Hi. You may be right about renaming Podlachian to Podlaskie. But these names were agreed long ago on WP, so better to wait for approval from the community first (see Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board where I've started a discussion). Also you aren't allowed simply to replace a page's content with a redirect - for licensing (GFDL) reasons among others - you have to use the "move" button. If it turns out that the move is impossible without administrator assistance, you have to propose it at WP:Requested moves, following the procedure described there.--Kotniski (talk) 11:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a massive update to the page - adding significant content and references. Ajh1492 (talk) 19:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK but still, you didn't follow the right procedure. Not that I'm an unthinking enforcer of rules, quite the reverse, but this one is quite important for copyright reasons (the edit history of an article has to be preserved, and this can only happen if you do a move in the standard way), and you need to be aware that doing this sort of thing can make people angry. However, no harm seems to have been done on this occasion. Wishing you continued successful editing! Kotniski (talk) 10:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and the Wikipedia entry for merging and moving pages says.

Merging is a normal editing action, something any editor can do, and as such does not need to be proposed and processed. If you think merging something improves the encyclopedia, you can be bold and perform the merge, as described below. Because of this, it makes little sense to object to a merge purely on procedural grounds, e.g. "you cannot do that without discussion" is not a good argument.

Just following the written process.

Ajh1492 (talk) 11:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What you did was not a merge, however, it was a move. Rather than bringing two articles both with content into one, you over-wrote the redirect at one with the content at the other, then created a redirect at the first - this is known as a cut-and-paste move. This causes problems with copyright and attribution of edits - as far as the history of Podlaskie Voivodeship is concerned, it looks like you created all the material originally in this edit [1], and there's no clue as to the true origins and development of the article; an external observer would not know to look at the history of what is now a redirect at Podlachian Voivodeship to see who is responsible for each edit. That was why the "move" button was developed and added, because it merges and moves the history in the correct fashion so that you can check it later.

It's an easy mistake to make as a new user - I've put tags on that article and the one at North European Plain, which you moved in the same way, so that an admin will repair the histories (you need admin tools to do merge page histories). In future if you want to move a page, just click the move button and enter the new name there and the software will do the rest. However, always check the talk page first: if it's a page move that has been discussed previously but not happened for some reason (like at Podlachian Voivodeship), I'd strongly recommend using the process at WP:RM so that more people are aware and can discuss the merits of the move - there's no rush to move a page that's been sat at a title like that for a while, and the more eyes on it the better. In the case of North European Plain a bold move (using the move button!) would have been fair enough as it hadn't been previously discussed, although again a WP:RM discussion wouldn't have harmed. Knepflerle (talk) 12:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About the file you asked for: I have text files with lists of gminas, powiats (counties), and towns (cities) in Podlaskie - I could send you them if you want. But you can get the same information by just browsing Category:Podlaskie Voivodeship and its subcategories. The bot hasn't started creating articles on the villages in that voivodeship yet.--Kotniski (talk) 09:56, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the bot (User:Kotbot) is working more or less in the way you suggest, except that it is creating articles on all the villages as it goes, which is quite a slow process, particularly since quite a lot of manual intervention is required. If you wanted to help speed up the process, and if you have a fixed fast Internet connection (which I don't always have), then I could send you the files and you could run the bot on your computer. (You wouldn't necessarily have to do any of the manual work; the bot runs on its own, but generates a log file of problems which - if you don't have time to tackle them yourself - you could just send back to me.) If you think you can help in this way then please contact me via "E-mail this user".--Kotniski (talk) 08:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I already replied here. Hut 8.5 16:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try, though it's going to take a while (there's a lot of them). It might be better to ask at WP:AN (then you get more than one administrator to see your request). Hut 8.5 10:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Protected everything with 50 or more uses. This vandal could have caused a lot more damage that he did - he hit a template with 58 uses when he could have hit one with 2500. Hut 8.5 12:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We do already have a guideline (WP:HRT) which says that high risk templates should be protected - it's just that the number of templates with enough uses to make a tempting target is huge, mass protecting templates is extremely dull work, most people don't know about the scale of the problem, and there are some users who have an issue with mass protecting pages. If you go to Special:MostLinkedTemplates you will see that the really high risk templates with tens of thousands of uses have already been protected, so we are getting somewhere. If you want to raise awareness the best place to ask is WP:AN since most active admins read that page. Hut 8.5 10:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) It is a standard format for navboxes. - Darwinek (talk) 08:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know - I'm about to send you the bot files by e-mail, together with instructions on how to set it up. --Kotniski (talk) 16:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will keep my eye out for the e-mail. Ajh1492 (talk) 19:16, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try to inform the Polish noticeboard. You may also try to issue WP:RM for affected articles. - Darwinek (talk) 09:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also find it interesting that once my move request was made

• 13:25, 25 July 2008 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Requested moves‎ (→25 July 2008)

a number of other articles Grodno Governorate, Grodno Voblast and Belostok Oblast were edited to remove most, if not all Polish/Lithuanian traces, and Russified.

