User talk:Piotrus

You have the right to stay informed. Exercise it by reading the Wikipedia Signpost today.

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps (not signed with ~~~~) are archived manually when I get around to it.

"You have new messages" was designed for a purpose: letting people know you have replied to them. I do not watch your talk page and I will likely IGNORE your reply if it is not copied to my page, as I will not be aware that you replied! Oh, Template:Talkback is ok. Thank you.

Please add new comments in new sections if you are addressing a new issue. Please sign it by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Thanks in advance.

Archive

Talk archives:

Reasons for my raising wikistress: Some general observations on Wikipedia governance being broken and good editors trampled by the system Wikipedia is a kawaii mistress :) I agree to the edit counter opt-in terms. Current RfAdminship RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report Elli 175 5 2 97 16:53, 7 June 2024 2 days, 6 hours no report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report Last updated by cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online at 09:53, 5 June 2024 (UTC) RE:Assessments Hi Piotrus, I am always happy to expand on my comments or provide additional comments if you want them. Replies are at Talk:Polish-Austrian War#Assessement and Talk:Zamość Uprising#Assessment. I will get to the remaining articles on the milhist requests page soon. Any questions can be left on my talkpage, regards. Woody (talk) 15:30, 18 June 2008 (UTC) Please don´t try to help others by suggesting me to be a neo-Nazi, as you did here. Fiction was taken for fact, no need to insult anyone. Thanks --134.93.60.170 (talk) 21:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC) RE: Vilna Offensive Sure. Most of it's pretty minor stuff like tense-usage, I should be able to fix it up either today or tomorrow. Cam (Chat) 21:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC) Ok, I've got the first two sections done, I still have to do "the offensive" and "russian counterattacks", but from a quick look-over those shouldn't take me too long. Cam (Chat) 22:38, 18 June 2008 (UTC) Ping!. Cam (Chat) 18:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC) No problem! It was close enough that all it needed was the copyedit, glad I could help. Cam (Chat) 19:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC) Przemyśl Is it correct to call Przemyśl a historic Ukrainian area? Ostap 04:42, 19 June 2008 (UTC) Thank you for the response. It seems obvious but another editor apparently disputes it, I figure you know best. Ostap 04:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC) I wrote up a long-winded talk page defense, but I see you changed it. I suppose your version is better, I thought its Polish heritage was implied since it is after all in Poland. I guess its best to be clear. And no, there was no imperialist rhetoric intended :) Thanks for the help. Ostap 04:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC) Events involving the League of Nations Seems reasonable to me... I thought I would try to build up the category a little before making too many sub-categories. Feel free to make it (and a UN equivalent) though.. Events? Conflicts? Crises? I'm not sure which name is best. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 19:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC) Happy Birthday Happy Birthday from the Birthday Committee Wishing Piotrus a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!--~~~~ Idontknow610TM 13:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC) Polish-Muscovite War (1605–1618) FAR Polish-Muscovite War (1605–1618) 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.--Berkunt (talk) 04:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC) Serious concerns have been raised regarding the near complete lack of in-line citations in the article that is being reviewed, and it has been suggested that the prose of the article also needs a lot of attention. In its current state, the article will likely be downgraded from FA-class. Contributions by you regarding the review would be appreciated.EasyPeasy21 (talk) 04:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC) Image:Jakub Błaszczykowski.jpg Witaj. Na en:wiki załadowane jest zdjęcie Image:Jakub Błaszczykowski.jpg, niestety marnej jakości. Na commons mamy zdjęcie Jakuba o wiele lepszej jakości (commons:Image:Jakub Błaszczykowski.jpg). Niestety z powodu identycznej nazwy obu plików, wywołanie zdjęcia w artykule powoduje wyświetlenie wersji z en:wiki, czyli o wiele gorszej. Czy mógłbyś zmienić nazwę pliku na en:wiki tak, aby można było do artykułu wstawić fotkę z commons? Mógłbym ją przenieść, ale jest tak marnej jakości, że nie uważam tego pomysłu za najlepszy. Pozdrawiam, pjahr (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC) Masz w ogóle zamiar coś z tym zrobić, administratorze? pjahr (talk) 20:57, 21 June 2008 (UTC) Karol Adamiecki Przepraszam, I believe you are confusing priority with cause. The Michał Kalecki page is also special pleading rather than NPOV. What tends to happen is that at a certain stage in culture, different people have similar ideas because they are looking at the same problem. Do your reference books specifically state how Henry Gantt got to hear of Adamiecki's unpublished work and then stole it? If so, it is legitimate to say the Gantt chart is a modified Harmonogram. If they just assert it or note it was around