This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SylwiaS (talk | contribs) at 04:15, 4 February 2006 (→Powiat & Co Vote). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 04:15, 4 February 2006 by SylwiaS (talk | contribs) (→Powiat & Co Vote)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Vandalized articles or needing attention * Anti-Polonism Kulturkampf,Germanisation |
Discussions
---
Polish Wikipedians Notice Board archives
| Talk Archive 1
| Talk Archive 2
| Talk Archive 3
| Talk Archive 4
---
Homolka = Gomułka
Dear established Polish editors!
Homolka is a Polish name because it’s similar to Gomułka. It’s a well sourced self-proving fact, and even the Bohemian Homolka dynasty cannot change it. Therefore a Karla Homolka – the Canadian serial killer is a 100% ethnic Pole. Aaron Kosminski, another serial killer though from England, born a Polish Jew somewhere in half of 19th century in the Russian Pale, was actually an ethnic Pole born to Catholic parents who baptised him Aaron, because… YES! because it was trendy in their neighbourhood. No less than 53 American boxers, wrestlers and American football players are all famous Poles because they have perfectly Polish sounding surnames. Andy Warhol was a Pole like every decent Ruthenian born in Slovakia. Those hateful people who didn’t have enough courtesy to choose names with “ski” suffix are no longer on the list. So Brzechwa, Tuwim, Leśmian had to go. But don’t worry, the list of famous Poles is today longer than ever, and every day more and more new pleasant Polish surnames comes. Those and many other awesome facts you can learn from the article List of Poles and it’s talk.
Now, if you think that I lost my mind, you’re probably right. So, please, save my sanity and VOTE!!! Talk:List_of_Poles#Voting.
To była reklama!
Seriously though, of course you’re welcome to vote as you wish. I just prefer to have a clear consensus whatever way than keep the senseless discussion there.--SylwiaS | talk 09:55, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
- Ouch and tnx for spotting this. To all who have not yet visited this page: do so! We seem to have a 'hijacker' (troll?), going by User:Informationguy, who seems bent on, well, creating his own defintion of 'Pole'. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Michel Foucault at Warsaw University
There's been a search on for a free use photo to illustrate our featured article Michel Foucault since last May. It strikes me that it might be relatively easy to find something from Foucault's brief stay at Warsaw University in 1958 published without a clear copyright notice; if so, then Template:PD-Poland would apply.--Pharos 07:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- It would be easy to find it if someone republished one of the pictures lately, but I didn't find any. The only place which for sure has all the old newspapers is our National Library . You can email them at the address: biurozam@bn.org.pl It would be good to know the exact date of his visit to help them find a relevant paper. They can make a digital photo at request for 7 złoty = about $2.--SylwiaS | talk 19:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
The number of Poles murdered by Soviet Union
Does anybody have an idea where I could find number of Poles that were murdered by SU during WW2 ? --Molobo 12:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Disgusting. --Ghirla | talk 13:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- What so disgusting about it? The fact, that Soviets have murdered few hundreds thousand of Polish citizens?
Na Talk:World War II casualties Bernd122 podaje:
Estimated losses -Soviet occupation-400,000 (including Poles in Soviet Army as well as Soviet terror) Estimated losses -UPA terror-100,000-Poles massacred by Ukrainian forces.
Opiera sie na: Both articles appeared in the Polish Journal Dzieje Najnowsze # 2- 1994
Czesław Łuczak - Szanse i trudności bilansu demograficcznego Polski w latach 1939-1945
Krystyna Kersten- Szacunek strat osobowych w Polsce Wschodniej Szopen 13:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC) Nawiasem mowiac starty podawane kiedys byly mocno zawyazone. Np dosc popularnie przyjmowano jeden milion deportowanych, co uleglo rewizji dopiero niedawno, po otwarciu archiwow w Rosji Szopen 13:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
North European Gas Pipeline
http://en.wikipedia.org/North_European_Gas_Pipeline It would be nice if somebody would look at this article.Explanations as to the nature of Central European objections to the projects are constantly deleted by users Ghirlandajo and Voyevoda(who declares his mission in Misplaced Pages is to correct the one-sided view of history maintained by Poles throughout the Misplaced Pages.) I don't want to violate 3RR so all help in making the article objective and presenting Central European opinion is welcomed. --Molobo 21:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Molobo, you've been told zillion times that invitations to revert warring are frowned upon. Please behave yourself. --Ghirla | talk 22:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Please Ghirlandajo do not assume bad faith, I am only inviting other contributors to work on the article for it to become objective. --Molobo 01:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Slavic mythology redux
There are some refreshing proposals on Talk:Slavic mythology. Everyone is welcome to comment. --Ghirla | talk 22:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yep, proposal is good, and what especially needed are now some volunteers with at least some knowledge of the subject to carry out the work. Unfortunately I know almost nothing about this particular area.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Tuchel heath
I just stumbled upon the (unreferenced, created by anon) stub Tuchel heath, which is supposedly "the scene of the Polish cavalry attack in which a mounted unit of the Polish forces rode its horses against German panzers in 1939". I was under the impression that was a myth. Could someone with more expertise in this area take a closer look at it? Appleseed (Talk) 16:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- A Bogus. I've nominated it for deletion. --Lysy 16:38, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- In an incident that has been alluded to ad nauseam for the past 67 years, a Polish cavalry unit entered German infantry positions and inadvertently found itself confronting German armor. When the Germans subsequently showed the aftermath to Italian journalists, the myth was born. It has ever since been exploited by those who wish to ridicule Poles and things Polish, especially in Germany and the United States. It definitely was not Polish military doctrine to send cavalry against tanks.