• 15:20, 25 July 2008 (hist) (diff) m Grodno Governorate‎
• 15:20, 25 July 2008 (hist) (diff) Grodno Governorate‎
• 15:12, 25 July 2008 (hist) (diff) m Belastok Voblast‎ (What does Polish have to do here?)
• 15:10, 25 July 2008 (hist) (diff) m Belostok Oblast‎
• 15:09, 25 July 2008 (hist) (diff) m Belostok Oblast‎
• 15:08, 25 July 2008 (hist) (diff) Belostok Oblast

These articles had been sitting for a number of months without significant revision prior to my effort to contribute with adding relevant facts, improving formating (infoboxes, etc.) and related article linkage - no commentary. Strange that it was just the articles I edited, not the Vilna Governorate, Kiev Voivodeship and other articles from the Western Krai - those still have references in Polish and Lithuanian.

What did I do? I replaced the Polish & Lithuanian items that had been removed while keeping the Russian references (probably should have been Belorussian references) that were in keeping with what Knepflerle said: ones from English-language texts should be found and used. Then I kept on upgrading the entries by adding relevant non-POV material, like the WP guidelines say . . .

Ajh1492 (talk) 21:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The user page of Kotniski says you are minding Kotbot while he is away for 10 days, so I bring my concern to you. I see that Kotbot is creating a great many pages about towns, villages, or hamlets in Poland, apparently sourced only to the corresponding Polish encyclopedia article. In the English Wikipedia a bot some time ago created articles about cities and hamlets based on a U.S. government census database. We know these places exist, because the government did a census of the people who lived there. We have deleted many articles about claimed geographic places or villages because sometimes it is just a street where a developer built a housing development, and is really part of a larger city. In other cases, we have deleted articles about claimed places because they were total hoaxes. The way to prevent this is by complying with the verifiability requirement by citing one or more reliable sources to show there is such a village or town at the claimed place with the claimed name. The US stubs also included population information. The articles Kotbot is creating generall have no reliable source. No Wikipedia is a reliable source, because each contains some hoax articles or articles making unverifiable claims. I see no mechanism to go back and delete these bot-created articles if the corresponding article is later deleted from the non-English Wikipedia. "Trust me" is not a substitute for WP:RS and WP:V.. Please only create articles having population information and at least one reliable source. It need not be online or in English. I have created a discussion about this at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Bot creating unreferenced articles about geographic places. Please turn off the bot until consensus is reached there on whether creation of stub articles lacking reliable sources should be allowed. Thanks. Edison (talk) 17:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The population data is based off the Central Statistical Office (GUS) Population: Size and Structure by Administrative Division (in Polish) dated 2007-12-31. GUS is partially equivalent to the US Department of Commerce. The villages are also only the Sołectwo, so there is a basis for creation. As the KotBot page says, it only creates the pages that it has been instructed to create - it's not a free-range bot :). Kotinski and myself, as native English speakers who understand Polish fluently, are verifying the pages as they are created. We will be increasing content, over time, as additional passes are made through the articles, so by no means are the articles completed.

KotBot is an approved 'Bot doing the task it was designed to perform.

Ajh1492 (talk) 18:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond at the Village pump, so as to avoid having mini-discussions scattered at various places. The Bot approval discussion did not address policies WP:V and WP:RS. The articles for villages rarely include population, which if unknown, makes the village look non-notable. Thanks. Edison (talk) 18:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find it rather rude that a discussion about any concerns could not have been discussed here first. I could have stated what KotBot is trying to do. Instead the decision was made to air the complaint in front of the entire community. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if you find it "rude" but I consider it a crisis when I look at "new articles" and most of them are created by this bot which makes every dot on a map into an unreferenced and uninformative stub article which doesn't even say what the population of the place is. Please address your concerns at Village Pump as to the policy issues. ThanksEdison (talk) 01:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Crisis? You really need to step away from the computer, dude. Ajh1492 (talk) 13:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, it seemed a crisis because most of the new articles were unreferenced stubs created by this bot, at a rate of 5 or so a minute [2], when it was approved for 2 per minute. A day's work at AFD is about 120 articles, so this bot was creating as many stubs in a few minutes as a full day of AFD is typically required to remove, unless they were in a group nomination, which I do not like. The aythorization also said it should add population and area, which it has not done for the villages, only for the gmina. The concern about unreferenced and unverified articles was previously brought to the talk page of the bot creator, where he dismissed them. The next step is to bring it to the attention of the community, which I did. I checked in the public library and could not find information there about a sample of these villages. The smallest towns in Poland which apear in the multivolume "Columbia Gazetteer of the World" appear to have several thousand. Is there really no information anywhere on the population of these villages? I added a couple of references to Morag, population 14500, but it had a pretty good article from the first edit. Is there really no source for these smaller villages other than the population and area of their gmina? Then how about limiting the coverage to a listing of the village sin the gmina article initially. Then if anyone found any references for a village, it could be made into its own article. Gmina Tuszyn indicates the rural villages of that gmina number 22 and have a total of 4512 inhabitants for an average population of 205. [[Gmina Wodzierady] has a total population of 3098 in 28 villages, for an average of 110. This is like having an article for every city block in a city, or every square mile of rural land, which seems overkill. Edison (talk) 19:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which file in [3] lists the sołectwo? Thank you. --NE2 05:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Gazetteer of 44.600 official settlement names from the Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization, Warsaw, Poland - data presented is from GUS.
• National Official Register of Territorial Division of the Country - TERYT register contains systems of:

   ** identifiers and names of units of administrative division,
   ** identifiers and names of localities,
   ** statistical regions and census enumeration areas,
   ** identification of addresses of streets, real estates, buildings and dwellings. 

• GUS Regional Databank

Ajh1492 (talk) 01:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per this AN/I thread please don't run the bot while the village pump discussion is ongoing. BJ^Talk 09:02, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi do you know any editors who would be willing to run the GEOBOT that was approved?. It might not be a bad idea if a few editors with a knowledge of computer programming and bots who could be running it, after all we have a project set up to run it and it seems unfair for us to expect to depend on Mr. Fritz to run it alone. Do you have a knowledge of bots and how we would go about running it for other countries besides Poland? Ideally I had wanted to draw up a detailed world list of settlements with global coordinates in a table as was originally proposed. The Bald One ^{White cat} 19:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am a programmer by profession and I have a rather good knowledge of how WP bots operate. I would be willing to run the Bot after Poland is finished. And I do have a higher-speed dedicated internet connection. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi sorry for the delay. Thats fantastic if you do. The Kotbot is really very good despite all the fuss kicked up about it. We jumped 4,000 articles the other day. Once Poland is done I would be immensely grateful if you and Mr Kot can help out! The Bald One ^{White cat} 13:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to drop me a line on Gadu-Gadu one of those days! :) My contact info is on my userpage.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's up? Ajh1492 (talk) 18:56, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe still this ? -- Matthead  Discuß   06:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't mind the flame above, I asked you because I always like to chat about Wikipedia and get to know the fellow editors better :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid you have made a few errors. I am not a template expert, but for starters, they should align right, not center. Also, make sure that the links to edit the template link to the correct template. You should probably ask for help at WP:VPT.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You incorrectly made a change to the Borders of the Baltic states template that created a loop. It's now fixed. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:04, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regrettably I have come to inform you, that this bot project will not go into operation and therefore the project will be closing down. Thanks everybody for their time and support but there is a clear reason why it failed. Dr. Blofeld (talk) 11:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We missed you.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:44, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS. When creating new articles, please don't forget about adding categories to them; and marking them as stubs if they are small (for example, with {{Poland-stub}} or one of its substub templates). Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Work has kept me busy. Trying to go back and get some articles back to a neutral, factual state. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:48, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry I had to revert some of your recent edits, please see the corresponding article's talk for explanation why. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:50, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's discuss it at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Poland#Privislinsky_Krai. I think we agree on most things, just need to flesh out the details. See also WP:BRD. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still waiting for you to finish our discussion... hopefully you'll be back before another year elapses :D --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just had to deal with a few things. Should have a chance tomorrow. . .and it was only 6 months last time Ajh1492 (talk) 18:25, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are doing another activity check on members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland. I've noticed that you have not been active in the Poland-related articles in the past few months (we define it as doing 10 or more Poland-related edits per month in the last three months period), and as such I took the liberty to adjust your position in our Participants list from active to inactive. Please note that this is just a method of keeping track of how many editors are currently active on Poland-related topics. Feel free to move yourself back if you disagree with this, and/or comment on WT:POLAND. In case you are not aware of that, our project has many active discussions on its talk page, we also list Poland-related article news (hee), Poland-related new articles for review (hee), Poland-related articles in need of cleanup (here), a listing of most popula Poland-related articles (here), a portal (here), and other tools. If the activity incrases, we would like to implement other tools, such as project A-class reviews and a newsletter. We are looking forward to seeing you around more often! Take care, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:31, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Waldemar Magunia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. BurhanAhmed (talk • contribs) 04:10, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Severo^TC 14:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw your edits at Bialystok and elsewhere. Just wanted to drop a note that if you need help with any kind of translation from Polish, I'd be happy to help. Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could use help with the following articles

• Polmos Białystok <== article does not exist in English
• Elektrociepłownia Białystok <== article does not exist in English
• Browar Dojlidy <== Dojlidy Brewery
• PKS Białystok
• PKP Bialystock train station
• Translating the list of churches from the PL:WP Bialystock article

