User talk:Piotrus/Archive 31

Username for SOC0317
Piotr,

My name is Erika Moul, and I am a student in your SOC0317 class, and I am very confused by the Wikipedia assignments. I have made a username (Emm66) and have gone through the tutorial, but I do not understand how you will be tracking my activity. I hope that you can clear this up for me so that I am able to meet the Sept. 21st deadline for the Wiki assignment. Also, my group members are Angela Han and Mariah J(?).

Further, when I posted my blog commentary this morning, I noticed that my comment to another student's entry from last week does not appear on the blog. Do you have record of my making a second posting last week? (I had posted it on Saturday afternoon.) If there was a computer error and you did not receive the post, is there any way that I can make it up? If not, how will this affect my grade? Since the blog comments are 50% of our grade, I am very concerned about this matter. Thank you for your understanding - please advise.

Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely, Erika Moul username: Emm66 | email: emm66@pitt.edu

global society
i have created my account and posted a diff of an article. my account is d.j.weingart

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Craigellachie,_Moray&diff=315199599&oldid=306286192

-Dan W

Assignment Completed
I have created an account, joined group 6, completed the tutorial and edited a page. The page I edited is

Justin Lovett jml72 22:13 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Diff
I tried to post my diff earlier but I think I did it wrong, so here you go: []

Justin Lovett jml72 23:04 20 September 2009 (UTC)

New Account
I managed to make a new account. Username: mariahjenae

~Mariah Blake~

Patrick Atkins
My username is PatrickJatkins and my real name is Patrick Atkins. I am in Group 10.

My user name
Hi Piotor,

My name is Teresa Green and my user name is T.starr.green. Also, I had a family emergency last Friday (that is why i wasn't in class) is it OK if I still do my comment on someones post? I did the summary, but because of the family emergency I did not have the opportunity to do it

-Teresa

account, edit, group
Hi, I set up my account (username: mariahjenae)and have completed the sandbox edits through the tutorial. I edited an article about Mercersburg, Pennsylvania by including the opening day of the ski season(Thanksgiving) to the information about the Whitetail Ski Resort. I have also joined group 7 with Erika, Angela, Amber, and Dominique.

Thanks, Mariah Blake

Wikipedia Assignments
Hi this is Sean McNamara I have completed the tutorial, joined the group, and made an edit (University of Pittsburgh page, added comments regarding residence halls)

