Talk:Polish Land Forces

message: Well, it's at stub status now at least.  I rendered some of the Polish names into their more traditional Anglo-American English equivalents.  The translations and pictures on the Polish Army website were my only guide, since I know almost zero Polish! --Jpbrenna 23:59, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub 

message: the article states: 118,000+ 50,000 makes 168,000 So, which on of these three numbers is wrong in the article??? noclador 11:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Troop Strength

message: :Image:PZA Loara.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:PZA Loara.jpg

message: My take on the situation is that people are getting CARRIED AWAY with pictures, the page clearly lacks any meaningful narrative, yet it is full of pictures, many which are duplicates. I believe that we should revert back and exercise some moderation in this situation, lets not make the page sloppy and cluttered.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.149.136.97 (talk) 01:39, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive picture edits: 

message: In my opinion there are to many pics, looking at other military pages this one looks incomplete with no text, all these silly 
tables, and bad pictures which clearly belong on the "Equipment of the Polish Army" page. Last time someone tried to add army rank images even though there is a whole page devoted to "Polish Armed Forces rank insignia". Everyone should exercise common sense and not add junk on the page...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.149.136.201 (talk) 01:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many pictures... 

message: Again, someone just comes in and adds a tone of pictures and new charts without considering that the page is getting cluttered.
Please take this into consideration, Wiki is not a photo album we still need a lengthy narrative on that page not more pics...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.57.91.34 (talk) 02:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Pictures can be removed but not the CORE information of the article. Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 15:10, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Oh and another thing: Why are you removing --> SOURCED <-- information? Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 16:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures Edits... 

message: Hey SuperTank17, let me clue you in on a few things... there are people including myself who were maintaining this page for months before you came in (a couple of weeks ago)... now you think you own this page. 
1. you entered so many excessive pictures I had to edit a few, so you got mad a got rid of them all...
2. your tables created a mess and another user had to fix them...
If you don't learn to use commonsense and moderation I will take this argument to the page administrator you can't just come in and run this page like you are the only person in charge of editing, this site is used by so many people and you have to use constructive editing to make this page clear, and easy to use...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.57.91.34 (talk) 23:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all I never once said that I own that page. Second, there's a good reason for deleting these photos. The article doesn't need them. Having them only makes the article: 1. bigger and 2. more of a mess. Also here's what YOU posted a month ago: "Again, someone just comes in and adds a tone of pictures and new charts without considering that the page is getting cluttered. Please take this into consideration, Wiki is not a photo album we still need a lengthy narrative on that page not more pics...". Has the article became uncluttered in the meantime? Have I missed something? Also you still haven't told me why were you deleting sourced information (look here if you forgot: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polish_Land_Forces&diff=288795790&oldid=288794395). Also I just checked the history record of this article and I counted five contributions of yours to this article which consisted of very small edits, additions of pictures and deleting sourced information. I wouldn't exactly call it "maintaining" this article. - SuperTank17 (talk) 00:10, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note to SuperTank17... 

message: SuperTank17... please note other Polish military pages, that are maintained by myself and few others for some time now... like the "Polish Navy" or "Armed Forces"... there is a balance between the articles and pics... this makes the page simple yet informative... this is the Wiki standard... also, note other foreign military pages that follow this format... this is what we are going for... people made changes to these pages, but no one went crazy and just started adding "stuff" just because they could, you are welcome to add info, just consider the overall format...
:How about including pictures but in a gallery format. Instead of making the pictures screw up the equipment tables you could just make an expandable gallery on the bottom or the top of the table. There's also a possibility of adding a slightly smaller version of the picture into the table the same way it is done for example in the Afghan National Army article. 
:Oh and you still haven't explained that deleting of sourced information. And BTW what's with all those triple dots in your messages? Why not just make normal singular dot when you're ending a sentence? - SuperTank17 (talk) 11:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note... 