Ajh1492 (talk) 15:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the list of churches, you want just a list of them, or a translation of the section from the Polish wiki article [4]?  Volunteer Marek  22:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

::How about a translation of the section from PL:WP. Ajh1492 (talk) 14:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look at it soon. Why don't you ask at WT:POLAND as well? And try to go for a WP:GA status, it is not that far from a B one (which I'd like to formally review for the project, but we don't have enough manpower to do so, at least - automatically, without people asking). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 12:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a bad suggestion going for WP:GA. Will post a note to WT:POLAND. Ajh1492 (talk) 13:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're really serious about WP:GA please take a closer look at the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (infoboxes). Quote: "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. Of necessity, some infoboxes contain more than just a few fields; however, wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content." Thanks. — Raczko (talk) 00:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes are a lot easier to read on mobile devices than text contained with the main body of the document. It's the first information that shows up on the mobile device allowing the user to quickly scroll through the data to find what they need w/o having to dive through the article. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. I'd be happy to help, but it will probably take me a week or so to find the time. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When you write articles that are beyond WP:STUB, like Białystok-Krywlany Airport, please consider adding inline references and nominating your work at T:TDYK for a front-page exposure. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please add them to appropriate categories and add appropriate WikiProject assessment templates on talk. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:05, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I put them in when I find a good category (not just dump them in a category just to have one). I've added them to WPP. Ajh1492 (talk) 11:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but you have to do a proper move, not a copy&paste. Article's history needs to be preserved. You can ask an admin to do so, preferably through WP:RM. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit too German Lopatin, you added a few wikilinks, and removed the "Wikify" tag, as if those few links addressed the problem. To wikify an article means to bring the format of the article into compliance with standard Wikipedia guidelines, including the use of a standard lede paragraph and standard headings. Please do not remove maintenance templates from articles until the entire job is done. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:20, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ajh1492 I wonder if you would mind if I now removed the orphan designation that you added to the Future Legend Records (independent label) page? I have found 9 other pages referencing Future Legend Records. Would this be enough to make the page no longer an orphan? I have made quite a few changes to the page also, which may be enough to rectify your other designations. What do you think? All the best AubreySimpson (talk) 17:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ajh1492, please do not remove entries from that page, unless you find out that they are false positives or unless someone else has already done the history merge (which requires admin rights). If you find a similar situation in the future, bring it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History Merge. Thanks. Graham87 15:11, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling stations would be better at Xxx station or Xxx railway station rather than (PKP station). The trouble with the latter is that if you don't know what PKP is/who PKP are, then the title is quite meaningless, but anyone with a basic grasp of English knows what a (railway) station is. I would do a WP:RM but I don't really know where to do such a large one to include all articles :/ Severo^TC 19:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		for your Translation assistance on Frank Blaichman The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 03:24, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded - a superb effort. Thanks very much. - Sitush (talk) 04:14, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid it will get shut down due to being a list rather then prose, but you can try it and see what the reviewer says. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:11, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good observations, such things would be better reported to WT:POLAND I think. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking care of this while I was busy; please note that the discussion has now moved to Talk:Frank Blaichman. Your further input there would not go amiss :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you post a comment on the newest version? The other editor feels that my recent edits go beyond what you wanted. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You extracted this deleted article from the Wayback Machine and re-posted it. There are two problems with that: (a) it loses the contribution history, which we are obliged by the license terms to maintain; and (b) the article was deleted for a reason, WP:CSD#G11, having been tagged "db spam. information merged into Anton Dreher." Another user asked at WP:REFUND#Dreher for the history to be restored, and I have done that, and have notified Fastily (talk), the deleting admin, to let him decide what he wants to do. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the middle of trying to hack and chop the article up. The Dreher Breweries are very notable in Hungary. Merging into Anton Dreher isn't exactly appropriate since Anton Dreher Jr died in the early 20th century. Just give it a few days to finish doing edits on the article. Ajh1492 (talk) 20:07, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will point Fastily to this conversation. I'm sure you understand the need to show significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 20:35, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's SABMiller's brewery in Hungary with exports to South Africa, Asia and other countries. Ajh1492 (talk) 21:15, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fastily has retired though he occasionally pops by, so I would not rely on getting a reply from him soon. You may find it better to address the issue elsewhere with other admins. ww2censor (talk) 23:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Władysław Raginis at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • April 2011 For our freedom and yours Welcome to our first issue of WikiProject Poland newsletter, the Monitor (named after the first Polish newspaper). Our Project has been operational since 1 June, 2005, and also serves as the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board. I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions. We hope you will join us in them, if you haven't done so already! Unlike many other WikiProjects, we are quite active; in this year alone about 40 threads have been started on our discussion page, and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised. In addition to a lively encyclopedic, Poland-related, English-language discussion forum, we have numerous useful tools that can be of use to you - and that you could help us maintain and develop: we have an active assessment department. As of now, our project has tagged almost 80,000 pages as Poland-related, out of which 1,500 still need a quality assessment, and 20,000, importance assessment. we have also begun B-class quality reviews on our talk page, and if our activity increases, hopefully we will be able to institute our own A-class quality reviews. As of now, we have about 500 C-class articles in need of a B-class review. If you'd like to help with them, instructions for doing B-class reviews are to be found in point 10 of our assessment FAQ. once an article is assessed it will appear in our article alerts and news feed, which provides information on which Poland-related articles are considered for deletion, move, or are undergoing a Good or Featured review. Watchlisting that feed, in addition to watchlisting our project's main page, is a good way to make sure you stay up to date on most Poland-related discussions. you can also see detailed deletion discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland (which is another good place to watchlist!) also, those articles will be included in our cleanup listing, which allows us to see which top-importance articles are in need for attention, and so on newly created Poland-related articles are listed here. They need to be reviewed, often cleaned-up, and its creators may need to be welcomed and invited to our project we are maintaining a Portal:Poland automated Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Popular pages lists the most popular Poland-related pages from the previous month(s) This is not all; on our page you can find a list of useful templates (including userboxes), awards and other tools! With all that said, how about you join our discussions at WT:POLAND? Surely, there must be something you could help others with, or perhaps you are in need of assistance yourself? You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a [member link] at WikiProject Poland. • Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:15, 25 April 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Please do not remove "citation needed" tags without giving the requested source. Please respect the result of the Gdansk vote as described at Talk:Gdansk/Vote. Please don't use a biased language as a term like "Prussian-controlled" would be. Thanks HerkusMonte (talk) 18:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See the end of the sentence. Also please stop removing sourced material, i.e. "windawski" was the name of the unfinished section of the canal. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:07, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked for a third opinion at Talk:Augustów Canal#3O request. HerkusMonte (talk) 13:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

