User talk:Lysy

Open peer review
Thank you for forking the page Open peer review. Fences and windows (talk) 11:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Help
 --Koretek (talk) 12:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Piotrus 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, &mdash; Coren (talk) 22:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Where are you?
Hi Lysy, I just want to say that you are missed here on Wikipedia. Hope you are OK and hope to see you back. I know, trolls are a real pain in the ..., but surely you can stand them. Life is full of trolls, and yet we live it. Tymek (talk) 04:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

polonized vs de-germanized at recovered territories article
Please excuse my revert, but Polonized fits much better. De-Germanisation implies to recreate the state before the Germanization (11th century), which was certainly not the case. The territories rather underwent Polonization: everything changed Polish (names, people, etc pp). Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

FYI
You were mentioned and thanked by Greg in his final remark (I just found about it today by accident). Read his post here.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Poland
Congratulations. WikiProject Poland has reviewed your contributions and decided you are an active member. Thank you for your encyclopedic contributions! But creating content by yourself is only part of the collaborative Wikipedia user experience, there is an active community of editors discussing how to better improve the Poland-related content; please consider joining our discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland. There are many editors who would like to work more closely with you, benefit from your insight, and help you with their experience! PS. Please also consider editing your entry in our participants list to state your areas of expertise/interest. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Fed. of Expellees
Hey,

I reverted two of your edits in the Federation of Expellees article. The Spiegel story was reflected differently by Polska and FAZ which is now sourced and in the "federation today" section, so the other paragraph you inserted (unintentionally) turned out to be be an unsourced POV fork. The second edit I reverted was about the Nazi Soviet population transfers. You are right that the Soviet Union did not occupy the Baltic states immediately after the pact and subsequent invasion of Poland, yet the Molotov Ribbentrop pact had defined the areas which were to be Soviet/Nazi controlled without leaving a territorial buffer. The "evacuation" of the Baltic Germans was made in apprehension of the Soviet take-over and only from those parts "assigned" (by Hitler/Ribbentrop and Stalin/Molotov) to the Soviet Union. The exact time of the actual military take-over was thereby unimportant. I hope you see my rationale, regards Skäpperöd (talk) 10:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is an interesting issue (though sort of a "dark" kind of interesting ...). Regarding the Baltic German and related resettlements, that is is covered in History of German settlement in Eastern Europe, but not in great detail. I recently developed Polish areas annexed by Nazi Germany, covering (at least partially) their temporary resettlement and the contemporary expulsions/deportations/murder of resident Poles and Jews. Also there are articles on the Baltic Germans themselves and the Nazi-Soviet population transfer, which for sure could need an expansion. So if you got time and sources .... Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 07:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tamka
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Tamka, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No cliam of importance

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. TurningWork (talk) 19:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Lysy, can you provide any reference supporting why this street is more historically signifigant than any other in warsaw, without sources to support it's importance, it's still potentially a deletion candidate. TurningWork (talk) 18:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Jochen Böhler
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Jochen Böhler. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

brutal mass murder
All murder is brutal, no? It's redundant and adds undue weight. The first sentence of the paragraph says its ethnic cleansing. Would "deadly aggression" not encompass not only the death but all actions that took place? Murder wasn't the only thing happening.--Львівське (talk) 08:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

"...the brutality of the UPA there is unparalleled in the 20th century in Europe" how can you honestly say that?