message: SuperTank17... please note other Polish military pages, that are maintained by myself and few others for some time now... like the "Polish Navy" or "Armed Forces"... there is a balance between the articles and pics... this makes the page simple yet informative... this is the Wiki standard... also, note other foreign military pages that follow this format... this is what we are going for... people made changes to these pages, but no one went crazy and just started adding "stuff" just because they could, you are welcome to add info, just consider the overall format...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.57.91.34 (talk) 00:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note... 

message: Those equipment lists should be removed to a sub page. The polish army army article should include information on deployments, history, training, oath of allegiance and things that really matter to the polish army. The polish army has a long history, from ww1 - ww2, operations in afghan, and 100s of years in the medieval age. I am going to put the equipment infmation on a sub page. Recon.Army (talk) 10:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equipment pictures 

message: Is this page a suitable place to cover the history of the Polish forces that escaped to France and then to Britain in 1939-40 and played an important role in defending Britain from 1940 until their deployment in Normandy? I'm writing a book about the defence of Scotland in 1940-41, and Poles were responsible for defending Fife and Angus. Happy to start a new page if not appropriate. If there is a more suitable page please advise. Thanks.  Gjbarclay (talk) 12:27, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The page you want is Polish Armed Forces in the West. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 20:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish Army in the West 1940-46 

message: No one is censoring your work, so please stop accusing me, or anyone else of doing that. The issue here is that you keep adding a picture that has little connection to the text (it is a static photograph that lacks a historical setting in the background). You can add hundreds of pictures of soldiers, but they are not pictures of historical events, and since images on a wiki page are to be kept to a minimum, they have to be more than a portrait photo. Yet you keep adding this file to every page you edit. --76.118.227.161 (talk) 12:59, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image edit 

message: 4th Regiment of Chemistry, Brodnica<----  4th Chemical Regiment, Brodnica ; Wojska Specjalne  Polish Special Forces are not part of Wojska Lądowe, but one jpg. from WS is on this site.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.70.126.226 (talk) 14:47, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  ERRORS 

message: This page states that Michał Jach is Polish Minister of Defence. It's clearly not true - Antoni Macierewicz is. Michał Jach is head of Sejm (Parliament's) Defence Comission (I don't know if that's correct translation). I don't have any Wikipedia editing experience, so somebody please correct it. -Mateusz Duchalski  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.25.130.28 (talk) 19:16, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  error: Michał Jach 

message: Please remove map with locations of Polish Armed Forces bases. There is a map below the article. It may be used by the potential enemy. 
That kind of information should never be in public web site like wikipedia.org Jacek Zaycev (talk) 15:37, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Wikipedia is not censored. Sir Joseph (talk) 21:12, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2017 

message: , does this page still need protection? I don't see any recent persistent incidents. Regards, LukeA1 (talk) 21:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: We cannot properly judge, because the vandals are sometimes deterred by not being able to vandalize without getting a username, but I agree, no particular recent incidents. Let me ask a third opinion of  and then if he says yes too, we could remove the protection. Buckshot06 (talk) 14:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably safe to remove the protection. Articles on the militaries of developed economies don't tend to be subject to a high risk of persistent vandalism (charmingly, the vandals tend to focus on those of developing countries). Nick-D (talk) 22:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , I'll give you a call if the situation starts to get out of hand. Regards, LukeA1 (talk) 19:52, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , I urge you to remove the protection since unregistered editors are seeking changes to this article (see the section below this one). LukeA1 (talk) 14:22, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

text: Thank you LukeA1 (talk) 10:42, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies  - busy IRL; but somebody helped you, I see. Buckshot06 (talk) 18:29, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's OK! :) LukeA1 (talk) 20:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing page protection 

message: EasonChiu610 (talk) 10:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NiciVampireHeart 15:35, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2019 

message: Hello, current strength listed is inaccurate, as of March 2020, Strength of Land Forces is 108,000. This is my first discussion, so apologies if I have messed something up here. If someone who has edit permissions could adjust this number listed in infobox, it would be appreciated.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoemelass (talk • contribs) 03:41, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strength should be edited to reflect size in 2020