User talk:HerkusMonte/Archive 2

Kolberg

I am busy now,when I am free I will look at page--Woogie10w (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Question

Could you explain why your edits removed information that Polish optaten were treated in the same way German optaten were? Here :[1]. Also why have you inserted information about this without noting(as the author) that these issues concerned Germans rejecting Polish citizenship and who are clearly singled out by author of Optatent throughout the text? Your edits suggested that this issue covered all Germans.

I know I asked you this before, but so far you have not answered. Should I direct this observation to other channels of communication if you are unwilling to explain your edits?

--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Your answer completely avoids the issue. Why have you entered information that was completely incorrect and characterised measures against specific group as measures against all Germans? The writing in Lippelt was quite different from what you wrote. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Silesia vs. Lower Silesia.

I live in Wrocław. Lower Silesia is NOT considered part of Silesia, despite the name, nor do the inhabitants of Wrocław consider themselves Silesians (or even Lower Silesians, for that matter). Silesia, in Postwar usage, refers strictly to Upper Silesia (most, but not all, of Śląskie, and also some of Opolskie). The postwar situation in Lower Silesia was VERY different from the situation in Upper Silesia (Lower Silesia had a very small autochthonous Polish population, and most of the present day population originated from other parts of Poland, especially the Kresy). Kamusela is discussing only Upper Silesia. The autochthon argument had nothing to do with the aquisition of Wrocław after the war, as it did in Katowice or Kashubia. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 12:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I did not say there were NO "autochthons" in Lower Silesia, just nowhere near the number found in Upper Silesia. Their presence had little to do with the decision to assign Lower Silesia to Poland (which had more to do with military defensibilty). Yes, there was some propaganda associated with the change, but in Wrocław, this took on a different flavor than in Upper Silesia, and the role of the autochthonous population was not as important, even though it was exaggerated. Actually, the propaganda in Wrocław had more to do about re-establishing Lwów and Wilno, which were lost to Poland after the war.

For a similar example of counter-intuitive naming, consider Lower Saxony, which is NOT part of Saxony. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 13:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Good editing atmosphere

I saw your recent comment on that. I do support improving editing atmosphere and rebuilding good faith and such. I'd suggest that a good first step would be for you to acknowledge that Poeticbent (and his other accounts) have done nothing disruptive/abusive and should not have been banned from this project. Please note that WP:SOCK allows editors to have multiple accounts if they are used in non-abusive ways. How about that? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 12:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry to hear that. I suggest you reconsider your attitude. Until you are ready to WP:FORGIVE and edit collaboratively with others, the situation is unlikely to change. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 13:12, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Following AGF, I am assuming you are genuinely not realizing that I and others (VM, for example) are perceiving your actions as battle-minded. Please, reconsider your attitude. We want to collaboratively edit with you in a friendly manner, but this cannot happen if you fail to adhere to WP:FORGIVE, WP:AGF and similar policies. If you feel my comments are not helping, I will gladly stop them, as I have only attempted to mediate between you and VM, and in response, got what I perceive as a combative and unfriendly comments on my talk page. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 14:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Since you seem to misinterpret/twist anything I write, I am withdrawing from this discussion. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 14:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmm

[1] Your edit here went completely against the source. Source states in first sentence of the article that he was murdered. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC) In fact it described in detail how he was beaten to death. Care to explain your(another one) edit which completely misinterprets the source? --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

You missed the first sentence where it writes that he was executed by German militia and detailed description of execution.In future since you don't know Polish very well, you can ask me for translation.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Zakatowany=tortured to death. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC) Nope, since the article clearly describes the execution and mentions that doctors ignored his wounds in the very fragment you gave. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:41, 17 January 2012 (UTC) What cancer? Who says that cancer was lethal? It's nowhere in the text you used, in fact the text outright denies this as fabrication and points to ignoring the wounds suffered during the execution. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC) Nothing about cancer in the sections you bolded. And the article states in the first sentence that was tortured to death, also says that doctors ignored his wounds suffered during execution(which it describes in detail, including weapons used to kill him) and so on and so on. In fact at every place the article contradicts what you are claiming. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC) Well I am a native Polish speaker Herkus, and you yourself confessed that "My Polish is rudimental". As I said, in future ask for translations, if I have time I will help you. As to the text-it states in first sentence(as mentioned before) that he was tortured to death. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC) Oh and the text you bolded? It means that they ignored his injuries. Including a shovel that was thrust through his ribs. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Please provide source

You claimed about Masurian delegation It's obviously a prelude to the foundation of the Komitet Please provide source for that. Otherwise it is OR. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Why have you described murder of Poles as propaganda and "Polish activites"?