missing information
I'm Jessica McCracken....my wiki username is Jam187....i thought i already gave the info to you but i might not have

````

Group 4 Plan, Pax Mongolica
Here is group four's flexible plan: We are expanding a stub on Pax Mongolica. The outline for the article is: 1. Introduction to the subject and academic term; 2. Rise and early years of the Pax Mongolica; 3. General Pax Mongolica period (what was covered in Before European Hegemony basically); 4. Latter years and "decline" of Pax Mongolica One person will work on part 1 and this same person will work on part 2; Two persons will work on part 2; Two persons will work on part 3 because it will be the bulk of the article; One person will work on part 4. As of now our plan is to have Stefan work on parts 1&2, Sean will work on part 2, Carly and Lauren will work on part 3, and Jessica will work on part 4. We have picked out several books to help us with our research and will use these appropriately. Gxlarson (talk) 04:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Group 10 Game Plan
The group will be covering Semi-periphery countries.


 * Eric: Definition of the Semi-periphery
 * Pat: Semi-periphery countries in the 13th century
 * Dan: Semi-periphery countries from the 13th to today
 * John: Semi-periphery countries Today
 * Chazz: Transitional Effects on Exising Systems

D.j.weingart (talk) 05:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Extra points for Wiki
Hello,

I should have 2 extra points for the wikipedia:

(1) Showing my edit to the class (2) Posting a diff of my edit to your talk page

Thanks Ragini

Rgg6 (talk) 14:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Sophia of Poland
Thank you, Piotrus. I've had two articles on the Did you know page before. I don't know how to nominate an article and I thought the creator of the article couldn't nominate it. Thank You--David (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Group 6
Hello, our group will be covering the topic of proto globalization. (talk) 04:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit
Piotr,

Additionally, I made an edit to the Peters Township, Washington County, Pennsylvania page [].

-Erika Moul

Piotr,

I made an edit to the Suffield High School page. And several in the sandbox, see [mytalk page]

ColleenHelen (talk) 18:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Group 2 Article & Plan
Hello!

As we asked you in class - we would like to do Deviant Subculture. I made an article for it since there was none on Wikipedia - I am not sure if it will still be there because some speedy removal alert came up and I am unsure of how to address it, I added some headings to it.

Here is our preliminary plan for completing the article. As we complete the preliminary research we will further refine the outline and plan of action.

Overall/General Information
 * Definition
 * What makes a culture/group deviant

Examples
 * Past prime examples
 * Current prime examples [so far we have thought of gangs, religious groups, homosexuals, those who live off the grid]
 * Prime examples of movements

Effect of Globalization
 * Discussion of what made prime examples prime and not present
 * Increase in tolerance
 * Strengthening of Groups
 * Networking
 * Strength in numbers
 * Global movements

We have divided preliminary research in the following way:

John - Overall definition and ways to categorize.

Kate - past examples of deviant subcultures and social movements.

Ragini - Present examples of deviant subcultures and movements.

Jessica - Present examples of deviant subcultures and movements.

Melissa - tolerance and networking.

Everybody will look for information and examples dealing with globalization.

Please let us know if this article and plan are acceptable!

Thank you Rgg6 (talk) 04:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Piotrus, the article almost got deleted because there was essentially no content beyond the definition. (I declined it, & added an underconstruction tag.)  It would probably be of some help to try to have at least an initial paragraph and a general reference at the start.    DGG ( talk ) 05:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, we actually found an article "counterculture" which was essentially our topic.

We would like to switch to:

Topic: First World http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_world

1.	Overall Information a.	Definition of a first world country i.	GDP, GNP, prosperity – other number based quantities 2.	Three World Model a.	Origins b.	Changes c.	Relationship b/n the First World and the 2nd and 3rd floors 3.	First World pre 1914 4.	First World post 1914 5.	Recent ( based on research – what do experts consider recent) changes in countries belonging to First World a.	Globalization i.	Pros- examples 1.	Free trade ii. Cons - examples 1.	Specialization can lead to people losing jobs b.	Ascension and descent of certain countries in and out i.	General information – why membership changes ii. Examples 1.	Reasons particular to the country (as opposed to the general reasons listed above)

Division of Work among Group Members: Melissa – Overall Information, recent examples of countries entering or leaving first world Ragini – three world model Jessica F – first world pre 1914 Kate – first world post 1914 John Adams – globalization in connection with First World

Rgg6 (talk) 18:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Re:GA assignment
Food power was recently redirected to Embargo, and Deviant subculture has a PROD tag. Group 7 might also pick a more concise title (like "Gender in Chinese globalization" or something similar). Other than that, things are looking good. Should be an interesting term. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 21:46, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It has the potential to work as an encyclopedic article, but if it isn't well-done it definitely won't work. Depending on how able you think they are, you can either let them try it or suggest another topic. It's tricky, but it might turn out fine. The problem here is that the chance that it won't work - especially given their inexperience - is higher than the chance that it will. Short answer is, it's your call - let them try, or don't. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That would work (I'd suggest calling it "Chinese globalization" or "Globalization in China"), but you're right - it would be very broad, and as a result unlikely to achieve GA without an incredible amount of work. It's a question of balance - the gender topic is narrower, but this one is easier to find good encyclopedic information for. 23:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Group 1 : Polyethnicity plan / mini-outline
We first decided to create headlines we would like to fill in, so we came up with:

Defining Poly ethnicity
basic concept

Conceptual History
the history of the concept, its origins, etc

Polyethnicity throughout History
a lot of what we have read in the book thus far, as well as other significant examples

Poly ethnicity and Ethnic Identity
this will highlight how widespread polyethnicity is, but how cultures are able to retain ethnic identity. This could ultimate feed into the idea of homogeneity

The Assimilation of Ethnicities
this will discuss how it is possible for some cultures to eventually assimilate, or combine. Specific examples will be given

To begin our research, we are all meeting at the Hillman Library and pulling many books that have polyethnic concepts in them. Once we get a solid amount of books, we are going to divide up all the reading between the group, note everything (including page numbers and whatnot), and then meet up to see what we have.

The other thing we will have to do (hopefully you can direct us here) is rename the article on Wikipedia. Currently, it is found under Polyethnicity. This could problematic, because "polyethnicity" does not actually seem to exist as a word. I am not really sure if we do anything about that. The word that does actually exist is polyethnic.

Nec26 (talk) 01:30, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Extra Credit
I made some edits to my old high school's wiki. I added a lot of references within the athletics section, as well added a new tidbit.

St. Charles East High School

Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

 * New talk pages: LiquidThreads in Beta
 * Sockpuppet scandal: The Law affair
 * News and notes: Article Incubator, Wikipedians take Manhattan, new features in testing, and much more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia used by UN, strange AFDs, iPhone reality
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: New developments at the Military history WikiProject
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 05:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Suwałki Agreement GAN...
I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:47, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Piotrus :)
My question about rynek glowny was that nobody in either Polish or English article included information about Walenty Badylak and I don't understand why. I basically grew up on rynek (ooo... the good old times!!!) and I remember learning about the tragedy early on, whenever it was possible. I could never walk by the well without knowing. But why nobody ever included the info in Krk history? --Koliber (talk) 12:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

8th Rifle Division (Soviet Union)
Thanks for your kind words. I've got a long-term plan to continue the translations as far as possible from Ru-wiki, the next being the 10th Rifle Division (Soviet Union). Would you be able to help at all? Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 23:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Addendum: I can see you're busy with your class etc, but if you have any interest, please take a look/help out/direct others to User:Buckshot06/3rd Guards Motor Rifle Division which is in fact the next on my list. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 12:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Implicit vs explicit
You still don't understand the difference. Explicitly there was a line that said south is Poland, north is Lithuania. We promise not to cross the line. Explicitly zero was said about Vilnius. Implicitly Vilnius was on the Lithuanian side. By drawing the line south of Vilnius Poland implicitly recognized Lithuanian claims to the city, as well as hundreds of other villages, towns, and cities. The same way as Vilnius was alloted to Lithuania, Suwalki was alloted to Poland. No one can deny that. Just look at any map. Renata (talk) 17:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Zeligowski's letter explaining his mutiny to Polish command (quoted in full in Lescius work) references Suwalki Agreement and his disappointment and outrage that Poland pre-destined Vilnius to be left on the Lithuanian side for good (in reference of any further negotiations). Renata (talk) 00:27, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Am I suitable
This is a rather unusual request, but I'd like to know whether you think I'm a viable admin candidate. I would appreciate any advice, opinion, or commentary that you have to offer. Thanks again.Smallman12q (talk) 01:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

(copied here so you can have a record...thanks again for the reply=D)
 * Probably yes, but unfortunately I don't have time to review your edits in detail. Do you have an admin mentor at this point? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:14, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I currently do not have an admin mentor...but I will get an admin coach=P. I was looking for a simple yes/no...I wanted to know if I'm "ready enough" to pursue adminship. Thanks again for the belated reply...it is much appreciated.Smallman12q (talk) 00:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Juliusz Słowacki
