Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:20, 3 March 2006

Si Deus Nobiscum quis contra nos ?

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Misplaced Pages:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

• Archive 1 ( July 12, 2005 to 21 November 2005 ):
• Archive 2 (next to start)

No insults, neonazis, devoted nationalists please.

Edit summaries; correct translation of quotes

Please provide more accurate edit summaries. In this edit, you indeed removed a POVish unsourced sentence, but you also added a lot of quotes which were discussed on Talk:Georg Forster at great length, but refused to comment, despite being asked to do so. By the way, the translation "cattle" is improper, as I showed on the talk page. If you want more sources about why Forster's view is not as important for the rise of anti-Polish sentiment as you make it, there is a book on "Polnische Wirtschaft" by Hubert Orlowski, ISBN 3-447-03877-2 (in German) and ISBN 83-900380-8-0 (in Polish) that shows the history of this national stereotype in lengthy detail. Kusma (討論) 00:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Re:Pewien

Na jego RfC nie zaszkodzi z pewnoscia. Poza tym mediation moze? Zobacz tez Misplaced Pages:Civility.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Definition of Vandalism

You seem to need a definition of vandalism, as you labelled as "vandalism" something that clearly wasn't. I refer to this edit. Here is wiki's definition of Vandalism and what it isn't: Misplaced Pages:Vandalism#What_vandalism_is_not. I'd be happy to help with any other definitions you're unclear on. Thanks. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) File:UW Logo-secondary.gif 02:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Georg Forster

It is really unfair to do like you do. Me and Kusma know that this is a delicate question and we proposed a formulation on the talk page. As no one opposed the formulation for around one month we introduced that into the article. If you want to change the formulation, please voice your objections on the talk page, propose a alternative formulation there and after the common formulation is found we will be able to introduce it to the article. Still, the aim of the work is not to cover facts, but to present them in a fair, encyclopedic manner. alx-pl D 12:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Now, it's better, we can reasonably present arguments in favour or to the contrary. :-) alx-pl D 19:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I think I hate the language that killed Gabriel Narutowicz, and please don't recall me anymore his case, the case of Stefan Żeromski, and more recent case of Czesław Miłosz. alx-pl D 21:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Learn history then. alx-pl D 21:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

"cynik, sybaryta, obżarcioch i pijak" - you really have to learn Polish history, as you seem to forget about it digging into the history of Germany. alx-pl D 22:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

That was my pointer to a particular part of the Polish history. If you insist on missing that I can't help you. alx-pl D 22:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You seem to know more about my beliefs than I do. This is a privilege of the Holy Spirit. I, a poor, error prone human being, cannot help you. alx-pl D 22:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't want your comments on my talk page anymore. You really use the language that was used in nationalist Polish newspapers right before the assasination of Gabriel Narutowicz, after the publishing of Przedwiośnie by Stefan Żeromski and between the death and the funeral of Czesław Miłosz. I'm fed up with that, at least for today. alx-pl D 22:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I did sleep bad last night. alx-pl D 23:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

3rr warning

You're skating on thin ice re WP:3RR; see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:Molobo. This is your warning. Also, labelling content disputes as vandalism is Poor Form. William M. Connolley 16:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC).

Voting

You might want to know that there was a voting started at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Geography_of_Poland#Vote. Halibutt 00:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Minor edits

Please don't mark edits such as that are part of a content dispute as minor, see Misplaced Pages:Minor edit. Thank you, Kusma (討論) 01:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Uwazaj na przypisy

Can you go back over this edit and restore the references you deleted? You need to be careful with that.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:36, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey

Molobo. Hi, I added and adapted a bit more of what I thought would be a npov wording. The wording of your revision struck me as a bit too definitive and aggressive. We cannot know Bismarck's psychology exactly and "eradication" of Polish culture is too strong in English (even though the effects were substantial). Remember that I defended you in the RfC when many of the German editors were critical about your approach on this article. I think the main points are covered, but you are right the Polish section could be expanded -- but with more specific examples and not vague condemning language. But I would certainly willing to help you phrase any other additions so we don't respark that controversy. Best, Tfine80 00:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not defending Bismarck. I simply believe that from a historian's perspective, we cannot use one comment from a different context as the definitive motivation behind the entire Kulturkampf in Poland. It has a complicated historical impetus, and Bismarck's psychology is also complicated. While not a great guy necessarily, I'm not sure he literally wanted to exterminate the Poles as Hitler seemed to with the Jews. And even if you believe this quotation is important and supports this view, it cannot be phrased as a simple fact because of Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy. However, this is more of a subject for his biography anyway. Here we need to do more to document specific incidents of anti-Polish actions that can be construed as part of the Kulturkampf. Find data on the number of churches affected, anti-Polish elements in Kulturkampf decrees, etc. Tfine80 01:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Joke translation

I added it later to the talk page. Here it is anyway:

Two bored hooligans sitting next to each other. "Hey, Ivan, there's nothing to do; I'm really bored" - " Yeah, O.K. then you see those two guys coming this way? I don't like their looks. So lets kick their asses" - "Uh, what if they'll kick our asses instead?" - "Why would they want to?"

By the way, I have already expressed the opinion against the term Russophobia, but our Russian friends seem to like it (just as you liked Polonophobia title, as I saw from the renaming discussion). My opinion is the article title should be neutral: Anti-Russian sentiment, see e.g. other titles in category:Anti-national sentiment. I think there should be a separate, neutral article, which in a balanced way describes the history of Polish-Russian relations, both negative and positive aspects, but I don't really care. (BTW, it seems that Putin likes Poland now. Is it so?) mikka (t) 20:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Molobo, please use edit summaries, use descriptive rather than emotional section titles (including at talk pages) and do not paste stuff that belong to narrow articles in broader ones. I explained at talk:History of PL why it is a bad idea and outlined the possibilities opened my such practice. I hope my suggestions will be taken into account. --Irpen 21:36, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Lodz liberation

Wiesz, ja naprawde nie widze nic zlego w tym zdjeciu z opisem I. W koncu Polacy witali Armie Czerwona jako wyzwolicieli - niewielu przypuszczalo, ze wpadli 'z deszczu pod rynne'. No i zreszta na ich miejscu pewnie tez bym sie cieszyl, nawet gdyby Nazistow wykopywaly diably z piekla rodem pewnie bym krzyczal 'Wiwat diably' :D --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Tiaa... Polecam Czerwoną zarazę Ziutka Szczepańskiego.. Halibutt 22:28, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

May I stop by to remind that English is preferable to use at en-wiki. Pls find a single time of my or your favorite editor's writing in Russian (or in Ukrainian) anywhere at wiki. I might have used Russian or Ukrainian a couple of times talking to editors with very significant handicap in English who were still interested in contributing. I'd appreciate if you, gentlemen, would be couteous to others in the future. --Irpen 23:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

History of Poland

The revert war makes me quite sad, especially that both main participants seem to have quite some knowledge on the matter, but got completely blind to what the other guy says. This has gotten out of control. Seing the revert war raging on, I proposed Irpen a way to settle the dispute in a civilized way. Here are the basic steps I propose:

1. We revert the article to some pre-revert-war version (Piotrus' version of Feb. 1 seems a fine choice)
2. Then all of the people involved refrain from editing the article on their own. We could even block the article for some time. There were enough reverts there today to ask some admin to revert at random and block the article anyway, so I believe such a solution is in accordance with the rules.
3. We add the {{maintained| {{user4|Irpen}}<br>{{user4|Halibutt}}<br>{{user4|Piotrus}}<br>{{user4|Molobo}}<br>{{user4|whomever}}}} tag to the talk page, just in case anybody wondered
4. We prepare a list of issues at the talk page or some temporary sub-page of the article (I could do the basic formatting). Ideally such a list would be broken down onto separate sections: one for a mere list of issues (numbered) that all parties believe should be mentioned in the part in question; one for the various wordings during the revert war, one for discussion on various issues raised, their sources and so on; and one for the proposed compromise wording.
5. After a compromise is reached on each of the sections, we apply the changes to the main article on a case by case basis.
6. Then we ask for peer review of the article and move along to other issues.

