Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The list doesn't include Polish writers. "Banning" was a relatively mild punishement, we need a list of authors murdered during the Third Reich.Xx236 (talk) 07:01, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Please add them, and improve the articles. Also, make sure to raise those concerns at their talk, and

WP:GERMANY. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

15:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

It's a task for ten people, not for me only.Xx236 (talk) 07:43, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I have added Interwiki.Xx236 (talk) 07:43, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I had no idea Galicia was such a wonderful place to live until I read about it: Galicia_(Eastern_Europe). It seems that the only problem were the Poles. --85.222.86.176 (talk) 18:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

... that a deadly anti-Semitic riot involving approximately 10,000 people erupted in Warsaw in 1922 in response to a planned concert of Yiddish song by soprano Isa Kremer? Xx236 (talk) 13:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, that seems like a surprising failure of a

fact}} to that sentence in the article (also, should ask the author and nominator, User talk:4meter4, to use more neutral and better referenced hooks in the future). Mind you, I am not saying that the article's claim is false (at the very least, the sources do prove there was a riot), but as things stand, the sentence is unreferenced and controversial (and should've never been let to pass as a DYK hook). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

16:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The New York Times article is a very brief obituary (four paragraphs) that doesn't mention the 1922 incident at all. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Then it seems like

WP:TROUT is even more warranted :) Can you ask the reviewer to comment on the issue? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

03:48, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

It gets worse. It seems the only source for the incident is an interview with the subject herself. See pages 1–2 of this PDF file.

I'll leave a friendly note for

User:Dincher asking for more diligence with respect to future DYK nominations. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk

21:31, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

There is now a discussion at Talk:Isa Kremer concerning the content; see [2] for diffs of edits. Currently the riot is sourced to "The Canadian Jewish Chronicle (14 September 1923)" (offline), this is a pretty poor (hard to verify) reference. Also, please invite User talk:Przemyśl to our project (and mention this discussion to him). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Looking at [3], I suggest that somebody suggests to the involved editors that they need to discuss things on talk, instead of reverting. 3O would probably be useful, too. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:51, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I stumbled across Category:Poland articles missing geocoordinate data and found quite a backlog in how many Poland-related articles don't have geodata (i.e. coordinates). The figures are:

Any ideas on how to tackle this massive work list? Severo^TC 13:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

It also doesn't help us that this bot stopped importing from PL wiki in 2008 due to problems with the formatting of disambig pages: I wonder if that is a problem since solved or if we can solve it somehow. The WikiProject for such geodata is WikiProject Geographical coordinates. Severo^TC 13:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Could you bring this to the attention of that project and the bot creator? Unfortunately, geodata is outside my expertise, but if you need to contact a Polish editor, I'll be happy to translate the massage for you. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Noted at the bot operator's talk page. I don't know what the operator means by bizarrely-formatted disambig pages, whether here or on PL wiki and if the problem has since been solved with them. Geodata is useful because it is what puts the little Wikipedia icons into Google Earth, amongst others. Severo^TC 07:15, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I've now sorted out about 10% of this backlog, but have now run out of suitable data (see my talk page). If anyone can provide me with an authoritative source for Polish geodata that meets our licensing criteria, I'd be happy to use my bot to insert the data into the articles.

One possibility might be to start an equivalent of

WP:COORD on the pl: Wikipedia, by making a Polish-language equivalent of {{coord missing|Poland}} and [[Category:Poland articles missing geocoordinate data]] (would the equivalent be {{współrzędne brakujących|Polska}} and [[Category:Polska artykuły brakuje geocoordinate danych]]?). If any Polish-speaking editors can help me get pl: community approval to create this, and can help me get bot approval on pl: to make the necessary mass edits, I'd be glad to help. -- The Anome (talk

) 11:15, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Update: see pl:Dyskusja wikipedysty:The Anome. -- The Anome (talk) 11:33, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

FYI, there's a dispute going on at Johannes Hevelius (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article and talk page for 7 years now, about whether this guy is German or Polish. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 20:28, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The symbol seems to be international (see this). Pl wiki page on monuments suggests that this is a catalogue of such objects in Poland. Does anybody knows anything more about this issue? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Which issue? The Rejestr zabytków is available and you give the link. pl:Zabytek links the law. File:Monumentenschildje.svg informs, that the symbol is international, to protect the monuments during wars. Xx236 (talk) 12:00, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Poland-related articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:36, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

So I am back, if in a limited fashion. Thanks to all who helped with that, and thanks to all who kept this project alive in the meantime. Over the next days I will be suggesting a bunch of edits here, for your consideration. Please strike them out if you carry them; or let me know if you think they are unnecessary/unhelpful. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Task 36

Batch from

1. Jerzy Józef Potocki
   - unreferenced, Poland-noble, Poland-mil stub, BLP, Poland talk pages projects
2. Folk Dance Ensemble Sanok - borderline for DYK, suggest to the author (User talk:Silar) that he expands it and nominates, also invite him to our project. Talk project pages for Poland and Dance.
3. Multimedia City - Cat:Nowy Sacz, talk:Poland... I am not sure about notability.
4. History of the Jews in Brody - not a stub, Ukraine and Jewish history projects, suggest DYKing to the author (User talk:Roman Zacharij)
5. Racovian New Testament - Poland, Christianity talk projects, borderline DYK, suggest to the author (User talk:In ictu oculi) that he expands and nominates the article.
6. Jeżycjada - Poland, Books talk projects, the tag suggests expansion is coming, so I am inclined to leave it alone for a few days
7. Maciej Dakowicz - still as stub, so Poland-bio and photographer stub, talk: Poland, BLP
8. [4] - please revert this unworking youtube link

A very small batch, even no sport articles :> I wonder if the bot was malfunctioning and missing some articles... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Task 37

Batch from Julian Bilecki started at 14:57, 4 October 2010 to Stattler started at 08:26, 7 October 2010