and the third opinion was ... The Canal exists! Ajh1492 (talk) 14:23, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I hope you are checking edits before you save them?

This one [5] left Bug river as a redirect when you changed a good link into a redirect - I know it is only a small point but I have just had to correct it. Chaosdruid (talk) 19:46, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have just checked your conntributions and can see that you are on a mission to change Western Bug to Bug River, please stop immediately as you are creating a massive amount of redirects. Chaosdruid (talk) 19:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I can see that strongly you have placed the link Name of Poland by the use of template "See also", at the beginning of the page. Previously, I moved it from there to the section 'See also' of the article, mainly to avoid the multiplication of templates placed on top of the page. I believe that the presence of a link to the Rzeczpospolita (disambiguation) seems to be inevitable, even though many historical meanings are already taken into account right in the article. As you know, the proposal to remove a disambiguation page for Rzeczpospolita was rejected as a result of the discussion. I think it would be skillfully to notify the existence of a dab page, just using the template "See also" placed at the beginning of an article, as it is already done. Possible to use is well as template "About" (with its variations), which, however, produces a greater number of auxiliary words and also displays the phrase "For other uses, see...", not appropriate in this case (I might be wrong). Given the above, I have a proposal as to determine the layout of templates on top of the page. Namely, we could use template "For" as follows: {{For|additional clarifications}}, which gives: For additional clarifications see: Rzeczpospolita (disambiguation) together with: See also: Name of Poland, as it is currently done. --Robsuper (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Ajh1492 (talk) 18:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have opened up a GA review - there is alot of work and I will post to see if folks can help. Are you up to it? I can easily leave the GA open for a few weeks of work continues. I can copyedit quite well but we need to get the content right, and that might mean adding new material to the daughter articles as well so we can selectively reintroduce stuff. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:05, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class
		On behalf of WikiProject Poland, for your your Poland-related contributions, I, Piotrus, award you this Polish Barnstar of National Merit, 2nd Class. Czołem! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
		this WikiAward was given to Ajh1492 by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk on 00:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!! Ajh1492 (talk) 01:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like [6] - votes don't matter without good rationale. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 03:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I replied there. I appreciate you are doing a proper review; please don't hesitate to ask for any other corrections. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think my lightheaded comment at the AfD has caused more than I cared to foresee, and I want to thank you for your quick action fixing the article's setup, so the AfD can finish normally. I will research the website now to see if it meets wp:web, and nominate the article if it doesn't - frankie (talk) 16:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on those comments...Orczar (talk)