What do you say? Halibutt 22:28, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Fine, since we (me, Irpen, Molobo and Piotrus) agreed for my solution, I'm starting the formatting of the talk page right away. Please refrain from editing the article at the moment, ok? Halibutt 22:40, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

History

Daj mi trochę czasu zanim wypisze cały protokół rozbieżności, ok? Trochę mi przeszkadza że wstawiasz komentarze gdzie bądź. Poczekasz chwilę? Halibutt 23:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Kopernik

Thanks for the informative text. I am trying to use exactly that line of argument: that Kopernik was Polish by citizenship (and his ethnicity is irrelevant). As to the people who try to call him a European, I wonder, is that going to make him the first European on Misplaced Pages? I have never seen anyone described as a European in a Misplaced Pages biography article. Balcer 00:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Kepler

Hi,

I'm replying to your asking about the Kepler mission. (Yes, I have an account but am usually too lazy or something to actually log in, so you see just my IP most of the time.) Anyway, I saw the report from this news article here: http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0602/06nasabudget/

Hope that clears things up! --BGManofID

Well I checked NASA's budget proposal for 2007 and it listed Kepler as being launched in June 2008. --Molobo 13:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... if that's true, I'd certainly welcome the news, although I did see this:

To help make up a projected $3 billion to $5 billion shortfall in the shuttle budget between now and 2010, NASA plans to limit the growth of the space science budget to just 1.8 percent in 2007 and 1 percent per year thereafter. Doing so will defer the development of several major unmanned projects, including one to search for planets around other stars and another to detect Earth-like extra-solar worlds.

Perhaps they just chopped the Extrasolar Planet Finder? --BGManofID

The cancelled or delayed de facto anything of value sadly TPF,SOFIA,SIM,Keck , but Kepler was in its deployment stage so it got the funding needed to launch. --Molobo 13:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

the last remaining part of independent part of Poland

<<Mobolo your mom's "the last remaining part of independent part of Poland">> was a joke. To add "the last remaining part of independent part of Poland" is first and foremost nonsense. I haven't insulted you. You just can not call me a "vandal" for that. <<rv vandal that uses insults>> is what you said adding the nonsense back in.] The Free City of Kraków was controlled by its three neighbors, Russia, Prussia and Austria until 1846. Your summary of the city is not NPOV.--Showcase 22:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Showcase, you use "yo' mama" comments like some stupid hood and you're surprised when people get insulted. Grow up and try to be more like Joe. Space Cadet 22:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

What can I say... thanks :) I hope I was of some help. Halibutt 00:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: I would be interested

I do remember that quite a few of your edits were on topic and valid. But you do so much of warring that I stopped, long ago, to ignore pages where you "work". All is fine except that the wars are pretty annoying for anyone on RC patrol and the articles look like they look.

I dare to guess that with tact and diplomacy you would be more sucessful in edits and the articles would get better too. But that's everyone choice. Pavel Vozenilek 01:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Slavic Europe

I absolutely agree with you (although you forgot to add Yogoslavs and Bulgarians into this curious mixture). The point is no one really cares; and in the Western world all slavs are dzikusy. No one thinks here about "same isentity" or "shared entity". People think in terms of stereotypes. Just the same, one may say that Latin Europe is nonsense: eg. Spain and Portugal in the past were ready to cut throat each other. And of course the listed Hellenic Europe that consists of the single Greece is nonsense.

There is a word "Slav", and to all Americans there is Slavic Europe. Russians, Poles, Yugoslavs are equally disrespected. You cannot change this. There is "Slavic Europe" in Western brain. All you can do is to edit the article Slavic Europe (I see you already started) and explain all this bullshit, and I will help you. mikka (t) 08:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

"Slavic Europe" Revisited

"...'Slav', and to all Americans there is Slavic Europe. Russians, Poles, Yugoslavs, are equally disrespected".

"There is 'Slavic Europe' in Western brain (sic)".