The present bicentennial of Juliusz Słowacki's birth (and the 160th anniversary of his death) might indeed make a good occasion to refurbish the article about him. Nihil novi (talk) 19:27, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Piotrus. Thanks for the template and the award. I tried to do my best and continued to improved and created article of the Piast dynasty members. Thanks again and sorry for my bad english!!! Aldebaran69 (talk) 19:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Notice of mention at another page
I have left a message regarding your use of Wikibooks to store grievances at User:SB Johnny's talk page, since he is an admin both here and at Wikibooks. I feel it was an inappropriate use of that project. Novickas (talk) 22:20, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

 * From the editor: Perspectives from other projects
 * Special story: Memorial and Collaboration
 * Bing search: Bing launches Wikipedia search
 * News and notes: New WMF hire, new stats, and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: IOC sues over Creative Commons license, Wikipedia at Yale, and more
 * Dispatches: Sounds
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Tropical cyclones
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Soviet invasion of Poland
Hi, I left the following comment on the talk page of this article regarding the timing of the invasion. Could you have a look at it and reply if/when you get the time. Thank you in advance. "The article currently says "Moreover the Soviets might have taken into the consideration that France and Great Britain did promise Poland, in the case of war, to land expeditionary forces within two weeks (via Romania)[citation needed]; the exact date of the Soviet invasion might have been simply a sum of the date that France and United Kingdom declared war on Germany plus 14 days, which equaled September 17, 1939." I would very much like to see a citation for that because the Agreement of Mutual Assistance Between the United Kingdom and Poland of 25 August 1939 (the Anglo-Polish military alliance) gives no timeframe at all for any assistance (it simply says "immediately") and makes no commitment to land any troops anywhere (it says " the other Contracting Party will at once give the Contracting Party engaged in hostilities all the support and assistance in its power."). It may well be that the Franco-Polish treaty contained a commitment to land expeditionary forces within two weeks (via Romania), I have very little knowledge of the details of that treaty, but everything I can find in the Anglo-Polish treaty says that the British gave no such commitment. Is there another agreement or treaty between the Polish and the British which we need to be quoting from and/or linking to?"Varsovian (talk) 13:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Prawo autorskie - ustawa z 1926 r.
Cześć. Przypadkiem trafiłem na Twój wpis w dyskusji odnośnie prawa autorskiego. Nie wiem, na ile sprawa jest aktualna, ale w każdym razie jakiś tydzień temu ustawa z 1926 r. została opublikowana na Wikiźródłach, pod adresem pl:s:Prawo autorskie (ustawa z 29 marca 1926 r.). Pozdrawiam --Teukros (talk) 17:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

re your recent revert at Suwalki Agreement - pls use more informative edit summaries
Please use more informative edit summaries. You reverted my latest addition with the edit summary of 'clarify'. Per Help:Edit summary "an edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may question your motives for the edit. Proper use of edit summaries is critical to resolving content disputes. Edit summaries should accurately and succinctly summarize the nature of the edit, especially if it could be controversial." Which this issue is. I've added quite a few modern historians' interpretations to the article, including EB's. Pls discuss, at the article's talk page, your disagreement with the sentence you removed. Novickas (talk) 00:22, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Assignment for October 14, 2009
Just wanted to let you know on behalf of my group(Kate, Ragini, John, Melissa and Jess) that our research plan with links to articles/books is finished on our FIRST WORLD talk page! Wanted to make sure you knew we got it done before the end of the day and on time! If you have any suggestions for improvement please let us know. Kmm131 (talk) 02:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Group 10 To Do List
The group has created their to do list for the article on semi periphery countries. The list is as follows, and is also present on the article's talk page which is posted as follows. []

Each member of the Group will write one section of the Wikipedia Article. They will correspond as follows:

Eric: Definition of the Semi-periphery


 * Find a reliable source for the definition. Alternatively, one could form an original definition through synthesis of several ideas found in established sources such as print and online encyclopedias.

Pat: Semi-periphery countries in the 13th century


 * Formulate argument by using the book "Before European Hegemony" as a background, as well as supplementing it with additional sources found in the library and online. The section will follow the flow of the book, with sections focusing on The European Subsystem, The Mideast Heartland, and Asia.

Dan: Semi-periphery countries from the 13th to today


 * Formulate argument by using the book "Before European Hegemony" as a background, as well as supplementing it with additional sources found in the library and online. The section will follow the flow of the book, with sections focusing on the growing forces of democracy, the workers and communism during this time.  There will be sections focusing on social and cultural revolutions, and how this effected the semi periphery.

John: Semi-periphery countries Today


 * Formulate argument through use of online sources and print sources such as periodicals, and scholarly nonfiction works. This section will attempt to be as conteporary and relevant to current day as possible, and will provide a brief prediction for the future of semi periphery.

Chazz: Transitional Effects on Exising Systems


 * Chazz will synthesize all of the new information learned in the Wikipedia article and use it to formulate a thesis on the transitional effects on existing systems.

The group has deliberated that meetings will occur within the group on a weekly basis to monitor the progress of the article. The function of these meeting will be to organize sources and references for the article, as well as refine its fluidity.

--D.j.weingart (talk) 02:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Semi-Periphery Articles
Piotr,

In addition to the Group 10 to-do list above, I added some articles relating to our topic. Feel free to have a look at them and the list. Jcl41 (talk) 03:11, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Jon Luchansky

Group 2 Posting of Plan
Hello,

Our plan has been posted to our talk page Talk: First World. We edited our parts and signed our sections. Resources are also linked.

Thanks Rgg6 (talk) 04:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kordian
Hello! Your submission of Kordian at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Geraldk (talk) 16:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Please for intervention
Hello.

I add template "citization need" in two cases. I'm right, because many of sources called Silesian only as a dialect, not as a language. LUCPOL, who add this unsourced information, didn't add sources. Moreover, he removed templates and called me "troll". I think it is rude behaviour. This situation need invervention of administrator. Maglocunus (talk) 20:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Jego zachowanie to typowy trolling. Wyjaśniłem to w opisie zmian. Języki regionów zawsze budzą kontrowersje, na temat większości takich języków są rozbieżne zdania czy to język czy dialekt. To dotyczy nie tylko śląskiego ale również wielu innych wypisanych w tym artykule. Jestem absolutnie pewien że nawet Maglocunus (dawniej znany jako Mmt) uważa że np. język szkocki lub luxemburdzki są to dialekty, a jednak nie wpisuje tam szablonów proszących o źródła. Dlaczego? To oczywiste dla każdego kto zna Maglocunusa. Mało tego, w tym artykule żaden z języków nie ma podanych źródeł!!! Dlaczego mielibyśmy robić wyjątek dla jednego? Jest to zwykłe czepialstwo w stosunku do śląskiego, dlaczego to akurat śląski ma mieć jakieś dodatkowe rygory? A mianowicie tak nie będzie, będę revertował takie zachowanie z automatu. Znasz mnie i wiesz że nienawidzę takiego czepialstwa i będę bronił śląskich artykułów przed takim zachowaniem. Tutaj, w tym artykule jeśli co to należałoby wstawić ogólny szablon {Refimprove} dla całego artykułu bo żaden z języków tam podanych nie ma źródeł. I co ciekawe, nikt inny nie czepia się innych języków ale o dziwo przychodzi tu jakiś polak z polski i trolluje bo mu się jakiś fakt nie podoba. LUCPOL (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Pokoj, pokoj. Przedstawcie to spokojnie na WP:PWNB. Ja obecnie nie jestem adnistratorem i biore wakacje od kontrowersji :) Peace. Peace. Take it to WP:PWNB. I am currently taking a break from being an admin and dealing with controversies :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:37, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Poland
Thank you. — Malik Shabazz 18:44, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

The Mass Extermination of Jews in German Occupied Poland


"Yak she mash? Tso novego? Ya nyeh umyem peeshch popolskoo. Aleh umyem muveech the fine yewzk." PS: Image of Poland's work in exile thought might interest you. --Ludvikus (talk) 00:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

RE
I cant block min as I am not an admin you could take it to the ANV though.-- Coldplay   Expert  02:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

High income economies
In reply to your posting on my talk page please see Talk:First_World. -- PBS (talk) 13:30, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

To-do list
I just wanted to make sure that you saw all of group 1 posted their To-do lists on our topic's Talk:Polyethnicity page. We will be regularly posting there to keep in contact with each other. Our to-do lists have been up for some time, but I forgot to post on your talk page.

Nec26 (talk) 21:35, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Arbcom and the class assignment
What are your plans? - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Membership
I'll join sooner or later. Real life comes before Wikipedia I'm afraid.

I also want to pick a name to suitably annoy the Lithuanian nationalists here on Wikipedia who keep trying to tack "Lithuanian" onto everything, but hysterically go into denial when you show them the Litwin article. I'm thinking "Podagrycznik". :P 124.190.113.128 (talk) 09:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Chcialem dodac: czy cos w koncu sie stanie z artykulami niektorych postaciow z tymi problemami narodowe? 124.190.113.128 (talk) 09:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Piotrus, could you pls talk to this user about the Wikipedia-is-not-a-battleground policy? WP:BATTLE? Also about removing references and using talk pages? Novickas (talk) 14:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I presume you have done it yourslf? But I totally agree. Dear Australian IP, please stop reverting and start talking with other editors; assume good faith. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Novickas (talk) 22:09, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It's hard to assume good faith when you see the kinds of actions that are being purported by some users here, especially when one of my first experiences with editing on Wiki came up against one such nationalist and has left a bitter taste in my mouth ever since. So unfortunately this is a ship that had sailed a long time ago. Podagrycznik (talk) 07:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes Piotrus, that's what I'm trying to do, however the niggling feeling regarding some of these topics is still getting to me. Podagrycznik (talk) 08:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Update on Group 1