No problem, didn't know if you had questions. Ajh1492 (talk) 00:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, I finally got around to answering all the points, sorry about the delay. So many topics to write in relation to that, see Rewolucyjni Mściciele for example :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:56, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Ostrzanin Uprising at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Władysław Raginis a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. Thanks also for your reviews. Featured article candidates and Good Article nominees always need more reviewers! All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Please make sure to indent your posts. It really helps to keep the conversation clear. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:13, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am sorry to say that once again it will take me over a week to get started on them. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:32, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually a quite large gap in terms of quality between GA and FA, as I've found out through personal experience. I agree with the reviewers that the article is not ready yet. It needs a good bit of copy editing and clean up of the prose as well as a lot of gnomish minute and tedious work in regard to formatting (which I personally hate). I think all the most important information is already in the article but the presentation of the information does need to be worked on. I'll keep trying to help out with the article and I think in a bit of time we can get it back up for FAC again.Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a reply. Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:48, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, replied at Talk:Battle of Bautzen (1945)/GA1. Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ping? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:07, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pong! Will be back to it this weekend. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at Talk:Władysław IV Vasa/GA1. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 18:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've put the GA review of Augustów Canal on hold for an initial seven days to allow concerns regarding presentation and formatting to be addressed. Nothing major - just a bit of copyediting and a brush up. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 22:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ping. It will be a shame if your GA fails because you couldn't even spare half an hour to address all the issues... :( --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 15:29, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes things get busy, it the big scheme of things WP editing is pretty far down on the priority list. Can always submit it again in the future. I disagree with the anti-tables bias. Ajh1492 (talk) 10:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have closed the GA. The article has not been listed. You can nominate again in future, though it would make sense to do a copy edit first, and to turn the tables into prose so the information is understandable to the general reader. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:19, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you have an interest in the topic, I have re-written the article slightly. I was wondering if you could maybe find/make a map that would show the exact 1944, 45 and 48 adjustments, and redo that incorrect Poland-Belarus map. In addition, I am having difficulty sourcing information regarding the events of 1944, since I, alas, do not understand Polish. Last, but not least the article is slightly orphaned, and it needs to be lobbied in the numerous relating articles. And as a final note, it needs more expansion, since it is focused on the topic of Poland-Ukraine and Poland-Belarus, but to my knowledge the treaty also agreed on the splitting of East Prussia and the adjustment to the border around Lithuania and Suwalki, and more information is necessary on those points. I would greatly appreciate if you would assist me on some (not necessary all) of those requests. Best Regards! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.165.80.196 (talk) 12:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Amazing work on the LOT Polish Airlines Flight 016, you were just too fast. I will keep checking for new information to help the page improve. We all appreciate this. EmadIV (talk) 15:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, could not have done it without your help too. We scooped the Drudge Report. They didn't pick it up until I dropped a tip in the story box. Ajh1492 (talk) 15:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll fix that. Is there any chance you could contact the family or captain Wrona himself and ask for a proper licensing (see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 15:25, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2011_November_1#File:Lot_b763_sp-lpc_warsaw_111101_1-1-.jpg. And Portal_talk:Current_events#Can_we_replace_QANTAS_with_LOT_Polish_Airlines_Flight_016_.3F. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 15:27, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Z10572853X,Kapitan-Tadeusz-Wrona--To-on-mistrzowsko-wyladowal.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Russavia ^{Let's dialogue} 16:26, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Z10572853X,Kapitan-Tadeusz-Wrona--To-on-mistrzowsko-wyladowal.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Poland for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 08:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some concerns about the Władysław Raginis article, which is currently a Good article, have been brought up on the talk page. You might like to respond to the points raised there or it could undergo a reassessment. AIRcorn (talk) 23:35, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Currently going through a reassessment. The link is Talk:Władysław Raginis/GA2. AIRcorn (talk) 20:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of WPPOLAND - we hope to see you back with us again one day! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:14, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see you back. The issues with WR are discussed at Talk:Władysław Raginis/GA2. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:05, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...and, we miss you again! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... and I'm back again. --Ajh1492 (talk) 12:16, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

W. D. Graham 08:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're an established user I won't post a warning template, but I'd like to remind you that if someone reverts an edit you make, you should discuss it rather than putting your preferred version back. Please follow WP:BRD --W. D. Graham 08:53, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate your input on my comments regarding resolving this problem. W. D. Graham 10:13, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting silly, can we just agree that we have both made mistakes, and from now on we're going to focus the discussion on article content rather than editor conduct? --W. D. Graham 11:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've also posted at WikiProject Spaceflight requesting a third opinion. --W. D. Graham 11:30, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

W. D. Graham 20:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

N2e (talk) 02:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you would have a lot to offer the encyclopedia in the spaceflight area. Please consider joining us. Cheers. N2e (talk) 14:11, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm 2Awwsome. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Frédéric Chopin that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 2Awwsome^{Tell me where I screwed up. See where I screwed up} 16:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Twenty Polish Christmas Carols (Lutosławski) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• # NAJŚWIĘTSZA Panienka PO deutschland CHODZIŁA (Holy Mother Mary (ran through the wide world).

