviet research is less preferable to modern Western one. Sigh.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Piotrus, it saddens me that you not only resort to canvassing but blatantly misrepresent what the dispute is. Shame. --Irpen 20:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It saddens me that you result to WP:STALK. Please don't assume bad faith about others actions.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, no, no. I do not stalk. This board is on my watchlist and I occasionally post here to ask for help or provide my feedback to the ongoing discussion. Mostly amusing is that you know that very well. So, why stalk? Anyway, say what you want. --Irpen 20:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polonization dispute

message: * ChciaÅbym powiadomiÄ wszystkich, Å¼e uruchomiono WikiProject Silesia. 
* Attention everyone, WikiProject Silesia is now open. LUCPOL 23:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Silesia|WikiProject:Silesia]]

message: * ChciaÅbym powiadomiÄ wszystkich, Å¼e uruchomiono Portal:Silesia. LUCPOL 22:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Portal:Silesia]]

message: I apologize again with unrelated to Poland annoucement, but I believe this discussion (vote) is very important to Wikipedia. Shortly: DB is a notable critic of Wikipedia who requested that Wikipedia delete his article. I believe that nobody should have the right to censor any information, including among themselves (think if China requests we delete all China-related articles...). This has caused significant controversy. If you want to shape Wikipedia's future, please vote - and in this case I will take exceptional stance and strongly advice voting Overturn deletion (undelete).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Deletion review/Daniel Brandt]]

message: :commons:Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Several_images.2C_see_below. An admin from Katowice deleted my photos for 'bad quality' under speedy, violating Commons guidelines (bad quality is not a reason for speedy deletion) - but his friends support his actions :/ This is an evident case of admin abusing his powers, and a bad case of deletionist motives. Comments appreciated (unless we want to see mass deletions on Commons of any images that fails to satisfy some admin's arbitrary quality standards).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Commons turf

message: Another renaming discussed.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Talk:Historical eastern Germany]]

message: One these sections (1, 2) get translated, do we duplicate the content, or just insert it in one and link to it from the other? Kind of a silly question, but as a fan of the KaczyÅskis, I suppose I just want to see that information on en.wiki, as well as the article on their father. Biruitorul 04:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO either would do. Generally, however, I prefer self-contained articles, so I tend to duplicate info -- especially if it is not too long. As long as we are not dead-tree encyclopedia, we do not need to save the paper ;-) Let us be reader-friendly and not force him to explore a bunch of pages to find the relevant info. The only situation that justifies linking instead of giving the explicit text arises when we link to a _really_ broader separate main article (a history-of-something or alike); and even in this case a concise rÃ©sumÃ© is highly helpful. --Beaumont (@) 10:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or consider creating a subarticle like Bush family... -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

text: OK. If anyone wishes to translate, I can provide a free translation from ro.wiki in exchange. Biruitorul 01:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: KaczyÅski

message: Suggested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland/Assessment. Please comment (and also, please help with Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Assessment in general).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A-class Poland-related articles review

message: Can anybody verify this? I think a good part of that was removed from Slavic mythology for not being verifiable, and parts of it come from deleted subarticles...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Polish folk beliefs]]

message: As done once before, can any Polish editor look at the article to see if the article is NPOV? I intend to make it a featured article, but since a lot of content about Poland is included, I figured to see if yall want to look at it first. Thanks. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It will be an interesting challenge, I wish you good luck. I will try to help.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have another question, open to anyone: has there been recent border demarcation issues between Belarus and Poland (from indepdence to present)? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Recent, no. I vaguely recall something shortly after the IIWW between Poland and SU...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can cover that in the history section, if you want. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Belarus]] 

message: User:67.180.67.179 has lately been engaged in a POV-pushing vandalism spree, which began with trying to unreasonably expand the above list and add unsourced claims about people on it, but has now become wider. Examples include ,
.  Please keep an eye out for similar edits. Balcer 14:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of Ukrainians]] 

message: I realize that some wikipedians have confused the issue with their edits and unfortunate name choices and article moves, but the truth of the matter is as follows (and largely follows the situation on the Polish wikipedia, with one noted exception stated below):
*Upper Silesian Coal Basin (Polish: GÃ³rnoslÄskie ZagÅÄbie WÄglowe, GZW) is a geological designation in geography and describes a wide region saturated with coal deposits.  Google for USCB or the extended name and you will see it used in scholarly geological and coal-mining literature. Unfortunately, User:LUCPOL has portrayed it as a metropolitan area on both the Polish and English wikipedias.  This should be fixed, and is the exception I allude to above, but redirecting this article about a geological/geographic region to another article about an urban agglomeration which happens to lie within the northern portion of this region is not the way to do it.
*Upper Silesian Industry Area is the large agglomeration situated within the northern part of Upper Silesian Coal Basin.  In Polish it is GOP or GÃ³rnoslÄski OkrÄg PrzemysÅowy/aglomeracja katowicka/konurbacja gÃ³rnoslÄska among others, but certainly not "GÃ³rnoslÄskie ZagÅÄbie WÄglowe" (Upper Silesian Coal Basin). It has about 2.8 million inhabitants, and is centered around [[Katowice] and its cluster of neighboring cities such as Gliwice, Bytom, Zabrze, ChorzÃ³w, Sosnowiec.
*Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union, (Polish: GÃ³rnoslÄski ZwiÄzek Metropolitalny, GZM) is a proposed union of 14 cities which have the legal status of urban counties.  These cities happen to be a large portion of the Upper Silesian Industry Area, but this union is not the same thing as the metropolitan area/agglomeration known as Upper Silesian Industry Area (GOP).  This union has very definite goals (see the section which I added before you blanked the article into a redirect).  It is not, however, a new single municipality/super-city.  Its combined population is 2.1 million. It should not be a redirect to the article about the agglomeration of which it is part, either.
*There is another, smaller, agglomeration/metropolitan area to the southwest of the Upper Silesian Industry Area - it's the Rybnik Coal Area or the Rybnik Coal District (Polish: Rybnicki OkrÄg WÄglowy, ROW).  It has 0.7 million inhabitants. LUCPOL argues that the two metropolitan areas have coalesced into one "de facto" metropolitan area, which he calls Upper Silesian Coal Basin, but that's premature - I find no support for this in literature.
In sum, referring to the Polish acronyms which are confirmed/verifiable/acutally used by everyone, it's best to reflect in wikipedia the following reality: there are two metropolitan areas (GOP = 2.8 million, ROW = 0.7 million) within a coal basin (GZW), and that the larger agglomeration includes within its area a proposed union of 14 cities (GZM).  That's the facts, and I ask you to not be a party to further making a mess of them with harmful, confusing redirects.  Take care, --Mareklug talk 04:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Upper Silesian Coal Basin]], [[Upper Silesian Industry Area]] and [[Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union]] are three distinct entities -- please don't redirect these things to one article