Hi Piotr,

We just wanted to let you know that we have reworked our Talk:Polyethnicity page a little bit. We have added a small section underneath our page outline called Group Chat, and here we are keeping small conversations between the entire group.

Additionally, we will begin to fill in sections with our research and references as we compile. I know that on Novermber 2nd we are supposed to have a "written" outline of what we need, will the outline we have going on our talk page be sufficient enough?

Thanks, Nec26 (talk) 19:13, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Lead Paragraphs
[copied from Talk:First World: Sorry, my mistake. We do have a "lead" paragraph planned for the article - but somebody else is doing that. How can I work on the three world model section [which has much of what is in the current lead paragraph] before my group mate has down the lead paragraph [which we plan to have different content than the current paragraph]? Rgg6 (talk) 21:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is what I had done originally, however I took the first paragraph and put it under a heading. Should I just make the heading underneath the paragraph?  If this is the case, my heading will say essentially the same thing as the first paragraph but in a slightly different style. Is this okay? I am afraid somebody else will come along and delete it because the article [being under construction] will be messy and repetitive at that point. Rgg6 (talk) 21:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:28, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * News and notes: WikiReader, Meetup in Pakistan, Audit committee elections, and more
 * In the news: Sanger controversy reignited, Limbaugh libelled, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Relocation of EEML evidence
Just a notice: For a few users I have relocated your EEML evidence to a sub-page.

The reasons for this are because your sections are now so long it was becoming impossible to navigate and decipher who wrote what, particularly towards the end of sections. This effectively rendered your evidence as unusable, which was not a good thing.

Rather than reduce the size of your evidence (which I deemed as unfair) I have removed them to private subpages. These are yours and yours alone to edit. They certain make interpreting your evidence MUCH easier.

The downside is that when you update your evidence it does not go into the history log of the principal evidence page. Hence I suggest you add a brief "Updated evidence on ..." note beneath your evidence heading on the main evidence page. This will alert people to changes on your subpage. An extra bit of hassle I know, but it a small price for having evidence which can be understood.

Also feel free to create a single sentence description of your main headings and insert it on the main page below the link I have added. See for an example from a previous case.

I hope none of you are upset by this - I assure you my only objective was to increase the usability of your evidence.

Sincerely, Manning (talk) 22:58, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Radom Ghetto

 * I removed two links from the page as they are on the Wikipedia banned list. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 06:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Operation Reinhard Defined Incorrectly
The definitions given in en and de.Wikipedia for Aktion Reinhard are unsupported by any documentation. The term "Aktion Reinhardt" most definitely was in use during Nazi ethnic-cleansing operations, but it was named after Fritz Reinhardt and referred to recovering and turning in valuables from the persons apprehended for imprisonment or execution in concentration camps. You'll find my evidence in the en article under subheading "Alternative Definition." It is the only part of the article that enjoys references to documentation attributed directly to an actual participant (Höss).--Joe (talk) 15:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

user page
czesc, mozesz zablokowac moja strone uzytkownika do edycji dla wszystkich poza adminami, czeste wandalizmy, malo tu edytuje i nie jestem wstanie tego pilnowac, a obrazliwe zdanie wisialo przez miesiac i nikt nie cofnal, dzieki DingirXul (talk) 12:42, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Soviet invasion of Poland
Could you please be so kind as to explain why you removed my text (which was properly sourced) but left statements which are entirely unsourced and in complete contradiction to the available sources?Varsovian (talk) 17:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have already mentioned the problematic statements in the discussion page. Please discuss it there. Can you please outline the conclusions which I drew from the primary source?Varsovian (talk) 17:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

EEML Workshop
In light of your recent edit summary that stated "since it appears replies from parties are accepted":


 * Yes, your recent edits are completely acceptable. The Drafting arbitrator's instruction was: "The sender of quoted email may place a brief response below each".
 * Subsequent responses by anyone for any reason are NOT acceptable. I am monitoring the page, but do please alert me in the event I miss something. Manning (talk) 01:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Jedwabne pogrom
Hi Piotrus. Thanks for your note. I've seen a lot of activity at that article lately, but I've been afraid to look at what the edit-warring's all about. I'll take a look at the issues over the weekend and see if I can help. — Malik Shabazz 06:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Battle of the Cosmin Forest
Could you, please, help improve and develop this article? I have access to sources in Romanian and English, but I don't know Polish. Perhaps you can do a more detailed search in Polish and on-line and off-line Polish sources, and - why not - English ones. I know it is very time consuming, so I won't pressure you to do it immediately. But I don't know other people qualified to do it comprehensively (I can ask others for short Polish-English translations, but that's no enough). Dc76\talk 09:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Lesser Poland map
Hi Piotrus, could you help me out with this very useful map:



I do not know how to add it to the Lesser Poland article. Thanks in advance. Tymek (talk) 05:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks man, you are the best. Tymek (talk) 18:39, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw
Hello! Your submission of Nicolaus Copernicus Monument in Warsaw at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! &spades; B.s.n.  &hearts; R.N.  09:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:34, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Interview: Interview with John Blossom
 * News and notes: New hires, German Wikipedian dies, new book tool, and more
 * In the news: Editor profiled in Washington Post, Wikia magazines, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Soviet invasion of Poland
nominated Soviet invasion of Poland for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. --Labattblueboy (talk) 15:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Piotrus, Thanks for doing this. I want to say that I can see your (positive) influence over the POV fights in articles related to Poland, and I consider the recent EEML predicament as completely uncharacteristic of you. (Igny (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC))

ANI notice
Hello,. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have an interest in adding your comments. Thank you. --Ludvikus (talk) 19:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikibooks and suchlike
OK, I know I might be considered to be one of the Boris Badenov type ;). If you think that joke is a bit obscure, hey, I'm mumbledy-mumble years older than you, so I have a somewhat deformed, and possibly senile, sense of humor. I honestly do think that if you can find any sources which could be added to Wikibooks, particularly sources which might not otherwise be available to us English readers, that would be as valuable if not more as being an editor here. I know a lot of people aim for GAs and FAs. If you look at my personal history, however, you will clearly see that I am not one of them, having none of either. I think it would probably be just as useful for the encyclopedia, and possibly even more useful than making a comparatively few GAs and FAs here. I acknwoledge that I myself can't read a lick of Polish, and actually even have a little trouble with German, which I took classes for, but I would be more than willing to do what I could to transfer material from there to here, particularly if it is on notable subjects we don't have covered yet. I know like a lot of other countries in Europe there are hundreds or thousands of individuals in Polish history who have established their notability, and, basically, earned mention. Particularly if you could find some sort of dictionary of Polish biography, history, or geography and work on that, I think that sort of a source, which would give us a broad base of material relevant to the history of the country, might be one of the best things we could do. And, if you were to want to go ahead on this for Poland or any other EE country, feel free to let me and probably User:Himalayan Explorer know. Right now, with Fritzpoll and a few others, we're kind of the point men for the less-well-covered parts of the world in general, which is pretty much everything outside of the UK, US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and maybe France and Germany, and would welcome anything you could do to help improve content for those areas. John Carter (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I was actually thinking about wikibooks, because I haven't yet encountered wikipedia books myself. Regarding your list of Poles, proper language prohibits me using any of the perjoratives which would follow "Holy ..." in my description of that page. It looks like there are about 20000 entries available there? One thing we could do, if you wanted, would be to request that you be allowed to actively edit pages related to Poland in your userspace, with them being moved into mainspace with the approval and consent of an uninvolved admin. Such arrangements have been made before, and I personally think that it might not be a bad idea in this case either. If you want to request that, let me know and I'll propose it, unless you would prefer to do that yourself or have someone else do it. John Carter (talk) 20:06, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Economic history of Poland
Yes. The difficulty is that it's a potentially very large topic needing a very large article. So unless there's A LOT of work done on it quickly it might end up with lots of empty sections. The trick is to present a coherent self contained narrative that hits all the main points. Also, this is one that may be best first developed in user space until it's got enough content in it. Like I replied on my talk page, I'll see what I can dig up.radek (talk) 19:48, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem
I hope ArbCom listens to me. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:30, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia broken?
Hi Piotrus, After reading your morsels of wisdom, I have a couple of questions/comments/rants for you. I have seen several times editors leaving WP claiming WP is/was broken beyond repair or something. I think such a claim is fundamentally wrong.

The way I see it, Wikipedia is a complex dynamical system, with rather nontrivial internal interactions of a huge number of contributors and bureaucrats. Moreover, it is probably governed by certain laws under certain assumptions. There is a microscale (individual contributors editing certain articles), a mesoscale (groups of editors pushing their agenda in a group of articles) and a macroscale, the whole project evolving over years. On a microscale nothing matters. You, me can join, can leave Wikipedia, very few would even notice. In a matter of days, may be months names and contributions would be forgotten, the project would however survive.

