User talk:Tulkolahten/Archive11

Excuse me?

What are you trying to warn me for? Such warnings to administrators who have done nothing wrong are ill advised to say the least... --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Incorrect. Blocked users do not have carte blanche to abuse their talk pages as they wish. I am an administrator, and do not revert idly and have a pretty good idea what I am doing. Thanks. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Its in the protection policy. There is a reason why {{pp-usertalk}} exists. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

In my judgment, the second use of the {{unblock template}} constituted and warranted reversion and protection. I've been an admin for two years at this point, and my judgment in dealing with these things is fairly sound. At this point we must agree to disagree. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

We have had a difference about the specifics about how the revert policy should be applied. We have discussed our differences. I thought we were done. What is left to discuss? Also, please reply here, if there is further reply, because I like an uncluttered talk page and do not wish to fragment the conversation. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Just saw this, so I reckon that cinches it. Thank you. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Georg Giese

A tag has been placed on Georg Giese 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 notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Avruch^Talk 23:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Talking about strange names

Could you comment at List of famous born Gedanians? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Letov S-231.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Letov S-231.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The German page uses de:Vorlage:Bild-PD-alt, which seems equivalent to Template:PD-old-70. The image therefore seems to be public domain, but I do not know who the photographer was. Olessi (talk) 19:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Petr Ginz drawing dispute

Note: the image appears to be still under copyright. This means that it should not be merely not featured on the main page, but also that it should preferably be deleted. Dahn (talk) 06:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Note: Image is in public domain. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 08:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The image uses an obsolete tag, and the rationale you left on my talk page is not all convincing: it is not PD for being in the Yad Vashem, and it being copied in a magazine certainly makes it more likely that it is copyrighted. It being on commons also adds nothing, since the uploader may have ignored the rules in uploading it. I think you should run that by an expert. Dahn (talk) 14:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I allowed myself to revert your edits on the DYK, since, if this is indeed a problem, people managing the page should know about it - copyrighted material does not make it on the main page. What I am saying is this: an image like that one may or may not be copyrighted, but it generally is. The tag applied to it is obsolete, and the simple fact that someone decided to upload the picture on commons is not an argument. I may be wrong entirely when assuming it is still copyrighted, but I am yet to find an argument that would convince me I am wrong. Dahn (talk) 15:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree to continue this on talk pages, and I agree if you decide to remove all my comments there if it should eventually prove that I am wrong. I'm never sure about fair use and its applications (from my part, I think it may qualify), but note that: a. fair use images cannot be uploaded to commons; b. fair use images cannot be featured on the main page. They are strictly limited to one article, and you have to provide an argument for using them there. If it should prove that I am right, then the image on commons should be deleted there. Dahn (talk) 15:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

That may well be, but one could still upload the image on this project under fair use, if it should prove it applies (and, i must stress this again: using it only on one particular page). Dahn (talk) 15:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

You have stepped into the dangerous lands of meta:copyright paranoia. Of course, nobody and his dog care that we use it or would sue us, but there are some editors who do. If all fails, try fair use.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Piotrus, I simply follow what they told me to follow. If it were after my standards, it would not matter much if it is copyrighted. The problem is that often these issues go unchecked, and we end up with all sorts of anomalies in mainspace. Dahn (talk) 20:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Are there any reasons we cannot switch to fair use with rationale and forget about it for the next few years?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 20:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Yep: it's on commons and, as fair use, it cannot be featured on the main page. Under fair use, it will have to be present in just one article. If it is to be kept under fair use, it will need to be uploaded a second time here, not on commons. Plus, I'm sure that we may forget about this, but there are others periodically checking fair use claims. Dahn (talk) 22:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I will look again, but ATM I am busy with Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Józef Piłsudski‎. Btw, don't hesitate to read this article and comment at FAC if you have some time :) I would greatly appreciate it! -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Adolf Opálka

I missed your older post, sorry. Here's my review: 1) lead needs to be expanded 2) the Out Distance, Last Battle and Aftermath paras are a bit stubby, could use expansion (or just cancel the headings) 3) looks great for a DYK but may be a bit to short for a GA. Expand, expand, expand is my general advice. Btw, did the Out Distance group had a Czech or Slovakian name?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 17:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You may want to comment

Here: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2007_November_29#Polish_occupation_of_Czechoslovakia_.E2.86.92_History_of_Cieszyn_and_T.C4.9B.C5.A1.C3.ADn -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note; could you copy your comment to that RfD discussion? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Grossmann.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Grossmann.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 1 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jaroslav Skála, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 11:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 1 December, 2007, a fact from the article Adolf Opálka, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Western Pipe & Steel

Hi there Tulkolahten, thanks very much for promoting this article, I worked very hard on it so naturally I'm glad to get some recognition for that.

Just one minor point, someone altered the hook at the last moment. Would it be possible to change it? It currently reads that Western Pipe & Steel was "the only shipbuilder to bid" but I'd like it to read "the only shipbuilder to submit a bid" (without the italics of course).

I did ask Royalbroil to make the change but he doesn't seem to be around ATM. If it's not possible to make the change, don't worry, but I'd appreciate it if you could possibly manage it. Regards, Gatoclass 14:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Cancel that request, Royalbroil just did it for me :) Gatoclass 14:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

• THANK YOU for crediting everyone for this round! I'm dealing with major snow problems here right now, but I somehow found just enough time to promote the update. Royalbroil 14:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for handling the DYK credits

Thanks for handling the credits for the most recent DYK update. — ERcheck (talk) 21:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Order of merit

Thanks! It wasn't a big deal, and sorry I couldn't do the whole job, some articles had been edited subsequently and I didn't have time to go through them manually... Cheers though! The Rambling Man 11:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

5 let

Ahoj. Díky za hezkou cenu, ale zatím jsem ve třetím roce svého pětiletého WP plánu :) Mé odhodlání v budování lepších WP zítřků však nepolevuje. Doufám, že ani Tvoje. - Darwinek 13:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Nurse's cap? Think I did. Adam Cuerden ^talk 11:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:Twin projects

Interesting. Perhaps it can be tied to WP:KIND or similar project? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:11, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Lists

These are being split off from List of composers? I must say that first, they're hopelessly incomplete (which the categories are not), and furthermore the lists are redundant when the category serves the same function. This is the same reason I got several similar lists (e.g. List of metalcore groups, List of screamo groups) deleted. Well, I just wrote several articles on German composers, none of which are on that list; check my recent contributions for a few of several thousand that need to be added. Chubbles (talk) 06:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Checkoslovak vs. Checkoslavakian

Czechoslovakian is a noun, Czechoslovak is an adjective. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 22:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Clearly, I was unaware. Chalk up another bit of knowledge to Wikipedia! Tiger Khan (talk) 00:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Your invitation

You invited me to the WikiProject Czech Republic. I am sorry, but as I noticed on my page, I don't contribute to the Czech part of the Wikipedia and this is extended to Czech topics on en: in most cases. —V. Z. ^{Talk • Contributions • Edit counter} 09:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Invitation

Many thanks for your invitation to WikiProject Czech Republic. But I think I can not help in this case. I have only edited some Czech/Czechoslovak Olympic competitors. Kind regards Doma-w (talk) 22:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:OK NAB.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:OK NAB.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mangostar (talk) 19:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I added the tag because I doubted you drew the map yourself--it looks like a scan. Did you draw it? Mangostar (talk) 00:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

If it's a screenshot it's nonfree, unless you took the screenshot from a public domain source. Where did you get it? Mangostar (talk) 12:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:OK_NAB.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:OK_NAB.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image 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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mangostar (talk • contribs) 03:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks! I'm taking things slowly for now, especially because of the holidays, but should gradually start easing into the new tools in a couple weeks.  :) Have a great holiday season, Elonka 23:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Veselé Vánoce

Darwinek wishes you a Merry Christmas!

User:Piotrus and friends, in the midsts of Wigilia, wish you to enjoy this Christmas Eve!

Ahoj! Přeji šťastné a veselé Vánoce a vše nejlepší v novém roce. - Darwinek (talk) 11:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of František Budín

A tag has been placed on František Budín 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 notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Jfire (talk) 05:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

The town voted

The number of the year seems to be 3-digit. But yes, it's quite probable they voted against Poland. BTW - a person moved an article to Expulsion of Germans after World War II and started to impose his POV.Xx236 (talk) 10:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

It's an another person.Xx236 (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:

To je problematicky uzivatel, kazdy druhy clen WP Poland Ti to potvrdi. Jestli jde o ten jeho template, tak si myslim, ze v soucasne dobe je krute konfliktni a i do budoucna predstavuje jisty problem. Jde o to, ze Sudetenland je vskutku velke uzemi, nehomogenicke a neumim si predstavit tuto sablonu v clanku o kazde vesnici na tomto uzemi. Takze osobne si myslim, ze template potrebuje predelat nebo nominovat do WP:TFD. Sudetenland neni pouze nacisticky koncept a osobne mi nevadi, kdyz je v nejakem clanku o ceske nebo polske vesnici napsane, ze vesnice lezela historicky v tomto uzemi, problem je, kdyz se vsude dava tu sablonu, ktera ani nemuze obsahnout vsechny obce, protoze by byla obrovska. P.S. Ja treba planuji vytvorit sablonu na Tesinsko, ktera bude zahrnovat vsechny tam lezici obce (na polske i ceske strane), ale tech obci je snad dohromady 50, takze neni problem. Navic dodnes obcane z obou stran citi a vi, ze ziji na uzemi Tesinska. Kdo z dnesnich obyvatel Sudet ma nejake povedomi o Sudetenlandu? - Darwinek (talk) 12:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

To rozhodne nelze, nemuzes mu v tom zabranit. Nicmene existuji jiste paky jako RFC na tohoto uzivatele. Takovy zakaz muze dat pouze ArbCom a ten by v tomto momente nejspis odmitl zabyvat se tim problemem jako "content dispute". Zkusim ten template nominovat, uvidime co si mysli ostatni. - Darwinek (talk) 12:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Myslim, ze ten community ban, o kterem jsi mluvil muze aplikovat pouze ArbCom. Jinak Ty nemas aktivovanou emailovou adresu? Jde o to, ze komunikace po takovem aj-sik-ju by nam usnadnila kooperaci. - Darwinek (talk) 23:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Since you are interested

In naming discussions for that period, what do you think of this? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 12:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Award

Thanks for the award, I am glad to help out and will continue to help improve coverage of the Czech REpublic, once again thanks.--The Dominator (talk) 19:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Interested in this

Hi, my second contact with you. Please don't take it offensively, but I suggest that the next time you are invited to vote in a name dispute like that of the Union of Cracow and Vilna, please read what the editor that you are supporting has written before voting. It would be helpful to everyone. Best Dr. Dan (talk) 01:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

You might be interested

There is a proposal to name Sněžka-Śnieżka into Schneekoppe[1]--Molobo (talk) 10:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC) --Molobo (talk) 10:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC) He likely is. Just try to be amused by it, really, I doubt such proposals will get much support, as its obvious they are not serious and again Wikipedia guidelines :) --Molobo (talk) 10:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Psal jsem Ti maila před pár dny. Jinak mrkni se na talk:Olza River a přihoď nějaký koment. Dík. - Darwinek (talk) 11:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

A question

There is a discussion about the shape of Bombing of Dresden article, including a question regarding if the lead should consist of a quote[2]. I know you are interested in German history so you might be interested in this. However my main issue is involved in something else. I would like the quote if it can't be removed to be moved to a sub-section about quotes about Dresden, and I would like to have a quote counterbalancing the view with the view of those being represenatitve of victims of Germany. I do recall Bohumil Hrabal writing about it in Closely Watched Trains at the end IIRC. You wouldn't happen to know the quote in English ? --Molobo (talk) 21:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Molobo trolling?

Hi. Sorry to bother you, but you seem to know the user Molobo. Based on the discussions on the talk page of Slavic peoples, I can arrive at no other conclusion than that he is just trolling to disrupt Wikipedia. Having been here for two years, I've never come up against such stupidity before (I'm normally a most polite person and Wikipedia user and I'm sorry to sound so harsh. Unfortunately, I can't describe it any other way). I seriously doubt he is genuine and consier reporting him for trolling. Nobody can have such difficulties understanding things that it needs to be outlined step by step twenty times before he gets it. I'd appreciate your opinion. Thanks and keep up the good work! JdeJ (talk) 17:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Revert

Ahoj. Diky za revert v clanku o Tesine, nicmene to IP ma pravdu :). V roce 1910, v poslednim rakousko-uherskem scitani lidu se skutecne vetsina obyvatel jednotneho Tesina prihlasila k nemcine. Na Sachsenbergu tehdy zili prevazne Zide. Jinak faktem je, ze tuto malinkou ctvrt postavili Rakusane (Nemci) a ceske, polske a lokalni nazvy teto ctvrti se odvozuji od nemeckeho jmena. :) Necham to zatim tak, ale kdyby to zas zmenil tak to tam nech, myslim, ze umysly ma dobre. Nekdy kdyz budu mit hodne casu (nevim kdy) chci cely clanek predelat a rozsirit tak, aby z toho mohl byt Good Article. - Darwinek (talk) 14:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Český Těšín

"Bydleli bychom na Sachsenberku, v domě u žida Kohna, ..." (Jaromír Nohavica, song "Těšínská"). I am not Czech but apparently know more about your country than you do.--Xixaxu (talk) 19:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Good to know

A bit from your friend's correspondence (under the "Long time no see" headline) found and copied to his talkpage (and subsequently deleted by him). As a Czech speaker you should be able to understand although it is not in Czech ("Borok" means "chudák" in Czech, the rest should be understandable). Darwinek´s grandfather is surely proud of him.--Xixaxu (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Trolling again? I suggest Tulko to make not any reactions to you per Jimbo Wales' "Don't feed trolls." motto. Stalkers and trolls like you should not be treated well on English Wikipedia. -- Darwinek (talk) 21:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