message: :Powyzsze zmiany LUCPOLa troche pomagaja, niestety, w przypadku artykulu o GZW daleko mu jeszcze do prawdy.  Artykul zawiera nieodpowiednie grafiki - okolice Katowic na starej mapie z 1905, ktore nie pokazuje granic zaglebia, i nieaktualna (bledna) mapke GZM, ktory jest mniejszy od tego na mapie (nie ma w nim Bedzina, Knurowa i Czeladzi), i jest jeszcze mniejszym fragmentem opisywanego obszaru.  Potrzebna jest mapa GZW. Sama definicja jest bledna - to "de facto metropolitan area" jest moim zdaniem tworczoscia wlasna LUCPOLa - i zaglebie *nie jest* poprawnie zdefiniowane jako obszar lezacy czesciowo w Polsce i czesciowo na Czechach.  Totez tabela miast na obszarze zaglebia tez jest mylna i wylicza tylko miasta GOP i ROW, pomijajac czeskie.  No i nikt nie twierdzi ze czeskie miasta zaglebia i polskie funcjonuja jako aglomeracja/zespol miejski, wiec cale to "de facto metropolitan area" jest wysoce niestosowne chocby z tego powodu.  A artykul, zamiast powtarzac danych o transporcie z artykulu o GZM-ie czy GOP-ie powinien tyczyc sie faktow gorniczych i geologicznych o zaglebiu - co tam tkwi z ziemi, np. duze zloza metanu; ile wegla wydobyto a ile jeszcze pozostalo, itp.
:The above changes made by LUCPOL help a bit, but, unfortunately, in the case of the Upper Silesian Coal Basin the article is still far from being truthful.  The article contains inappropriate graphics - the vicinity of Katowice on an old map from 1905, which do not indicate the extent/boundaries of the coal basin, and an outdated (faulty) map of the Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union, which is smaller than the area claimed on the map (it does not include Bedzin, Knurow and Czeladz).  The definition of the subject of the article is mistaken -- the phrase "de facto metropolitan area" is in my opinion original research of LUCPOL - and the coal basin *is not* properly defined as an area straddling Poland and the Czech Republic.  And so, the table of cities found in the coal basin is wrong and lists only the constituent cities of Polish metro areas Upper Silesian Industry Area (GOP) and Rybnik Coal Area (ROW), omitting the Czech cities.  And no one makes a claim that the Polish and Czech cities of the coal basin function as one agglomeration/metropolitan area. Therefore, this "de facto metropolitan area" definition is wrong, if only for that reason.  And the article, instead of repeating the information about transport and roads included in the articles about Upper Silesian Metropolitan Union or Upper Silesian Industry Area should focus on the mining-related and geological information pertaining to the coal basin -- what's in the ground there; for example, considerable quantities of methane; how much coal has been dug up and how much more remains, and so on. --Mareklug talk 06:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kolego Mareklug. UsunÄÅem wÅaÅnie z artykuÅu mapkÄ GZM  lecz mapka zagÅÄbia z 1905 roku zostaje choÄby dlatego, Å¼e nie ma lepszej. Jak na razie nikomu ona nie przeszkadzaÅa. Jak stworzysz lub znajdziesz lepszÄ to wtedy moÅ¼emy pogadaÄ :) Co do twojego cytatu: "zaglebie *nie jest* poprawnie zdefiniowane jako obszar lezacy czesciowo w Polsce i czesciowo na Czechach" - a czy to tylko i wyÅÄcznie wina osoby ktÃ³ra pisaÅa artykuÅ? Tu jest przecieÅ¼ Wikipedia. Zamiast ciÄgle narzekaÄ to trzeba byÅo uzupeÅniÄ artykuÅ lub wpisaÄ o tym w dyskusji artykuÅu, aby wpisaÅ to kto inny. NapisaÅeÅ rÃ³wnieÅ¼ "nikt nie twierdzi ze czeskie miasta zaglebia i polskie funcjonuja jako aglomeracja/zespol miejski, wiec cale to "de facto metropolitan area"..." - a ja siÄ ciebie spytam: jakim prawem edytujesz w artykule o ktÃ³rym nie masz zielonego pojÄcia i robisz zamieszanie odnoÅnie rzeczy o ktÃ³rych nic nie wiesz? Czy ty nie rozumiesz, Å¼e aglomeracja, konurbacja, zespÃ³Å miejski i obszar metropolitalny do cztery odrÄbne rzeczy? JeÅli nie widzisz pomiÄdzy nimi rÃ³Å¼nicy do dlaczego tu trolujesz? A teraz z innej beczki - obejÅ¼yj sobie tÄ grafikÄ: . I ostatni cytat z tego twojego postu: "A artykul, zamiast powtarzac danych o transporcie z artykulu o GZM-ie czy GOP-ie powinien tyczyc sie faktow gorniczych i geologicznych o zaglebiu - co tam tkwi z ziemi, np. duze zloza metanu; ile wegla wydobyto a ile jeszcze pozostalo, itp" - dublujÄce dane o transporcie juÅ¼ usunÄÅem wczeÅniej (to tak na marginesie), co do reszty tego zdania siÄ zgadzam, ale nie oczekuj Å¼e Ja - osoba znajÄca jÄzyk angielski na poziomie en-1 zacznie tÅumaczyÄ geologiczne teksty o zagÅÄbiu. Tym to moÅ¼esz siÄ przecieÅ¼ sam zajÄÄ, poniewaÅ¼ znasz lepiej jÄzyk angielski ode mnie. I nie zrzucaj caÅej winy na mnie, bo kolejny raz piszesz w postach "LUCPOL to, LUCPOL tamto", jakbym Ja byÅ co kolwiek winny :( LUCPOL 10:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Upper Silesian Coal Basin]]

message: Part of the problem with some Silesia articles, aside from excessive sharing of content, is the choice of name for the English article about :pl:GÃ³rnoslÄski OkrÄg PrzemysÅowy/aglomeracja katowicka/konurbacja katowicka/konurbacja gÃ³rnoslÄska/etc.
Translations of Polish "GOP":
*Upper Silesian Industry Area
*Upper Silesian Industrial Area
*Upper Silesian Industrial Region
*Upper Silesian Industrial District
**Support.  To my ear, this is the natural English translation, precise and elegant.  logologist|Talk 07:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Need to settle on a name for [[:pl:GÃ³rnoslÄski OkrÄg PrzemysÅowy]]

message: Dzien dobry!! I wanted to let you guys know I have proposed a WikiProject on the Revolutions of 1848 here. Come join if you're interested! K. LÃ¡sztocska 14:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, a WikiProject just for that? Isn't it a bit excessive? I will surely help with related articles, though!-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  big 1848 project 

message: See User talk:Emax and User talk:Witkacy (and add them to your watchlist). Those now inactive users have uploaded many Poland-related pictures in the past, but didn't bother with sourcing them, and often claimed PD for non-PD images. Now their images are getting tagged and deleted after few days, since almost nobody checks their userpages. Please help find sources (Google Image search is very useful) and/or reclassify those images (fairuse, etc.) so they are kept.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Please help save pictures

message: User:Gerea-en has moved "LwÃ³w-Warsaw School of Logic" to "LvivâWarsaw Philosophical School of Logic."  Two questions:
*1.  Why "Philosophical School"?
*2.  Why "Lviv"?
 
Any thoughts?  logologist|Talk 06:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not forget that pesky en dash. It should be changed back to a hyphen. Appleseed (Talk) 15:38, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Revert as disputed controversial move with no consensus. Simple.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I had previously undone Gerea-en's move of the article.  This time, "The page could not be moved."  Is there an administrator who could facilitate a move?  I have limited experience of wiki-bureaucracy, and at the moment little desire to increase that experience.  logologist|Talk 06:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I deleted the redirect, and the School of Logic still would not repatriate.  logologist|Talk 00:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've succeeded in getting the article over to "Lwow-Warsaw School of Logic," but of course that's not fully satisfactory, without the "Ã³" in "LwÃ³w."  logologist|Talk 00:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Lviv-Warsaw Philosophical School of Logic" 

message: Is the term "Exploding Diet" used to describe the Sejm of the PLC? Google Books and Google Scholar turn up nothing (Poland-related, that is). I think the article should be deleted. It's probably bogus and doesn't contain any information worth merging into Sejm. Appleseed (Talk) 21:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even though the article does not provide a single source, thereâs something similar (if not equally puzzling) here. The document at www2.fultonschools.org is called APE REVIEW. The only reference to "exploding diet" is phrased as a question: What three states declined in Central/eastern Europe in the 17th & 18th centuries & why? Include:  Peace of Karlowitz, exploding diet, Germanic liberties & capitulations.The quiz called APE REVIEW could also be based on a hoaxed article about Poland created by User:69.212.2.169 on 19 October 2005, but I have no way of finding out what came first, the article or the quiz? My gut feeling is that it might be a hoax. The same user made some very suspicious edits to only 4 articles and than ceased to exist on that date. --Poeticbent  talk  22:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Vote move to Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. Balcer 23:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Second the motion.  logologist|Talk 00:40, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exploding Diet 

message: See Help:Sorting.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A useful tool: sortable tables

message: See Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_March_4#Image:Jozef_Pilsudski_na_Kasztance.jpg and comment on this example of meta:copyright paranoia.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: PiÅsudski na Kasztance - for deletion

message: You asked me to join the project, so I went and read something.
Look at the "discussion" of the articles Battle of Somosierra and Plan Peking and read my remarks. There are only two articles I could read today and I am scared. If other articles are in the same condition, probably we have to start whole project from the very begining. We can not place on en-Wiki wrong translations or false informations if we do not want to create for us opinion of amateurs and dilettantes.
belissarius 03:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, most of us are amateurs and dilettantes. There are precious few professionals editing Wikipedia (despite calls to arms). I am not aware of any professional historian with Polish specialization contributing to this project - we do what we can. We have done quite a few articles that I think we can be proud of (Polish-Soviet War, Katyn massacre, Jogaila) - but yes, it's a tip of the iceberg. Alas, there is only that much that a small group of volunteers can do :/ Still, every day, it gets better... Thank you for your comments - every little bit helps. And remember: Be bold in updating pages.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I understand (please, do not feel offended for "dilettantes") - correct me if I am wrong - am I able to update, improve or correct articles I found not paralelled with historical science? If so, I am starting tomorrow. Here I will just show you what I am telling about: 
our knowledge of the Battle of Somosierra have two sources -  one is the 13. Bulletin of de Grande ArmeÃ©, and the second "Memoirs of the 1. Regiment of the Polish Chevaulegers of the Imperial Guard of Napoleon I" written by Jozef B. Zaluski in the Krakow's periodical "Czas" from 1856 to 1858. There are not other evidences from eye-witnesses of the battle, and we have to back our article on that relations. Author(s) of the mentioned pl-Wiki and en-Wiki articles used instead the dubious article from the Polish newspaper "Rzeczpospolita" in which I can see many mistakes, as for number of cannons in the Spanish batteries, as well as for number of charges. I am going to improve the article in pl-Wiki as well. belissarius 05:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you can edit anything you want. If you can, please use inline citations to back up any changes. And feel free to ask us for help on any technical matters!-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Some remarks

message: Obviously, this work will never be done, but I can say that more or less it is ready.
Please check out the category
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Polish_historical_voivodeships_%281921%E2%80%931939%29
I have described the voivodeships of interbellum Poland, adding a trivia page.
Please feel free to add any information you find 
Tymek 18:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish Voivodeships 1919-1939 

message: JÃ³zef Kloze, an article about a Polish former footballer , was brought to my attention when it was nominated on AfD (it looks like a landslide keep). In searching for sources to expand it I found little in English, but it looks as though there are several promising online sources in Polish. Would any Polish-speaking Wikipedian care to expand it a little? Thanks. Oldelpaso 19:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[JÃ³zef Kloze]] 

message: List of Poles has been revamped as of March 14, 2007, with considerable team effort. I invite you all to check it out. --Poeticbent  talk  18:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very nice job. It seems to have been cleared of anyone dubiously Polish. A reminder to everyone that the list is a brief mention of famous Poles, so it would probably be wise if the most popularly known Poles were given precedence in the Literature and Painting sections etc. Just for future tweaks.
===Last Polish list needing clean up===
Anyway, I've been trying to establish this same sort of standard for Polishness on List of Polish Jews, including the addition of a header, but it was met with a ferocious edit war and at this point has just rounded down to bickering on the talk page. The opposing side is pretty much exhausted of any new arguments so now it's just dwindled into strange accusations of original research and precedence. If anyone cares to comment, it would help in whipping that list back into shape. LeszekB 14:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Poles 

message: Anyway, I've been trying to establish this same sort of standard for Polishness on List of Polish Jews, including the addition of a header, but it was met with a ferocious edit war and at this point has just rounded down to bickering on the talk page. The opposing side is pretty much exhausted of any new arguments so now it's just dwindled into strange accusations of original research and precedence. If anyone cares to comment, it would help in whipping that list back into shape. LeszekB 14:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Last Polish list needing clean up

message: There is discussion about scope and name of this article. Former name was 'Treatment of Polish citizens by occupiers '. Comments appreciated on article's talk page.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Talk:Occupation of Poland (1939-1945)]]

message: One user is disputing whether this article deserves the GA status (it was recently promoted). Comments appreciated on article's talk page.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Soviet invasion of Poland (1939)]]

message: Would anybody see a good reason why we have :Category:Polish art as a subcategory of :Category:Arts in Poland? I'd suggest merger.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the standard category structure. Appleseed (Talk) 00:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? I am sorry, but I don't see any difference between those categories based on name...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  01:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I supose that "Polish art" is for masterpieces of polish artists no matter of their current owner or place of exhibition."Arts in Poland" would be for pieces that are currently in Poland, like Leonardo's Dama z ÅasiczkÄ. Radomil talk 01:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Each one has a "by country/nationality" parent category, which means that other cultures also have both these categories. Appleseed (Talk) 02:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the arts, the term "the arts" is broader than "art", so perhaps "Arts in Poland" should be the parent of "Polish art" and not the other way around. Appleseed (Talk) 02:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Two art categories?

message: I suggest sending this forgotten artifact to WP:MFD. Any objections?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections from me, let's get rid of it. Appleseed (Talk) 01:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just  it to spare everyone's time. --Irpen 01:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:List of Poland-related topics]]

message: Heve we got any idea how to deal with this article? Many articles that lik there refers no to modern ethnic group but to tribe of ÅlÄÅ¼anie Radomil talk 23:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Split? ÅlÄÅ¼anie can certainly use the article, what's left is about modern Silesians.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Silesians]]

message: Thanks for uploading :Image:Herb K Maly.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the  tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as  or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is User:Emax artifact. Please help with fixing it.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unspecified source for Image:Herb K Maly.gif

message: One of our members, User:Darwinek, has shown some bad judgement recently (blocking opponents he was involved in a dispute). This is being discussed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Darwinek 2 and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Darwinek. I believe some friendly but stern comments about 'with great power comes great responsibility' would help Darwinek to understand the situation. I believe he has made a mistake (or several) and should be more careful in the future, although some proposed solution (including banning from the project!) seem over the top.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Piotrus, please do not use strawman arguments to canvass supporters. Obviously, the banning won't fly. Desysopping might as the user has a pattern of poor judgment and repetition of bad blocks after past apologies. Also, the user in question has repeatedly attacked his opponents with extreme offenses including in non-Enlgish, including after requests to at least use English. Some of such offenses took place in your own exchanges with Darwinek, also in Polish, were you joined him and used ethnic slurs bashing your and Darwinek's "enemies". --Irpen 18:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't suppose you have any diffs to support any of your accusations? This board is not the place for your personal grievances against various editors. Appleseed (Talk) 18:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, at least we have another evidence of Irpen accusing his opponents  of canvassing and using ethnic slurrs...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Indeed, thank you for providing diffs to the place where Darwinek explains in Zaolzie gwara this word has no negative connotations he is aware off. But of course you assume bad faith and go on to accuse him of ethnic slurrs in several places over the past few months...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Piotrus, in that particular set of diffs, an ethnic slur came from your mouth where you responded to Darwinek. Darwinek entry was simply a very disrespectful comment on directed towards his peer-editors. And I also meant to include this one, to which your gracious entry was a response. --Irpen 19:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Sigh. Why do you forget to mention that this 'ethnic slur' was discussed at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Piotrus (which ended in another editor close to getting a civility parole and certainly no consensus it was an ethnic slurr), similar no consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive145#Disruption_during_polls_and_xenophobic_remarks - and in any case since some do perceive it as offensive, I apologized for it (at User:Durova/Mediation - even through, I repeat again, many users agreed it is not offensive). You, on the other hand, have never apologized for many personal attacks you've made on my person - such as your constant accusations of canvassing/vote staking (just see this page, do I need to provide a diff?).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My "accusation" for the vote staking is not a personal attacks. If you can show any evidence of my "attacks" on you, I am ready to look at it and withdraw if there were any. It is, however, Darwinek, who is on trial here. I think the user went much further than accusing others of staking and canvassing as I have explained above. --Irpen 20:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this is neither discussion of Irpen's or Piotrus edits, it is EOT for me. However, Irpen, if you continue to accuse my every second post on this board of being 'canvassing', I will seek WP:DR steps, as I consider such behaviour offensive to me and disruptive to other editors (who have little interest in reading discussions such as above).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Piotrus, I can't prevent you from seeking any steps you want. I've seen much of your wikilawyering at different Wikipedia space boards and I expect this to continue. I pointedly do not see any diffs showing my "personal attacks" in your last entry. --Irpen 20:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Darwinek on trial

message: Poll for renaming the article. Comments appreciated.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:CANVASS again? Piotrus, did you see that one vote was closed early because of canvassing earlier today? --Irpen 19:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I've stated before, this board is intended for exactly these types of announcements. I myself have made announcements about proposed page moves in the past, without any problems. I shall say it again: this board is not the place to air your grievances against other editors. Appleseed (Talk) 19:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Appleseed, please cool down. I do not come here just to air some grievances. I comment on specific issues, be it recruiting help to save the user from well-deserved sanctions at arbcom or to affect the ongoing poll by the mass influx of votes like it has happened here. Besides we likely see only a tip of the iceberg when watching this board. Judging from this coordinated entry of three of this board's members with no visible onwiki communication, more seems to be going on behind the curtains. -Irpen 19:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that the unfortunate email campaign doomed the Internet Troll Squads article. But that has nothing to do with announcing proposed page moves on this board. As for your thinly veiled accusations regarding "three of this board's members", I suggest you take your conspiracy theories somewhere else. Appleseed (Talk) 19:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I apploud you for analyzing the wiki communication of those three members. Surely, it's would never be considered stalking, merely a proper analysis by a concerned Wikipedian to ensure there is no cabal. And indeed, your finding that they did not communicate on Wiki yet took part in the same vote is certainly proof enough of the existence of some cabal! Unfortunatly, this is nothing new, Irpen: Polish cabal is already listed at Wikipedia:List of cabals... On the other hand, may I suggest you further analyze the particulary interesting correlation between common characteristics of editors voting to delete? Who knows, maybe you will uncover something equally interesting...  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Why do I get the feeling you're not being sincere? There are many ways to find pages on WP. Relevant ones may include WP:AFD, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Europe, Special:Contributions, etc. But if you insist this board is just the "tip of the iceberg", a mere front for the various nefarious activities of the Polish Cabal, who am I stop you? Appleseed (Talk) 20:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Appleseed, all it takes here is just say that the seemingly coordinated voting was a coincidence rather than a result of the off-wiki communication. I said already that I will take a user's word for it. Can you just say that no calls to vote were passed over the email or other off-wiki means? If you say yes, I will take it. --Irpen 20:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Irpen: I am not aware of any editor asking others to vote in any specific way ('keep' or 'delete') in this case. However I personally spread information about this vote (ex. here and here). I see nothing wrong with spreading information about any vote or discussion, as long as there is no pressure on the users informed to vote in a specific way. Spreading information is the best way to ensure a fair vote/discussion.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Irpen, it is you who is playing wikilawyering (or some other strange game). I told you clearly above that yes, I did spread information about this vote to other editors that might be interested. I gave you diffs to two groups (Russian editors and military editors) which I have notified. Out of curiosity: why don't you complain about me notifying the Russian editors and military history editors - certainly two large possible cabals with much interest in that vote? Certainly there is proof enough that many Russia-interested editors took part in that vote, and so there is much room to rant about canvassing in that regard, including off-wiki one, since I am not aware of any on-wiki notification about this AfD to Russian editors before my note, yet many took part in the debate before it... That said, I have no interest in speculating about who might have contacted who and how - as I wrote before, I believe information about such events should be spread as wide as possible, and if anybody spread info about this discussion, I don't care how or to whom he did so - more power to him, as long as he didn't force others to vote in a specific way. EOT for me.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Piotrus, can you just say that you did not (or did) contact these two users off-wiki on this matter. Yes/no/"refuse to answer" are the only clear answers to the question that I can think of. You keep posting sets of off-topic opinions about what's proper and what's not. You can as well ignore the question which is the same as refuse to answer. You do not have to answer any question I am asking. But it is not constructive to respond with empty talk. If you don't feel like responding, then don't. --Irpen 23:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you first address the much more visible issue of high-number of Russia-interested editors dominating that vote? Or was it already addressed as an issue that only those editors should have the right to discuss?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: "I see no reason to answer your simple questions in more detail" when you fail to address any part of my questions. Out of curiosity, 'the loss of which invaluable editor' do you mean? Surely not User:Ghirlandajo, who is quite active both in article and various discussion namespaces...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Ah. So you accusee me of driving him away (proof?) and claim that a user with 20+ edits daily is 'not really editing'. You know, I'd very much like to drive away and thus raise the activity of editors like Halibutt () or Balcer () to that level. Alas, they seem to have been drivien away from this project by much more dedicated trolls than myself ;> Now, if you have nothing further to add to this other than bad faith speculations and attacks, I strongly suggest EOT.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...have been driven away from this project by much more dedicated trolls than myself. Hmmm? Dr. Dan 14:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