What is interesting to me is that your morsels capture certain dynamics on a mesoscale quite well. And that made me wonder if you can share your thoughts over the future dynamics of the whole project here. Not just some subproject, not just over the next few days, but the whole Wikipedia over years.

That brings me to the next question. How can one claim the system of Wikipedia is broken? Do they understand the dynamics of Wikipedia better than me so that they see something that defies/breaks some natural laws? I understand that they joined the project to help it achieve a certain goal (whatever they set in their mind) and after a failure to do so, they leave frustrated. But to claim Wikipedia is broken? Why? What do they see that I do not? To me it is akin to claiming that the nature is broken after seeing that foxes eat rabbits. What do you think about that? (Igny (talk) 03:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC))

extra credit blogpost
Hello,

I have done a post about the origins of the word revolution for extra credit.

http://da1globsoc09.blogspot.com/2009/10/origins-of-word-revolution.html

Thanks Rgg6 (talk) 02:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Are we supposed to have 6 blogging points? I have 5, I do not think I missed any blogs. Also, was my extra credit post {above} not applicable for extra credit? Rgg6 (talk) 15:37, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
A lot of people have said that, so I finally gave in and stood for adminship.

I hope you get your mop back soon. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 19:14, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

group meetings
Hi Piotr,

Can we [group 2] have Nov 6 for our meeting? [Ragini, Kate, Jessica F, Jon, Melissa]

Rgg6 (talk) 21:21, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello,
 * I am sorry, but one of our group mates had something come up so she won't be able to come on Nov 6. Sorry for the inconvenience, I will send another date ASAP. Rgg6 (talk) 01:40, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Piotr, I believe we are supposed to leave you a message letting you know we've made edits to our article for the deadline for Nov. 2. I've made some edits to the Globalization section, but I am having a rough time w/ it. I plan to do so more work as the week goes along, can you offer any suggestions? I feel that what I have there now may be a bit too broad. JFA7 (talk) 06:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

re: B-class Review of Polish Underground State
Hi. Since it has been several months since I assessed the article, perhaps it would be best if you requested an assessment at WP:MHAR. However, the fact that the article is cited predominantly to the same source is a major concern. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 02:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Minor sabotage still start per criterion 2, coverage and accuracy, as it does not seem complete enough, or cover enough, of the subject. I do not think the "History" section has enough detail, and the majority of points in the "Operations" section are dot points. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 02:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

edits
i have made those edits, and i rephrased the quote. Also the "World-systems theorists..." paragraph existed before i started work on the article, so i can't reference it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D.j.weingart (talk • contribs) 19:00, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

First World
Hi Piotrus...I wanted to clean up First World but I noticed you've given it as an assignment...would I be interfering with the student's assignment if I cleaned it up a bit?Smallman12q (talk) 00:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * (copied from my userpage) Prompt response! Very well...will do. I wasn't aware that you were a professor. You really should say something on your userpage=D.Smallman12q (talk) 00:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Please see my latest comment. -- PBS (talk) 10:45, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Rough outline
Piotrus, I was wondering if we needed a paper copy of the rough outline for you by tomorrow or if you were just basing it off of the work done on the wikipedia page itself. --Accgail (talk) 02:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

For your information
I wasn't sure if you have the student's talk pages on your watchlist, but I left a note for Dagypt about their article - I think (s)he was trying to move it to mainspace, but accidentally move the talk page to article space. I moved it back and nominated the redirect for speedy. Also, there's some discussion at Talk:First World over what discussion is appropriate at an article talk page - care to take a look? Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 17:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Arielle's Draft
I have put my draft up (I did Print Media). I hope it is okay. 

Airp89 (talk) 17:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Arielle Parris

Group 10
Piotr- I just updated our article on semi-periphery countries, and it seems to have saved correctly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PatrickJatkins (talk • contribs) 20:09, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Draft
Hey Piotr, Carly and I have put up our sections of Pax Mongolica including the decline and plague. Go check it out! Thanks. -Lauren Lassib (talk) 00:03, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Group 10
Piotr, I updated the "today" section for semi-periphery countries and made a few edits and additions on the references. Feel free to check it out and let me know if there are any other necessary edits at this time. Thanks. -Jon Luchansky Jcl41 (talk) 01:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

First World updated status
My section has now finally been edited. Sorry for the delay, my computer has not been working for the past week. Everyone has completed their edits for this stage, so the First World is ready to be viewed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsf26 (talk • contribs) 02:09, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Group 1 / Polyethnicity
We have a pretty good (well, I think) draft up on our page. Please, let us know what you think! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nec26 (talk) 05:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:53, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

AC
Might be waiting another 6 weeks...Pity that this case is deemed to be politically not important...regardless of who they think is pov pushing  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) (Invincibles Featured topic drive) 08:22, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Piotr. I added my section of the project onto my group's discussion page yesterday, but Arielle let me know that I also should add it to the main article page, because that is where you look. Hopefully you see that I did post my section yesterday on the deadline, but I also posted it today under the article section. Sorry I was confused about where you would be looking. Also, I was wondering if I could set up a day and time to meet with you to discuss some things. Thank you.

~Megan Miller-Daghir —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mem134 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Group 7
Hi Piotrus I have created my draft on my user page. This is just an outline so I will elaborate more when I have more materials.

Angelalhan (talk) 16:53, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Piotrus,

I am currently in the process of posting my draft on the discussion page for my group (Group 7), but I am setting up a meeting with another group member in order to figure out how to get the information where it should be. I apologize for the late notice, but I have been trying for a day now to have it posted in the proper place, but it is not working. Please let me know if you have any advice. I will post more after further research. Thank you. Emm66 (talk) 04:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Group 8
Hello Piotrus I have now posted a diff. that you requested to see... here's the link Eric wisniewski 23:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Group 7
Thank you. I will have my portion posted ASAP. Emm66 (talk) 04:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Skala
A third often utilized, and perhaps more appropriate, name for Skala is Skala Nad Zbruczem (which, literally translated, means "Skala near the river"). Bsilverbush (talk) 18:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)Bradley Silverbush

Group 1 / Polyethnicity
Hi Piotr! Thanks for the tips you left us on our page. They were really useful and we're working on those changes now!

I was curious though. What was your overall thought on the page? Are we on the right track? Do you think we're doing well?

Thanks for your help!

P.S. I blogged for extra credit our discussion topic today in class :)

Nec26 (talk) 23:01, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Nov 6 Lecture
Hello!

Do you know what we will be doing on Friday? On the syllabus it says TBA - I wanted to know if pages for Leo were assigned or anything...

Thanks, Rgg6 (talk) 00:09, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!
Piotr,

Thanks for the comments. I already added some references, I was just having with the style for references. I just have one question, the European Coal and Steel Community does have an article, but it still comes up in red in the First World article. Why is this? Kmm131 (talk) 00:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Dear Piotr, Could I meet with you tomorrow after class? --Accgail (talk) 21:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Piotr, Could you put the directions on how to consolidate many references into on reference, in the a,b,c format? Kmm131 (talk) 19:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Pictures for public use
Hello Piotrus,

I am a webmaster for some reasearchers at Carnegie Mellon University who stumbled upon some lovely pictures of the Mellon Institute and Hamerschlag Hall which you took. They are absolutely breathtaking and I was wondering if I could possibly use these on our departmental web page. While I know these are released under the CC license, I wanted to get your explicit permission before proceeding. Please let me know if this is all right.

Much thanks!

Akh13 (talk) 22:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

resignation
Under the circumstances, I can understnd why you saw fit to resign, even if I personally am not real happy about it. I Know I've made some comments which seem somewhat harsh, and I acknowledged that at the time, but they were, in part, made that way to present an öpposing viewpoint", not necessarily to say that that viewpoint was necessarily my own. You have been an extremely valuable contributor to the project, and I sincerely hope that, when the current drama is resolved, however it will be, that you will return and continue to be the valuable, productive, and almost irreplacable editor you have been. If you should ever have any concerns which you think need to be called to the attention of an admin, please feel free to let me knnow. I personally, for what it's worth, am an ethnic Bavarian/Austrian, so we may not have the same background or existing beliefs, and I certainly don't know anywhere near as much about Poland or Eastern Europe as you and some of the others, but if you see any matters relating the content which would benefit from admin input, please feel free to let me know. The Eastern European project was, for what it might be worth, one I helped create so that the relevant content could be assesed, so that interested editors could see what content there was and how good or bad it was. I went around creating similar proejcts for virtually every other country out there, and still have to do even the basic assessments on some of them. The seizures of last year really didn't help my productivity in that regard for some time, and there is still a lot of backlog to take care of. However, I am probably more interested, personally, in the content relating to EE than many other areas, know a little more about it than a lot of other areas, and will, as time and circumstnaces permit, probably spend some more time on that content than the rest when the time is available, probably on the religious based content most of all. But I do want you to know that, while I can understand why you did resign as an admin, I think it is a regretable that you, who have been so valuable to the project, felt the need to do so. John Carter (talk) 13:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

