Warning: Three-revert rule on Polish collaboration with Nazi Germany. |
|||
Line 88: | Line 88: | ||
Note that you are in danger of edit warring.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 19:08, 17 March 2018 (UTC) |
Note that you are in danger of edit warring.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 19:08, 17 March 2018 (UTC) |
||
:Ok, I'll set up a talk page disscussion, but I have to admit this really comes across as Poland bashing, this is not the correct application of this term and what is the point of having a Polish-German relations tag ther as well? --[[User:E-960|E-960]] ([[User talk:E-960#top|talk]]) 19:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC) |
:Ok, I'll set up a talk page disscussion, but I have to admit this really comes across as Poland bashing, this is not the correct application of this term and what is the point of having a Polish-German relations tag ther as well? --[[User:E-960|E-960]] ([[User talk:E-960#top|talk]]) 19:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC) |
||
== March 2018 == |
|||
[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left|alt=Stop icon]] Your recent editing history at [[:Polish collaboration with Nazi Germany]] shows that you are currently engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit war]]. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|talk page]] to work toward making a version that represents [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See [[Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle|BRD]] for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant [[Wikipedia:Noticeboards|noticeboard]] or seek [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary [[Wikipedia:Protection policy|page protection]]. |
|||
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in your being [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked from editing]]'''—especially if you violate the [[Wikipedia:Edit warring#The three-revert rule|three-revert rule]], which states that an editor must not perform more than three [[Help:Reverting|reverts]] on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—'''even if you don't violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> - '''Tom''' | [[User:Thomas.W|Thomas.W]] [[User talk:Thomas.W|'''''<sup><small> talk</small></sup>''''']] 19:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:15, 17 March 2018
Nice work
Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for all the recent work you've put into the Poland article. It's a good step in removing the issues that often plague Polish topics on Wikipedia. --Samotny Wędrowiec (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Samotny Wędrowiec, many thanks! I figured a bit of grammar fixing was in order. :D --E-960 (talk) 20:35, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Response
Sorry for not responding earlier (re: this) - I'm glad you placed a discussion on each of the talk pages but the wording makes it seem as if you're suggesting it when in fact you already changed it. Still, the replacement maps are mostly as good if not better. The only one one where it really didn't improve the article was at Elbe Germanic peoples (this was reverted by Bermicourt), since the new map didn't contain any mention of Elbe Germanic and the original map was integral to the article. Since most of them are not contested I'd say it worked out. Prinsgezinde (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, E-960. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Łódź
Hi, thanks for re-adding Szczecin, which has the 3rd largest area in Poland. However, Łódź is not a major city. Although it has the 3rd largest population, it is not significant, its metropolitan area is roughly 1 million and has little significance in tourism or the total GDP economy. Thanks. Oliszydlowski, 21:34, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- Hello Oliszydlowski, just reviewing the discussion from back in July [1], and it looks like folks back then were inclined to keep Łódź on the list. Also, it appears that now, also other editors would like to keep the city. Łódź is the 7th largest city by GDP, and 3rd largest by population, so you can't simply argue that it's not a major city because of tourism. The city plays a significant role in central Poland, plus low unemployment and new investments such as the Silk Road railway terminal and Central Airport are going to be built near Łódź. This article [2] lists Łódź as having a +58% GDP increase between 2005 to 2013 (one of the highest in the country). --E-960 (talk) 22:16, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- The topic of the GDP increase is insignificant. We are talking about major important cities right now and not about future prospects. Oliszydlowski, 00:05, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Frederick the Great
Hello, no big deal and sorry to disturb. About the three partitions of (entire) Poland. By the map, Russia was the one who gained most of the territory. (my reason for that edit) I have read about Frederick the Great and Prussia. But wasn't he mainly interested of a westbound expansion ? It was he who moved Prussia's Capital from Köningsberg to Berlin (which until then was a rather insignificant town). Have you any source for Frederick the Great as "the brain" behind this sad part of Polish history ? (Preferably not of the kind used by the Communists 1945-1989). If possible only. Thanks Boeing720 (talk) 21:45, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- Just look at the article on him and the sources contained there. The partitions were initiated by him, both Austria and Russia just went along to prevent Prussia for controlling the whole country. --E-960 (talk) 17:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- When it comes to the 1772 and the first partition, I take your word for this. But Frederick died in 1786, seven years prior to the second and far worse partition, by 1793. Warshaw was ceded to Prussia in the last partition, 1795. But later became Russian until end of WW1. Are the experts saying Frederick was behind all three partitions ? That seems strange. Boeing720 (talk) 03:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- Second partition was initiated by Catherine the Great, and the third was initiated by both Frederick William II and Catherine the Great. So, all things being equal, Prussia can be seen as giving birth to the idea of dividing Poland. This concept only suited Prussia, because Russia already had influence over Poland through Stanisław August Poniatowski, and Maria Theresa of Austria objected to the idea. --E-960 (talk) 16:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- When it comes to the 1772 and the first partition, I take your word for this. But Frederick died in 1786, seven years prior to the second and far worse partition, by 1793. Warshaw was ceded to Prussia in the last partition, 1795. But later became Russian until end of WW1. Are the experts saying Frederick was behind all three partitions ? That seems strange. Boeing720 (talk) 03:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Collaboration with the Axis Powers during World War II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tadeusz Piotrowski (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 11:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I responded on my talk page.
