User talk:Halibutt/Archive 20

Please add new comments in new sections. Thanks in advance. Halibutt

Archives(e) Sep 11, 2004 Oct 24, 2004 Nov 18, 2004 Jan 13, 2005 Apr 12, 2005 May 18, 2005 Jun 29, 2005 Aug 30, 2005 Nov 14, 2005 RfA-related (Nov 29) Jan 28, 2006 Mar 17, 2006 Jun 24, 2006 Nov 1, 2006 Sep 5, 2007 Mar 8, 2008 Oct 2, 2009 May 18, 2011 Dec 5, 2012 Mar 3, 2014 history reset Everything else

Disclaimer

If you came here to accuse me of anything, offend me or suggest my parents were commies - think twice before you post anything here. //Halibutt Cool page! I'm really stressed LOL but, anyway how old r u? I'm 11!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by My Dady's girl101 (talk • contribs) 10:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

German Soldier House

Hi. I am writing you because you seem to be the mail contributor of German Soldier's House, an article whose factual correctness seems is doubtable to me, because no actual historical proof seems to be existant. Please look over at the talk page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.168.6.211 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

Mapy

Serdecznie zapraszam do edycji Atlasu historycznego na Wikibooks Proszę o odpowiedź na http://pl.wikibooks.org/wiki/Dyskusja_Wikipedysty:Dawid —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.4.185.100 (talk) 13:54, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Tadeusz_Mazowiecki.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Tadeusz_Mazowiecki.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu badali ^(talk) 22:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for opinion

Halibutt, hi, I know we haven't agreed on some things in the past, but I do value your opinion on many things Poland-related. I know that you've worked on articles related to Polish Army officers, and I was wondering if you could take a moment to offer your opinion at this discussion? (caveat: It's about one of my relatives) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antoni Dunin (2nd nomination). It's my feeling that the debate could definitely benefit from more opinions from people who are actually familiar with the topic area. Thanks, Elonka 17:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, and we'll see! Unfortunately there are a lot of politics going on, and I'm afraid that the article is being judged on other things than just its merits.  :/ If it's deleted, I would find that sad, since I think that it's currently in better shape than most of the other articles at Category:Polish Army officers! I do wish we could find out why he was awarded the Virtuti Militari, but if nothing else, I was very interested in the information that you found, especially about the Battle of Bzura. I was wondering, do you think you could find out which battle that Antoni's older brother died in? The one in the Wojciech Kossak painting?[3] The Death of Stanisław Dunin, Śmierć Porucznika Stanisława Dunina. I was thinking that if there's an article about the incident somewhere on Wikipedia, perhaps I could donate an image of the painting. I know very little about his military career or death, except "starszy syn Stanisław poległ śmiercią walecznych w r. 1920 pod Maciejowicami." Thank you again for the help, Elonka 08:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't tell much about the other of your ancestors. In 1920 the village of Maciejowice in Masovia (or rather nearby Kobylnica; the battlefield of Kościuszko's earlier Battle of Maciejowice) was quite notable as the furthest point up the Vistula the Soviet Mozyr Group reached. There were some fights with Russian front guards there during Piłsudski's offensive (see the article on the Battle of Warsaw (1920) for more info), but the picture show some fights in the winter and in the winter of 1919-1920 the Bolsheviks were some 800 kilometres to the east of Maciejowice. Besides, judging by the Russian uniforms, the picture you linked seems to show a scene from the 1860 January Uprising rather than the 1919-1920 war. This might be a poetic representation (you know, like Bonaparte dressed in Roman armour), but the snow definitely is something fishy. Sure, there are other villages of that name in Poland, but all of them were outside of the Soviet sphere of control in 1920. //Halibutt 12:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and that rings a bell. When I was a child, I remember someone telling me that the painting was indeed a stylized version of Stanislaw's death, and that there hadn't really been snow on the ground! I also remember them saying something about how it was more of a skirmish than a full-out battle. The story that the painting is representing, is that of an ambush -- the enemies (Russians?) had been pretending to be a civilian family, and then as the Polish cavalry approached, the Russians threw off their covering blanket or something and then attacked. The painting shows someone on the sled firing a handgun directly at Stanislaw (you can see the muzzle flash if you look closely at the painting), but from what I was told, that's stylized too, as he wasn't actually killed by that kind of small-arms fire. Another art expert that I spoke to, who didn't know much about military history, was quite impressed by some of the other artistic elements of the painting, saying that there were some breakthroughs in terms of perspective or foreground/background elements in that period of art... I wish I could remember more. I do know that Wojciech Kossak has done a lot of work on patriotic Polish paintings, so there was probably something else that was being represented here about that area or the style of the fighting there, I'm not sure. My father told me that when he was in Poland, he remembered someone showing him a book of Kossak's artwork which talked more about this particular painting, and I think also held some earlier sketches of the same setting, but I've been unable to locate exactly which book. There's a museum somewhere in Poland that has an entire wing of Kossak artwork, yes? Perhaps they have a bookshop, hmm... The link to the January Uprising is also interesting, as I know that there were other family members involved with that. The painting was probably commissioned by Rodryg Dunin. His grandmother Agnieszka Baranowska was a well-known playwright in Poznan, and her husband Stanislaw Baranowski (Rodryg's grandfather), another Army officer, died in the January Uprising. So that link might have been deliberate! But that's all just guesswork. Oh, and the other painting of the man in uniform at my "paintings" page.[4] I'd be happy to donate an image of that as well, if you could figure out where it would be useful. :) Anyway, thanks again for the help, 10:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Images listed for deletion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them.