1. Julian Bilecki - I think that Righteous Among Nations are notable, but this is a sub-stub. Poland and BLP talk projects (and perhaps Jewish history?)
2. Września Miasto (railway station)
   - Poland-stub, rail-station-stub, Cat:Railway stations in Poland, Category:Defunct railway stations (and consider creating their subcat - Category:Defunct railway stations in Poland), talk: Poland and rail projects
3. Września (railway station)
   - as above, but not defunct
4. Dębowiec Sports Arena - Poland talk project
5. International American School - redirect to International American School of Warsaw and tell the creator (User talk:Click2sunny
   ) about redirects
6. International American School of Warsaw - no need for two logos, +Cat:Schools in Warsaw, +Poland and edu talk page projects
7. Simone Simoni - talk: BIO project
8. Dębno oil field, Lubiatów-Międzychód-Grotów oil field, Barnówko-Mostno-Buszewo oil field - like the mines before, need to location categories, to be linked from the location articles, and Poland talk project, WikiProject Energy
9. Koninki - Poland talk project
10. Uniwersytet Przyrodniczy w Lublinie
11. Karol Chodura - Poland, BIO BLP, unreferenced...
12. M-City (Artist) - I'd prod this mess, frankly
    1. Nominated for speedy deletion under G12 (copyright violation)
13. Zespoły Filmowe (film studio)
    - Poland-company-stub, talk projects - Poland, movies

Sport: Emil Pulczyński (Unref BLP!).

Again, not a deluge. Thanks for helping out, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Task 38

Batch from Helena Bulaja started at 14:57, 4 October 2010 to Wuds started at 14:34, 8 October 2010, 11 October 2010

• Helena Bulaja - please tell the author (User talk:Ny-pigeon) about DYKs
• TV Biznes
  - Poland-stub, tv-station-stub, talk: Poland, TV, business projects
• Adam Sowa - categories: 1957 births, Generals of Poland, in references, use {{Polish}} for attribution, talk: BIO, Poland, MILHIST, consider inviting the author (User talk:Kravshera) to our project
• Chopin Statue, Warsaw - Category:Frédéric Chopin, talk: Poland, architecture projects, please tell the creator (User talk:JackofOz) that with a little more expansion this could be DYKable; in fact here's my DYK - but some expansion is probably going to be required: {{subst:NewDYKnom | article=Chopin Statue, Warsaw | hook=... that '''[[Chopin Statue, Warsaw|Chopin Statue in Warsaw]]''' was destroyed during WWII but the surviving mold allowed it to be recast? | status=new | author=JackofOz | nominator=Piotrus}}. Here is a reference that confirms deliberate destruction by the Germans ([5], also [6]) but not the handwritten sign mentioned. A good external link with pre-war photos and such: [7]
  . Should probably ask the author about the reference for the sentence he cites (and if it is a translation, it would be good to provide the original sentence in Polish, too).

I didn't add any pictures, because the article already has two photos from Commons. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

• Tenczyn Castle - Category:Myślenice County, also a good opportunity to create Category:Tęczyński family (link to pl:Kategoria:Tęczyńscy), talk: Poland, architecture projects
• Iwno, West Pomeranian Voivodeship - talk: Poland project
• Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych - time to create Category:Insurance in Poland (part of Category:Insurance by country
  ), Poland-government-stub, talk: Poland project

Sport: Ekstraklasa (futsal) , Marcin Kokoszka , Łukasz Pielorz, Artur Andruszczak , Adam Banasiak, Radosław Mikołajczak , Krzysztof Ziemniak , Grzegorz Wan , Adrian Napierała, Jacek Gorczyca , Adrian Woźniczka, Mariusz Mowlik , Damian Seweryn , Bartosz Romańczuk,

Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Task 39

Batch from

1. University of Szczecin - Poland-university-stub (if it doesn't exist, should be created)
2. Poznań Central Station - Poland-stub, Category:Poznań, railway stations in Poland; talk: Poland project, railway project, iwiki pl:Poznań Główny
3. inline citations
   , iwiki Dom Towarowy Smyk w Warszawie
4. Stanisław Gabriel Worcell - iwiki Stanisław Worcell, talk: Poland, bio projects
5. 201 Schutzmannschaft Battalion - talk: MILHIST, tell the creator (User talk:Jo0doe
   ) about DYKs; here's my DYK proposal (tried to avoid controversies): {{subst:NewDYKnom | article=201 Schutzmannschaft Battalion | hook=... that '''[[201 Schutzmannschaft Battalionw]]''' was engaged in [[anti-partisan operations in Belarus]]? | status=new | author=Jo0doe| nominator=Piotrus}}.
6. Piotr Słonimski - POLAND, FRANCE, BIO projects, tell the creator (User talk:Kencflewo) about DYKs and invite him to our project; DYK proposal: {{subst:NewDYKnom | article=Piotr Słonimski | hook=... that geneticist '''[[Piotr Słonimski]]''' with colleagues organized support for scientists repressed during the time of [[martial law in Poland]]? | status=new | author=Kencflewo| nominator=Piotrus}}
7. Andrzej Węgierski - Poland-bio-stub, talk: Poland, bio projects
8. Feliks Janiewicz - Poland-bio-stub, composer stub, talk projects as above
9. Gregorei Alexandrovich - Russia-bio-stub, needs categories (1739 births, 1791 deaths, Russian revolutionaries), Russia and bio talk projects
10. Zdzisław Bubnicki - iwiki Zdzisław Bubnicki, Cat: 1938 births, 2006 deaths, Polish scientists, talk projects Poland, bio
11. Motl Zelmanowicz - Poland, bio talk projects, tell the creator (User talk:Eliscoming1234) about DYKs, the need to format references, borderline DYK nom already...?
12. Władysława Markiewiczówna - Poland-musician-stub, pianist-stub, regular talk projects
13. Tadeusz Żmudziński - as above
14. Nicholas Oleśnicki - move to Mikołaj Oleśnicki, iwiki Mikołaj Oleśnicki (starszy)
    , regular talk projects
    1. Google indicates that Mikołaj Oleśnicki is the more common name, but almost all of the top hits appear to be in Polish. The English hits seem to prefer Nicholas Oleśnicki. Should I raise the question on the article's Talk page?
       1. You can; my stance has always been that we should not translate first names. Kings are occasionally a special case. Nobles, I can't even recall an example of the past. What English sources? Do raise it on talk if you think it is worth it; in this case I would just move the article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:24, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
          1. Moved. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
15. Pińczów Academy - iwiki Gimnazjum pińczowskie, cat: History of Poland (1385-1569), possibly Polish Unitarians (we need to create cat:Calvinism in Poland, I believe), talk: Poland, education, Calvinism/Christianity WP, also the first and last to Synods of Pińczów
    1. Could you explain what that means (first and last to Synods of Pińczów)? Thanks.
       1. Sorry. I meant that the Synods need talk projects - Poland and religious one. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 03:24, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
          1. Gotcha. Done. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
16. Kazimierz Pułaski Technical University of Radom
17. School Group no. 2 in Pruszcz Gdański - Poland-school-stub, Cat: Schools in Poland, Category:Gdańsk County, talk: Poland, edu
18. Józef Kachel - borderline stub, regular talk projects, remind the creator (User talk:Jack1956) that slight expansion and inline refs will make it a DYK
19. Pioneer Pekao Investments - Category:Financial services companies of Poland, 1992 establishments, talk: Poland, business projects; invite the creator (User talk:Treeman007) to our project, tell him about DYKs
20. Mazurek (cake) - Poland, food talk projects (hey, the article is using my photo :) )
21. Schönberg, former East Prussia - prod/delete, fork of Szymbark, Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship (consider adding the German name and picture to the existing article). Alternatively, somebody could move it to Castle in Szymbark and rewrite with info from pl:Zamek w Szymbarku
    ...