text: No, Irpen, I didn't send any emails regarding this AfD vote. Satisfied, my dear inquisitor? Now, I wonder if I should ask Balcer and Halibutt whether you were one of the reasons they limited their involvement with Wiki... PS. When Ghirla left Wikipedia for a few weeks, his note didn't mention me....-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Talk:Battle of Wilno (1939)]]

message: :::Appleseed, please cool down. I do not come here just to air some grievances. I comment on specific issues, be it recruiting help to save the user from well-deserved sanctions at arbcom or to affect the ongoing poll by the mass influx of votes like it has happened here. Besides we likely see only a tip of the iceberg when watching this board. Judging from this coordinated entry of three of this board's members with no visible onwiki communication, more seems to be going on behind the curtains. -Irpen 19:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that the unfortunate email campaign doomed the Internet Troll Squads article. But that has nothing to do with announcing proposed page moves on this board. As for your thinly veiled accusations regarding "three of this board's members", I suggest you take your conspiracy theories somewhere else. Appleseed (Talk) 19:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I apploud you for analyzing the wiki communication of those three members. Surely, it's would never be considered stalking, merely a proper analysis by a concerned Wikipedian to ensure there is no cabal. And indeed, your finding that they did not communicate on Wiki yet took part in the same vote is certainly proof enough of the existence of some cabal! Unfortunatly, this is nothing new, Irpen: Polish cabal is already listed at Wikipedia:List of cabals... On the other hand, may I suggest you further analyze the particulary interesting correlation between common characteristics of editors voting to delete? Who knows, maybe you will uncover something equally interesting...  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Why do I get the feeling you're not being sincere? There are many ways to find pages on WP. Relevant ones may include WP:AFD, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Europe, Special:Contributions, etc. But if you insist this board is just the "tip of the iceberg", a mere front for the various nefarious activities of the Polish Cabal, who am I stop you? Appleseed (Talk) 20:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Appleseed, all it takes here is just say that the seemingly coordinated voting was a coincidence rather than a result of the off-wiki communication. I said already that I will take a user's word for it. Can you just say that no calls to vote were passed over the email or other off-wiki means? If you say yes, I will take it. --Irpen 20:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Irpen: I am not aware of any editor asking others to vote in any specific way ('keep' or 'delete') in this case. However I personally spread information about this vote (ex. here and here). I see nothing wrong with spreading information about any vote or discussion, as long as there is no pressure on the users informed to vote in a specific way. Spreading information is the best way to ensure a fair vote/discussion.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Irpen, it is you who is playing wikilawyering (or some other strange game). I told you clearly above that yes, I did spread information about this vote to other editors that might be interested. I gave you diffs to two groups (Russian editors and military editors) which I have notified. Out of curiosity: why don't you complain about me notifying the Russian editors and military history editors - certainly two large possible cabals with much interest in that vote? Certainly there is proof enough that many Russia-interested editors took part in that vote, and so there is much room to rant about canvassing in that regard, including off-wiki one, since I am not aware of any on-wiki notification about this AfD to Russian editors before my note, yet many took part in the debate before it... That said, I have no interest in speculating about who might have contacted who and how - as I wrote before, I believe information about such events should be spread as wide as possible, and if anybody spread info about this discussion, I don't care how or to whom he did so - more power to him, as long as he didn't force others to vote in a specific way. EOT for me.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Piotrus, can you just say that you did not (or did) contact these two users off-wiki on this matter. Yes/no/"refuse to answer" are the only clear answers to the question that I can think of. You keep posting sets of off-topic opinions about what's proper and what's not. You can as well ignore the question which is the same as refuse to answer. You do not have to answer any question I am asking. But it is not constructive to respond with empty talk. If you don't feel like responding, then don't. --Irpen 23:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you first address the much more visible issue of high-number of Russia-interested editors dominating that vote? Or was it already addressed as an issue that only those editors should have the right to discuss?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: "I see no reason to answer your simple questions in more detail" when you fail to address any part of my questions. Out of curiosity, 'the loss of which invaluable editor' do you mean? Surely not User:Ghirlandajo, who is quite active both in article and various discussion namespaces...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Ah. So you accusee me of driving him away (proof?) and claim that a user with 20+ edits daily is 'not really editing'. You know, I'd very much like to drive away and thus raise the activity of editors like Halibutt () or Balcer () to that level. Alas, they seem to have been drivien away from this project by much more dedicated trolls than myself ;> Now, if you have nothing further to add to this other than bad faith speculations and attacks, I strongly suggest EOT.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...have been driven away from this project by much more dedicated trolls than myself. Hmmm? Dr. Dan 14:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

text: No, Irpen, I didn't send any emails regarding this AfD vote. Satisfied, my dear inquisitor? Now, I wonder if I should ask Balcer and Halibutt whether you were one of the reasons they limited their involvement with Wiki... PS. When Ghirla left Wikipedia for a few weeks, his note didn't mention me....-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internet troll squads]] OT case

message: There seem to be two versions, both supported by quite reliable sources. Please comment at Talk:Borders of Poland.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How long is Polish border?

message: Does the term "Polish clans" jar on anyone else?  The expression was never used in Poland  or in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  An individual was "of the [fill-in-the-blank] coat-of-arms," and many unrelated families might use that same coat-of-arms (Polish:  "herb").  Why introduce a term ("Polish clans") that is completely alien to Polish history?  logologist|Talk 08:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have to reserch this more, but I believe the issue is the Polish term 'rÃ³d' (plural, 'rody').-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Polish "rÃ³d" can be "family," "parentage," "descent," "kin," "stock," even (in reference to a primitive society) "tribe."  In an extended sense of "family," "rÃ³d" can refer to the "human family," or "mankind" (as in the title of StanisÅaw Staszic's 1820 book, RÃ³d ludzki).  But "rÃ³d" is not "clan," and "clan" is an anatopism in relation to Polish history.  logologist|Talk 00:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So... should we move this to Polish noble family? Incidentaly this would fit our categories :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this supposed to be a list or an article? If it's the latter, then we already have szlachta. If it's the former, then we should name it List of Polish noble families and make it the main article of :Category:Polish noble families. Appleseed (Talk) 02:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While we're at it, something should be done about the article The Princely Houses of Poland. It looks like Gustavo has put a lot of work into it, but I'm not sure he's going about it the right way. Perhaps it should be "listified" into List of Polish aristocracy or something similar. Appleseed (Talk) 02:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These are all excellent points.  logologist|Talk 02:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