There is another name for these opinions in psychiatry, it's called, Paranoia. In layman's terms, it's called absurdity. Now this nonsense takes on an "anti -American" character, as well. Reminds me of one of my visits to the former Soviet Union, when I was introduced to a simple Russian family as our "American" guest. A little boy ran in "horror" behind his grandmother's skirt. We all laughed, but we were all embarrassed by this faux pas fomented by the political climate of the cold war. Maybe that's the time frame that Mikka learned we were all boogey-men, too. Dr. Dan 20:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Stalking

Molobo, if you don't stop stalking me on every second article I edit, you will incur my severest displeasure. You should remember that stalking may lead to block action. --Ghirla | talk 12:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Polonophobia

I'm not sure whether you've forgotten this but there are some statements obviously incapable of proof left in the "article". Remember? It was several weeks ago. Every time I deleted them, either you or Space Cadet would revert me without explanation. The statements are still contested and unproven. As you claimed historical facts would always be on your side, could you perhaps come to the point there? Sciurinæ 13:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Personal remarks in edit summaries

"rv German nationalist vandal-deletation of proper links and established terminology.If you have problems talk on the discussion page"--Molobo 19:06, 20. Feb 2006

"As usuall I recomend you to avoid personal remarks. --Molobo 14:47, 20 February 2006" Pretty much self-explanatory. Sciurinæ 19:19, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Your edits are self explanatory. Deletion of sourced information without any explanation and after it has been solved on talk is pure vandalism. Yes I repeat-Sciurinæ you are beheaving like a vandal I stick to that statement. --Molobo 19:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

And I'll quote you on that. Anyway, I'd never thought you'd even launch a revert war on my own talk page. Sciurinæ 20:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

blocked for 3rr on German Eastern Marches Society

I've blocked you for WP:3RR on German Eastern Marches Society. Don't label your reverts as anti-vandalism; it only makes things worse. William M. Connolley 12:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh ok, I will return in 24 hours, in the meantime I shall write some articles about German atrocites in Gdynia, Warmia and Mazury. --Molobo 13:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Re vandalism: having your own personal definition is fine for your own use. But for wiki purposes, you are obliged to use the official defn: WP:VAND. William M. Connolley 14:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC).

And it fits Sciurinæ edits perfectly: Blanking

  Removing all or significant parts of articles (sometimes replacing the removed content with profanities) is a common vandal edit.

--Molobo 16:16, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Err, yes, if expressing disapproval of the article's subject was the most significant part of the article. Maybe it is, to you, then you should look up Misplaced Pages:Attack page. Sciurinæ 16:55, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Expressing disapproval ? Hardly-you simply deleted all links and sentences that conflict with your POV. I have yet to see you present any sources contradicting scholary work citing the organisation as nationalistic.--Molobo 16:58, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Hardly-you simply deleted all links and sentences that conflict with your POV. My opinion?! I didn't even state my opinion, so don't pretend you had gained any access to my mind beyond generalising from your own one. If you had read the discussion, you would know that I believe 'nationalistic' carries negative connotations which you are aware of, dear student of journalism. You talked around that concern, neither confirming nor denying that the word 'nationalistic' is disapproving. You would only repeat over and over and over again that two sources on the internet included it when talking about the German eastern whatever company. Great, if you had read WP:NPOV, you would know that a staetment does not only need to be verifiable. I've told you so many times before that there are three key rules: no original research, verifiability and NPOV, all the trhee of them must be applicable. You started by only adding material denouncing the subject of the article, then tried to find sources sharing that view. You even added a link to Genocide so don't even start accusing others of POV pushing because one can jump to certain negative conclusions about you yourself in the same way. Am I the third or fourth user you defamed as vandal in the last five days. It's a record I guess. The same goes for you being asked to read the definition of vandalism, starting with User_talk:Molobo#Definition_of_Vandalism. Let me finish this with a recent quote (by you on me) "Your recent activity has led me to doubt if engaging in debate with you is sensible as you have proven to ignore debate and sources"--Molobo. Sciurinæ 21:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