• Image:Elblag Flaga.PNG
• Image:Elblag Herb.PNG
• Image:Gniezno Herb.PNG

Thank you. Conscious 08:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

PoeticBent and the Free City

So tell me, what convinced you?

PoeticBent cited two things:

• Other articles which use Kraków, many of which he moved himself. It's entirely possible that some of them should have it, by WP:NCGN; if it would help, I'll make that point.
• Policy references which do not say what PoeticBent says they do.

If you are in fact reacting to the appalling baiting going on, please consider that this, in the long run, gives the "victory" to the side with the least scruples and greatest numbers; destroying WP's civility and credibility in the process. Tempting though this must be, are the odds with you? and is it worth it? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

History of Warsaw

I'd suggest you don't waste your time on trying to convince some Lithuanian editors to our POV; it is as stressfull as it is ineffective. Instead, why not try to finish History of Warsaw project? I am sure it will be much less stressfull and much more rewarding.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

You know its not true. We have dozens of long articles that vandals rarely touch.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  06:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

And all articles were related to Lithuania. Do you see a trend? If they don't want our help, let them be. We have plenty of Poland-related topics to develop. I am all for waiting 10 years and seeing if by then we get more editors from those parts who understand words like 'cooperation' and 'consensus', but I am not ready to let few extremists chase me off this project when there is still so much work to do in areas which they don't frequent. Again, I urge you to start work on History of Warsaw, and for each trolling you suffer during it I pledge to buy you a case of beer :) How does that sound? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately in my areas of interest there's barely anyone but extremists. Sure, it was fun to browse through hilarious delusions by Nico, Zyvinbudas or Dr.Dan, but it is fun no more. Once I had plenty of time to write articles - and some of them must've been nice. However, currently my time is limited and I really don't like the idea of wasting it on writing articles for the bunch of hammers to vandalize just for the sake of it. Ever seen Lokyz, M.K. or Dan provide a single piece of evidence to their claims? Nope. Then why should I be better then they are? If they can do harm to this project and go unpunished, then there's no place for me here. Sad but true. I'll let them play their games in peace. Mądry głupiemu ustępuje, or something along those lines. //Halibutt 17:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Why should you be better then they are is rather obvious. And please, show me a non-Lithuania topic you wrote an article recently on and that was subject to trolling?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:43, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