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:39, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The quality standards are very high, and it is next to impossible for a non-native speaker to pass on prose. I suggest you work with others if you want an article to get to FA, through those days I prefer to work on GAs and DYKs, it's more satisfying. If you see a Featured Article that you think should not be featured, please submit it to WP:FAR. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:05, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am a native english speaker, and had received off-line input from fellow native speakers, yet it was still savaged. I agree with your points on withdrawing from the FAC process. Ajh1492 (talk) 07:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear AJH1492, Hi. Hope you don't mind me mentioning here but I think Barbara Massalska might be a bit more notable than might appear. The sourcing is problematic but I think some of her work is well known (even if many don't know who did it) in Gdansk. I should mention I'd never heard of her but I think 26 Long Market and the windows in St Barbara's are well known to many in Gdansk. The pictures in the National Gallery (Gdansk branch) and at Malbork Castle collection might be enough to pass artist if we wanted. I don't know if you might want to have another look. If not no worries and feel free to ignore this. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 14:29, 26 October 2013 (UTC)),[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bug River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Brest and Lesnaya

List of national parks of Poland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Kurowo

Pilica (river) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ostrowek

TR-106 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to TRW

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ajh1492,
I genuinely do not understand what you're trying to do with the Białowieża Forest article. You keep reverting my edits, stating as your motivation ([7], [8]) that the names from the World Heritage List are to be used. If we take a look at the World Heritage List, we see that it uses two names:

• Belovezhskaya Pushcha
• Białowieża Forest

These are the Russian and Polish names, respectively. You can tell that the first is in fact the Russian name, not the Belarusian one, from the fact that it says Belovezhkaya. The Belarusian name has an a in that place (Byelavyezhskaya).

But contrary to your stated aim, you keep reverting the article to a version which does *not* have the name used on the World Heritage List, but instead uses a Belarusian name (which is *not* on the World Heritage List). Or, to put it another way: the names that I am inserting *ARE* the ones used on the World Heritage List.

No they're not the names are "Belovezhskaya Pushcha / Białowieża Forest" at the top of the page. Ajh1492 (talk) 12:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So if you truly think that the article should use the names as inscribed in the World Heritage List, I genuinely do not understand why you keep reverting my edits. - TaalVerbeteraar (talk) 11:08, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They need to show up on the page EXACTLY as they are on the UNESCO transcription - "Belovezhskaya Pushcha / Białowieża Forest", not in Cyrillic. If it should be lang-ru vs lang-be, then make that change. Ajh1492 (talk) 12:14, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Ramsar sites of Poland at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Nyttend (talk) 15:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! Unfortunately, I'm just about to leave the house and go to work, but I'll try to remember to review the article tonight. If I've not responded by tonight/tomorrow morning (US Eastern Time/Central European Time, respectively), please remind me that I've forgotten. Nyttend (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had to learn about how to avoid WP:COPYPASTE and similar issues the hard way, too. It's annoying, but we have to use mostly our own words in most cases. You don't want to cheat here, as Nyttend noted - editors get blocked for this. See this and in particular this. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:24, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Although Centennial Hall is on the UNESCO list, however, the best known and most frequently visited by tourists is the Wrocław Market and Cathedral Island. All the historical old town of Wroclaw is the Monument of History.

https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomnik_historii

https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zesp%C3%B3%C5%82_historycznego_centrum_Wroc%C5%82awia

Peatlands in Poland a lot, but are popular with tourists, so it makes no sense to place pictures and here is just the bog. Karkonosze is Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO. WKS Śląsk Wrocław (talk) 14:33, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear opponent

Which should it be exactly: they don't speak Ukrainian there or cite a reliable source? Your statement and your request are mutually exclusive. Please bear in mind your "I just asked the MIasto (Powiat)" can't be taken seriously. I've just asked God and He told me quite the opposite. I'm rolling back your edits and if you want to start a real conversation, you can do it here. 87.210.232.221 (talk) 08:31, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I point you at Bilingual communes in Poland and at the map. Ukranian is not spoken in Gmina Orla. Being in Bielsk, as opposed to being in the Netherlands, I can actually walk to centrum and stop at Powiat Bielski for verification or at the Museum. Your conversations with God is your own thing. Ajh1492 (talk) 12:27, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of national parks of Poland, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jeziory, Stary Folwark and Smołdzino (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to RTCN Suwałki (Krzemianucha) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Transmitter or Transmitter Jeleniewo or Broadcasting Transmitting Centre at the Krzemianucha Hill (not to get mixed up over '''Krzemieniucha'''.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:41, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Warsaw–Kalisz Railway may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Warsaw - Kalisz Railway''' ({{lang-pl|Kolej Warszawsko-Kaliska}}), also called '''Kalisz Railway''') is a railway which connects [[Warsaw]] and [[Kalisz]], built in 1900 - 1902 by the ''Society of