As usual Sciurinæ presents no sources, ignores all scholary work, and makes personal attacks. Add to that false claims. As I said-as usuall. --Molobo 22:43, 21 February 2006 (UTC) If you had read the discussion, you would know that I believe 'nationalistic' carries negative connotations which you are aware of, dear student of journalism. I can assure you that the organisation well deserves the description and it is widely described as such by historians. The fact that you believe that banning Polish language, and expelling Poles is quite neutral belongs rather to a minority view. I rather believe that German organisations sharing that belief aren't remembered well in history of XX century. Anyway the organisation is described as nationalistic on German[REDACTED] as also.(you can of course change it to "preserving the unity of German nation against Polish extremists(that being Poles not wishing to abandond their identity)) --Molobo 22:43, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

You started by only adding material denouncing the subject of the article, then tried to find sources sharing that view. The organisation's nationalistic and discriminatory nature is common knowledge in Polish history classes.Appereantly it seems it wasn't in yours so I added sources confirming this. But I understand you will ignore them, as you ignored facts about German war crimes, insisting on claiming them POV, which was based solely...on your private views. --Molobo 22:43, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

To remember

Write article about treatment of Poles in Germany and German slogan demonstrating that attitude towards Poles: 'Wenn das Polenblut vom Messer spritzt, dann geht’s noch mal so gut. --Molobo 13:35, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

To remember

Create article about German concentration camp for Polish children in Potulice. --Molobo 13:58, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

To remember

Translate article "German atrocities against Silesian resistance" to the article of the same name. --Molobo 13:58, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

To remember

Create article about expulsions of Poles from Gdynia by Germans --Molobo 13:58, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

To remember

Create article about "German repressions in Białystok Voivodship" --Molobo 13:58, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Done ! :) --Molobo 14:26, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Need your help with Polish links

Hi. Since you're Pole (the first I "know" here), asking your help with this link added by an anonym. The content of that Polish-language page is very inflammatory. So could you check the source of that publication and the entire server it is located on? I mean if this wasn't a scholar historical article (or based on such) we should delete the link as POV and trolling.

I'll ask another Polish editors to check it too. Thanks, Ukrained 18:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Steinbach

Molobo, nie obraź się, ale co ma piernik do wiatraka? Tak samo denerwują mnie Ruscy nacjonaliści próbujący roztrząsać sprawy stosunku Polski do prawosławnych w XVI wieku w artykule o Piłsudskim, jak i Twój pomysł na pisanie historii Rumi w artykule o Steinbach.

1. Oczywiście że niemiecka nazwa jest neologizmem i zgermanizowaniem nazwy oryginalnej, wymyślonym po zaborach. Tylko po jaki grzyb pisać o tym w artykule o Steinbach zamiast w artykule o Rumi? Chyba wyłącznie po to, by zaognić sytuację, bo innego wyjścia nie widzę
2. Jasne że uznają, choć nie tylko ich. A co jest złego w wyjaśnieniu tego w sposób neutralny zamiast angażowania uczuć?
3. Ale to nie ma nic do rzeczy. Ktokolwiek był wysiedlony, był ofiarą wysiedleń. To wynika ze słownikowej definicji słowa victim. A to że ja mam inną definicję wysiedlonego of p. Steinbach to już insza inszość. Ale nie zmienia to faktu, że to jej ZgV ma być z założenia poświęcone niemieckim ofiarom wysiedleń. A że dla niej ucieczka na zachód z koszar koło Auschwitz też była wypędzeniem to inna rzecz. O tym też można napisać, ale na miły bóg, w jakiś rozsądny sposób, do zaakceptowania przez wszystkich.
4. I tu się z tobą zgadzam że zgodnie z prawem międzynarodowym nie było wypędzeń. Ani Niemców po 1945, ani Polaków po 1939. To były jedynie przesiedlenia, ale nie wypędzenia. Co nie zmienia faktu że to też nie należy do artykułu o Steinbach tylko do ethnic cleansing, Expulsion of Germans after World War II i innych tym podobnych. Ale po jaką cholerę pchać się z tym do notki biograficznej - i robić wokół tego wielkie halo? Halibutt 20:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Halibutt, I second your statement and am delighted to see that you are apparently beginning to reconsider your strangely cordial relationship with an editor like Molobo. I just wished you'd have the guts to make these points where Molobo made his and in English, rather than here and in Polish. This would help to overcome the impression that this is a kind of trench warfare between German and Polish editors. It would also help to dissipate the suspicion that your loyalty is to fellow Polish editors first, and to Misplaced Pages's overall objectivity second. --Thorsten1 21:05, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

and am delighted to see that you are apparently beginning to reconsider your strangely cordial relationship with an editor like Molobo.

