User talk:Wronkiew/Archives/2009/February

Peer review notice
Hi, you're listed on the peer review volunteers page under technology and mentioned computer science as one of your interested topics. I just requested a review of Python (programming language) and, per the peer review page's instructions, thought I'd let you as a possibly interested reviewer know about the request. --Cybercobra (talk) 09:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Wronkiew (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Space colonization
Hi, thanks for your inquiry. I am a physicist, generally interested in human expansion off the Earth. I am particularly eager for us to establish independently viable colonies elsewhere, so we do not have all our species's eggs in one basket, though I am unclear where that should be, I think maybe asteroids or in-space habitats, but I guess it is still up for grabs. Professionally, I work in space astronomy. Cheers, Wwheaton (talk) 23:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * How funny! We've met at least three times, I think.  Space Freaks are everywhere, it seems.  (Well, SoCal is a bit weird....)  David will laugh.  Sherilyn is at B-27 and counting, so no doubt we'll be shooting off rockets ourselves soon.  Look forward to our next encounter.  All the best,  Bill Wwheaton (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and a request
Thanks for signing up at Peer review/volunteers and for your work doing reviews. It is now just over a year since the last peer review was archived with no repsonse after 14 (or more) days, something we all can be proud of. There is a new Peer review user box to track the backlog (peer reviews at least 4 days old with no substantial response), which can be found here. To include it on your user or talk page, please add. Thanks again, and keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you again - the thought is that if people see the peer review user box, they might say "I could review that". Everyone who posts the box helps with this, and I see you have recently made some PR comments - so thanks yet again, Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

RE:ER
Not at all.-- TRU  CO   02:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Wronkiew (talk) 02:07, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

PR of Xgrid
I noticed you are on the technology PR volunteer list. I would appreciate if you could have a look at Xgrid. Much appreciated. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 11:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Wronkiew (talk) 16:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Early medieval history of Poland
Sorry it took me so long. I restructured the lead adressing most of the issues you raised.

One of the issues which I am not sure about is if the alternative theory of Slavic origin, i.e. the autochtone theory, should be mentioned at all in the lead. This theory was not very popular outside Poland in the early 20th century and today has lost most ground even in Polish circles, but since it was in the lead before, I left it in but rewrote it so it is more comprehensive what theories we are actually talking about - after all, the opposing "mainstream" migration theory is just that, too, a theory.

Another issue I am not sure about is the four paragraph rule. I never heard of it, but I am not the MoS expert :). I however tried to structure the lead into chronological ordered paragraphs, only the first two are about the same period and could be merged if it wouldn't get too long. If the autochtone theory mentioned above would however be cut from the lead, the first two paragraphs could be merged without creating a too long one and you would have four more or less equal sized paragraphs. As an alternative, one could merge the last two, but that would be my second choice because they cover rather distinct periods and issues.

Third thing I am not sure about is the sentence with the uninhabited and build-up gords. From what I know the build-up ones are a type of early towns, used by the nobility, military, and selected servants such as craftsmen (merchants and most of the populus were kept out, so it is not a "town" in the modern sense). The other type of gords, which are more or less a wall around an empty space, were simply shelters where everyone could go in case of an attack. I think this should either be explained so the reader does not wonder why the Poles build "empty" burghs, or it needs to be cut from the lead as an explanation would give that detail even more undue weight.

Finally, I tried to structure the body a bit and corrected some mistakes (eg Truso was not in Pomerania). If you still need a ref that solidi hoards were hidden for religious purposes in the 6th century, I got a ref, but I did not find the respective sentence. You can extract the ref from Early history of Pomerania, last paragraph, if you still need it (I just finished that article and it has not yet been vandalized, so you can be sure the references still reference the sentence they are supposed to).

I hope I was able to help you a bit and my best wishes for your GA project. Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 22:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

243 Ida DYK
Now that the article is live, we can nominate it for DYK. I prefer the hook about Ida being the first asteroid to be found to have a moon. What do you think? Reyk YO!  07:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, the first one is better. I added in the correct date from the article. Want to do the honors? Wronkiew (talk) 08:04, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Reyk  YO!  08:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)