This is not trolling. This is only revealing your real intentions here, Darwinek. You are a Polish nationalist and there is evidence out there all editors have a right to see and to reveal to others.--Xixaxu (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:

I am aware of the three reverts rule and today I have made one revert so far. I am not a new user and I do not get scared when being threatened. Are you assuming good faith in accordance with the rules?--Xixaxu (talk) 22:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not threatening you. I assume good faith to all users, except for you. You are the Czech Silesian pro-German nationalist and revisionist and you accuse 12-times awarded Darwinek of being a "Polish nationalist". I never claimed Polish nation is better than Czech or any else and never intended to incorporate EN Wikipedia to PL Wikipedia. Well, you seem never met any real Polish nationalist which I really wish you. All my articles are fair and balanced, that's why I am respected here and am the Administrator. If you want to see real nationalist edits look at other editors or at some your edits. I will continue my fight to present fair and balanced articles and never give up, despite your revisionist attempts. If you are so worried about quality of articles, add e.g. whole 1910 population statistics to Cieszyn article where they belong. I wonder why I have very good relations with all Czech editors here, with many Polish editors, with many German editors and with many Silesian also... ...except for you. That needs no comment. - Darwinek (talk) 22:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

As I pointed out several times before, I do not get impressed by you and your "achievements". Sorry but I simply do not. And most importantly, I do not give a toss who is your friend and who is not. The only thing I consider is what you say. And mostly it is a Polish POV. That is the beginning (and the end) of our dispute here. If you will stop inserting that POV, I have no reason to interfere. And I am not a "Czech Silesian pro-German nationalist and revisionist". I am not Czech, I am not German and I am not Silesian.--Xixaxu (talk) 23:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

...then you are a liar. You claim you are not Czech, German, Polish or Silesian but still you can read Czech, Polish, Silesian and German. Wow! This is truly amazing. Are you even a human being? As for me, I have news for you I ain't Polish, too. I am not even a real Wikipedian and human at all, I live in Matrix, that's the truth. I suppose you live there, too. I just didn't met you there. Maybe you live in other Matrix. Why are you keeping your ethnicity in secret? Do you feel shame for your ancestors? Or maybe for yourself? Thousands of users on EN WP say publicly their nationality and it is not and shouldn't be a problem at all. You should be impressed by my achievements, you didn't achieve anything here, just made some noise and mess. Fact that I have so many friends here speaks for itself, you don't have any which is quite understandable. And for the record, I am not inserting a Polish POV, if I've done so other users would react and not just still and only you. You are the one who is POVing here, with anti-Polish POV which can be seen by your every single edit. God, you must really hate Polish people. -- Darwinek (talk) 00:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Do not be pathetic! I do not take anti-Polish views and do not make anti-Polish edits. (Unless, of course, you consider deleting Polish POV as making anti-Polish edits.) Provide evidence if you believe it is not so. Also, I am by far not the only one to react to your behaviour here.

You ask me about my nationality. I will not tell you as I believe nationality does not matter on Wikipedia. However, contrary to you I am not at the same time 1 a self declared Czech[3] (when talking to editors with Czech ancestry), 2 a European[4] (since the beginning of this calendar year), and 3 a Pole[5], whose grandfather was active in preparations of the Polish occupation of Zaolzie[6] (when talking to your fellow Polish editors).

If you talk about your achievements, why do you not mention that you were several times blocked (once even by Jimbo Wales) for personal attacks or incivility[7]? Why do you keep quiet about being desysoped because of bad behaviour in a dispute relating to ethnic issues?[8]

In relation to the latest edits in Cieszyn and Český Těšín (the Austrian census of 1910) do you still believe there were no Czechs in town[9] or did you "not know" at that time ("… It is not a POV pushing from my side, I would do the same for the Czech minority, if some would be here. …")?

Do seriously think of your approach. You have my sympathies in preserving Polish traditions and ethnicity in Teschen Silesia but I will keep on strongly opposing your POV insertions. They do not belong here. This is Wikipedia.

--Xixaxu (talk) 17:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you, although as I'm officially retired it'd be a little cheap for me to put up barnstars. Then again, when has that ever stopped me? :) Thanks! +Hexagon1 ^(t) 07:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Józef Piłsudski

Since you commented in the last round, please note that the nomination has been restarted. Thanks for the comments and edits so far! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Category Sudetenland

Actually it is empty, it contains only a wikiproject talk which is for being in the category invalid. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 09:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, I deleted it.JERRY ^talk _contribs 12:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

velká série editů

zase se rozjel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Matthead Patří Ti velký dík za bleskovou nápravu a průběžný monitoring tohoto uživatele. --Bluewind (talk) 20:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)