edits
Piotr,

I thought I had put in some links in my first edit, I added some more though. Do you think this is good, or should I add still more?

Chazz Aden (talk) 19:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Grade
Dear Pitor,

I was wondering if you could tell me what my grade translate to in terms of letter grade. I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

-Teresa Green —Preceding unsigned comment added by T.starr.green (talk • contribs) 19:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Gender aspects of globalization in China
From what I can tell, they've got one article in userspace and a similar one in mainspace, but different group members are working on different versions. Do you know what's going on with this group? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * If it's more than just a one-group thing, you could always have everyone create their articles in userspace and then make one of the "deadlines" the day that you move it to mainspace. If it's just this group, though, that seems a bit drastic...other possibilities include docking marks if an article is deleted for no meeting stub? I'm not really sure how you could word it more strongly. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Merger
Y'know, I don't think I've ever done a page merge in my life, actually. I have a very strong feeling that I would screw this up in a really silly and embarassing way, unfortunately. If you want me to try anyway, I can, but in this case I think I am very much out of my element. John Carter (talk) 21:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

New article
Hi Piotrus, I have been thinking of starting an article on Names of Polish football clubs, but there already is one named Football club names, and I do not really know if I should waste my time on the new one. What do you say? Tymek (talk) 05:21, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

reply
I saw it already, just haven't figured out very intelligent comment about it yet :) Its definitely an improvement, although previous proposal was just horrible, so it is not that big achievement. Wording can be interpreted very differently so its still problematic.--Staberinde (talk) 17:34, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

relevance of some sections in First World
Hello,

I am working on the Three World Model and Relationships with other worlds sections on First World. Do you mind looking over them and letting me know if the content is relevant? Rgg6 (talk) 23:10, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Extra Credit blogpost
Hi,

I have written a blogpost on polygamy in Islam here: http://da1globsoc09.blogspot.com/2009/11/polygamy.html

Thanks Rgg6 (talk) 02:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest!
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:34, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

semi-periphery
alright, thanks, I'll do that

Chazz Aden (talk) 19:13, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits to First World
Hi, you put in some "citation needed"s...for some of them, for example three world model, there are three sentences and they all came from the same source, so as per footnote rules I put the citation at the end of the last sentence from that source...however you have added citations needed to the previous two sentences...how do I resolve this? Rgg6 (talk) 00:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Turabian footnotes
When several references are made in the same paragraph to the same source, it is acceptable to use a full author-date citation for the first reference and page citations, e.g. (101-5), for subsequent references. If all references are to the same page in the source, only one full author-date citation is required.

http://www.sfu.ca/politics/resources/research_guide/essay7.html

and

Consolidating footnotes within a paragraph If you have multiple citations from the same source within one paragraph, you may consolidate these citations into one at the end of the paragraph. Simply combine all of the page numbers in one author/title/source citation.

http://www.uwlax.edu/history/ChicagoTurabian%20Citation%20Style%20Guide.htm Rgg6 (talk) 01:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * That means that if I have three consecutive sentences from source "5," then there should be a 5 footnote after each one? Rgg6 (talk) 02:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

making columns
Hi, I was just wondering how to make columns in the notes section of our wiki page on polyethnicity. I've been looking through different pages, and looking it up, but I cannot seem to figure out how do it. Your help would be greatly appreciated! Jeh123 (talk) 03:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK on Zamojski Academy
Could you please check Template talk:Did you know? Ucucha 12:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Our wiki meeting today
Hello, I am concerned that my section [Current Relations] is irrelevant as I talk about "former first world countries." I believe past relations ships is fine because that is talking about cold war dynamics. Can you check this section specifically? If it not relevant, can I move it to the developed page? would it get me any extra credit? I researched the "Current" section quite a lot and put a lot of time and effort into it. Thanks, Rgg6 (talk) 02:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Group meeting
I just wanted to sincerely apologize for not making my group's meeting today. I've been ill since Friday but that doesn't excuse me not letting you know ahead of time. Sorry, Jsf26 (talk) 05:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Piotrus
Hi Piotrus, thanks for your invitation. Unfortunately, I have no such time to fully join any Project in wikipedia, but I suggest you to call me if you need a help about contemporary history of Poland or about any problem of international law involving the country or its neighbours. Goodbye!--Cusio (talk) 17:20, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Question
Do I need more information in my section? I changed the sources that you said were not reliable. Are they better?

-Teresa —Preceding unsigned comment added by T.starr.green (talk • contribs) 02:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Poland/Political Parties
Sure, done. Graham 87 02:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Food Power
Hey Piotr, I have been doing lots of reading and researching. Also i added another paragraph. I am still finding it difficult to find the information that i think is relevant to the topic. It seems like it is like finding a needle in a hay stack when i am reading through all of these articles. However, i am still working. I am a little nervous about the Monday deadline because of the trouble i am having with finding good information. This is taking longer than anticipated and is much more difficult to find info. than i thought it would be.

Thanks, Dorothy R Smith (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I think I just sourced it... however, the longer description of the article didn't pop up in the references section like that last one did it only came up as a website. How can i fix this? I am still confused when it comes to the references.

Dorothy R Smith (talk) 19:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I have added some more info that i think is good. We plan to do more tonight at the library. I also have started putting wikipedia links in for words. Am i doing it to the right types of words? Thanks

Dorothy R Smith (talk) 22:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Pictures
Piotr- sorry but I'm having a difficult time trying to find pictures. I have read the picture tutorial but am still not sure what pictures are acceptable to use and which ones are not. --67.186.56.18 (talk) 01:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop
As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome. For the Arbitration Committee, Risker (talk) 08:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Starting a Project
Aestrella (talk) 05:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC) Thank you for your welcome. I am really new to Wikipedia. I am getting used to it.

Removing Picture on First World
Hi, There is a picture on the top of our page that was there from the beginning. I could not find its Image tag in the edit screen, is it coded somewhere else? I would like to remove the three colored one. I have already put up its replacement [the single blue map] Rgg6 (talk) 23:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Elisabeth of Greater Poland (1152–1209)
Hello! Your submission of Elisabeth of Greater Poland (1152–1209) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Geraldk (talk) 03:59, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Sociology of Health and Illness
Hey piotr im finishing up my sections in my groups page and when im finished im going to reference the sources...is that ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeaster89 (talk • contribs) 23:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Trouble
I dont understand why my secton "africa" under soc of health and illness is still saying it is not cited when i put in the references/footnotes? (Jeaster89 (talk) 04:40, 16 November 2009 (UTC))

Proto-Globalization
In our draft review you said no "overview section", I wrote my whole contribution in the overview section & that's my fault I didn't change the heading...the real focus/heading of my section is "Historical Background" or something like "The World Before/Leading up to Proto-Globalization" or "World Events and Changes Leading to Proto Globalization" (also Archaic Globalization). Any thoughts on the best concise title? - katie d. Toasterlyreasons (talk) 21:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, so with regard to my lack of sources.... the unique nature of this wikipedia project allows you to glimpse our individual processes involved in research-paper-writing...you're one of my first professors (after four years of college) to learn that I have a rather unconventional tendency to write first, source later. See, I've absorbed my college education like a sponge and there are many facts I know I have learned from a reputable source at some point, and that I know beyond a shadow of a doubt these facts are 100% true, so I like to write my papers all at once and then put my sources in afterward because my writing flows better that way. (Is this unethical? I've always wondered) But never fear! By the end of the week I will have sources, it's just a matter of tracking down some place that corroborates my extensive inside-my-brain knowledge. (It'd be so much easier if I kept all my old textbooks, but I'm a poor college student and always sell them for beer money). (I'm 22, so that statement was in no way incriminating) -katie Toasterlyreasons (talk) 21:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

another question: What if I did a lot of editing (just in my section) and then realize I wasn't signed in? Can I still get credit for doing that editing? Toasterlyreasons (talk) 05:04, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * 1)  04:36, 15 November 2009 71.61.59.16 (talk) (21,108 bytes) (→China=) (undo)