That's the bunch for now, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Task 40

Batch from

1. WP:COPYVIO
   .
2. Adolf Kozieradski - Poland, BIO project on talk
3. Wilhelm Troszel - as above
4. Ján Koehler - as above
5. Yulianna Avdeeva - this one is Russian, but since I seen it... Russia-musician-stub, Russia and Bio projects on talk
6. Ewa Lajer-Burcharth - I tend to veer towards notability for academics, this one needs talk project tags and categories: Date of birth unknown, living people, historians of art, Polish-Americans, Harvard University faculty...
7. Please invite User talk:Kallimach to our project

Is the bot down again? I am not seeing entries after 21 Oct... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:46, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

A photo of Christ the King (statue) is badly needed, should anyone be passing that way... --Kotniski (talk) 09:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

See Talk:Katyn_massacre#Work_needed; there are four citation needed tags, as well as few dead external links that should be piped to Internet Archive or updated with new live versions. It shouldn't take much to clean this Featured Article up; if nothing is done, it will however get delisted... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

• All but two of the listed issues have been fixed by now: a citation request regarding the attitude of the Western leaders towards the Polish-Soviet conflict at the time (first para here); and another one regarding allegations that Nazi Germany knew or was informed about the massacre beforehand (fourth para here). --Illythr (talk) 22:11, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I finally took a look at {{WikiProject Poland}} after reading Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland/Archive 6#Assessment and found the problem that makes class=B return a C-Class rating. The problem is the B-Class checklist which is used by the template. It seems that it is compulsory to use it to enable the B-Class rating to appear. Now, I don't use checklists and the like at all (I think that WP Banner ratings are for indicative purposes so we don't need to be too strict), so I would propose removing the checklist altogether, but I don't know if other people use it and if it's popular. Severo^TC 20:59, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I actually like the checklist. I think we should standardize to the highest standards, which means the projects using those checklist. An ideal project, to me, would be like MILHIST, with enough activity and will to review B-class and A-class articles. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

That list is in need of inline references. See discussion. There is a current general reference (http://web.archive.org/web/20070701095957/www.savingjews.org/docs/clergy_rescue.pdf) but we really need inline cites for each community mentioned. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:52, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

The article A Jungle Book of Regulations has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references found only a single published (gBooks) very minor mention of the subject, fails

WP:V

, the polish language version is also unreferenced

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 17:19, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I have added the IMDB link. The critics was partially wrong.Xx236 (talk) 08:44, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

At [8] you can find links to a bunch of Poland-related archives of historical documents in the (most English-speaking) West. They often have a lot of nice historical images that we could use. If you could email them (using text

Why these ones? I would add The Cruise.Xx236 (talk) 08:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC) Kalina Jędrusik - red. She deserves an article. Xx236 (talk) 09:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd get rid of the three notable sections as small list sections in articles of "notable" people almost never add anything that hasn't or shouldn't be written in the prose and it ends up being an editors unsourced favourites list. The notable films section already has a separate list article where the criteria for inclusion can be defined and similar articles could be created for actors and directors. Severo^TC 10:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the 3 lists, there is also

I'm danish, writing on danish wikipedia and are participating in the Danish variant of WikiProject Lithuania, and wants to translate the artickle about Kalduny. But .... I am sorry to say, this artickle is of so low quality that I will have to rewrite it totally! Pls. look at my critic on the talkpage! PerV (talk) 12:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

[9]. Volunteer Marek (talk) 00:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

So I am back, if in a limited fashion. Thanks to all who helped with that, and thanks to all who kept this project alive in the meantime. Over the next days I will be suggesting a bunch of edits here, for your consideration. Please strike them out if you carry them; or let me know if you think they are unnecessary/unhelpful. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Task 41

Batch from Mater Dolorosa (Berlin-Lankwitz) started at 21:17, 24 October 2010 to Ján Fröhlich started at 09:22, 29 October 2010