- While we're at it, another myth: that the Polish Air Force was wiped out on the ground by the Luftwaffe in the first hours of September 1, 1939. The Polish Air Force existed until the Soviet invasion of eastern Poland on September 17, 1939. (Some pilots flew their planes to Romania.) logologist|Talk 17:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- Instead of deleting the article, it should be corrected and the fallacy explained. It still seems to be an unfortunately common belief, and the only way to disprove the myth is by explaining publicly why it is false. Olessi 17:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- The myths are already explained in Polish September Campaign. Appleseed (Talk) 17:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
No, what I meant is that this name seems to be completely out of the blue. I may be wrong, though. Anyone heard of it ? --Lysy 18:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- Upon further research, "Tuchel Heath" is the same as Tuchola Forest (Bory Tucholskie, Tucheler Heide). The myth of the Polish cavalry charge at the Battle of Krojanty is already discussed at Polish cavalry#Cavalry charges and Nazi propaganda. I am not sure if Krojanty is considered part of the Tuchola Forest, but Chojnice and Tuchola look fairly close on a map. Based on this information, "Tuchel Heath" should redirect to "Tuchola Forest", and links to Krojanty or the Polish cavalry pages should be added to "Tuchola Forest". Olessi 18:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Good job, I think I was a bit too quick to jump with my VfD. Anyway, why would anyone want a link from Tuchola Forest to Battle of Krojanty ? It seems almost like making a link from Europe to Tuchola Forest. --Lysy 18:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- If some people think that "Tuchel Heath" (Tuchola Forest) was the site of a Polish cavalry charge against tanks, then it seems a good idea to link to an article describing what actually happened. How expansive is Tuchola Forest? Would the Battle of Krojanty be considered as having been fought within its confines? Olessi 20:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I'd rather move the article to Tuchel heath myth or Tuchel charge myth or if they are invented, unused terms to Polish cavalry charging tanks myth (any other suggestions?), redirect Tuchel heath to Tuchola Forest and add a see also or para about this to the relevant articles that don't have a mention of this event yet (starting with Tuchola Forest probably).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Półkozic Coat of Arms
There is currently a link to Rawa at Półkozic Coat of Arms; would I be correct in assuming it should be linked to Rawa Mazowiecka? Also, you might want to take a look at the promising work of the new contributor Lucasm at Żnin. Olessi 07:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Polish friends! (about Jan Dlugosz)
I just want to notify you that I have purchased The Annals of Jan Dlugosz, in order to have access to the important sources on Romanian history, however, if someone is in need of sources on Polish history between 965 to 1480, let me know and I'll try to find out. The book is translated in English, which is great if you need relevant references. I will be busy for a few days with writing on Moldavian history articles, but I should be available for next week. --Anittas 11:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hello, my Romanian friend. You might have saved the expense you bemoaned, because Dlugosz is a very unreliable source who perpetrated a number of fantasies invented either by himself or others. See Lada and Lado for one thing. You'd better purchase some more recent and serious historian. Next time, before making such decisions, just ask me :) --Ghirla | talk 11:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Ghirla, Dlugosz is not more or less reliable than any other XV century old historian. He has access to the sources we have not access to. He is quite reliable source, but you must remember he is not the oracle, he has made mistakes, but he is as reliable as any other XV century historian Szopen 13:41, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- I needed the sources to enrich my articles on Moldavian history. Some of his writings are exclusive in history. Many sources from different chronicles are exagerated or fantasies, but one can try to seperate what is accurate from what is false. Herodotus is called the father of history, but he is also called the father of lies. He was ridiculous in his theories of the sun, but his content is, nontheless, priceless. --Anittas 11:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- I wouldn't compare Herodotus with Dlugosz. Just don't take everything he writes for granted, and everything will be OK. --Ghirla | talk 11:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- I wouldn't either. Herodotus traveled a lot and interviewed many people, while Dlugosz was more settled. And yeah, it's always best to compare different sources. --Anittas 11:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- But you have just compared them :) sure, Herodotus is more famous, but Długosz is more important if one is studying Polish history. As Szopen writes, history then was not as reliable as today, as Ghirla notes it mixed with fables and stories. But for good or worse, this is the level of sources we get from that period - there is simply nothing better (in books). Anittas, I'd appreciate it if you could use the book you have now to expand the pitful stub on Długosz, and perhaps create an entry for the Annales themselves?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:29, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- I wouldn't either. Herodotus traveled a lot and interviewed many people, while Dlugosz was more settled. And yeah, it's always best to compare different sources. --Anittas 11:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- I wouldn't compare Herodotus with Dlugosz. Just don't take everything he writes for granted, and everything will be OK. --Ghirla | talk 11:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Naming
See Talk:Polish Biographical Dictionary for an ongoing book-naming discussion, and see Talk:Four Tank Men And A Dog for my related new question about tv series/films naming.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Timespan for Category:Polish nobility
I wonder if 12th century persona's like Agnes of Babenberg should be counted in that category. Especially as we seem to have a distinction between earlier Category:Polish knights and Category:Polish nobility, I'd rather see all personas from before 15th century moved to some other category then Polish nobility. Or perhaps we should go the other way around: move all 15th century nobles into a Category:Szlachta? This is a tricky question, related to the 'when did szlachta became a distinct class, and what were it's predecessors (możni?)?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- What do you think of creatin a Category:Polish royalty for wives of Polish kings, some elected kings and others who would not really classify as Polish nobility = szlachta but had equal status and lived in Poland? Like Agnes from the above para, or Cecylia Renata...--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- We already have Category:Polish queens consort and Category:Polish monarchs. Appleseed (Talk) 22:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- I am afraid they don't solve majority of our problems. For convinience, I'll ist problematic entries below (I might have missed a few):--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- We already have Category:Polish queens consort and Category:Polish monarchs. Appleseed (Talk) 22:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- Bezprym, Bogusław XIV of Pomerania, Boleslaus George II of Masovia, Bolesław I the Tall, Bolesław II the Bald, Bolesław II the Bold, Bolesław III Wrymouth, Bolesław IV the Curly, Bolesław V the Chaste, Casimir IV of Pomerania, Henryk I the Bearded, Henryk II the Pious, Henryk III the White, Henryk IV Probus, Kazimierz I the Restorer, Kazimierz II the Just, Konrad I of Masovia, Leszek I the White, Leszek II the Black, Mieszko III the Old, Mieszko IV Tanglefoot, Władysław I Herman, Władysław II the Exile, Władysław III Spindleshanks, Zbigniew of Poland - not kings, but not common nobles. I suggest moving them to Category:Rulers of Poland, and using a {{Euro-royal-stub}} instead of {{Poland-noble-stub}} (or we can create a {{Poland-royal-stub}} if you want. I don't think that Category:Polish heads of state would fit them (it contains Piłsudski only ATM).
- Family of rulers, they would fit really well into Category:Polish royalty:
- Alexander Charles Vasa, Charles Ferdinand, Duke of Opole and John Albert Vasa - sons of Zygmunt III Waza. Need renaming. Together with Catherine Jagiellon, 16th centiry, daughter of Zygmunt I Old, married outside Poland (also consider if she should be renamed as per Talk:List of Polish monarchs).
- Anna of Masovia - 16th century. Piast dynasty - are they nobility? Needs references, plus possible renaming to Anna z Mazowsza. Another candidate for Polish royalty category, I think.