 * 2) (cur) (prev) 04:35, 15 November 2009 71.61.59.16 (talk) (21,109 bytes) (→World Events and Changes Leading to Proto-Globalization) (undo)

^Those are the edits I did whilst not logged in, from the edit history Toasterlyreasons (talk) 03:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Should the template be at the very very top of the talk page? I can't figure out how to get it above the other stuff... Toasterlyreasons (talk) 17:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh ok I got it. It definitely took me waayyyy too long to figure out that there's an 'edit this page' tab that gives you access to the top section of the talk page as opposed to the little 'edit' options by each section. I probably should've known that by now since I've been avoiding my inability to access the lead section of the article...in my defense the internet makes fools of us all... :-/ Toasterlyreasons (talk) 17:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Hang in there
You're a good editor and I hope you'll stick around. Jehochman Talk 06:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Nihil novi (talk) 08:09, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I view you and some others as basically good apples who had the misfortune of getting into the barrel with a few bad apples. Note that I never read your email, and will never do so. ArbCom may have the right to read it, but my personal standards do not allow that. Jehochman Talk 17:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Sosnowiec Ghetto
Dear Piotrus. I am very confused. I keep putting my finalized section on my group page (politico-media complex), and am receiving messages that I am vandalizing the page and it is erasing my work. I am going to put my final section on here so you can see that it is done.

Television and Politics Around the World
In the “Dramas of Nationhood: The Politics of Television in Egypt,” Lila Abu-Lughod suggests that a nation’s television should be studied to answer larger questions about the culture, power, and modern self-fashioning of that nation. Abu-Lughod focuses on the Egyptian nation, and investigates the elements of developmentalist ideology and the dreams of national progress that dominated Egyptian television in the past. She analyzes the nation’s television broadcasts and highlights the attempt to depict authentic national culture and the intentional strategies for fighting religious extremism.

The main cultural form that binds together the Egyptian nation is, surprisingly, television serials. These serials are melodramatic programs, similar to American soap operas but more closely tied to political and social issues than their Western counterparts. Their contents reflect the changing dynamics of Islam, gender relations, and everyday life in the Middle Eastern nation of Egypt, while at the same time trying to influence and direct these changes.

Another group of individuals who studied the impact of television on politics were Holli Semetko and Patti Valenburg. In their studies, they analyzed the framing of press and television news in European politics. For reader clarification, they provided the best working definitions of news frames as defined from a wide range of sources. News frames are "conceptual tools which media and individuals rely on to convey, interpret and evaluate information" (Neuman et al., 1992, p. 60). They set the parameters "in which citizens discuss public events" (Tuchman, 1978, p. IV). They are "persistent selection, emphasis, and exclusion" ( Gitlin, 1980, p. 7). Framing is selecting "some aspects of a perceived reality" to enhance their salience "in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation" ( Entman, 1993, p. 53). Frames are to help audiences "locate, perceive, identify, and label" the flow of information around them (Goffman, 1974, p. 21) and to "narrow the available political alternatives"(Tuchman, 1978, p. 156).”. In other words, news frames act to direct the attention of viewers and promote a specific issue or idea.

News frames have what is known as framing effects. Framing effects are when relevant attributes of a message – such as its organization, content, or structure – make particular thoughts applicable, resulting in their activation and use in evaluations ( Price et al., 1997, p. 486). Framing has shown to have large effects on people’s perceptions, and has also been shown to shape public perceptions of political issues or institutions.

Like agenda-setting research, framing analysis focuses on the relationship between public policy issues in the news and the public perceptions of these issues. However, framing analysis "expands beyond agenda-setting research into what people talk or think about by examining how they think and talk about issues in the news" ( Pan & Kosicki, 1993, p. 70, emphasis in the original).” The results of Semetko and Valenburg’s research indicate that the attribution of responsibility frame was most commonly employed by the news. This particular type of framing focuses on making viewers feel a sense of role responsibility, in which they feel bound to perform whatever duties are attached to the given role, and feel a sense of moral accountability for not taking on the role. After understanding the attribution of responsibility frame, it is easy to see why it is such a powerful tool to news programs, as it evokes strong emotions within the viewer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mem134 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
A8 UDI  17:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Research
Nie wiem, czy to odpowiedni projekt, ale pokaż chłopakom nasz rodzimy produkt: pl:Wikipedia:Wstęp - 600 testerów w miesiąc, test wykorzystywany już był na warsztatach - dodany do witajek, przez paręnaście dni wisiał w anonnotice. 2 x 6 kroków (edytowanie + test znajomości zasad). To na razie próba generalna. Na styczeń szykujemy coś specjalnego :> Przykuta (talk) 21:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

First World submitted
Hi,

I have nominated First World for GA review. Rgg6 (talk) 21:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Historical Polish geography/translation help
Hi! I've been working on Siege of Danzig (1734), and this source contains some interesting details about events outside the siege area. Specifically, some of the besieging Russians are twice sent out to deal with Polish partisans, once to "Schwetz" (where there is a skirmish), and then again to "Wuicezina" (where there is what sounds like either a large skirmish or a small battle), which is described as three days' march, near the sea, and "not far from the frontiers of Pommerania". The work appears to be translated from German to English -- Schwetz is presumably a German name for some community. I'm unable to spot modern place names that match these by naively perusing Google Maps in the area around Gdansk. Might you be able to shed some light on where these places are in modern terms? If your curiosity is aroused, I'd be interested in knowing more about the Wuicezina affair if Polish sources have more to say about it than the above source. (I'm not a reader of Slavic languages at all.)

Thanks for your help!  Magic ♪piano 22:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I hadn't thought to look in German WP (I did look in Polish WP). Looking there, it turns out Schwetz is Świecie, but Wuicezina is still a cipher -- I don't obviously recognize it in any of the counties west of Gdansk (which is where the geographic description leads me to think it is).  I can follow up in the places you suggest if you don't want to pursue it further.  Thanks again for your help.   Magic ♪piano 01:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Semi-periphery countries submitted
Piotr,

I have submitted Semi-periphery countries for GA review. This is group 10's article. Thank you. Jon Luchansky Jcl41 (talk) 22:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

GA Review Requested for Politico-media Complex
Colleen has submitted our request for a good review.Ecr6 (talk) 03:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Question
I tried looking at our history for our article to see what happened to the changes I tried making for Megan's section on "Television" (to get rid of her bullets and convert it to prose since I hadn't heard back from her.) Was it Laurinavicius? Thanks for your help. Ecr6 (talk) 03:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see, nevermind then. I could not tell if it was Megan or someone else who made the changes to her section.Ecr6 (talk) 03:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Władysław Odonic
Hi Piotrus, I just began my translation of Duke Władysław Odonic but I have a problem: what is the proper translation of his nickname "Plwacz"; the only word I found similar was Płacz. Please help me to make a good article, thanks a lot. Aldebaran69 (talk) 04:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Gender aspects of globalization in China Submitted for GA
Hi Piotr,

I have submitted Gender aspects of globalization in China for GA status on behalf of Group 7. Thanks! -Erika Moul Emm66 (talk) 08:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 16:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

PIT Econ
Hey Piotrus, sorry, I thought the assignment might be over because it was going up for GA. I left a resource link on the discussion though for students to use for gathering additional info. CrazyPaco (talk) 00:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Odp
Stonuje w gadkach. Ale nie mam zamiaru ustępować. Prawda jest po mojej stronie. Oni są fałszywi i każdymi środkami próbują zagmatwać sytuację. Wielki Chodaczków jest dowodem - znalazłem kolejny dowód w postaci polskiego historyka, tym razem niepodważalny, a oni nadal kwestionują zajście mordu posługując się niesprawdzonym źródłem (a sami pousuwali inne źródła polskie, te im niewygodne) które w dodatku nie może być brane pod uwagę bo tej kobiety nie było w Chodaczkowie pomiędzy 1940-1945 (mord był w 1944). Właśnie dlatego nie można ustąpić, by Ukraińcy nie fałszowali historii. Polskie ofiary ludobójstwa domagają się prawdy, a nie pomników dla ich katów. Zwłaszcza że Ci gieroje, mordowali też Ukraińców.--Paweł5586 (talk) 07:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Mentoring
Hi Piotrus - your Arbcom questions to me reminded me that I haven't heard form you in a while. Although I was expecting a bit more back and forth via e-mail, shall we discuss our arrangements here, on-wiki - it'll make it a lot easier to keep track of. I guess the first thing to do, assuming you still want to go ahead with mentoring, is to outline the parameters of what you want to do, where you want to work, and how I can help. Best wishes Fritzpoll (talk) 10:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Topory
Hi, could you contact User:Topory on the Polish Wikipedia and ask them to clarify the source of ? At the moment it simply says pl.wiki, although I presume Topory took the image personally. If Topory could also remove the watermark that would be useful, but if not someone at the graphics lab here should be able to do the job. Nev1 (talk) 22:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

You email
Hi Piotrus.

I got your email, and I've replied to your question at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list/Proposed decision here. Regards, Paul August &#9742; 01:21, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Practical advice
Hi Piotrus. I think it is time to stop the negotiations over remedies in the EEML case. The arbitrators seem to have hardened in their views, and I do not think further discussion will change anything. Instead, I recommend that you participate in whatever way you can that is constructive. If you are allowed to write articles in userspace, and it is allowable, I will be glad to copy them to article space for you. Meanwhile, do good work, stay out of conflict, and after some time you can lodge an appeal. The ArbCom composition will change soon. Given a little time and some fresh faces, you might get a more sympathetic hearing. Jehochman Talk 15:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Educational GARs