earlier, then it is a slander on Gantt. I was about to write (based on the Marsh article which I have) what the harmonogram was and how it was superior, but I don't think I'll bother now. (And why does the Polish Wikipedia not have a decent article on the harmonogram?)Chemical Engineer (talk) 20:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC) Don't agree. They indicate independent invention on the pages you cite. Only the first reference (is the author by any chance of Polish origin?) in any way asserts they are the same, but does not give a reason on the page you cite. I stand by my statement that (for the purposes of an encylopedia entry) the most which can be confidently said is that the Harmonogram is similar to the Gantt chart.Chemical Engineer (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC) WP:RSUE - Non-English sources There's a bit of discussion at WT:MHCOORD#Non-English sources and a couple of drafts. Input there would be appreciated prior to taking this to WT:V. --ROGER DAVIES talk 22:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC) You may be interested in this proposal to revise the text for articles using non-English sources. --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Battle of Murowana Oszmianka Hi, you may have missed this but I provided a GA Review for the article some days ago and placed the article on hold. The seven day period for improvements will run from today.--Jackyd101 (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Lithuanian-Soviet War Not following what you are trying to say. See Lithuanian Wars of Independence#War against the Bolsheviks. Renata (talk) 17:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC) The wars and maps are on my (humongously long) to-do list. Lithuanians were part of the Daugpils battle, just don't know to what extent. It's obscure topic and needs some digging. Renata (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC) The lines & states are there because the source map had them. I do not have enough data to move the frontline to where it was in February (in any case, January is supposed to show greatest extent). Some goes for Belarus SSR borders. If you have any maps that can be used for that purpose, let me know. Renata (talk) 17:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Ouch. From User:Piotrus/RfA review: Unless you are a nobody, you will face objects due to not being perfect. ouch. Horologium (talk) 01:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC) Administrative divisions overview From what I see, the administrative division of Polish territories after partitions article is supposed to serve as an overview of administrative division of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, administrative division of Duchy of Warsaw, and administrative division of Congress Poland, correct? I can't say I like the existing implementation all that much (there is too much overlapping and intertwining between the articles on administrative divisions and the general history articles), but the idea itself seems to have merit. The name of the article definitely needs changing, though; to what exactly, I have no opinion, but you'll have to agree on the new title based on the existing academic studies of the subject (only if it is impossible would the article fall under WP:SYN). I'd have to agree with the removal of Polish names here, primarily on the grounds of this being the English Wikipedia, in which English names matter the most. Polish names can be added to the articles on the actual governorates in cases where doing so is warranted. In this edit, I understand Irpen's intent, but it doesn't seem to agree with what the paragraph intends to convey: it does not claim that all of the territories in the list were Polish or Lithuanian, but rather lists the governorates into which the territories that were Polish or Lithuanian had been incorporated. I can see how the list can be misintepreted if one takes the current title of the article into consideration. All this is strictly my personal opinion, of course, but I hope it helps.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:27, 24 June 2008 (UTC) Vin americanii! Hi, Piotrus. Do you know of a similar phenomenon to the one in this new article of mine having taken place in Poland? (Apparently there were similar hopes in other Eastern Bloc countries, but my sources deal mostly with Romania.) If so, and if you have material, it could be an interesting subject to explore. Biruitorul Talk 22:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC) Polish articles I think I have retired from Polish articles. You know I can't just copyedit but need first to read sources to find the right wording and so it would be a massive undertaking, after which one is criticised for bias by the usual crowd. You seem to have the leather skin required for this arena, but I have found quieter waters. I'm sorry to chicken out. qp10qp (talk) 02:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC) move by mistake please correct your move by mistake, see Talk:Lębork-Bytów Land. thank you Skäpperöd (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC) WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves By the order of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of your outstanding contributions to Polish military history, including the creation of numerous Featured Articles, A-Class articles, and Good Articles on the subject. For the coordinators, Kirill (prof) 01:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)