Cannabis Ruderalis

Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running!    

User talk:Piotrus


Image:Kyokpae banner.png

You have the right to stay informed. Exercise it by reading the Wikipedia Signpost today.
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:Piotrus/Archive 12. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
"You have new messages" was designed for a purpose: letting people know you have replied to them. I do not watch your talk page and I will likely IGNORE your reply if it is not copied to my page, as I will not be aware that you replied!. Thank you.
Please add new comments in new sections if you are addressing a new issue. Please sign it by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Thanks in advance.
Have seen worse days. Reasons for my raising wikistress:  not many :)
Enlarge
Have seen worse days. Reasons for my raising wikistress:
not many :)
Wikipedia is a kawaii mistress :)
Enlarge
Wikipedia is a kawaii mistress :)

Contents

If you have come here to place a request for a re-confirmation of my adminship, please note that I will either:

  • seek community approval of my adminship through an RfC; (no consensus == no change)
  • choose to take the matter to ArbComm;
  • resign my powers and stand again for adminship;

at my discretion

  • once the "six editors in good standing" count has been met using my own criteria
  • and the matter concerns my admin powers rather than a non-admin editing concern.
  1. Remember, this is a voluntary action, and does not preclude an RfC or RfAr being initiated by others, should others feel they have no recourse.
  2. Lar's criteria include the requirement that if the user is calling for recall is an admin, the admin must themselves have been in this category for at least a week. This does not apply to non admins. Lar reserves the right to impose additional criteria.


I agree to the edit counter opt-in terms.

copyrigth

Czesc pan Piotrek, Im Thorek Sekuterski/Sredzinski Herby Leliwa.

I want to make a commercial book about Polish Nobility. I would like to use sources from wikipedia.org like example the text about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miko%C5%82aj_Hieronim_Sieniawski

Mikołaj Hieronim Sieniawski (1645-1683) was a Polish noble (szlachcic), military leader, politician.

Son of the starost of Lwów Adam Hieronim Sieniawski and Wiktoria Elżbieta Potocka, the daughter of Hetman Stanisław "Rewera" Potocki. He married in 1662 the daughter of Court and Grand Marshal Prince Aleksander Ludwik Radziwiłł, Princess Cecylia Maria Radziwiłł.


Leliwa Coat of ArmsHe was Grand Guardian of the Crown since 1644, Great Chorąży of the Crown since 1668, Court Marshall of the Crown since 1676, starost of Lwów since 1679, voivode of Volhynian Voivodship since 1679, Field Crown Hetman since 1682 and starost of Radom, Rohatyn, and Piaseczno.

He became famous as a talented commander in wars against Cossacks and Tatars during the reign of King Jan II Kazimierz. In the rank of a Chorąży he companioned Jan Sobieski in the Chocim expedition.

He was Marshal of the Coronation Sejm on March 2 - March 14, 1676 in Kraków.

Like his son Adam Mikołaj, he participated in the Vienna expedition of 1683.


My version in my book is edited, modified or changed and shortend also i will use the photo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mikolaj_Hieronim_Sieniawski_%281645-1683%29.jpg


since all this history information is provided by users often anonymus and without sources i may use them? Im also using Boniecki and Niesiecki as source. Will there be a publishng problem with my commercial book?

Jenki for for yout pomoc Piotrek... Thorek Sekuterski/Sredzinski Sweden I would apreciate if the answer is sent to my email: Thoreks@Hotmail.com Jenki Pan.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.180.104.200 (talk • contribs) . User:193.180.104.200, 09:03, September 8, 2006 (UTC)

re:refs

Hi. In your version, last sections of each line floats over the first version of each other (making the left side of my screen look like a mess). I can picture others having the same problem. Dahn 20:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Not in the examles you cite, but it continues to do it every time I open your version of "Polish-Romanian Alliance", and I've seen this happen in some other articles where the system was used. This either means that the system has a bug, or that your version had a script error in it. Dahn 06:05, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Kilinski.jpg

Załadowałem, proszę o wybranie odpowiedniej wersji "fair use". W przyszłośći postaram się przenosić na en: grafiki na "fair use", jeśli wykryję że zostały użyte. Pozdrawiam! A.J. 09:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Wyniki wyborow

Czy Twój mail z zeszłego roku (ten na post.pl) jeszcze jest aktualny? Picus viridis 20:13, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Tony Judt