text: There is always my list of szlachta... :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  02:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I've seen this word be used synonymously with Polish tribes moreso than anything else, as in the tribes pre-900. LeszekB 14:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We're talking about a later period.  logologist|Talk 14:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Although feel free to expand Polish tribes, a stub I recently added, and which needs all the help it can get :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Polish clans"

message: A newly created account user  besides a name that does not contributes to the healthy climate here has all the features of the same good old Ksenon/Reichenbach/Truthseeker. The passion to Radio Maryja, habitual stalking and other whatnots. The newborn started the activity from the stalking spree on the heels of . May I ask that this community deals with the problematic user to save us all the effort of having to deal with it at different pages designed for such matters. Also, someone here not only has a button to block the stalker but can also nicely rollback these edits by a click of the button... --Irpen 06:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll give Litwa a warning, for now, about tag trolling. I see nothing meriting a rollback other than the Radio Maryja incident?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New reincarnation

message: I wonder if we shouldn't reorganize the modern chronological part, that is sections after Young Poland which ends in 1918. Polish culture in the Interbellum is still a red link (anybody could write a few words? It is the last red link in that template...). I just created stub on Polish culture during World War II, which is probably OK, but then we have Socialist realism in Poland (which was meant to describe Polish culture during communist times, but I think socrealism was not the only trend during that era, particulary after 1950s) and Culture in modern Poland which actually describes communist times, too... Help? :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Template:Culture of Poland sidebar]]

message: Please comment at Talk:Occupation_of_Poland_%281939-1945%29#Fork_name.3F on whether Occupation of Poland (1939-1945) article (former Treatment of Polish citizens by the occupants) should be renamed back, split, merged, etc.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Occupation of Poland (1939-1945) and History of Poland (1939-1945) 

message: Is Polander a valid redirect to Poland? I checked the interwikis, and I don't think it's the name of Poland in another language (like some of the other redirects to that article). Appleseed (Talk) 17:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm. n. 1. A native or inhabitant of Poland; a Pole. Webster's 1913 Dictionary (also , wiktionary) and genrally, if it is a hoax, it has spread pretty widely. All things considered, I'd redirect it to Poles. If you want to consider deletion, WP:RFD.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:50, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch, I thought it might be something like that. I've changed the redirect so it points to Poles. Appleseed (Talk) 23:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polander 

message: There has been an extensive effort to combine Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research (together with much of Wikipedia:Reliable sources) into a new policy called Wikipedia:Attribution, and its FAQ, WP:ATTFAQ. 
Recently,  on Wikipedia talk:Attribution and on the Wiki-EN-l mailing list, Jimbo questioned whether the result had adequate consensus, and requested:
* "a broad community discussion on this issue", (now taking place at Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Community discussion), followed by
*"a poll to assess the feelings of the community as best we can, and then we can have a final certification of the results." (now being drafted at Wikipedia:Attribution/Poll)
You are invited to take part; the community discussion should be as broad as possible. If you wish to invite other experienced and intelligent editors, please use neutral language. This message, for example, is . -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Attribution]] 

message: I think it's a joke, but some disagree: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion#Polish_roulette_.E2.86.92_Russian_roulette.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Polish roulette]]

message: Please look at this short list and consider voting/commenting (and adding that page to your watchlist). Which articles are deleted from Wikipedia is quite important, but there is almost no input from our members on that issue.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland]]

message: Powiem krÃ³tko - przeniosÅem dziÅ na en.wiki szablon mapa lokalizacyjna z polskiej wiki. Efekt do zobaczenia w infoboxie hasÅa Warsaw. Tylko, Å¼e to jedyny infobox z dotychczas uÅ¼ywanych w hasÅach zwiÄzanych z PolskÄ, gdzie byÅo to Åatwo zaimplementowaÄ. Zdecydowanie Template:Infobox City bije na gÅowÄ Template:Infobox City Poland, gdzie nawet wspÃ³ÅrzÄdne sÄ dodawane przez oddzielny szablon. SÄ plany zmasowanego dodania haseÅ polskich miejscowoÅci - gmin wiejskich, miejskich, gmin-miejsko-wiejskich i miast, ale potrzebny dobry infobox. KtoÅ jest w stanie pomÃ³c w przeniesieniu polskich infoboxÃ³w warunkowych na en.wiki ?--Hiuppo 15:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Location map Poland]] 

message: I am interested in the Lemko minority group, and in the history of sixteenth century Poland, as it applies to this group.  I also have an interest in the 20th century history of this area of southeast Poland.Pustelnik 13:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome! Don't  hesitate to ask about anything and for anything here :) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newbie 

message: I would like to invite you all to participate in a discussion at this thread regarding bilateral relations between two countries. All articles related to foreign relations between countries are now under the scope of WikiProject Foreign relations, a newly created project. We hope that the discussion will result in a more clean and organized way of explaining such relationships. Thank you. Ed Â¿CÃ³mo estÃ¡s? 18:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bilateral relations discussion

message: If anyone is interested, our German friend Matthead, who has been insisting â against a near-universal consensus of serious historians â that Nicolaus Copernicus was not Polish (what was he, then?) is now introducing conceptual and linguistic distortions into the "History of philosophy in Poland" article.  logologist|Talk 04:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to the watchlist.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S.  The other day, Matthead deleted Copernicus (and Hevelius, together with their portraits) from the "List of Poles" Astronomy section.  logologist|Talk 07:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems to be already under control. In related news, we seem to have some disruptive activity on Katyn massacre. Another good laugh: see Operation Wilno where some editors are denying that Pilsudski was Polish...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Matthead is back with the vengeance, promoting his views on the List of Poles. For your information, Matthead just reported Logologist for 3RR on Administrators' noticeboard. --Poeticbent  talk  03:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Both had been blocked for 12h. Logologist should learn there are other ways to deal with this than breaking 3RR - a lesson we all should remember. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[History of philosophy in Poland]]

message: De optimo senatore, a book by Wawrzyniec GrzymaÅa GoÅlicki. Appleseed (Talk) 00:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article request 

message: Iâd like to point your attention to the most recent edit war taking place over the Jewish-Polish-American novelist Jerzy KosiÅski. One editor, with the support of a meatpupet, has attempted to make the Poles responsible for the Holocaust by removing almost half of the article and changing its tone including the meaning and purpose of earlier citations. 207.102.64.209 16:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads up. Please consider registering on en Wikipedia so we can communicate more easily in the future.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jerzy Kosinski 

message: In having a peer review option for B- and A-classes in our assessment template, like WPMILHIST has, and would be likely to actually review articles?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dzien dobry Piotr, the answer is yes. But it requires others to commit as well. I don't have the necessary expertise by a mile and it'll be best to work as a group. In the beginning at least, best to learn from others. Britlawyer 01:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would anybody be interested... 

message: The article should be probably renamed or integrated with other articles. Ethnic data are needed.Xx236 16:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why it should be renamed? We also have Wilno Voivodeship, Kresy Wschodnie and Province of Posen Radomil talk 17:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is lack of references. I'd suggest noting the problem at Lithuanian noticeboard.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Suvalkai region]] 

message: Would you be so kind to contribute? What is your opinion about the removal of the names of the burned villages? If Lidice has almost an article, why is the list of villages wrong? Xx236 09:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What about just merging it into Treatment of Poles by the occuppants? It's an orphan anyway...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing is preventing you from writing new articles on those Polish villages pacified by the Nazis or adding relevant information to already existing articles. If I were you I would start with the most notorious mass murders like those in  ZÅoczew and JabÅoÅ-Dobki  (which seems to be the proper village name as oppose to Jablonki-Dobki mentioned in the article). Make sure to cross-reference Polish Wikipedia along the way. Good luck. --Poeticbent  talk  14:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Pacification operations in German-occupied Poland]] 

message: :Image:W samo poludnie 4 6 89-Tomasz Sarnecki.jpg has been nominated for deletion on Commons. Please comment.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright paranoia team strikes again

message: Now that Poland has been selected as one of the hosts, this article may be of interest to the participants in this project.  It certainly needs a great deal of improvement. Balcer 13:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On the bright side we have a little time before 2012 :D -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[2012 UEFA European Football Championship]] 

message: I have found a photo of the statue of BolesÅaw Prus that stands on Krakowskie PrzedmieÅcie in Warsaw.  The photo is here ("Denkmal") on the German Wikipedia.  I would like to place the photo in the English-language "BolesÅaw Prus" article, but don't know how to copy it into the Commons.  I can't make any sense of the directions at Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons.  Could someone explain in simple terms how the move is made or, better yet, move the photo into the Commons?  Nihil novi 07:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ummm... copy, upload, note original license and source... not sure which part is unclear?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  12:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually... the whole process.  For starters:  "copy" to where?  "upload" to what?  If there were an example to imitate, I imagine I could learn to do it, like any good ape; but I don't see one... or I've missed it.  Judging, too, by the "Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons" talk page, others are baffled too.  Nihil novi 14:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, let's see. Save the photo in the highest resolution possible on your computer. Go to Wikipedia Commons, register or log in, click upload, follow their instructions. I will see what can be done about making the instructions more user friendly (screenshots are probably a good idea).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  That's helpful.  For now, an anonymous editor has kindly moved the statue photo into  the Commons, and I've placed it in the "BolesÅaw Prus" article.  Nihil novi 00:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Statue of BolesÅaw Prus

message: Please help to solve sofisticated copyright problem about very important religious paintings. A.J. 20:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:   [[:commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Divine Mercy paintings|Commons:Deletion requests/Divine Mercy paintings]] 

message: Are there any Polish sources mentioning the Armenian quote, this quote is about how Hitler reportedly wanted his soldiers to treat Polish citizens. Mieciu K 20:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't find anything so far. But I will ask others.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a heated Armenian-Turkish debate about if this quote can be atribiuted to A.H. so the opinion of Polish historians would be apreciated in that article. Mieciu K 17:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenian quote 

message: M.K has submitted a request for arbitration regarding Piotrus, an editor who frequents this board. If you are an involved party, you may wish to add a statement. Appleseed (Talk) 00:17, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Piotrus]] 

message: Time of Troubles - some POVs are more equal than other ones.Xx236 14:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that's just a good example of article based on 1911 Britannica and 19th century Russian historians. I tagged it with 1911 pov; at some point it will be rewritten and updated. Quite a few Polish history articles are in similar condition, too...if you find something like this, tag it and move on.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, canvassing, how nice... <_< -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 17:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please keep your bad faith comments to yourself. Thank you, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Piotrus, people are tired of your lecturing. Honest. It does not earn you any points. Please do not respond with a new barrage. Thank you. --Irpen 19:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your incivility and attempts to censor other users are what is not welcomed here. Please take my advice to Grafikm to yourself too and keep such mean-spirited comments off wiki: discuss articles, not editors, per WP:NPA.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I As you can see from above, almost knew it. :( Too bad... --Irpen 20:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I am glad this prompted me to read the corresponding chapters of the American historian George Vernadsky. I will sure expand the article. --Irpen 19:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evil Poles 

message: If someone could perhaps translate the pl.wiki section on his current troubles, I would appreciate it. Here's an opinion piece on it. Let me also say that I commend Poland's efforts in this area. No one who had links to the communist power structure has any business participating in politics today. Would that the rest of Europe had people like the KaczyÅski brothers and Roman Giertych running it. Biruitorul 08:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ummm... yes to the first part, no to the second one :) Think in terms of 'collateral damage' :D -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[BronisÅaw Geremek]]

message: The Page Polish Cathedral style has been nominated to be deleted.  Please vote on this issue.
:Added to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland; please see other discussions there and vote on them too.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Polish Cathedral' style nominated for Deletion 

message: Warsaw Uprising has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
LuciferMorgan 15:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Warsaw Uprising FAR

message: We have  and . I believe one is enough... -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Do we need 2 Warsaw stubs?

message: Should anyone want to help me expand the article I've just started, I would be grateful
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lower_Level_Football_Leagues_in_Interwar_Poland
greets Tymek 21:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish Football 1919-1939 

message: ;Euro 2012
I propose all interested editors to join the authorities of our countries in this cooperative project. I hope there is a sufficient degree of interest and good will  about at least this (yet) non-controversial topic if we can't do it all over WP. The Euro 2012 could be made a GA or, perhaps, an FA, and maintained such with our mutual attention and effort. Please help keeping this article cleaned up, help developing it and let's make sure the nationalism of any side can be kept in check while we work on this. 
Football is one of the issues which strongly unite my country despite a host of issues that divide it. Let's hope that this topic can unite some Wikipedians divided over other articles. 
Volunteers welcome? --Irpen 22:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. This is an important article, and getting it to a GA/FA status is needed. âdima/talk/ 00:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Great idea.  Let me also suggest that we should work to improve other articles related to this one.  Just to give one example, the infrastructure now being built to support Euro 2012 should be described.  And here I have a request:  having started the Autostrada A4 (Poland) article about what must be one of the most important motorways for the event in Poland, I would like to see an article about the Ukrainian motorway it will connect to, the M10.  Would any of you have the necessary information to get that article going? We could also use articles about other roads connecting the major venues in Ukraine. Balcer 01:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or (even more related) Olimpiysky National Sports Complex I once destubbed  for DYK. That the final will be held there won't hopefully enrage my colleagues :). BTW, with some inline refs it can easily be GAed. All info is from the refs provided. Inlining them is all it would take (plus native speakers' copyediting). --Irpen 01:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Support, but as football is not one of my strong areas I am afraid I cannot help much. But I will see about the 'fringe' areas like infrastructure in Poland (particulary Silesia).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: PL-UA cooperation proposal

message: See Talk:Armia Krajowa#Armia Krajowa or Polish Home Army? for ongoing discussion.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Armia Krajowa or Polish Home Army?

message: See :Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-Polish.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polish communist PD template nomimated for deletion on Commons

message: See discussion at NCGN.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cracow or KrakÃ³w?

message: Please add this page to your watchlist or check it every few days. Poland-related deletions often need comments.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland]]

message: We could use some more source information on :Image:Stefan Czarniecki.jpg. âRemember the dot (talk) 04:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image copyright issue 

message: There has been a request to provide sources for the CiepielÃ³w article. Mieciu K 11:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Who? Anyway I suggest splitting CiepielÃ³w massacre from CiepielÃ³w, the village is non-controversial by itself, I am sure.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CiepielÃ³w - citations needed 

message: Did he use such name, eg. in Latin tetxts? Lithuanian Wikipedia claims he was lt:Jurgis Radvila. Did he ever use such name? Xx236 10:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lithuanian Wiki is feel to use whatever they think it's appoppriate on their end, per their 'Use Lithuanian' guidelines and such. I am more worried about whether we should remove cardinal 'middle name' from all cardinals (Stefan Cardinal WyszyÅski, etc.).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is the appropriate designation for a Cardinal In English. First name, "Cardinal", last name. Dr. Dan 04:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Western clergy)#Cardinals Olessi 04:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks; as far as I can tell the title should not have that 'cardinal' prefix then? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Normally I prefer to do without the cardinal title. However, including it for this article might make sense to disambiguate from Jerzy RadziwiÅÅ. Olessi 17:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer dates, but in that case it is indeed a minor issue, good point.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Jerzy Cardinal RadziwiÅÅ]]  

message: Currently there is a Polish nominee in Portal:Arts/Featured picture/Vote for the feaured image in the Arts Portal for July. Go to the Arts Portal and then to Nominations to vote--Orestek 04:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Portal:Arts/Featured picture/Vote]]

message: Please see here and comment.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polish historical pictures nominated for deletion

message: I suggest to add a few sentences to the section concerning religion: 
----
According to the most recent research conducted by CBOS, only 55% of Polish people declare to follow the rules of the Roman Catholic Church, while the 39% declare to believe "in their own way". 6% declare not to be religious at all.
----
I suppose it is quite important, because once a week I have to listen how religious we - Poles - are. 
Here is the direct link to the exemplary article on the subject: 
http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/1535731,11,item.html
: Feel free to edit Religion in Poland article... - Darwinek 16:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion - statistical data. 

message: This image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Polska_Flaga_Berlin.jpg has been given an unsourced image template and has also been removed from a number of articles. It seems strange to me that someone needs a source for this seeing as it was probably taken by a soldier in Berlin. Regardless I think it is still covered under its original license. Can someone please investigate so we don't lose this important image? Thank you. JRWalko 17:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another copyright paranoia strike team. See User_talk:Betacommand#Bot_problem.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: This particular photo bears the logo of the "Archiwum Dokumentacji Mechanicznej" which is part of the government archives. Doesn't that inherently make it a public domain? BTW, the photo was removed once again. :-) JRWalko 20:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, one would have to check the copyright status fo the "Archiwum...", even if it is governmental it doesn't necessarily make it PD, unfortunatly.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polish flag over Berlin

message: Hello, I just tagged :Image:Hussars 1604.jpg for having no source. Since it was uploaded by the inactive User:Emax, I saw the PWNB notice on the page and am notifying you guys here. Regards, howcheng  {chat} 20:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also from the Hussar article, :Image:Hussar by Alexander Orlowski.jpg and :Image:Szarza Husarii.jpg. howcheng  {chat} 20:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - finally somebody noticed the tags :) We will get right on it, hopefully we can find sources and additional info.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

text: In English, it is commonly spelled "uhlan."  Nihil novi 08:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

text: UÅan i dziewczyna (The UÅan and a Girl), by Wojciech Kossak, after 1925. Jacek Kendysz 22:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't hesistate to add info to the picture...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  07:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The title is better rendered "Uhlan and girl."  Nihil novi 08:20, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image:Hussars 1604.jpg 

message: The same as section above. I tagged this image as having no source and was adviced to come here. Garion96 (talk) 13:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Image:Witold Leon Czartoryski.jpg]] 

message: For those interested please provide your opinions in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Poles on the issue of what religious groups in Poland are notable in the article Poles. Thank you for your input. JRWalko 19:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Religions in Poland

message: I think we should change her French nationality because she only lived there for a few years but she was born and did most of her projects in Poland!!! Thank you!!âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by Illinois208 (talk â¢ contribs).
:Polish-French is fine.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Marie Curie]] 

message: I've just started the article about Maria Peszek. I was wondering if "nowa twarz fonografii" Fryderyk award can be translated simply to "best debut"? Jogers (talk) 12:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maria Peszek 

message: Could anybody find a better quality of this image? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stefan Potocki's Death Near Å»Ã³Åte Wody 

message: See Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Image:WWII_Poland_Invasion_1939-09-01.jpg. See the image. Please share your opinions.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Important image on deletion review

message: This individual might be notable, but the English-language Wikipedia page is just a stub that doesn't assert notability. The article's been nominated for deletion. Could someone who has access to information on Mr. Huber (and who reads Polish) expand this page? --Charlene 02:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tnx for the note, always glad to help - this one is notable. Expanded the article a little.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I suspected he was notable given the length of the article on Polish Wikipedia, but I don't speak Polish so I couldn't edit it myself. --Charlene 07:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Tytus Maksymilian Huber]] up for deletion

message: Comments requested here please.  A concern has been raised that the author of this article may not understand this deletion process.  It is hoped that a Polish-speaking Wikipedian can interpret by their Polish article if they are a notable band.  And if so, it is hoped the English article could be improved to reflect that notability.  Thank you.  Cricket02 17:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alastor (band)]]

message: A notability issue about Polish-related chess move. Not my area of specialization, but perhaps some of you can comment?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Talk:Polish_Defense]]

message: There is a discussion about renaming this article, as my old translation of Å¼oÅnierze wyklÄci as 'cursed soldiers' is indeed not the best. Comments as to what a new name should be would be appreciated. Also, there is a request to expand the article using other sources, so if anybody is interested...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Talk:Cursed soldiers]]

message: The article has been greatly improved in recent time. Several new sections have been added with hierarchical headings, inspired by similar articles already featured. The improvements include an extensive list of over 37 new references and footnotes, and a number of supplementary articles written and linked to it recently. Please leave your comments on the project page. --Poeticbent talk 03:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, you did a good job but I am aftaid it may still be too early for FAC. A good feeler is to go for WP:GAC first. I will comment shortly - one way or another, it's an impressive improvement indeed.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  05:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, some of the questions raised after the nomination was made could not have been foreseen without it. Please read the initial comments. Naturally thereâs always time for improvement and youâre all welcome to contribute. --Poeticbent talk 14:39, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While FACs are good for criticism, they should not be used for that before WP:PR and WP:GAC  has been tried - so editors at FAC don't have to repeat some basic issues. I used to be a FAC reviewer (I still look there occasionally), and when I see an article without PR and GAC, I am always somewhat annoyed. Those tools were introduced for a reason... sorry if its sounds a bit rantish, again, I respect your work.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  16:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/KrakÃ³w]] 

message: Hi, could you please help me in proving this article's notability - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/KONGER. --ArtInterventions 19:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: KONGER