Well I will be surprised when Halibutt starts to erase information about German persecution of Poles Thorsten.

--Molobo 21:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Blind fury

It his blind reverts of users he does not like, Molobo has also deleted an interwiki link (de:, coincidentally) , either intentionally or as collateral damage of his Polish POV. --Matthead 20:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

UPA

panie Malobo, prosze mi powiedzić czy pan jesteś rzecznikim kombatantów AK ?, czy tez kpiarzem z polskiej historii, dlaczego wypisejesz bzdury o jakimś pojednaniu miedzy AK a bandytami z UPA, prosze nie robic sobie nie robić kpin,

20:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Nic strasznego przeciw UPA nie mam, to fakt że popełnili wiele zbrodni, ale taka była sytuacja w tej części Europy, to wiele bardziej wielowymiarowa sytuacja niż na przykład stosunek Niemcy-Polska gdzie mamy wyrażny podział na kata i ofiarę, Ukraińcy byli prześladowani i po części można zrozumieć ich motywacje. To że są próby pojednania mnie nie dziwi, bo nawet podczas wojny organizacje Ukraińskie miały też stronnictwa próbujące porozumieć się z Polakami lub uważające masakry ludności cywilnej pochodzenia Polskiego za niepotrzebne, a nawet proponujące sojusz. --Molobo 09:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

To POV or not to POV

That is the question. My recent edits to the History of Poland, were to improve the article grammatically with a small tweak of historical fact. Nothing to do with POV, except by someones wild imagination. The Union of Krewo, set the stage for several things to happen. Amongst others was for Jogaila to marry Jadwiga, and become King of Poland, and change his name to Wladyslaw Jagiello. If that's POV, move to biology or botany. May I ask you, as the very patriotic Pole you make yourself out to be, if it bothers you, that two of Poland's greatest and successful leaders, Wladyslaw Jagiello and Jozef Pilsudski were Lithuanian? Dr. Dan 21:06, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Wait with your changes till the discusion is over before spreading your POV.

--Molobo 22:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Where do you think the name Jagiello came from? Can you distinguish facts from POV? Any answer to my question about Jagiello and Pilsudski? P.S. the "dicussion" is not about Jogaila's original name, but what he should be called now. My edit in an entirely different article, made reference to what his name was, before the Union of Krewo, and I stated that in my edit summary. Did you pick up on that?

pasting

Molobo, I deleted your response by mistake and restored it before you even noticed. Now, would you please stop pasting huge chunks into articles and talk pages. Talk pages getting too long are impossible to follow and you render them useless. A link to the info that you want to use is enough. Everyone knows how to click. As for pasting into article, you won't like if I paste Wisla Action into hsitory of Poland, would you? Please reconsider. --Irpen 23:01, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

s for pasting into article, you won't like if I paste Wisla Action into hsitory of Poland, would you? Please reconsider. Huh ? I have nothing about mentiong the event in History of Poland. Again, you are the third editor today from Russia that makes some bizarre comments. This is somewhat strange. --Molobo 23:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Molobo, attributing the editors to the nationalities is offensive. Besides, I am not from Russia. I am from Ukraine and I am a Ukrainian. In any case this is beside the point.