Double Memory
Your deletion in Massacres of Poles in Volhynia of Double Memory section is based on an invalid assumption that there was consensus for removal. Please re-read the talk section. The material is verified in a very reliable source. Please do not remove it again without discussion. Bobanni (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to get involved!
As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. -  Trevor  MacInnis   contribs  23:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI
Talk:Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Komański, Siekierka
O co chodzi? Przecież to źródło oparte na zeznaniach świadków wydarzeń opublikowanych w karcie. Na ich książki powołuje się np. Motyka w Ukraińskiej partyzantce. Jeśli masz jakieś do nich zastrzeżenia to powiedz jakie a nie usuwaj bez słowa ich jako źródła. Są na pewno dobrym źródłem bo opartym bezpośrednio na świadkach.--Paweł5586 (talk) 09:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Jak sobie wyobrażasz badania obu stron w obecnej sytuacji na Ukrainie w ogóle negowane są zbrodnie? Kto w nich by uczestniczył nacjonaliści z Tarnopola którzy mają tam 35% poparcia i protestowali przeciw Hucie Pieniackiej? Siekierka i Komański są pionierami w tej kwestii, ale to nie przyczyna by ich negować. Póki nie ma lepszych opracowań, należy się na nich oprzeć, tak jak Motyka. Siemaszko też była krytykowana za 60 tys na Wołyniu itd. a obecnie ta liczba jest uznana powszechnie. Weź też pod uwagę że większość ukraińskich historyków tak i jak rosyjskich wybiela swoich. Pozdrawiam serdecznie--Paweł5586 (talk) 20:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

FAR of Invasion of Poland (1939)
I have nominated Invasion of Poland (1939) for Featured article review due to a number of, hopefully, resolvable issues that exist in the article. --Labattblueboy (talk) 02:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * May I ask why you undid my edit to the article? It was made in good faith to remove material that failed with regards to 1c of the feature article criteria and I suspect POV. In the future please do not reinsert material unless cited. --Labattblueboy (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I can understand your reservation but the content was largely uncited and didn't appear to make a whole lot of sense. This being said, I certain want to work cooperatively in improving the article, or moreso maintaining its FA level. If my future edits step on any toes please let me know. --Labattblueboy (talk) 16:45, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Polish civilian per cent casualties - OK, "about" is good. However, if you have no exact figures, we can rely on good ref in World_War_II_casualties. Alandeus (talk) 17:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Mediation
A mediation case has been opened regarding the Polish-Ukranian WWII dispute. I have picked up that case. Here's the link:

Polish-Ukranian WWII disputes.

If you choose not to participate, please tell me on my talk page. Thanks! :-) Xavexgoem (talk) 00:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Lysy! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Ludwik Dorn -
 * 2) Orest Subtelny -
 * 3) Ihor Ilyushin -

Talk:Karkonosze
There has been a new and expanded preferential poll created on Talk:Karkonosze similar to the recent Ireland poll. The votes from the previous poll could unfortunately not be transferred over to the new system and you may need to recast your vote. I apologise for the inconvenience. — what a crazy random happenstance 04:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Jan Dzierzon
Imie i nazwisko Dzierzona zostalo zmieniona na Johann Dzierzon, to jest pisownia niemiecka. Britanica podaje Jan Dzierżoń (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/175400/Jan-Dzierzon) i tak powinno byc. Rowniez tu (http://bees.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=bees;idno=5017629) angielskie tlumaczenie pracy Dzierzona podaje Dzierżon, Jan. Czy skontaktowales sie z museum w Kluczborku, albo przeczytales dowody i fotokopie w podanych pracach Brozka, Gladysza i ks. Mazaka? Pomijanie zrodel polskich jest niedopuszczalne. Ci ktorzy chca zmieniac artykul powinni uznac wage zrodel polskich wage a nie lawirowac na drugorzednych przekladach i niepelnych zrodlach. Podane tez sa wspolczesne artykuly w prasie polskiej i napisane przez Polakow. Trzeba je wniesc do tekstu. Niech chociaz bedzie widoczne ze spoleczenstwo polskie ma silne zdanie na ten temat. Podaje Ci e-mail jezeli chcesz powaznie pracowac bez udzialu szpiegow: erudra@hotmail.com. --Soujdspo (talk) 22:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Bierz zawsze pod uwage ze: 1) w okresie Bismarck'a zniemczano imiona celowo 2) Poszukiwania liczbowe zapisu imion na internecie sa falszywka - autorzy wtedy i dzisiaj powtarzaja to co zostalo zniemczone i wprowadzone w pismie, clowo, przez nieuwage lub niewiedze. Jedyna droga czy jego imie powinno byc pisane Jahann czy Jan jest stwierdzenie ze Dzierzon uwazal sie za Polaka i kultywowal polskos, i tak jest zgodnie z dokumentami opisanymi w pracach Brozka, Gladysza i ks. Mazaka etc. --Soujdspo (talk) 02:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC) --Soujdspo (talk) 02:33, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Tiptoety talk 09:44, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Digital library
Just a quick note saying thanks for your work on Digital library. It's been in a bad way for a very long time. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:20, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Resource Map
Regarding your edits to Resource Map. The big section of syntax seems out of place, is it meant to be there? I didn't notice it in the source (but only glanced briefly). An IP is enquiring on the talk page.--Commander Keane (talk) 06:36, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
 * This permission does not give you any special status or authority
 * Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
 * You may wish to display the Autopatrolled top icon and/or the User wikipedia/autopatrolled userbox on your user page
 * If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
 * If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 14:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland
Our project is becoming more and more active, recently we started doing proper B-class reviews. I'd like to invite you to watchlist the page (if you haven't already) and participate in our discussions. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:53, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Poland/Members activity
Hi. I am conducting another activity check for WikiProject Poland. It seems to me that you are "semi-active". Feel free to change your status here as soon as you make 10 or more edits on Poland-related articles per month! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Monitor. WikiProject Poland Newsletter: Issue 1 (April 2011)
Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Belzec
Dear Sir, Thank you for your fotos. Unfortunatly there is no inscribtion, and so it is not clear, what is to be seen - for example here: Datei:PL Belzec extermination camp 3.jpg