Hi... I wanted to let you know I reverted your recent edit to Tony Judt and to explain why. The external source (a blog!) you cited did not contain any statement from the ADL accusing Judt of anti-Semitism. The link is to a blog entry that contains an unsourced quote claiming to be from Tony Judt expressing dismay that a talk he was to give has been moved and rescheduled. The only reference to Judt's putative anti-Semitism came from Judt himself: he quotes 20/20 Network purportedly quoting the Polish Consulate purportedly quoting the ADL accusing Judt of anti-Semitism. Even the linked New York Sun article does not contain any reference to such an accusation by the ADL or anyone else. What is does contain is denials from both the ADL and the Polish Consulate that ADL objections played any role in the cancellation. Were you aware the external link you cited a source contained no such claim by the ADL? --Rrburke 22:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Followup:
Quoting Piotrus:
TJ wrote "anti-Israeli anti-Semites (= me)" where me equals him, thus according to his own words he was accused of being anti-Semite.
Yes, but you offered the link to cite an accusation by the ADL, not Tony Judt's claim of such an accusation. For that matter, he doesn't even claim the ADL or Foxman or indeed anybody "accused" him of anti-Semitism: he implies that the ADL regards him as an "anti-Israeli Anti-Semite." In neither case does that add up to Judt's being "accused of anti-Semitism by Anti-Defamation League," clear evidence of which a reader should expect to find after clicking your external link. The most one might say is that "Tony Judt recently claimed his upcoming speech on Israel had to be rescheduled after the venue was withdrawn by the Polish Consulate in New York, under pressure from the ADL, according to Judt and Patricia Huntington, President of Network 20/20, the group sponsoring the talk."
The uncertain provenance of the message quoted by the blogger is another matter. First, I doubt blogs meet the threshold for reliable sources. I know an uncorroborated citation by a single blogger of a communication (an email, a press release, a letter to the editor? -- the blogger doesn't tell us) purportedly from Tony Judt certainly does not meet that threshold. Every reference I can find to this message from Judt tracks back to the original blog, and I can't find any other coverage of Judt's message. You're an experienced Wikipedian, so I needn't remind you of Wp:rs#Evaluating_sources and Wp:rs#Using_online_and_self-published_sources.
Quoting Piotrus:
Also, from NYS article: "Judt have claimed that debate on the U.S.-Israel relationship is squelched by false accusations of anti-Semitism"
Again, this does not say that the ADL accused Judt of anti-Semitism, which is what your edit asserted. It doesn't say who is levelling these accusations, and it doesn't mention such accusations being levelled against Judt.
Quoting Piotrus:
I wonder if you could look at Talk:Tadeusz Hołówko where we were recently discussing the claims backed by sources citing sources citing sources being translated in each step
Gladly. But I'm not sure they'd be germane to our present case. Does your discussion mention cases in which A says that B told him that C told him that D pressured him not to do something, but where C & D deny such pressure was ever exerted? Judt says that Huntington told him that the Polish Consulate told her that they withdrew the venue under pressure from the ADL, but the ADL and the Polish Consulate deny any such pressure was applied. That doesn't mean such pressure wasn't applied -- people lie -- only that the claim that it was applied isn't verifiable and so shouldn't be included in the article as established fact, but rather -- if at all -- as something alleged by Tony Judt and Patricia Huntington but denied by the ADL and the Polish Consulate.
Besides, even if that were all true, it doesn't add up to Tony Judy being "accused of anti-Semitism by Anti-Defamation League," which is what the text you added claimed.

--Rrburke 01:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Much of the story is confirmed in a Washington Post article. The Polish consul appears to to have backtracked and now admits to pressure having being applied. The article now includes this information. --Rrburke 16:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Polish-Romanian Alliance

Hi. I was about to add new stuff based on the sources provided by Andrei on the talk page. Let me know when you are done, please. Dahn 21:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll add the stuff in several takes (as I am reading the texts portion by portion). I'll let you know when I finish, and you may change the references if you will (perhaps try and see what the problem with themm in this article is - a script error, perhaps?). Thanks. Dahn 21:30, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
All done. Dziękuję. Dahn 23:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Show/hide

Piotrus, have you come across a "side" template that uses the show/hide feature so I can copy the code into the HoP template? I've only seen it used in the "bottom" templates. Appleseed (Talk) 23:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 9th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 41 9 October 2006 About the Signpost

Interview with Board member Erik Möller Wall Street Journal associates Wikipedia with Grupthink
Account used to create paid corporate entries shut down Report from the Portuguese Wikipedia
News and notes Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Please accept my apology

with reference to your following comment : //It is proposed that this article be deleted, because of the following concern:

Hoax/vandalism, one google hit, creator vandalised two other articles replacing them with this content.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus //

Dear Sir, I didn't comitted the above action itentionaly/knowingly. All I wanted to do was to submit a new article about a very important but lesser know warrior clan of India, I thought that edited page will not replace the original one but will be "saved as". Please let me assure you that such mistake will not be repeated in future. I couldn't understood your comment "one google hit" . Please explain. If it is a fault than it may have done unknowingly.

 Please don't delete the article titled as : "Mall Sainthwar Rajputs" a warrior race of India.

Thanks Yours faithfully Shalendra Singh email : Singh_shalendra06@yahoo.co.in India

Working Man's Barnstar and Barnstar of Diligence

Hi! evrik suggested I contact you since you're associated with WikiProject Awards. After some discussion about changing the name of the "Working Man's Barnstar" to something gender inclusive, we realized that there is not much distinction between "Working Man's Barnstar" and the "Barnstar of Diligence". In order to avoid an overly-PC rename of "Working Man's", and given that there's not much difference between the two anyway, I thought it'd be best to conflate the two awards and have only "The Barnstar of Diligence." Your opinion on the matter would be much appreciated! The discussion can be found here. Cheers! -- Merope Talk 17:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Invasion of Poland

Hey piotrus, I'm awaiting your response concerning our debate on the Poland figure. I'm in favor of its remove based on the grounds I have argued. Have a nice day!--72.94.90.144 03:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Leave a Reply