- Gertrude of Poland, 11th century, daughter of Polish king, married outside Poland - as above
- Rikissa of Poland - 12th century, daughter of Bolesław III, married outside Poland
- Cymburgis of Masovia 14th century, Piast line, married outside Poland
- Chościsko, Piast, Popiel, Siemowit, Siemomysł, Rzepicha - semi-legendary Piasts. Category:Legendary rulers of Poland for all of them perhaps? Saul Wahl could join them in that category as well. Note that the confusion here is caused again by the misuse of {{Poland-noble-stub}}
- Sigrid the Haughty - legendary 10th century possibly Slavic princes?? I am not sure what do to with her, but Category:Legendary people seems better for her then Category:Polish noblity, really
- consorts of Polish rulers (but not kings):
- Agnes of Babenberg, 12th century, born outside Poland, married Łokietek (duke, not a king)
- Elizabeth Lacković, 15th century, born outside Poland, married to some Dukes of fragmentation period
- Ruthenians and such - are they 1) Polish nobility 2) Polish rulers 3) Polish royalty 4) or not Poles at all?
- Anna of Byzantium, 13th century, born in Byzantium, married to Kievan prince, I honestly don't see what's her connection to Poland is one way or another
- Lubart - 14th century, King of Galicia, like Anna of Byzantium he seems more Ruthenian then Polish
- Mindowhowna - another Ruthenian queen
- Svarn - another Ruthenian
- Jurij I of Halicz ?
- Germanized/Russified/other people who seem to have lost any connection to Poland beyond some of their ancestors being born there:
- Elfi von Dassanowsky/Robert von Dassanowsky - 20th century Germans, with ancestors in Poland...
- Ludwig zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg - Russian aristocrat of German descent - need more be said?
- Vladislav Khodasevich - Polish ancenstry, but was he Polish (nobility)?
- Trubchevsky/Trubetsky families:
- Vladimir Waloc Trubetsky - while Trubetsky article states some members of the family lived in Poland in 17th century, it also states that by the end of it they have returned to Muscovy. Vladimir lived in 20th century - what was his connection to Poland??
- Fyodor Nikitich Trubchevsky - same family as above, he died in 1608 before some of his descendants moved to Poland
- Svyatopolk-Mirsky family
- Nikolai Ivanovitch Sviatopolk-Mirskii - 'considered himself a Russian'. Svyatopolk-Mirsky - were they really a member of Category:Polish noble families? This fragment After the Polish insurgents destroyed Sviatopolk-Mirskii estate (1831) really makes me doubht they were Poles..
Other:
- Saint Casimir - should he be moved to Saint Kazimierz Jagiełło?
- Saint Hyacinth - should he be moved to Saint Hyacinth Odroważ?
- Stanislaus Kostka - another saint...
- Shouldn't their naming convention not follow the same rules as that of Saint Raphael Kalinowski
I am still waiting for comments in this section... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:47, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Recent problems on Polish topics
It seems the user Jadger is expanding his activity from Wola(where he kindly informed us about the fact that hospital patients murdered by Nazis were rebels).Anyway he now edits more articles concerning Poland.It would be nice for people to watch out for further cases. Also there is somebody using constant changing IP that edits Germanisation addding sentences like: As they can make a lot of money there, many Polish players run for Bundesliga-Teams nowadys instaed of playing football at home. The Polish contribuation is appreciated, as the Germans are amused by the pronouciation of the players' names. On the other hand Polish truckdrivers deliberately try to exterminate Germanic people by using the wrong side of the Autobahn as this happend yesterday in Hesse. Any help in protecting the article or trying to give sense to the person is welcomed. --Molobo 12:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- The power of propaganda. First of all, of course, Jadger never ever claimed that "hospital patients murdered by Nazis were rebels" so don't throw that at him to play on the emotions of the users here. Except for you who accuses him of being a Neo Nazi, the discussion on Talk:Wola seems to be good. The funny fight you and the anon on Germanisation was started by you. You and another anon insisted on the sentence "Polish players in teams from Germanic countries face discrimination and insults as shown by the example of Dietmar Kühbauer who refused to hold an interview with Adam Ledwon, saying he "stinks of Poland"." for eight reverts. I told you twice that when you claim that sentence to be true, you also have to prove that every Polish player faces discrimination and that you're sillily generalising from one uncommon example that is even irrelevant to the context. Of course you didn't reply. Now the anon strikes back and makes fun of you insisting on the sentences about the road incident and "In 2005 the Germans persuad the Polish-born Pope John Paul II to die. In a quick reaction and by secret treaties the Germans have German-born Josef Ratzinger elected his successor as Benedict XVI. Another perfect example of Germanisation." It's interesting that you distorted the incident to the extent that you're the poor hero, fighting wholeheartedly against the vandalism of an anon, when in reality you injected nonsense into the article to push the POV and lead another person to do the same. If you don't believe me, check on it and try to stop the war. I won't have time for wiki right now anyway. Sciurinæ 11:12, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Official's naming
See Talk:Offices in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - kanclerz or Chancellor (Poland)? Btw, for those opposed to voivodeship who want to change it into a province, how do you propose to rename voivode? :D Provincial? ;p --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
- "Kanclerz" translates into English as "chancellor"; "wojewoda" — as "governor." logologist|Talk 22:45, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
- Then what about "gubernator"?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:14, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- Context? logologist|Talk 00:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- Then what about "gubernator"?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:14, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- "Voivodship" is a common, accepted term--I'm surprised anyone wants to get rid of it. Although it may be equivalent to "governor", it has a different origin and history. I vote to keep it (along with "voivod", of course). Appleseed (Talk) 01:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Can somebody take some time and translate information from IPN
On Salomon Morel article ? http://www.ipn.gov.pl/odd_oboz_swiet_morel.html I don't have time.And the article was filled with bizarre statements.For example they named Armia Ludowa as Polish Police officers and fascists. --Molobo 01:58, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
transport in Poland by foot
I've removed the text below from the transport section in the Poland article. While it is quite funny, I'm not sure that it is encyclopedic, and I think it probably reflects original research. It is however an entertaining read.
- *Foot: The furthest distance between two points in Poland is between Świnoujście and a point 15km South-East of Wołosate. It is possible to walk this distance in 27 days, 8 hours and 15 minutes. A shorter journey time can be achieved by not taking a day off to purchase more durable clothing in Kalisz and by not being laid up with a stomach virus in a hotel in Frysztak for another day. It must be pointed out that the last 10km of the journey are not strictly speaking publicly accessible land, although it is possible to gain access to it subject to verbal authorisation from the border patrols. The consequence of this is that any two places in Poland are within walking distance if there is a month available for the journey.
-- Adz|talk 22:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- And it's not the 1st of April yet... WP:BJAODN?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- yep, I've already put it there. see here -- Adz|talk 00:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Problematic user
We've got new Polish trouble making user, known for his "actions" also on pl:wiki. Take wach on LUCPOL/SZPANER (e.g. his behavior in Talk:Poland and article it self. Radomil talk 22:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
- On a related note, I have to give a credid where due: . As far as POV pushing goes, this is pretty good :) Lol. I suggest keeping it with a proper caption explaining the stereotype of a 'Polish horse agriculture'. Some statistics how many horses are used in Poland now comapred to some past data would be nice.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Comments welcome
Polish-Russian dispute at Polish-Lithuanian-Muscovite Commonwealth.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 13:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Dziwny user
]-koncentruje swoje edyty na Prusach zarówno państwowych jak i grupie etnicznej. Byłbym wdzięczny gdyby ktoś się przyjrzał-niektóre wyglądają na dziwny POV-jak na przykład że cała Polska była własnością Niemieckiego króla. Mam też wrażenie że widzialem podobnego użytkownika kiedyś na wiki.Mógłby ktoś zerknąć okiem ? --Molobo 19:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Najnowsza
Perełka w kontrybucji o wspólnych dziejach na miarę artykułu o Woli
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wrzesnia Children that took part in the opposition were tried to be persuaded by Prussian teachers and punished as persuasion proved futile.
Ręce opadają...Ciekawe ile Polaków ukarano w GG za opór wobec perswazji... --Molobo 17:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Molobo, if you like to engage in a dialogue with me concerning this statement, just do it, for example, here. I'm sure that my summary is more accurate than yours. Not even the original text uses the word 'torture'. It makes me a bit sick that instead of trying to discuss, you've lately only tended to revert and get other persons (Space Cadet) to do the same. Sciurinæ 17:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- How about the sentence by User:Sicherlich in the German-language Misplaced Pages: "Die zunehmende Germanisierung des Ortes stieß auf Widerstand der Einwohner. Großes Aufsehen erregte 1901 der Streik der Kinder gegen die Unterrichtung in deutscher Sprache. Der Streik breitete sich auf benachbarte Orte aus und führte auch zu Verhaftungen. Der Streik endete erst Ostern im Jahr 1904." (roughly translated as: the increasing Germanisation of the place met resistance with the residents. Great stir caused in 1901 the strike of the children against teachings in the German language. The strike spread over neighbouring places and also lead to arrests) ? Sciurinæ 18:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
The sentence speaks nothing about the brutal beatings and torture made upon the children.Or that parents trying to save their children were persecuted by Prussian officials. Molobo. Don't worry though I will simply translate information from the city's Polish homepage which has extensive description of the events. Molobo
W artykule o nazistowskiej organizacji Selbstschutz
http://en.wikipedia.org/Selbstschutz Pojawiło się dwóch użytkowników z Niemiec usiłujących wykasować informacje o zbrodniczym charakterze tej organizacji. Proszę o pomoc. Molobo.