And what do you think about this one: Datei:PL Belzec extermination camp 10.jpg|11) Isn't it redundant and without any valuable information? --217.247.126.165 (talk) 18:25, 1 October 2011 (UTC) (=Holgerjan)

WP Poland in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Poland for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. I hope you'll take a few minutes and take part in this interview. It is a landmark for our project, and your participation is an important part of our little community! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 19:06, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Anti-Jewish violence in Eastern Europe, 1944–1946
The Netherlands isn't situated in EE.Xx236 (talk) 11:50, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28
Hi. When you recently edited Immunofixation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Precipitation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 14:34, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Good article reassessment
Kiev Offensive (1920), an article that  may be interested in, has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 16:21, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

MeeGo UX
I'm not sure why you changed UX to UI on MeeGo. The user experience layers are in fact abbreviated UX on that system. Marnanel (talk) 11:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

If you would like to help out with some WP:POLAND activities
I wonder if you'd be interested in my little current side project: ensuring that all individuals in List of Poles have a WPPOLAND talk template. This is so that this nice listing (WikiProject Poland/Popular pages) would be more correct. I am currently working from top down, started yesterday with musicians.

Or perhaps would you like to do a few B-class reviews for WP:POLAND? We have a backlog at WikiProject Poland/Reviews. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:51, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Belzec and Sobibór
Hello, Lysy. Please stop changing these redirects. Belzec is known by its Polish name as well. The camp was located in Poland.Hoops gza (talk) 21:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Auschwitz is an exception to the rule and therefore a poor example. Auschwitz is almost universally known as referring to the concentration camp. Auschwitz concentration camp is not referred to by the Polish name of the town it is near. It's just the way it is. Belzec by comparison is little known and would frequently be searched by its Polish name. The very lede sentence in the Belzec article clearly states that it is also called Bełżec. This is not an exact science, that's for sure.Hoops gza (talk) 21:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cloudera Impala, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LZO. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Please claim your upload(s): File:Eilean donan 2004.jpg
Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as own, amending the information added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add  to the media by uploader tag if it is present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the information where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transfered to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:35, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Please claim your upload(s): File:Oystercatcher flying.jpg
Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as own, amending the information added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add  to the media by uploader tag if it is present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the information where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transfered to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:37, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Jewish Nazi collaborators has been nominated for discussion
Category:Jewish Nazi collaborators, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Catrìona (talk) 20:29, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

The WikiEagle - January 2022
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)