1. I am not talking about mentioning. I am talking about pasting chunks like you did. No one would have objected to the mentioning of MR pact in the history of Poland. You, OTOH, just pasted stuff from the Red Army. This was aggravating not because I didn't like the info but because the article is too broad to go into the details. A mention would have been a different story.
2. As for your pasting chunks to talk pages, this just renders the talk pages unreadably long and useless. I don't want to censor your info. I want talk pages to be readable to users who come by and want to join the article. If half the talk pages consists of the stuff you pasted from elesewhere, this makes following them by outsiders merely impossible. Therefore, I request that once you provide the link, you don't duplicate it with pasting the text from it. We all here know how to click. --Irpen 23:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I am not from Russia. I am from Ukraine and I am a Ukrainian Out of curiosity are you ethnic Ukrainian or Russian living in Ukraine ? Anyway I guessed that you were Russian do to your pro-Russian views and the fact that you have Russian as mother language on your talk page. Molobo, attributing the editors to the nationalities is offensive Actually today Mikka talked about dog's blood of Belarussia(?), Ghirla about some mythical Slavs that are supposed to exist even today, and my crusade against them, and then it was you. So I just remarked that Russian users have sometimes strange comments, but I guess its do to different cultures that I don't understand their comments. --Molobo 23:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Molobo, first of all you "guessed" wrong. Second, my ethnicity is none of your business. My views are not pro-Russian. I simply take a firm stand against the Russophobia every time I see it (similarly to any phobia). That in my home country Russophobia is on the fringe makes me very happy but occasionally we may get some nutcases in Ukraine as well. As all fanatics, they tend to be very active and they may make others perceive that Ukrainian nationalism and Russophobia is indeed a potent force in Ukraine, while in reality, the Ukrainian nationalism in modern Ukraine is restricted to a small minority . I am saddened to see such a Russophobia among the Polish editors, however.

Second, my ethnicity is none of your business. Hm Irpen, It is you who stated first that you are Ukrainian, I simply asked if it means that you are an Russian from Ukraine, or ethnic Ukrainian(in view that you give Russian as your first language). Anyway we all know that Russophobia is used at everything that opposes Russian imperialism or nationalism-heck somebody wanted to claim Polish uprisings against Russian occupation were Russophobic. Which just shows how POVish the term is. --Molobo 09:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

You, OTOH, just pasted stuff from the Red Army. Oh, it's no longer pasted. As to your request-no, I stand by my decision to present fully quotes I view important. It's easier to see and copy them for other users. --Molobo 23:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I would like people to be able to read the discussion. The link is enough for anyone interetsed to read your extended quotes. WHat you do is you make other editor's inputs obscure in the pages of the text you paste. I will clean it up again, but I will sure preserve your links. --Irpen 00:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Stop deleting my posts Irpen, you are acting like a vandal. --Molobo 09:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

blocked for 3rr on Września

I've blocked you for WP:3RR on Września. Yes I read your comments on WP:AN3. You're wrong. William M. Connolley 13:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Erasing whole parts of article isn't vandalism ? Anyway good then and I respect the decision. I shall return in 24 hours. Now that I have finished writing about German genocide in Białystok I shall take time to write article about German concentration camp for Polish children in that spare time.

--Molobo 13:28, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I've reset and extended the block for evasion. Don't do it. William M. Connolley 16:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about ? Please explain ? I didn't evade the bloc. Why are you doing this ? Please point me to where I did evade the bloc. --Molobo 17:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Geez you are some objective moderator -I see now what happened-you blocked some innocent person as me, and me as well, without even looking at IPs. If you did you would discover that by miracle or teleportation device I managed to move from Silesia to Pomorze (a couple of hundred of kilometers) in half an hour. I shall ask for advice where to report your careless behaviour. --Molobo 17:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I will inquire; see Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_CheckUser#User:153.19.48.103_and_User:Molobo for the moment William M. Connolley 19:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Good-I have nothing to hide, and check will only confirm my innocence. Please don't beheave so recklessly in the future and stick to fitting procedures. --Molobo 19:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Molobo, I've just read the nice things you say to me. When at any point contributors opposing your behaviour will go further than just an RfC, believe me, - and I say 'when' not 'if' because I'm gradually getting better at anticipating your case properly - foul language will account for one point. It doesn't matter whether you put an "act like" before it, really, it doesn't. If I were you, I wouldn't start to trouble administrators, who are supposed to do a pretty mechanic job when it comes to 3RR-violations, either. And as for your alleged knowldege concerning the location of IPs, it could be come back to haunt you on the subject of sock puppeting. That's it, now feel free to demonise me as a person, and rip me apart, in another speech. If you should like to discuss on the article's talk page, just go ahead - I'll try to reserve some time for that. Sciurinæ 18:29, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