Hi Piotrus, I am currently reviewing four of "your" Educational GARs. Three look quite strong GA candidates, and I hope that one (at least) will become a GA by the end of the weekend.

I regard Proto-globalization as a strong candidate and I'm almost half way through it. However, I'm beginning to suspect that some of the Hostilities, War, and Imperialism section is going to be a Copyright Violation. It is cited, but I think that its a copy and paste job, rather than a summary. The subsection Thirty Years' War appears to be so (see Talk:Proto-globalization/GA1). I could be wrong, but it is going to take time to sort out. Pyrotec (talk) 16:41, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I shalln't fail any of these four before the deadline (I've only failed 18 in 185 WP:GANs, so I have wish to add to the failures), but it would be nice to award a GA before then. You might even get a WP:FAC. Pyrotec (talk) 17:10, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * One GA issued. Pyrotec (talk) 20:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment. I don't consider that my decision was "wrong"; I sometimes get small things wrong (grammar for instance is not a particular strong point compared with some other reviewers that I could name, but won't) and someone comes along afterwards and does a correction, and I spot it immediately. It seems to fit in well enough and I would not have noticed it, without it being brought to my attention. If someone feels strong enough they can raise it at WP:GAN; that was my 223rd completed GAN/GAR review. I've had abuse, but nothing overturned yet. Pyrotec (talk) 21:07, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

First World - GA status
Hi, just wanted to update you that we have GA status now. Rgg6 (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Does that mean we are done with Wikipedia, i.e. we do not need to work on our article anymore? (just clarifying) Rgg6 (talk) 03:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Vatican banner
I'm adding the Vatican/Microstates banner to the articles as they appear in the various relevant categories. So far, the two articles you mentioned haven't shown up in any of the categories I've been through. But, yeah, articles on the foreign relations of any country/similar generally do fall within the scope of all the relevant parties. John Carter (talk) 16:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Adding Picture
Here is the picture we'd like to use in our decline section, but the picture clearly has a copyright. Can we still use it somehow? --Gxlarson (talk) 17:00, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

This one would work too, but I don't know what the copyright deal is. --Gxlarson (talk) 17:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Czerwone gitary to wlasnie my.JPG)
 Thanks for uploading File:Czerwone gitary to wlasnie my.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Martial law in Poland
Hello, I translated some bits and pieces of Jaruzelski's text. I mostly used the text published in Estonian (that had in turn been translated from Russian) so if you happen to have some time, please take a look at the translation to revise it. PS. I'd be glad if anyone would broaden the article on Albin Siwak, recently created by me. -- Miacek and his crime-fighting dog ( woof! ) 21:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

NORDPOL
Sure. There are two major duplicating articles - Operation Joint Endeavor and IFOR - and several very small stubs - Operation Resolute (Balkans), the NORDPOL Brigade, and the Nordic Support Group which as a bunch of disconnected articles, don't give much context to the subject of the NATO effort in 95-96 in Yugoslavia. As one article at IFOR there is much better context. If any of the three smaller ones were anything more than two-sentence unreferenced stubs, I would leave them. But they're not. Anyone can come along at any time and recreate the articles from redirects when they've got a good amount of sourced material. But with the material there is, it's better at one place. Buckshot06 (talk) 22:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Addendum: see you established this stub. If all the Polish-language material including references and infobox etc had been translated, I wouldn't even have thought of merging it. However I don't know how big the pl:wiki article was when you did the translation. Buckshot06 (talk) 22:11, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Do you have an opinion
On the issues discussed here? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:47, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * As I indicated to Offliner above, I hope to vote shortly, and I expect that I may well make alternative proposals. However, my main concerns are that the findings of fact could go into more detail as to the actual on-wiki actions relevant to this case, and that some parties whom in my view ought to have been addressed by findings of fact have not been yet. If I propose alternative remedies they will likely be more extensive ones. --bainer (talk) 04:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There is so much email about this case that I've decided to not even try to bring myself up to speed. It's close to closure, and I am not participating. Cool Hand Luke 05:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Good article status and extra credit
Piotr, We finally got good article status! Yeah! I was just wondering if you could outline what exactly counts for extra credit points with wikipedia. Do we have to start a completely new article or improve upon others? Thanks! Kmm131 (talk) 18:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Origins of Term "Pax Mongolica"
Hello Piotr. Thanks for the information about the origins and first occurrences of the term "Pax Mongolica & Tatarica". We'd love to incorporate this into the article, but would it be out of accordance with the original research policy? Also, would citing GBooks be credible (because it doesn't provide the actual page where the term occurs)? Regardless, thanks a lot for the links. --Gxlarson (talk) 00:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Due dates
I'm doing family stuff for thanksgiving, so what are the due dates? - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 05:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problems; just a courtesy heads up and a request for help :)
Hi, Piotrus. :)

You seem to be mentoring User:ShaqSmith, who I gather is a student of some kind? I'm afraid that he seems to have pasted copyrighted content into the article Food power. I've identified extensive taking from several sources, and additional review is going to be necessary to be sure that other issues haven't been introduced.

I've left him the standard template for such situations, but since you seem to have a working relationship wondered if you could help clarify Wikipedia's copyright policies for him if necessary. Having myself worked with students, I know that copyright issues are not always at all clear to them. I don't want to discourage him, but unfortunately had to blank the article pending further investigation. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I see we were editing across each other. :) I'll be happy to take a look. I'm near the end of my wikipedia day, but will see what I can find as soon as possible. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:55, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. As soon as I can figure out which sections he's edited, I will limit the blanking to those. I'll suggest rewriting them in the linked temporary space. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I just found that. :/ You have another student, too, who doesn't seem to understand how to use source material. Compare with  and . Those are very closely paraphrased. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:16, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look at that shortly, currently I am documenting copyvios of User:ShaqSmith; found two more sources copyvioed ( and parts of Wallenstain). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe we are finding some of the same stuff. I've just found a bit more from Wallensteen . I am, however, right now running very late. I will try to get a bit more done on this in a couple of hours, so we can at least blank only the problematic portions. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears that all that was added by that user is a copyvio, but the works of others (ex. I just spend a while comparing this para with the source) seems fine. So I think the solution is to remove all that was added by him; then we can remove the copyvio tag and let the students go back to work. Would you concur? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, no, because as I pointed out above text introduced by User:Nikzen has also introduced some problems. Again, compare with  and . Those are very closely paraphrased. The phrase "Economic commodities are, however, necessary to maintain life and give life a material form. Thus, by denying access to food, life can be threatened" in the source certainly seems too close to me to the article's "Since economic commodities are necessary to maintain life and give life a material form, by denying access to food, life is threatened." This edit also incorporates content from this, this and this.


 * Currently, the section on Policy seems clear. I've found issues in every section above it. The Conditions section seems clear, too. Copyvios come back into it below that. It might be best to have your students work on the article in the linked temporary space. I believe at this point that has contributed only clean content. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 03:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm out of time for today, but I have made it down through the Employment section. Of course, we've already identified some material from below that, but I haven't checked all of the sections. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 03:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

←Okay. In the United States section, there are multiple hits on this source, introduced here. The punishment approach section also has multiple hits: and. (ETA: This source may be public domain, but without access to it, I can't tell. It was published by US Congress in 1984, but before that in 1978 in volume 14 of the International food politics publication by Vilho Harle.) The Food Aid & Food Power section infringes on Donaher:. The section on Europe infringes. See, for example,, ,, , , ,. Okay, I believe the sections on Africa & the Sudan are clean. After I wrap here, I'll go expose the sections that I believe are clear.

A good bit of this article is corrupt. I've advised ShaqSmith to rewrite content in the supplied temp space. He had requested specifics on what needs to be revised, but I'm afraid (and I know you understand) that these are not available. There is extensive evidence of copying out of policy here, and we can't presume that any of the text he contributed is clear of copyright concerns, given that these sources are subscription based or viewable in "snippet" at google books. Some of this text was also introduced by User:Nikzen. I don't believe that he (or she) has contributed quite so much to the copyright problem here, but there is out of process copying from him (or her), nevertheless. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Today's Class
Hello Piotr,

I'm very sorry, but I misread the syllabus and missed class today. What can I do as far as the wikipedia updates we went over?

Thanks, Chazz

Chazz Aden (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

today
Ok, thanks a lot

Chazz Aden (talk) 02:58, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 02:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)