• please invite
  User talk:Staszek Lem
  to the project
• Konstanty Górski - talk page: PL, BIO; consider making a disambiguation for 1) Konstanty Górski (1862-1909), Polish writer and historian and 2) Konstanty Górski (1826-1898), Russian writer, historian and military officer (bios on pl wiki)
• Polish Penal Code - Polanmd, law talk projects, law-stub
• T:TDYK
• [[Church of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Kraków]] - linked from T:TDYK (not nominated by the creator; a second word of encouragement would be nice at User talk:Kallimach), so just assess as start, low-importance, and add to WP:ARCHITECTURE on talk. I guess {{ChristianityWikiProject|class=start|importance=low|yes|catholicism=yes}} makes sense, too.
• Pultusk Academy of Humanities, I would create Category:Pułtusk, and Pułtusk
  should be reclassed to start class
  • As it's not a city county and there are very few town specific articles, I think Category:Pułtusk County does the job. Severo^TC 09:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
• Zen Podpora - unreferenced, I'd consider prodding it
• Julia Niewiarowska-Brzozowska - can you say "stub"? Also, Poland/BIO talk projects
• Bieniszew - hey, Kotniski, I thought we stubbed all geo places, why am I still seeing some in the new feed (can somebody notify Kotniski of my comment here?). Anyway, Poland template on talk needed, and pl interwiki to Bieniszew if the bot doesn't do it first. Invite User talk:Bratonufry to our project.
• Lodz Papers in Pragmatics - should be reclassified as journal, not magazine; add to Category:Pragmatics, add link to homepage ([10])
• Maria Sadowska - Poland talk project
• Paweł wakarecy - not sure if he is notable (prod? I will start AfD on pl wiki version), move to Paweł Wakarecy, needs categories, talk projects
• Russian-speaking Ukraine - move to All-Ukrainian Non-government Organization “Human Rights Public Movement «Russian-speaking Ukraine»”
  (I think....), bold the full name in text, add Ukraine talk project, Cat:2008 establishments...
• Diocese of Inflanty - add Category:History of Poland (1569–1795), please tell the creator (User talk:Maliepa
  ) that with slight expansion and inline refs this would be a good DYK candidate
• Krzysztof Michalski - Poland-stub, philosopher stub, tl bareurls (or fix it), Poland talk project
• Hermann von Wartberge - hmmm, isn't this still a stub, length wise? BIO talk project... German nationality? If so, needs appropriate catgories and talk project
• Mojżesz David Kirszbraun - Poland-bio-stub, Cats:Polish mathematicians, Polish Jews, on AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mojżesz David Kirszbraun). In the past, we have determined that entry in the Polish Biographical Dictionary is enough for notability; he is listed there (see User:Piotrus/List of Poles/Jesionowski-Kisielewski)
• invite User talk:Those Who Helped to our project (and possibly to Jewish history one?)
• this argument, if kept (unreferenced, and while true of the Yugoslavian, not true of the Soviets, AFAIK) needs to be moved to the note (does not belong in the lead)
• [11] - no prejudice towards AfD discussion, but undiscussed deletions (through redirecting) need to be reverted
• [12] - rv, incorrect category (date range)

Sport: 2011 Speedway Grand Prix of Poland II , 2008 PLFA season , 2009 PLFA season , 2010 PLFA season ,

I have stopped listing sport bios by Marekchelsea, as others have noted, they are actually properly categorized, stubbed and talk templated by him (good job, Marek!). I would put it for your consideration if his activity does not merit one of our project awards (I awarded him a sport barnstar for now).

And I was right, some bod failure prevent it from reporting articles from Oct 20-24 :( --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Task 42

Batch from

• Chopin Hill - Poland talk project, rate as stub
• Chopin Ridge - ditto
• Warszawa Dome - ditto
• Krakow Dome, Krak Glacier, Kosiba Wall, Stwosz Icefall, Funk Glacier
  - ditto (what is it, Antarctica week?)
  • I think we should create a category to house these and other articles: I'm thinking either Category:Poland and Antarctica (in line with Category:Science and technology in Antarctica e.g. Germany and Bulgaria) or Category:Polish Antarctic Expedition: any thoughts? Severo^TC 10:22, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
    • Poland and the Antarctica is probably the best. By the way, Polish wiki divides Category:Outposts of Antarctica into Category:Outposts of Antarctica by country, which is a good idea (there are five Polish stations, three of them have English articles, I've added the remaining two to my "to do" list). It has no Polish-Arctic category, however, and Polish Antarctic Expedition is also redlinked. You may also want to drop a comment about our discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Antarctica. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:12, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
      • Category:Poland and the Antarctic created; all above articles and all redlinks to Polish Antarctic Expedition added. The categorization of Antarctica is a little thin but I think it cleans up our side of things. Severo^TC 16:43, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
• Polish Bowl - sport, Poland talk projects, same for Polish American Football League
• Motława (ship) - Poland-ship-stub, Category:Ferries of Poland, Poland and ship talk projects
• PKP class ST45 - Poland, train talk projects
• Waldemar Sierański - Poland-actor-stub, Poland, BIO talk projects
• Joanna Bartel - ditto
• Leszek Malinowski - ditto
• Maciej Stuhr - ditto
• Natalia Kostrzewa
  - ditto
• Polish Women's Alliance
  - unreferenced, talk project: feminism, organization, Poland, USA
• Arriva RP - unreferenced, talk: Poland, company
• Szafrankowie Brothers State School of Music
  - talk: Poland, education, music
• Krzysztof Urbanski
  - not sure about notability, needs categories, wikify, talk projects...
• Polish National-Territorial Region - assess as stub, invite the creator to our project (User talk:Nietulisko
  ), tell him about DYKs
• Faculty of Materials Science and Technology of Kazimierz Pułaski Technical University of Radom - talk projects like with other articles in Category:Kazimierz Pułaski Technical University of Radom
• Karolina Kózka - Poland-bio-stub, saint-stub?, talk project: BIO, Poland, Saints
• [13] a bunch of very useful historical images were deleted due to insufficient fair use rationale. Please undelete/ask for them to be undeleted and provide the rationale (per Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline; example of a good FUR on a related topic is here)
  • Might it be that they should have been under the same license as File:Dywizjon 303 4.jpg? Or were they from a different source? Severo^TC 11:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
    • Without restoring (or admin to look it up), we cannot tell. Malik is an admin, could you leave him a note about that? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:58, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
      • I'll undelete them and provide FURs over the next few days. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Sport: KSW XV .

Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:47, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

A suggestion

I am grateful to all of you who are helping out with this. I wonder if I may interest you in not only helping to carry out the tasks I've listed, but in preforming the analysis yourself? Having several people doing this would not only lessen my workload, but would help to avoid unfortunate situations like loosing over a quarter of NA reviews (as happened earlier this year) when I was not able to carry out those tasks.

To avoid double work, I'd suggest you list the articles you've reviewed and acted upon here in the format I am using; or even you could just list that you have reviewed the articles from x dated y to a dated b (like I always do in my task header). This would create less work for me, and add redundancy to the project. Anybody up for that? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 13:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism for reverting

• [14]
• [15]
• [16]
• Please review this. I am not sure if it is vandalism or not, but "tag: references removed" raised my eyebrow. I do not have time to review it in detail myself currently. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
• [17] and [18]
• [19] (how come this edit summary did not trigger any antivandal response is beyond me)
• [20]

Update

With the newest amendment I should be able to resume carrying out majority of the above tasks myself. There may still be occasionally some issues in controversial articles I will report here, however. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Task 43

Please let me know if there are any objections to those edits:

• Peace of Riga: [21]
• Poland Anti-Religious Campaign (1945–1990): [22]

If there are no objections, I'd like for an editor to join the talk discussion (in the first case) and restore my self-reverted edits (in the second case). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:38, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, as I am staying away from potentially controversial articles:

• Warsaw Process
  : Poland, Ukraine, law-stub, Categores: Trial, 1935 and 1936 in Poland, same in case law, Polish-Ukrainian relations, low importance for pl wikiproject, add Ukraine and law WikiProjects
• Polack#Surnames - I think this should be split off into a name disambiguation, at the very list, please add {{split}}

This is a generalization of this discussion. I would like to invite all authors of articles related to history of Poland to check licenses of the images used in their articles. If image seem to have a bogus license like File:Gombrowicz2.jpg (which was used in 34 wiki articles) claiming {{PD-self}} for historical image, or File:Pope-poland.jpg, File:Strike Gdansk 1980.jpg & File:Okragly Stol 1989.jpg which are missing names of books/articles where they were published prior to 1994, as required by the PD-Polish license. There is a good chance the images like that will be eventually deleted from Commons, so it would be good to find replacements for them before they disappear.

One way to do that is to look through your handy library of books and magazines published in Poland before 1994 and find photographs related to your articles. If any photographs are already on commons then add you book/magazine to the source field. If the quality of the image published is good than it can be scanned otherwise one can often find identical historical images on the web. --Jarekt (talk) 15:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

The Julian Marchlewski article has yet to receive an assessment. Since it falls within the scope of this project, I assume at least someone is interested in assessing it. --Piast93 (talk) 19:17, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

And many other articles at Category:Unassessed Poland-related articles - but done anyway. Severo^TC 19:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks--Piast93 (talk) 19:50, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I've got another question. Wouldn't the Bohdan Khmelnytsky article fall within the scope of this project? Although he wasn't an ethnic Pole, he did lead an uprising against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. For that reason I assume that he would fall within this projects scope, but I'm not certain because I'm a new editor. Thanks in advance for your time. --Piast93 (talk) 19:56, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. Volunteer Marek (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't asking you to do it :P That does answer my question though, so thanks. --Piast93 (talk) 21:03, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

For the unassessed articles which are templated as stubs, couldn't we have them assessed by bot? To cut down on false positives it'd be good if the bot only assessed articles older than some time (to be conservative I'd say older than at least 6 months), to avoid newly created articles (I often create new stubs, then a few days later expand). This would cut down on the # significantly and let us focus on assessing non-stub articles. Volunteer Marek (talk) 00:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

You have a good point. I just don't know about the feasibility of it. Admittedly, I'm not the most technologically adept person. If it is possible to do I'd probably support it.--Piast93 00:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

It is possible, but I have been manually checking all articles with stub templates and in the unassessed Poland-related category to check if they are really stubs first and, tbh, I've nearly finished :) Severo^TC 05:57, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Re Talk:Poland#Religion_2

• The editing pattern of both: HistoriaPolska (talk · contribs), and 72.79.115.210 (talk · contribs), logging in and logging off,[23][24] seems identical with two IPs: 72.79.80.9 (talk · contribs), and 68.239.233.45 (talk · contribs) previously blocked for disruption (see toolserver lookup: [25][26][27]). I don't know how to deal with this new challenge? HistoriaPolska seems unwilling to cooperate with others. Please take a look at their edit histories, with the new barrage of copy-paste jobs from Commons, including huge galleries of randomly chosen pics added to a number of cities (Kraków, Poznań, Wrocław etc.). — Tatry (talk) 20:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Regarding this text, removed due to

I concur. The main issue is that the source died some time ago. Instead of the report, it downloads some garbage. Unless we verify the facts against the source, they are a lie. Artem Karimov (talk) 17:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

What about

WP:AGF that the orginal editor who sourced them did it properly? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

17:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Still, I do challenge the content. If it cannot be verified, then it is to be removed. Artem Karimov (talk) 18:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

As for the AGF and related stuff, when it comes to verifiability we have a sort of "guilt until proven innocent". Content is a lie unless supported by RS. Artem Karimov (talk) 18:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

This might be a browser issue or something. I have no trouble accessing the link (free). Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Weird, maybe it was down few days ago, now I can access it too. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:50, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I still cannot get the file. The browser downloads GetTRDoc file. I have tried in Chromium and IE9. Artem Karimov (talk) 15:11, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I had no trouble in Safari, have you tried that? Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Works for me in SeaMonkey. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Here is another online version. [29] As it turns out, it's a master's thesis. Debatable as a reliable source; Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Scholarship mentions only finished PhD dissertations. The refs he cites could be used instead. Novickas (talk) 00:30, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

WP:RS#Scholarship mentions master thesis as well. It can be used provided notability (scholarly influence) of the thesis is shown. This condition is not satisfied in this case so I removed sections again. By the way, if someone wants to restore the text again, at least they need to make it neutral. Artem Karimov (talk

) 14:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Just as a reminder, there's currently 192 unreferenced BLPs tagged by this project. The list is here. I will be looking over some in the next few days when I find some time for it but of course the more the merrier to share the workload. Severo^TC 15:10, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I should be able to help out with most of these now. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:00, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I have started Forced labor of Poles after World War II, now as a disambig. Xx236 (talk) 09:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

The article is quite old, lacks sources, contains a namber of errors.Xx236 (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Same is true for many, many other articles. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 14:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Yep. It has only one old reference which can hardly be checked. I will not go for AfD for now but the article really needs a contemporary online source. Artem Karimov (talk) 22:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

It does, because I am pretty sure that the listed source is not covering the article fully, so major parts are unreferenced. But if we were to delete all articlse in such state, we would lose more than half articles on Wikipedia :/ In the end, if you want an article improved, fixing it yourself is the best way. I am not being sarcastic here, but speaking from my experience, if we don't fix it (and I don't have the time and will for it), I will bet you that it will stay like this for many years... there is too much content to fix/create, and too few of us (heck, I estimated recently that it will take over a hundred years to finish stubbing this project, at the current activity levels...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:57, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposal for edit/expansion of this article:

Goal difference (would only demand a subtraction because goals for and against are already there) Points moved furthest right in the table, as this is more regularly seen. Special marking of european cup qualified teams and relegated teams. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightshadow1990 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I have little knowledge of sport articles; other than also asking at

WP:BEBOLD :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

14:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Same is true of most Ekstraklasa season articles - be bold, Nightshadow1990! Severo^TC 14:53, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I just completed an activity check on our members (active ones, seeing which are still active). Not too bad :) Anyway, I dropped the following note on the less active members talk pages:

That got me thinking - maybe we could create a newsletter? I can do it, I just need your ideas for what to add to it other than a list of tools I mention above. If you'd like to write a piece (article, advice, etc.) on anything to be included in it, go ahead! This reminds me I need to finish the WP:SOCIOLOGY newsletter now... :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:35, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

The main thing with this kind of thing is always to settle on a realistic frequency, which in turn is going to be a function of interest. Should this be monthly? Bi-monthly? What kind of "sub-headings/topics" would it have? One thing it could include is a more thorough BLP report, including suggestions for articles to be sourced (i.e. picking out the more important one out of the big list). Another way to slice it up would be contemporary/politics/history. It's worth exploring but we should probably get a good gauge of the interest out there. Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:27, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Take a look at the sociology newpapers I am doing, currently at two a year. I could do the same for us. If you'd like to do a BLP report, that's great. Picking the most important articles for collaboation... that was tried before and failed, it does seem to me that trying to get people to work on a specific article is hard; getting Wikipedians to work together is like herding cats :) See

Wikipedia:Polish Wikipedians' notice board/PLCOTW, now that's a piece of the project history... it died before I became really active :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

01:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, ok, so how many active members do we currently have? Maybe rather than trying to get people to collaborate on articles they may not be interested in, the newsletter could report the articles that people are already working on, in case someone somewhere can help. Go with the flow rather than try to "wielkich rzek zamieniac bieg". At the same time it would be good if the newsletter highlighted particular areas - like BLP or article assessment - that need work. Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:51, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Would someone who knows Polish mind looking at http://www.muzeumniepodleglosci.art.pl/pawiak_-_historia_wiezienia.php and confirm whether the source supports information at Pawiak#World_War_II? If the information is sourced, the sentences which support the info need to be indicated in the citation. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

It would help if you could be a little more specific about the article info you're wondering about. Looking over it quickly, it seems the statement "Approximately 100,000 men and 200,000 women passed through the prison" might be an inaccurate translation of Szacuje się, że na około 100 tys. więźniów, którzy przeszli przez Pawiak w latach 1939-1944 - 37 tys. zginęło w egzekucjach, zostało zamordowanych w czasie przesłuchań na Szucha lub w celach, albo zmarło w szpitalu więziennym. - "It's estimated that from the around 100,000 prisoners who passed through the prison between 1939-1944, 37,000 died in executions, were murdered during interrogations at Szuch's alley or in their cells, or died in the prison hospital". I'm not seeing the "200,000" part anywhere in the link, though the 37k is there (there was an an "associated" prison at Serbia (no relation to the country), which was specifically a women's prison, so maybe that has something to do with it). The 60,000 number also seems to be supported by the source: Około 60 tys. więźniów wywieziono do obozów koncentracyjnych, najwięcej do Auschwitz-Birkenau a także do Ravensbrűck, Gross-Rosen, Majdanka, Stutthofu, Sachsenhausen, obozu pracy w Treblince i do Buchenwaldu. - "Around 60k prisoners were sent to concentration camps, most of them to Auschwitz-Birkenau, but also Ravensbruck, etc.".

So the only discrepancy is the number for 200,000 women prisoners. Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:36, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

About "It would help if you could be a little more specific about the article info you're wondering about" - It has to do with all pieces of information cited to that particular source. When using foreign language sources one should indicate which sentences support the English text.

However the discrepancy of the women's prison numbers noted on the talk page was the reason why I made the inquiry

WhisperToMe (talk) 01:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

When using foreign language sources one should indicate which sentences support the English text. - lol, if only it were so on Wikipedia. I'm still waiting on a whole bunch of "indications" from German language sources widely spread throughout Poland related articles but they haven't been forthcoming. Anyway, I'll try to oblige. However, I think I'm missing something in this particular instance - there appears to be nothing on the article's talk page [30]. Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:05, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I think you're referring to this [31] - but that's not the article talk page. In any case, if that editor is right it would be a case of an extra 0. Which could be, but it's apparently from a different source. Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:10, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Thinking about it some more it does seem that since 37+60>100 the 100,000 number is for Pawiak exclusive of the women's prison at Serbia. Will look into it more. Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, sorry. I meant the inquiry on the Correction and detention page. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

And btw, anyone know the copyright status of the images in that source? Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I think pre-1923 items are PD-old. Later are not, sadly. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Serbia was a building next to the prison for men.Xx236 (talk) 11:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Are live again: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Poland#Article_news. Enjoy! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Good stuff! But to see the notices show up on my watchlist, I should be watching Wikipedia:WikiProject_Poland/Article_alerts - is that right?--Kotniski (talk) 14:32, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I believe so. Good point! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:41, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Can someone help me with this user - 72.79.115.210? He/she is permanently spamming the Warsaw article with an image gallery. I've already shortened the article by using templates (142 kilobytes long initially). Thanks. BurgererSF (talk) 00:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

• Read my comment above, under Your attention might be required. — Tatry (talk) 00:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

• You may want to request
  WP:AN. I am afraid we do not have many active admins on this page. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}
  01:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

The term is somewhat ambiguous. Similar article on plwiki is a source of controversy as some editors suggest that it is a colloquialism and really not a proper terminology. 'Polish tribes' are de facto 'Slavic tribes'. In the early Middle Ages such a term did not exist. There is no "German" or "French" tribes. And Masurians in a list of Early Middle Age 'Polish tribes'? respectfully, --Emanek (talk) 09:13, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

• I've done a minor, unprofessional, ad hoc edition removing modern ethnographic groups. But this list needs lots of professional attention, which was already discussed.
  talk
  ) 13:24, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
• "Polish+tribes"&btnG=Search+Books "Polish tribes" is used in over 800 books; and "plemiona+polskie"&spell=1 "plemiona polskie", in over 700. I think the term is notable, but the article can certainly benefit from a (sourced) discussion of the problems of definition (Emanek, could you source your argument there?). And of course, this article, like many others, needs much expert attention - that goes without much saying :) I'll notify User:Orczar, perhaps he will weight in. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 14:21, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
• "Tribes of West Slavs that lived in the territories that became Polish" in the current article seems a correct practical definition. Some were mentioned by the Bavarian Geographer, other supposedly later by Nestor the Chronicler (see the Polish article). Common sense suggests that up to the 10th century, or even after, they were no more closely related to each other than to other West Slavic (e.g. Polabian or Czech) tribes. It makes sense to speak of "Polish" tribes only as the tribes that happened to make up Mieszko's Poland. This was not an actual family of tribes, which is why the term did not exist in the early Middle Ages. It is however widely used in older literature, which can be a practical reason for using the "Polish tribes" terminology. I think the term Polish tribes has that limited meaning, although there were no actual "Polish" tribes, only Slavic. In light of this definition, two border tribes cause additional dificulty. The Lendians would have stayed in part outside of Mieszko's Poland, only to be taken over temporarily later by Bolesław Chrobry (Grody Czerwieńskie). Same for the Pomeranians, since Szczecin Pomerania has not been a part of Poland except for an early and relatively brief association under Mieszko I and the beginning of Bolesław Chrobry's rule (reconquered briefly again as a fief by Bolesław III). Orczar (talk) 21:54, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
• I have slightly changed the definition. In that sense, I believe, it is more accurate and doesn not 'create' new ethnic genome. Thegeneral nature of my objection was the term itself, not a particular part of the art itself. But once placed in the proper context, it might be usefull. yours, --Emanek (talk) 09:09, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

In keeping with our yearly tradition, I wish you all

Wesołych Świąt wszystkim. Volunteer Marek (talk) 03:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Best wishes to all for a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:03, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Is up for deletion; it was not tagged by Poland project template so will not appear at the Article Alerts. Discussion is related to recent deletion of a parent category; I am not sure I agree with it... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 12:54, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Large amount of categories are not PL-tagged... I will start a discussion about this below. Severo^TC 21:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Should we get rid of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/to do? I believe that the to do list have proven to be a failure: they are rarely seen, rarely maintained and almost never inspire people to act on them anyway. This "to do" list is a big and useless "wish list", taking space on our project main page. Manual updates have been superceeded with Article News bot anyway. I suggest retiring it. Thoughts? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:42, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I chopped it a bit a few weeks ago. As it remains, it is at the very least far too large. These kind of lists have a tendency to be added to with no one removing (similar is the non-bot part of the article announcements page). I don't know if maybe a to-do list does have a use - maybe there should be a simple "things to do" for newcomers to get their teeth into without looking through long cleanup listings reports. But if so, I'm thinking of maximum ten things such as "Reference a Poland-related BLP" which wouldn't need so much changing? Perhaps there is also a role for things which aren't done by bot - such as missing PL-related articles from PL wiki. Severo^TC 21:08, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I have redesigned Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland, mostly by moving things around. I have also added several useful links, and improved functionality of some elements. Please feel free to improve on that; you may also want to read that page from top to bottom - you may find we have some tools you never knew about (as was a case with myself, too!). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:47, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking of making some similar changes but didn't get round to it so I heartily approve :) Severo^TC 21:21, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Or perhaps defining scope by categories... I noticed a while ago that many PL-categories were not tagged and have been going through as I see fit tagging them. However, I am programmed only to tag categories which I consider all the articles are automatically in the scope of this project (to make it easier to check at any time if all articles in such categories are tagged and to tag the ones which aren't). I have found some tagged that I don't feel meet this criteria. First are biographical categories of people in Poland - although not notable for being in Poland - footballers and the like who are not from Poland but play for Polish clubs. The second are geographical categories where the geography includes Poland and elsewhere - take Category:Belarus–Poland border crossings as an example. All Poland articles in that category will already be covered by the extensive PL geography category tree. As such, I propose to: tag all categories where all articles are within the scope of the project (and remove categories which are tagged but are not within the scope) and create an exclusion list of categories to exclude parts of the Category:Poland tree as we see fit. Severo^TC 21:18, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

The category structure can be confusing. I'd tag the P-B border crossings, as if it is at least partially Poland-related, it belongs to this project. The footballers who play in Polish clubs are probably outside our scope, but defining the border is tricky. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:56, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Um, there's a note at the top of User talk:Emax saying I should notify you of any issues, including source issues with images. I've just nominated 4 of Emax's images for deletion, because the only source was "Author: Screen2", whatever that means. So, giving y'all my FYI. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I removed the delete tag from Commons images, the author refers to Screen2 (linked from the blank images). The local en wiki copies can and should be deleted, of course, as redundant and available on Commons. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:20, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

There are several issues, the current article rather misinforms. BTW - how do we write names of high schools in Poland? "graduated the XVII High School by the name of Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski" ?Xx236 (talk) 12:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I would call it the "the Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski 17th High School". I've made a few improvements to the article and moved the technikum section to a new article,

Technikum (Poland), which could also use some improvement.--Kotniski (talk

) 12:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

The "example" comes from Wojciech CejrowskiXx236 (talk) 14:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

In the first paragraphs on the Polish diaspora in North America there is a reference to the Polish-Jewish relations and the Holocaust. I do not think this is the right place for such reference. The Holocaust in the occupied Poland has nothing to do with the Polish diaspora.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jozbptr (talk • contribs) 19:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Which article do you mean? There are no articles on

History of Jews in Poland, an article itself in need of an update...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

15:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

The information on Poles in North America is very incomplete. There is no mention of "Polonia" in the New York metropolitan area (estimated at about 300,000), including New Jersey. There is nothing on rich cultural life: the Kosciuszko Foundation, beautiful historic building housing the Polish Consulate in New York, very active artists community, theatrical groups, Polish historic preservation firms renown in the entire US, Polish business community, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jozbptr (talk • contribs) 19:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Please be more specific; there is no article on Poles in North America.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I've started discussion in

Would it be possible for a fluent speaker of Polish to provide an IPA pronunciation on the article Wojciech Giertych? Thanks! — AlekJDS ^talk 19:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done--Kotniski (talk) 10:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! — AlekJDS ^talk 18:48, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Why the project did not take care of this so important to Poland article? Artucile is already nominee to GA. Greatings, kuba 91.215.34.42 (talk) 02:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Because there are tens of thousands article of similar importance and we have only a few active people here?

Should we include this article in our WikiProject? I am not sure if this is really a subject of significant interest to Polish culture... the article doesn't say so, neither does the pl wiki one (which only has a a para on storks in Slavic culture, but nothing Poland-specific). Thoughts?

PS. Kuba, please consider registering and joining the project. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I am requesting that a page be made about the other sports than football in the club Cracovia.

I am afraid we don't have enough man power to guarantee requests, I recently obsoleted an inactive to-do list of such requests we had that were not really acted upon. If you'd like to improve the relevant articles, you'll likely have to be bold and do it yourself. I admit I am not interested in that matter, and it seems none of our currently active editors is. From the past, consider asking User:Poeticbent, he was interested in Kraków... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:31, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I've drafted a navigation

Nice start. Here're my thoughts.

I am not sure if including people there makes sense, if so, I'd move them to a separate section (notable personalities or such). Lack of Lech Wałęsa is quite surprising. Is Stanisław Kania that important? Why no Stefan Wyszyński? Stanisław Mikołajczyk?

I'd also remove

Repatriation of Ukrainians from Poland to the Soviet Union and Operation Vistula are needed, I'd just leave the Vistula one as much more known. On that note, you are missing the second repatriation of Poles (Repatriation of Poles (1955–1959). I don't suggest you add it, but it illustrates the point that there are many items that fit the template, but we have to prioritize. Migration wise, what about Flight and expulsion of Germans from Poland during and after World War II

?

Would inclusion of

Autumn of Nations be too generic? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

17:16, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions Piotr. I've removed personal pages, Ukrainian repatriation (happened earlier, during the war) and Pewex, while adding expulsion of germans. I'm uncertain about the last two suggestions, as yes, they appear to me a bit controversial/general to fit. Waiting for yours and others' new feedbacks--Dans (talk) 19:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd remove the demographics link in the navbox. I'd also cut it off at 1989/1990 so it flows into History of Poland (1989–present). I dropped a few line breaks into the navbox. You might want to consider putting the time periods first, then the text. should move the roundtable into the 80's and move the rest into a new navbox for post 1989. Ajh1492 (talk) 17:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ajh1492, I've followed your advices. If there's a consensus, I'd put the template in place. Is there a way to ask for automatic insertion of the template in the articles, afterwards, or it is to be done manually?--Dans (talk) 11:23, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

AWB (if so, let me know a list of articles, or if it's all the articles linked to in the template and I will do it in a few days - probably Thursday). Severo^TC

11:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Severo. The

template is in place now. It should be added to all articles linked, and I'd be grateful if you could do it in one of these days. I'll try to get to know more on AWB in the next period. --Dans (talk

) 13:50, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Dans, have you considered joining our wikiproject? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Since we were on a roll, I pulled together this Template:History of the Third Polish Republic to cover the years afterward. Could probably use some additional macro-level events. Ajh1492 (talk) 16:30, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Good start. It does need more than just elections, I'd add

Polish involvement in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Rywin affair, perhaps the [[Thick line]... Cat: History of Poland needs to be updated to the relevant one from Category:History of Poland by period, and both templates should be added to Category:Poland templates (with the <noinclude> parameter). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

17:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Could use some proofreading and translating with Białystok. Volunteer Marek and others have been helping out which is greatly appreciated. Trying to get the article to at least B-class if not GA-class. Can use help with translation and content for Sports, Religion, Culture, Media (TV-Radio-Newspapers) and Education. Ajh1492 (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Always happy to hear about a GA initiative. So far, our project was not active enough to have "official" B-class assessments - things are just tagged B-class without a discussion (which is not my desirable situation, but...). While we do not have a discussion page for B-class, our template supports a B-class checklist (see for example

Talk:Poland during the Jagiellon dynasty or Talk:Warsaw). I'll do a review of Białystok soon. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

17:35, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

It's ready for a review, I've added the updated tags to the talk page. I think it's at least B-Class, but would like a third party to review. Ajh1492 (talk) 19:18, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

If I had thought this would have been controversial, I would of course have brought this issue here first. I proposed making a minor change to WikiProject talk page template to introduce two new classes - Future-Class and Book-Class. Book-Class is already used by 294 projects and sorts Wikipedia Books out of NA-Class articles. We already have one book (Book:Pope John Paul II) but I think there is scope for a lot more (Warsaw, Kraków, History of Poland etc). Future-Class is not so widely used (27 projects) but is used for upcoming events where the article is not yet expected to be at maturity because the thing hasn't yet happened. I wanted to sort five or so articles about upcoming sport events into such a category. (After the event has taken place, they get sorted as usual). I wanted to be bold, but it seems that is not allowed any more because the template is protected (although with no history of vandalism). So I apologise for this talk page spam. Severo^TC 09:00, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I think it is uncontroversial, but the admins there don't realize this. As I said there, if you want to take care of that, be my guest. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:27, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

The article starts with the year 1030, isn't it too far from the subject? It's the same logic like Recovered Territories...Xx236 (talk) 14:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Some historical background is useful. If we had a better (sub?)article, we could move it there, but nothing comes to mind... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:29, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

It's not only a historical background but also rationalization of expulsions, the same like in Recovered Territories. Xx236 (talk) 08:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I've merged two stub pages (

I'd prefer to have them unmerged. They seem like notable stubs to me, in need of expansion and referencing - but if we were to merge/delete all unreferenced stubs, we would likely loose a million articles accross the project. The way to deal with such articles is to add a stub template, and wait for them to be expanded. If one feels that they cannot be, then we indeed propose a merge or prod/AfD them and see if anybody replies. Of course, there is nothing wrong with being bold and jumping ahead, but in my experience, asking for comments first may lead to avoidance of discussion like this one.

There is also one more problem with such a merger. Consider this diff, adding merged and unreferenced content to a Featured Article. Thus this article no longer meats featured criteria, and that merger may result in a loss of that status... I'd strongly suggest removing all unreferenced additions to that article. Yet if we remove it, and don't umerge, we have just preformed an off-the-books deletion. I hope this further illustrate problems with mergers.

PS. Expanding

Regained Territories Exhibition is one of (many) items on my to-do list. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk}

00:25, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

The Exhibition deserves an article but the Rightist-nationalist deviation is a part of internal Communist fights so I approve the merging.Xx236 (talk) 08:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Frankly both are rather esoteric. Ajh1492 (talk) 08:24, 23 January 2011 (UTC)