Please explain why your edit has put murder of Poles into "propaganda" section and "Polish activities". Are you claiming these murders are propaganda or are caused by Poles? I will assume good faith that this was a mistake which you will correct[2]. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:08, 17 January 2012 (UTC) I am not asking you about these issues, I am asking why murder and attacks against Poles is under category "propaganda" and "Polish activities". Poles were murdered by Germans not by Poles and I hope you are not claiming this didn't take place and is propaganda. As I said, I hope this was a mistake that you will correct.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Translation

Hi Herkus Monte

For starters, the text that you asked me to translate, comes from this source [3], which has been provided by Molobo. In the link, I have come across this sentence, which Molobo has not mentioned: "The landrat (...) ordered to beat Linka up, but not to kill him". I will translate the text later, as I do not have time. Still, it looks like the beating of Linka was described in a 1920 "Mazur" newspaper, which,for obvious reasons, was involved in pro-Polish propaganda. I would trust neither Polish nor German papers from 1920, as in the heated atmosphere of the plebiscite, they both were involved in a propaganda war. If I could be of any more help, let me know. Tymek (talk) 14:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Tymek is not a neutral party here as he is heavily engaged in dispute with me Herkus. Why don't you ask a neutral party> --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 15:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I do not recall being "heavily engaged" in a dispute with you. When and where? Tymek (talk) 15:06, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

While it's true that the article says that the landrat ordered "only" to beat up Linka but not to kill him - does this matter?, I think Popieluszko was also supposed to be "only beaten" - that's helluva different than trying to put into the article that "he died of cancer", which is total bullshit and Herkus knows it.VolunteerMarek 17:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

:)

You do realize that 1939 is not 1943 right?--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC) So you are engaging in Original Research? Also sources clearly write that there was settlement there during the war.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:24, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I am unaware of any partisan sources used in the text. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 19:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Gawrzyjalki

[4] I would appreciate it if you didn't refer to my edits as vandalism, as that constitutes a personal attack.VolunteerMarek 06:24, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

yes it is a copy vio

Check the source. The text is copied verbatim from the source = copy vio. Stop edit warring to put copy right violations back in wikipedia.VolunteerMarek 19:35, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I must also add that the edit summary here [5] suggests that you're not quite aware of what constitutes copyright violations. Please review WP:CV and WP:PARAPHRASE.VolunteerMarek 19:39, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Again, one more time, please read WP:CV and WP:PARAPHRASE I linked to above.VolunteerMarek 19:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Please don't refer to my edits as "nonsense"

I admit I was wrong, I believed Polish Wikipedia article and I have corrected this error in Polish Wikipedia. But I find your "nonsense" to be an ad personam attack. Xx236 (talk) 08:51, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Danzig

Hi, I'm not sure why you have changed my 'The population registers of the Free City show that' to 'According to E. Cieślak the population registers of the Free City show that'. Is there doubt about those figures? Otherwise the 'according to' bit would see superfluous. Rsloch (talk) 10:32, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

A modern German court can 'officially' revoke a 1940s Free City judgement? Rsloch (talk) 16:13, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

You've been mentioned

Hello HerkusMonte. Your editing has been mentioned at WT:AN3#How to deal with disruptive reverts which don't actually break 3RR. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:08, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

My New Cap

I picked up this great cap on E Bay [6] --Woogie10w (talk) 12:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

AGF

I just became aware of Talk:Gdansk/Vote#Results_on_VOTE:_Period_from_1466_to_1793 and agree that the current status is correct. My edit was based on the information given in here However, this edit shows a clear failure to assume good faith, by labeling my edit vandalism. a13ean (talk) 20:10, 27 October 2012 (UTC)