Suspicious Polish musical group
It was brought to my attention tht there is a large series of articles about a "Polish girl group" Nache. I noticed that 84.40.192.143 (talk · contribs) created a huge number of articles. Many of them look real. But "Nache" sounds really suspicious to me. Some of them, eg., Wokalistka grupy Nache Natalia claim enormous notability, but I failed to find any traces in the internet. One article says "Album have sell 700.000 copies" - it should be quite notable in Poland, then. Please verify. mikka (t) 20:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- If someone sold 700,000 copies in Poland it would be called a miracle. There is 35,000 copies limit for Golden Album, 70,000 for Platinum one, and 350,000 for a Diamond one. Only 6 albums ever reached the Diamond level. Nache doesn't exist. Feel free to delete the series.--SylwiaS | talk 21:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- I suggest whacking the {{hoax}} tag on the article and questioning it's credibility on the talk page. If the author of the article doesn't substantiate their claims and provide sources then nominate it for AfD.
- I googled it. I didn't check all of the hits, but over 100 first (about 20% of all). No mentioning about a group called like that. If they were at least a bit popular, they would have to be present on Polish websites. I also googled the word Nache together with Dziewczyny - the supposed bestseller, and checked all the hits. Nothing like that exists.--SylwiaS | talk 23:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- I suggest whacking the {{hoax}} tag on the article and questioning it's credibility on the talk page. If the author of the article doesn't substantiate their claims and provide sources then nominate it for AfD.
Happy 200,000
Today Polish Misplaced Pages passed the 200,000 article mark. It is now the 4th largest Misplaced Pages, after English, German and French. Balcer 00:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Katyń FAC
Please comment at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Katyń massacre. I would expect this is going to generate some interesting discussion...--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Jogaila vs. Jagiełło vs Jagiellon
Some renaming discussion has been going on at Talk:Władysław_II_Jagiełło#Jogaila_move, with one user moving the article twice (I proteced it from moves now until some consensus is reached). Please comment.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Rece opadaja. The guy is not listening to the arguments, he ignores the Misplaced Pages rules. And now he just said he wasted his time and withdrew. Perfect example of how to deal with Poles in action. Sometimes I though of mkaing the list of wikipedians, who adhere to this guide: I got three candidates already (and more, but I forgot the names of the others. Szopen 17:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
The discussion is heating up, but perhaps something beneficial may come out of it. Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Polish rulers) has been reactivated, and see also Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(use_English)#.5B.5BJogaila_of_Lithuania.5D.5D.2F_.5B.5BW.C5.82adys.C5.82aw_II_Jagie.C5.82.C5.82o.5D.5D.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:25, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, it seems that the guy will just go with anything which is not our proposal, so he's now ready to support Władysław II of Poland as a less polonocentric name! (sic!)