If I were you, I wouldn't start to trouble administrators, who are supposed to do a pretty mechanic job when it comes to 3RR-violations, either. And as for your alleged knowldege concerning the location of IPs, it could be come back to haunt you on the subject of sock puppeting. If you have any allegations present them rather then make allusions-right now an innocent person is blocked as a result of careless admin, who didn't even checked if he is me. As to possesing knowledge-its quite easy as IP addresses are provided with link to page determing their origins on Wiki. As for :

That's it, now feel free to demonise me as a person,

Ask yourself what image you present yourself by constantly deleting information about Nazi warcrimes, genocide made by Germany or discrimination of Poles by German state. --Molobo 18:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

foul language will account for one point Feel free to present any example.I will gladly remove it. Ironic though that when your special "friend" made several insults using vulgarism on antipolonism article you hardly cared. --Molobo 18:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Btw Sciurinæ-stalking other wiki users is considered offensive-just a friendly remainder. Btw what was the last article on Wiki you made ? --Molobo 18:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll try to reserve some time for that Thanks but right now I am writing a big informative article about German concentration camp for Polish children(it regards forced kidnapings of Polish children by German authorities during WW2, you should remember this since you deleted information on that atrocity in the past). --Molobo 18:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

To remember

Bierut decrees don't exist: http://www2.warsawvoice.pl/old/v716/News07.html

• A conference organized by the Poland in Europe Foundation was held July 4 at the Melchior Wańkowicz Academy of Journalism, with the participation of many leading politicians and intellectuals, dealing with the issue of Polish-German relations. Artur Heinicz, former director of the International Studies Center at the Polish Senate, stressed that "in fact, there were no Bierut decrees." Bolesław Bierut was the first postwar president of Poland from the communist party. According to Heinicz, an expert on Polish/German issues, the idea of the "Bierut decrees" was to enable a comparison of the situation of Germans in Poland with the situation of the Sudeten Germans in Czechoslovakia. But Benes's decrees are a historical fact, while their Polish equivalents were not even issued by Bierut. In reality, they were merely part of Art. 13 of the Potsdam conference agreement.

--Molobo 13:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

To remember

That is not to say that the Russian thinkers of the 19th and 20th centuries did not display a real interest in the Slavic question. On the contrary, the question always occupied an important position because Russian thinkers and statesmen felt that Russia could exploit the Slavs for the greater glory of Russia. Thus, for example, the 19th century pro-Slav movement was a self-serving attempt to expand the interests of the Russian Empire with the help of the Slavs, or to use the Slavic population as a source of justification for the Russian policy of expansionism. --Molobo 14:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

To remember

--Molobo 21:29, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

To remember

Interesting: n his last work, Slovanstvo a svetbudúcnosti (Slavdom and the Future World), Štúr called for all Slavic nations to immerse themselves in a single Russian sea by accepting a common script (the azbuka), tongue (Russian), religion (Eastern Orthodoxy) and system (tsarist au- tocracy). Correctly anticipating resistance on the part of the Poles, he cursed them as Slavonic traitors. --Molobo 01:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

To remember

"Tied to Fascists corpse, he can only hate, lie and deceive." General Okulicki was described as "the murderer and traitor to the cause of his people and Slavdom ... an odious, scandalous figure, well-known in the sphere of espionage and diversion." --Molobo 01:20, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

To remember

And there is no denying that Sarmatian literature takes a view of Muscovy that the Russians would dearly love to erase. To a Sarmatian, Muscovy had little to do with European civilization. It was a "rude and barbarous kingdom" to be viewed with pity rather than awe. Sarmatian attitude contrasts sharply with the "powerful brother" image the Russians have tried to build in Slavic countries in the nineteenth century, and also in the Soviet period. --Molobo 01:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

William M. Connolley

Załatwione. Przepraszam, że z takim opóźnieniem, ale nie sprawdzałem poczty, kretyn. Space Cadet 12:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC) Translation: Taken care of. Sorry for the delay but I did not check my e-mail, what an idiot. Space Cadet 16:20, 3 March 2006 (UTC)