If Wiki is a restaurant, it's a big one. If you insist on eating in the troll section, and complain that they insult you - tough luck. There are many other sections with nice, cultural and friendly people, who appreciate what you do. Again, I urge you: don't get involved with trolls, edit something else. If you don't enter their small section, they will cease to exist for you.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I like your metaphores. But few points of order: 1) is the Lithuanian cuisine all you like? 2) Several people have seen the problem, but it appears that the crazy chief goes nuts only when he see Poles - and as few people frequent the Polish-Lithuanian corner, few people see the problem. I believe that the Lithuanian restaurant is an exception to the rule one bad restaurant in the city odoesn't mean that all food is bad there. One again I think you would solve all your problems if you could just give up on Lithuanian cusine for a few years. I am sure that soon enough, more migrants from that place will come to our Wikitown, and drive out the chief and his troll-aids who wreck their reputation, anyway.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  00:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

As for evidences you failed to provide single academic source to "Expulsions of Poles" claims. Maybe this read will help you clear your mind. It's about Belarus, but I do doubt situation seriously was different In Lithuania. And yes your metaphors really show your level of culture and bias.--Lokyz 14:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

My final argument: in the end, Wikipedia is on the right track. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  16:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)

The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Section break

Ok, I admit I could have and should have handled myself better regarding the last message. But I could not help after reading your posts on Piotrus talk about mad chefs, ultras, and other nice words.

This the very first and the very last time I ranted (BTW, 12 days shy of one year anniversary). I left, healed myself, stopped caring, and returned. In other words, moved on. Now you, on the other hand, have been ranting ever since. So I am just trying to understand, having been in the very same shoes, why don't you move on (either direction)? Renata 20:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Flagge Gdansk.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Flagge Gdansk.PNG. 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 06:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Kraków: 1918 to the present

Thank you for making the text clearer. OTOH, the opening phrase, "the only major pre-war Polish city that was left in Poland after the war" is, strictly speaking, incorrect. Łódż, of roughly similar size to Kraków, wasn't badly destroyed either.
BTW, the sentence as it is now "As the only [...] Polish city that was left in Poland after the war, Kraków remained relatively undamaged..." doesn't read very well IMHO. I'll try to improve it.--Jotel 13:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 26 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bykivnia, 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 13:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

wirtualnapolonia - unreliable

I think you'd be interested in the Polish kitchen cookings by your friend, to experience the true taste of cookies presented [5] as an academic references. Feel free to express yourself.--Lokyz 23:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I have removed that ref from the artile; the tone is really not appopriate for our project.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  04:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:PZL_P.11c.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:PZL_P.11c.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. Calliopejen1 04:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Articles to create

Are you planning to finish User:Halibtt/Jerzy_Wołkowicki, User:Halibutt/Orliñski, User:Halibutt/Kowel?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Grom_Wiesław_Sierociński.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Grom_Wiesław_Sierociński.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. Calliopejen1 17:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Wędrowycz.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Wędrowycz.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 02:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Truthfully, I don't think the image is necessary as Image:Wędrowycz publicity photo.JPG on Jakub Wędrowycz is fine (and too many fair use images brings out the copyright funsters). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:301_Squadron.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:301_Squadron.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 18:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue I (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! -- Noetic Sage 19:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Warsaw_siege2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Warsaw_siege2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 16:19, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Klodzko_BIP.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Klodzko_BIP.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 12:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Lviv Rail Terminal

I think you got some explaining to do here for these two edits[6], [7]. I would like you to state your position, and explain why, the second edit was carried out with no statement on the talk page, even though i already put it. --Kuban Cossack 12:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions[8] made on October 11 2007 to Karolina Proniewska

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. Nishkid64 (talk) 16:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

If you were wondering: Revert1, Revert2, Revert3, Revert4 (partial revert, but you still re-inserted material previously removed). Nishkid64 (talk) 16:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