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:11, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, but DYK and GA reviewers will ask for more references: there can't be any unreferenced paragraphs. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:53, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For comments here, may I suggest moving them to article's talk page? More people will see them there. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:27, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They are there already. Take a look at the Review Process upgrade I'm proposing that I posted on your talk page. Ajh1492 (talk) 08:30, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, streamlining it is a nice idea. That said, keep in mind very people do them. But getting them alive and kicking in our project is one of my goals. A-class would be next. But both require several active editors... and we have very few. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:31, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Making it easier to conduct the B-class Review by streamlining and automation can help encourage editors to do the reviews. Yes there aren't a tremendous number of editors, but removing some clunkyness can help the process. Ajh1492 (talk) 08:36, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Biosphere Reserves of Poland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Bug, Raptors, Leba and Rowy

Ramsar sites of Poland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Raptors, Tussocks, Leba and Rowy

Babia Góra National Park (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sokolica

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Aryeh Levin may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• near the village of [[Orla, Podlaskie Voivodeship|Orla]], near [[Białystok]], [[Russian Empire]] (now [[Poland]] to Binyamin Beinish and Ethel Levin. He had two older sisters, Miriam and Faige.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:43, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Białystok Voivodeship (1945–75) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• the lowest tier of local government in the voivodeship, taking over the role previously played by [[[gminas]]. A gromada would generally consist of several villages, but they were smaller units than

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jacek Bogucki may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {{politician

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wolkowysk County, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Biskupice (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may find this AE thread of interest. I hope we will see you active again soon! Perhaps you'd like to join Wikipedia:WikiCup/2014 signups?--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:34, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ramsar sites of Poland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Baltic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • January 2014 • Issue II For our freedom and yours Welcome to the second issue of WikiProject Poland newsletter, the Monitor (named after the first Polish newspaper). Our Project has been operational since 1 June, 2005, and also serves as the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board. I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions. We hope you will join us in them, if you haven't done so already! Unlike many other WikiProjects, we are quite active; we get close to a hundred discussion threads each year and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised. Last year we were featured in the Signpost, and our interviewer was amazed at our activity. In the end, however, even as active as we are, we are just a tiny group - you can easily become one of our core members! In addition to a lively encyclopedic, Poland-related, English-language discussion forum, we have numerous useful tools that can be of use to you - and that you could help us maintain and develop: we have an active assessment department. As of now, our project has tagged almost 83,000 pages as Poland-related - that's an improvement of over 3,000 new pages since the last newsletter. Out of which 30 still need a quality assessment, and 2,000, importance assessment. We have done a lot to clear the backlog here (3 years ago those numbers were 1,500 and 20,000, respectively). Can you help assess a few pages? assessing articles is as easy as filling in the class= and importance= parameters on the talk page in the {{WPPOLAND|class=|importance=}} template. See here for a how-to guide. once an article has an assessment template, it will appear in our article alerts and news feed, which provides information on which Poland-related articles are considered for deletion, move, or are undergoing a Good or Featured review. Watchlisting that feed, in addition to watchlisting our project's main page, is a good way to make sure you stay up to date on most Poland-related discussions. you can also see detailed deletion discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland (which is a good place to watchlist if you just want to stay up to date on possible deletions of Poland-related content) we have also begun B-class quality reviews on our talk page, and if our activity increases, hopefully we will be able to institute our own A-class quality reviews. As of now, we have about 500 C-class articles in need of a B-class review. If you'd like to help with them, instructions for doing B-class reviews are to be found in point 10 of our assessment FAQ. In addition to this automated list, you are also encouraged to help review articles from our B-class reviews requested list found here. also, those articles will be included in our cleanup listing, which allows us to see which top-importance articles are in need for attention, and so on. We have tens of thousands articles in need of cleanup there, so if you ever need something to do, just look at this gigantic list. (I am currently reviewing the articles tagged with notability, either proving them notable or nominating for deletion; there are still several dozens left if you want to help!). did you know that newly created Poland-related articles are listed here. They need to be reviewed, often cleaned-up, occasionally nominated for deletion, and their creators may need to be welcomed and invited to our project if they show promise as new authors of Poland-related content. we are maintaining a Portal:Poland automated Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Popular pages lists the most popular Poland-related pages from the previous month(s) Breaking news: we are looking for a Wikipedian in Residence for the New York City area. See Wikipedia:GLAM/Józef Piłsudski Institute of America for details. This is not all; on our page you can find a list of useful templates (including userboxes), awards and other tools! With all that said, how about you join our discussions at WT:POLAND? Surely, there must be something you could help others with, or perhaps you are in need of assistance yourself? It took me three years to finish this issue. Feel free to help out getting the next one before 2017 by being more active in WikiProject management :) You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a member at WikiProject Poland. Please remove yourself from the mailing list to prevent receiving future mailings. Newsletter prepared by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here and sent by Technical 13 (talk) using the Mass message system.

Template:Infobox PL constituency has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:01, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to have you around! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:02, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Poland Map Links has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 22:06, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Location map Poland-PD has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 23:17, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LK-linia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 17:19, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]