- Piotr, could you propose one place for all the discussions and voting? I checked some of the ilinks, but they usually lead to others, and it seems that there are about 10 pages now where people discuss the naming of kings. I simply don't know where to comment now and to what, lol. Or maybe some pages should be simply merged, because there is your proposal on one talk page and the chart with various names of kings on another.--SylwiaS | talk 19:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
- At the moment I think that Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Polish rulers) is the place to propose and discuss old and new proposals for the entire naming scheme, and Talk:Władysław_II_Jagiełło#Jogaila_move is dedicated to the single, specific case of Władysław/Jogaila.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Renaming of anti-Polonism
There is a proposal to rename the article anti-Polonism to Polonophobia on the talk page. Please voice your support or objections. alx-pl D 08:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Democratic_peace_theory#Poland-Lithuania
A very interesting discussion.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
- Here is a recent, highly relevant article from Gazeta Wyborcza: Balcer 18:32, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Polish-Lithuanian-Muscovite Commonwealth
Seems like another hotspot: Polish-Lithuanian-Muscovite Commonwealth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Other voices would be appreciated, as I don't want to revert Irpen, who is usually a reasonable contributor.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics)
Since the potential of this new discussion is to remove all diactrics (Polish letters) from the titles, I think it is something worth keeping an eye at.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Ponowna próba
Wymazania informacji o zbrodniach popełnionych przez żółnierzy niemieckich podczas Kampanii Wrześniowej, tym razem w artykule: http://en.wikipedia.org/German_17th_Infantry_Division --Molobo 22:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
There has been a recent attempt
To remove information about war crimes of Wehrmacht from the main article. I suggest moving it back again, you can discuss it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Wehrmacht --Molobo 02:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
1911 Britannica articles about Polish villages
Apologies if this is the wrong place to post this, but I found some articles that need Polish editors: Siva1979 has been uploading lots of articles from the 1911 Britannica, including some on Polish villages that were written at a time when they belonged to Germany. These articles need to be updated (or better, rewritten from scratch). So far I found Sokolowsko and Szczawno Zdrój (well, I renamed that one, hopefully to the correct name). If I find more, what should I do with them? Kusma (討論) 04:14, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for bringing this matter to us, this is definetly the right place for such matters. You may report those articles here, or at Portal:Poland/New_article_announcements#Articles.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 04:22, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- I took care of Sokołowsko. Maybe someone else can take Szczawno. Now it says: Szczawno Zdrój was formerly known as Salzbrunn, a watering-place of Germany, in the Prussian province of Silesia, at the foot of a well-wooded spur of the Riesengebirge, 30 m. S.W. of Breslau, by the railway to Halberstadt. LOL. Thanks Kusma!--SylwiaS | talk 06:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- A general comment about the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica: A few decades ago, it was sometimes described as the best edition of E.B. ever published. After 95 years, it is clearly often out-of-date. But what strikes me in the articles that have been imported from it into the Misplaced Pages is how opinionated — POV — it often is. It reeks of Edwardian smugness. If any of us wrote such an article today, it would immediately be challenged, thrown out or heavily revised. (I've done the latter in a number of cases, e.g. with "Stanisław August Poniatowski.") Material from the 1911 E.B. can be used, of course, but it must be done very judiciously. logologist|Talk 06:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- On the other hand, the prose in these real encyclopedias is very nice, and we would do well to emulate it. I hate to say it, but even many of the FA articles on WP sound like they were written by a high school student (or a committee of high school students :). Take a look at Columbia Encyclopedia's "Poland" article (especially the "History" section), and compare it to ours. Appleseed (Talk) 13:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- True. There seems to be a kind of "reverse snobbism" at work, whereby some feel that there is something precious or pretentious in expressing things precisely and concisely. It's often forgotten that there are differences between colloquial speech and formal written composition. logologist|Talk 15:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think there is anything as complex as this at works here - I'd rather bet it is a simple case of many people not being that fluent with writing, compounded by the number of people for whom English is not a primary language (like yours truly :).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- True. There seems to be a kind of "reverse snobbism" at work, whereby some feel that there is something precious or pretentious in expressing things precisely and concisely. It's often forgotten that there are differences between colloquial speech and formal written composition. logologist|Talk 15:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- On the other hand, the prose in these real encyclopedias is very nice, and we would do well to emulate it. I hate to say it, but even many of the FA articles on WP sound like they were written by a high school student (or a committee of high school students :). Take a look at Columbia Encyclopedia's "Poland" article (especially the "History" section), and compare it to ours. Appleseed (Talk) 13:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- A general comment about the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica: A few decades ago, it was sometimes described as the best edition of E.B. ever published. After 95 years, it is clearly often out-of-date. But what strikes me in the articles that have been imported from it into the Misplaced Pages is how opinionated — POV — it often is. It reeks of Edwardian smugness. If any of us wrote such an article today, it would immediately be challenged, thrown out or heavily revised. (I've done the latter in a number of cases, e.g. with "Stanisław August Poniatowski.") Material from the 1911 E.B. can be used, of course, but it must be done very judiciously. logologist|Talk 06:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- I took care of Sokołowsko. Maybe someone else can take Szczawno. Now it says: Szczawno Zdrój was formerly known as Salzbrunn, a watering-place of Germany, in the Prussian province of Silesia, at the foot of a well-wooded spur of the Riesengebirge, 30 m. S.W. of Breslau, by the railway to Halberstadt. LOL. Thanks Kusma!--SylwiaS | talk 06:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Naming mess
As we all well know, we have quite a few problems with naming. One issue which is fairly simple but will have a profound implications is whether we should use English or Polish names for non-geographical names and things. This bein English Wiki, I think it is obvious an English name is preferable to Polish. But what to do when English name does not exist or is rarely used? Should we apply the same rule of thumb as suggested in the discussed (please comment!) Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions/Geographic names? Consider a few examples below:--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:21, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- 1. Polish Biographical Dictionary or Polski slownik biograficzny?
- 2. Mold of the Earth or Pleśń świata?
- 3. Chancellor (Poland) or Kanclerz?
- 4. Council of Three or Rada Trzech?
- 5 Provisional Government of National Unity or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej?
- 1. Polski słownik biograficzny.
- 2. "Mold of the Earth."
- 3. Chancellor (Poland).
- 4. Council of Three (with parenthetical disambiguation, if required).
- 5. Provisional Government of National Unity (as in #4). logologist|Talk 17:21, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I concur with Logologist. I don't think we should translate Polish titles into English by ourselves. So if a book wasn't published in English we should stick to Polish title. One never knows what translators might do, like Die Hard = Szklana pułapka, so Polski słownik biograficzny might be Who is who in Poland. The same is with films on Imdb. They don't translate titles of Polish films if the films weren't shown in English speaking countries. The rest seems fine in English. I only never know what to do with names that have popular short forms, like KBW etc. BTW Are we going to vote on at least gmina vs. commune and powiat vs. county? Pleeeeease...--SylwiaS | talk 18:08, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- Then can we make our 'rule of thumb' being: if using English title, provide reference for where the title came from, otherwise use Polish name?
- As for the gmina&friends vote, I'd suggest drafting a proposal (or several) at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Geography of Poland and then inviting people from far and wide (including us) to vote.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I think we might make an official rule like that for titles of books, films, music albums etc. Does anyone know what people speaking other languages do in cases like that?--SylwiaS | talk 21:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- There is the policy Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (books). It allows for using both forms depending on what is more widely known in English. But I checked UK Amazon. There are 21 books with Polski słownik biograficzny in their references. And the only one hit for Polish Biographical Dictionary gives the other book. Well, I would be surprised if scolars translated the titles by themselves just to give them in references, and they don't. So I assume that someone reading Davies' "Europe: A History" or Grell and Porter's "Toleration in Enlightenment Europe" will not be looking for Polish Biographical Dictionary, because how the person could know it's the title to look for? Unless we assume that all English speakers know Polish and can translate the title by themselves. Maybe you'd like to add the list of the books that use PSB as a reference to the article?--SylwiaS | talk 01:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with you. Below is a list of more topics under Polish name that maybe should be moved to English, which I spotted when emptying Category:People's Republic of Poland (which is being replaced by Category:History of Poland (1945–1989).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 01:42, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- ZOMO (Misplaced Pages:Naming_conventions#Prefer_spelled-out_phrases_to_acronyms)
- Służba Bezpieczeństwa
- Ministerstwo Bezpieczeństwa Publicznego
- Milicja Obywatelska
- Korpus Bezpieczeństwa Wewnętrznego
- Kopalnia Wujek
- Główny Zarząd Informacji Wojska Polskiego
Znowu smutny przypadek How to deal with Poles
http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Bobby1011 http://meta.wikimedia.org/How_to_deal_with_Poles Rule number six: As soon as discussion is started, ask them for sources. Don't worry when they will provide you sources, they will be most likely written by Polish authors. Tell them that Polish authors are known by their dishonesty and bias. Demand English sources. In most unlikely scenario when you will be presented with English sources, you still have a chance. If the dispute is about history of, say, Germany, demand German sources as they will most likely know about history of their own country (and Germans are not Poles, so they won't be biased). If this is dispute about history of Poland, demand a book written by some totally neutral author, say, Chinese. I piękny przykład.
- I already gave you a book published by Ministry of Education of the Republic of Poland. You are claiming it is original reasearch ?
- Of course I am
Eh...jak komuś się chce męczyć to zapraszam. --Molobo 14:36, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Guidelines for the spelling of names of Polish rulers
It is a redirect page that is proposed to be deleted . (Not the article, only the redirect.) I personally don't care, but if there are any reasons why it should stay or maybe be renamed, please, comment now.--SylwiaS | talk 22:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Powiat & Co Vote
Please, vote here . BTW Where else I should announce it?--SylwiaS | talk 01:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- Probably at Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (proposal section, and the talk page). Also, Misplaced Pages:Requests for comments or Misplaced Pages:Current surveys may attact more people.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 03:41, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
- Done, thanks!--SylwiaS | talk 04:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)