• Comment: User seized editing the article 24 hours ago. Uninvolved editor should simply warn him to stop revert warring. No point to block him to stop the war as war have already ended as the user stopped editing the article. A stern warning to stay away from an article for, say, another 24 hours and that he may be blocked if he resumes edit warring would have been sufficient IMO. Users with a long record of contributions tend to be more aggravated with blocks and in general, blocks should be avoided if things can be accomplished with other means. --Irpen 16:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Irpen. I thought today was the 10th (I was just looking at the diffs only on the 9th, I didn't see Piotrus's edit on the 11th). There seems no point to prevent this user from discussing, so I have unblocked. My apologies, Halibutt. Nishkid64 (talk) 16:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

• • • Thanks, Nishkid. Let's hope the war will not continue and Halibutt will take this event as a reminder to not revert war. --Irpen 17:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem guys, didn't notice the 3RR anyway. BTW, I'm the one to try to settle some consensus at the talk page - and the one currently waiting for the others to accept or decline my proposals regarding that article (of which I am the author, BTW). //Halibutt 17:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

//Halibutt 17:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Hans Frank

I've added some comments to the Talk page here. Please could you have a look.--Major Bonkers (talk) 11:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Please don't accuse estabilished editors of vandalism

Sorry Halibutt, but this is not how we do it. They do it, sure - but we have to keep better standards.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Pushing one's POV against all references, even the ones provided by the person herself, is disruption of wikipedia. And to me disruption of wikipedia is vandalism. Fullstop. //Halibutt 22:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Consider lessons of WP:SPADE.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Keeping up with the good standards only makes wikipedia more vulnerable to vandalism and POV-pushing. Note I proposed at least 3 different solutions at the talk page - all were ignored. Yet the guys constantly revert the article to their liking. So, I could either follow the good spirit of wikipedia and try to talk to them ad nauseam - or simply revert the vandalism. There's not chance I could force Lokyz to respond to my proposals or questions, just like I couldn't force the Lithuanian club to provide a single piece of evidence for their slander. Reverting vandalism is easier. //Halibutt 23:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

But it doesn't yield a solution. You revert them, they revert you, where does it end? I'd suggest WP:DR, works in 9 out of 10 cases in my experience.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  23:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Other ways do not yield a solution either. I tried using sources, I tried talking things over at the talk page, I tried seeking a third eye, I tried using formal steps... If the only way is to go through painful and lengthy WP procedures each and every time Lithuanian nationalists try to promote their views on Wikipedia, then where does all the fun go? Writing articles should be fun. Caring for wikipedia should be fun. Constant conflicts with their club kills it. //Halibutt 00:53, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sikorski Lyon-Bron.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Sikorski Lyon-Bron.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pagrashtak 19:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bitwa warszawska 1920.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Bitwa warszawska 1920.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pagrashtak 19:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue II (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 19:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

A person is claiming WWII happened because Poles murdered 58,000 Germans before the war

Here [9]

Normally such claims are made by people with rather low skills at wiki and emotional. This wikipedian is quite dedicated editor using multiple sources to present his claims. I would take his attempts at putting this information as fact seriously, and would be glad in assistance at showing that this number is the product of Nazi propaganda. --Molobo 23:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Bitwa warszawska 1920.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Bitwa warszawska 1920.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, then 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, then 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:Fair use, 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 05:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Clarification: What I am tagging for is an absence of an exact source (website, book scen, created myself in photoshop) so as to clarify with certainty where the image came from. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Dialects of the Polish language, was selected for DYK!

On November 2, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dialects of the Polish language, 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.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 00:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Greetings

Hello, I'd just like to stop by in order to thank You for barnstar. I greatly appreciate it especially from a Wikipedian much senior to myself, with such an impressive list of contributions (and as I can see from the user page one of the principal authors of the article about Lviv). Hope will be seeing each other around on Wikipedia. --Vohon 16:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Lwów dialect

On 4 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lwów dialect, 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.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)