CheersGizzyCatBella (talk) 23:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Help
What was the name of that Polish statesman who in 1930/40 was offered by Hitler to establish the collaborative government in GG? He declined and then was shot by the Germans a few months later? I totally forgot the name of that politician. There were two of them, both refused and got killed. I can't remember names of either of them. I need it to amend the article. Appreciate it.GizzyCatBella (talk) 02:44, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- Is there a Polish board here? Maybe that question could be asked there if you forgot also, that info is how the article should actually begin with. I’m working on it by the way.GizzyCatBella (talk) 03:02, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- Hi GizzyCatBella, I myself actually never knew of this fact, so I don't even know where to begin the search for more info on this. As for a Polish discussion board, I think Poeticbent might know where to find one — being very knowledgable in this area. --E-960 (talk) 09:27, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- I believe such a question would be entirely on-topic at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. MPS1992 (talk) 15:26, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- OMG, got it, it was him Kazimierz BartelGizzyCatBella (talk) 17:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- and Witos of course, thank you people anyway. GizzyCatBella (talk) 17:56, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- OMG, got it, it was him Kazimierz BartelGizzyCatBella (talk) 17:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
GizzyCatBella, nice job very interesting stuff indeed.--E-960 (talk) 20:00, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Take a look/improve, thanks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puławianie_(communist_fraction_Poland)?wteswitched=1 GizzyCatBella (talk) 20:11, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
responded on my talk p
GizzyCatBella (talk) 17:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Suggestion
I advise removing your commentary from the Administrators' noticeboard. They are working on evaluating Fr reversal patterns and aren't interested in the content dispute itself. GizzyCatBella (talk) 18:12, 13 March 2018 (UTC) GizzyCatBella (talk) 18:12, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- When I had a similar dispute on the Poland Blue army page, I got blocked so fast, but if you make accusations about Poles, you'll get a warning. --E-960 (talk) 18:14, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- I know, but never mind the article has been restored to you requested version I think. GizzyCatBella (talk) 18:32, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Talk pages
Please do not comment on other users actions on talk pages, keep it to the subject. You are going to end up wit a block if you keep on (maybe that is why you were blocked so fast last time).Slatersteven (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- Slatersteven, what are you refering to, btw I can dissuss things with other editors and it's there for all folks to see, that's what the talk pages are for. So, is this a blackmail threat? It almost comes across as if you are looking to pick fights becasuse this just looks like Talk Page snooping. --E-960 (talk) 16:10, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- No, talk pages are for disusing THAT article (not what users do on other articles) and suggesting and disusing edits to THAT article (and not the wisdom of other users actions) please see WP:TPNO and WP:TALK#USE violation of these can lead to bans. As to blackmail what am I demanding you do? As to talk page snooping, what do you mean by that?Slatersteven (talk) 16:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- Dude, so give me a specific item you are referring too, because it's all vague. --E-960 (talk) 16:20, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- [3], and now [4], So read the policies and explain to me how these are not violations of them?Slatersteven (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- Slatersteven, I think you are just trying to pick a fight, read through the talk page and see all the direct comments that were made, not to mention yours like this one: I am thinking you both have issues that may need dealing with. Slatersteven (talk) 18:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC) This sounds like a personal attack implying something rude or demeaning about other editors. --E-960 (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- No saying you are both the problem on that talk page and both need to reign it in. Also you are not supposed to edits users comments when quoting them (as you would be aware of if you read the policies). I was saying (as I go onto say latter when I ask the pair of you to stop making PA's (so no I am not singling you out) is that you may both end up being dealt with by admins if you keep on (as I am also saying now. This is my last word on this topic, I am asking you to stop commenting on other users (unless of course you are asking them to obey policy) and I am asking you to only talk about the subject of the talk page, not other pages. I will not ask you again..Slatersteven (talk) 16:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- Slatersteven, I think you are just trying to pick a fight, read through the talk page and see all the direct comments that were made, not to mention yours like this one: I am thinking you both have issues that may need dealing with. Slatersteven (talk) 18:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC) This sounds like a personal attack implying something rude or demeaning about other editors. --E-960 (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- [3], and now [4], So read the policies and explain to me how these are not violations of them?Slatersteven (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- Dude, so give me a specific item you are referring too, because it's all vague. --E-960 (talk) 16:20, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- No, talk pages are for disusing THAT article (not what users do on other articles) and suggesting and disusing edits to THAT article (and not the wisdom of other users actions) please see WP:TPNO and WP:TALK#USE violation of these can lead to bans. As to blackmail what am I demanding you do? As to talk page snooping, what do you mean by that?Slatersteven (talk) 16:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Slatersteven (talk) 18:17, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello. I have struck your delete !vote per WP:DISCUSSAFD, since the nomination counts as a delete !vote, making your additional !vote a double !vote. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 18:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
March 2018
Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polish collaboration with Nazi Germany. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 19:54, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
What talk pages are for
Please see WP:TPNO and WP:TALK#USE violation of these can lead to bans. You have been warned already, please stop.Slatersteven (talk) 12:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
3RR
Note that you are in danger of edit warring.Slatersteven (talk) 19:08, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, I'll set up a talk page disscussion, but I have to admit this really comes across as Poland bashing, this is not the correct application of this term and what is the point of having a Polish-German relations tag ther as well? --E-960 (talk) 19:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
March 2018
Your recent editing history at Polish collaboration with Nazi Germany shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 19:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC)