Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Czech Republic/Archive 1

Proofreading Help Needed

 * A translated article needs lots of proofreading, expansion, referencing, and sourcing. If you speak English, and Czech well, please help. Thank you.--Puchiko 12:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Featured content
Hello and welcome to our new WikiProject! Do we have any Czech-related featured content on EN Wiki? From what I can recall, I don't know about any. There are two Good Articles dealing with the Polish minority there (both written by me) and one photo is now nominated at WP:FPC. Anything else? - Darwinek 13:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know about any :(  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 13:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to list Featured or Quality images on Commons? Jan.Kamenicek 20:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it could be possible somehow. - Darwinek 21:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I failed to find Featured ones, but here are some Quality: Jindřichův Hradec, Olomouc Trinity, Haná Easter eggs. Jan.Kamenicek 23:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Nice pics. I really like the Easter eggs one. I am from Silesia, so we really celebrate Easter seriously. :) Haná is nice, too :). I study at UPOL, so I like it a lot. - Darwinek 00:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

proposal for images transfer
It would be very usefull to transfer images from Czech Wikipedia especially from Catagory cs:Kategorie:Public domain obrázky vytvořené úřady České republiky to commons. There are many images so they can be renamed uniformly now. I think without diacritics is better for commons but it is not necessary. Examples: I know that there are many small images. But there are not available better images now. It will help wikipedias in other languages (especially German wikipedia) too surely. Images of Coat of Arms and of Flags are only images available for many cities now, it is much better to see any image in the article, see for example Uničov article. --Snek01 15:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * cs:Soubor:Bohdalec znak.png -> Image:Bohdalec CoA.png
 * cs:Soubor:Bohdalec_vlajka.png -> Image:Bohdalec_flag.png
 * cs:Soubor:Branky pečeť.png -> Image:Branky_seal.png
 * Hello. Sure, go ahead, it will only help. Next step is to insert infobox to those articles, they then look totally better. See Opava, for example. Don't forget to use template. - Darwinek 15:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

second version of barnstar

 * Second version of barnstar. Typing this: message ~ gets you this:


 * Looks pretty sharp- good work. Does the yellow on the ribbon symbolize anything? Olessi 20:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Not that I know of. It is just the combination that came out when I was playing with the colors. I can change it, but it would be a pain. If the colors aren't somehow unacceptably offensive, I would prefer to leave them alone. But if some color has some strong negative connotations, I can change it. --Ling.Nut 21:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Colours are just fine. :) Good work. - Darwinek 21:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool. :-) Later! --Ling.Nut 22:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty cool ;)  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 08:45, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I inquired about the yellow since the red and white symbolize Bohemia to me. It is my understanding that the barnstar has to go through Barnstar and award proposals to become official. Olessi 18:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Very nice graphics, but I have to ask why to feature only Bohemian colours and Coat of arms? – Yarp 16:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * For modern Czech Republic we can use the first version of barnstar representing all three colours.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 16:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * This "first version" might be better, but I cannot see/find it anywhere(?) – Yarp 16:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Check the project page ;-)  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 17:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

(undent) As I said repeatedly earlier, I can change the colors. But whatever! ;-) --Ling.Nut 16:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I checked it and it doesn't need to go through the official proposal.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 23:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion
Prosím, jak se zde navrhuje článek ke smazání? Tenhle nesmysl tu nemůže zůstat: Ivan Špaček. Zajímalo by mne, jestli ten pán vůbec existuje? Na české wikipedii to jasně vypadá na smazání. cs:Wikipedie:Hlasování o smazání/Ivan Špaček.

Please, How is possible propose article for deletion? This nonsense can not be here: Ivan Špaček. Does he exist? In cs: wikipedie is going to deletion clear. Voting for deletion on cs. wikipedia. Cinik 20:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello. I have nominated it here: . Please vote. - Darwinek 20:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

New articles
May I recommend splitting them into a subpage (you can include it where it is now as a template) and tagging it with Category:Wikipedia new articles? You could also employ User:AlexNewArtBot to make finding Czech-related articles easier.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I will take a look on it, thanks for suggestion. How to employ AlexNewArtBot ?  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 23:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:CzechProjectBarnStar.gif
Nice. But there already is Image:BoNM – Czech Republic.png. May I suggested moving the gif to commons and adding it to the BoNM category? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That png is much more better, but as Olessi suggested, it is in medieval colours so I propose to use it for medieval history and the gif for the modern history deserts.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 23:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I would also rename it to Bohemian Barnstar. Jan.Kamenicek 06:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Which one ?  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 08:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * This one. It is very nice, I really like its design. Despite this it would be great if some symbols representing the whole Czech Republic could be added. (Although it is true that the so called small coat of arms of the Czech Republic contains only Bohemian lion). I also have to admit that the regular coat of arms of the Czech Republic would not look so well on the ribbon. Does anybody have any idea how to make it look less Bohemian and more Czech without any loss on the quality of its design? Jan.Kamenicek 20:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * What about completely new design – something like on this sketch?. It would contain all three major CoA's if someone makes to draw it… – YarpTalk 11:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yarp, that looks great. But I would like to keep that barnstar because it simply looks great.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 11:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

(undent) Hi again..I can probably make (almost) anything you want, if you tell me exactly what it is.. I don't check these pages often, sorry... I'll look at the sketch above and see if it's something I can do.. but let me know what exactly you want etc. I'm pretty busy but can do things once in a while. later! --Ling.Nut 19:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You have already proved that you are very skilled in drawing. The Yarp's sketch looks as a good idea to me. It would be very nice, if you could make something of it. I think that the sketch says everything important - the award would contain Bohemian Lion, Moravian Eagle as well as Silesian Eagle in their original colours, as they can be seen inside the Coat of Arms of the Czech Republic. It would be good if the colours of their backgrounds could be kept as well, but my imagination is not big enough to say, whether their combination would look nice. Jan.Kamenicek 20:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have just remembered where this idea had come from to my head – the emblem of the Prague Castle Guard here (top right). – YarpTalk 22:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll do the best I can to make something similar to the sketch above. With that many colors and images, it won't be the cloth-style badge of the one I made previously. But I think I can put something together. IT will take a few days, since I am busy with other work. I'll shoot for 1 week to completion. --Ling.Nut 01:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Czechoslovak Legions
I left a question there: shall we rewrite the lead to encompass the WWII formation or does it have a better name?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Czech Republic higher child welfare ranking than US, UK, France, Austria
UNICEF ranks well-being of British, U.S. children last in industrialized world 'The report concluded that there was no obvious relationship between levels of child well-being and per-capita gross domestic product.

"The Czech Republic, for example, achieves a higher overall rank for child well-being than several much wealthier countries including France, Austria, the United States and the United Kingdom."' --Ling.Nut 16:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Guideline
I started a guideline about the article's name, please see it here Article's title and add your comments.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 22:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

ribbons
I created a couple of ribbons, please review them here.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 13:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

barnstar, new version
Ummm, well, not as nice as I had hoped... Typing will get you this:
 * Looks great, but the star is little bit small, what about this:

 ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 21:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I like it very much, too. I think it looks better with the smaller star. Jan.Kamenicek 22:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm agnostic with respect to star sizes. :-) Y'all decide for yourselves which you like better... and now I have to write a term paper about reduplication in Amis. :-) Later!--Ling.Nut 22:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

(undent) Ooops! I forgot to make the background transparent. Neither of the images have a transparent background... --Ling.Nut 14:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * what about changing the yellow background field to white? Cepek 20:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * bad idea, the colors would be in wrong order. Cepek 20:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Minor political figure
I am creating a stub for Hubert Ripka - anyone care to add to it. Jackiespeel 18:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Expulsions and forced migrations of ethnic minorities after World War II
Here is a dialogue that occurred on Talk:Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia after World War II


 * ==Expulsion of Hungarians should be mentioned==
 * The same the arrival of Czechs from Silesia.
 * Xx236 13:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I had given this some thought and deliberately decided to omit the mention of other ethnic groups because the title of the article is "Expulsion of Germans...". Can you make a case that we should expand the scope to discuss other movements of people within Czechoslovakia?  I think it would change the title of the article.  Perhaps a better solution would be to start another article to cover the history of Czechoslovakia during this time period. --Richard 15:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This is really a difficult subject. I think that the article has been started well. Should we also talk here about the expulsion of Czechs from Slovakia? Cepek 17:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The background behind the creation of this article is that it is a subsidiary article of Expulsion of Germans after World War II. In fact, the text of the first revision of this article was lifted from Expulsion of Germans after World War II.  There are "sister" articles Expulsion of Germans from Poland after World War II and Expulsion of Germans from Romania after World War II.  The point is that the focus of these articles is on expulsion of Germans as opposed to any other ethnic group.  I think the rationale here is that these expulsions are controversial because of public attention focused on them by the Federation of Expellees and historians such as de Zayas, Overmans and Nitschke.


 * For this reason, I would oppose a widening of scope to cover all migrations of peoples in Czechoslovakia at the end of World War II. However, I can imagine creating an article titled Ethnic homogenization of Czechoslovakia after World War II.  The new article would reference this one and also cover the expulsion of Hungarians and the expulsion of Czechs from Slovakia.  Does this approach make sense to you? --Richard 18:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, absolutely! Cepek 19:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry if I was unprecize. I believe that the expulsion of Hungarians should be mentioned/linked, eg. in "See also", not described here. The arrival of Czechs from Silesia should be described here, because they partially replaced expelled Germans.Xx236 06:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

The net of this discussion is to propose a new article titled Ethnic homogenization of Czechoslovakia after World War II. We are seeking your opinion about whether this article should be created and, if so, what the title should be.

--Richard 15:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Antonín Dvořák userbox
I created User:Olessi/Userboxes/Dvorak for fans of Antonín Dvořák. Olessi 18:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks good. But if I add it to my page I will choose a bit different background colour;) – YarpTalk 19:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Does it display incorrectly for you? I wanted to use the colors of Bohemia in it. Olessi 19:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I created some variations at User:Olessi/Userboxes/Dvorak. Which looks best? Olessi 20:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Karel Čapek
It is well known that the word robot was first used by Karel Čapek in his play R.U.R. The lesser known fact is that Karel had credited his brother Josef as the true author of the word.

Originally, the article used to say that Čapek originally intended to call the artificial creature "dělňas"; I have never heard of the word in relation with robots. The claim seems to come from some Slovak blog, and as far as I know, it's incorrect. In a Lidové noviny article (Czech, English) Čapek stated that his original word was "laboři", and since he didn't like the word (seeing it as too artificial), Josef suggested "roboti".

Now the question: where did the blogger get the word "dělňas"? Is it referenced anywhere, or is it simply a mistake on his part? - Mike Rosoft 13:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I would guess that the blogger gets his information from the very same source as the late Erich von Däniken --Cepek 15:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I have had a discussion with Juro on this topic; I am copying it here for reference.


 * I have reverted your edit of the article. The website mentioning "dělňas" is somebody's blog, and as a matter of fact it's inaccurate - the Čapek's article in Lidové noviny says something quite different (Czech, English). Karel Čapek intended to call the creatures "laboři", but he didn't like the word himself. When he told his brother Josef that he didn't know how to call them, Josef suggested "roboti". And of course, the word "robota" exists in the Czech language as well; in modern Czech, it normally refers to feudal labour. (I already stated that in the article's talk page.) Regards, Mike Rosoft 07:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I am well aware of the use of "robota" in most European languages. The problem is that the blog mentions an article from 1930 (i.e. another article), that I read the same story several times elsewhere in he past and that the cited article does not deal with the origin and certainly does not aim at mentioning all alternatives. So, unless this is someone's huge hoax, what the blog says is correct. Since the old newspaper is not accessible online, I do not know how to prove this, someone would have to go to the National Library (in Prague). Juro 14:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't call it a hoax; rather, a case of somebody making an inaccurate statement and others repeating it. (After all, this is exactly how urban legends and other rumors and misinformation spread.) Also, I find it hard to believe that Čapek would write twice in Lidové noviny on the same topic, once in 1930 and again in 1933, and each time telling basically the same story but with significant differences. I also remember reading the story about Josef Čapek being the true inventor of the word (such as in Ludvík Souček's "Opravník oblíbených omylů"), and each time the original word was "labor", not "dělňas". I tried looking it up on the Internet, finding:
 * Copies of the Wikipedia article
 * The blog
 * Other websites copying the blog's statements
 * An article in a Slovak newspaper "Slovo" making the same claim - and, by chance, written by the same person as the blog
 * And the readers' responses to the blog, making the same counter-arguments as I did.
 * I do have a valid reference for the original Čapek's word (quoting the author's newspaper article). Do you? (I am going to copy this discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Czech Republic; feel free to comment there.) - Mike Rosoft 16:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Once again, your argument is only "valid", because I do not have the article and the sources where the opposite is written and I am not going to invest my time into this. Secondly, the above text does not contradict what the blog says (there could have been and surely were more alternatives and the author certainly did not take notes of this, because he did not know that this would become relevant one day). Thirdly, the argument that there could not be two articles on a topic is NOT valid and is laughable. Fourthly, the author of the blog as a person is reliable, btw, he can be nevertheless wrong of course. Fifthy, look carefully at the story - it is so detailed and logical that either this is a hoax or it is correct, it cannot be an "error". I hope you are able to understand point five at least. What I plan to do - like always - is to wait till I come across about the story somewhere again and then I will revert your edits. Juro 19:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is silly:


 * Eduard Chmelár is doing his best to prove that robot is a Slovak word
 * nobody has heard about dělňas (in the connection with R.U.R) before Eduard Chmelár
 * Josef Čapek suggested robot to his brother
 * robot was introduced in R.U.R
 * the author of R.U.R is Karel Čapek (may be he didn't invented the word but he introduced the word).

is there anything else what needs to be added and/or clarified? --Cepek 17:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought this was the case. In any case, should Joro discover any more evidence (he added the claim to the article after all), he'll sure post here. - Mike Rosoft 18:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Bilateral relations discussion
I would like to invite you all to participate in a discussion at this thread regarding bilateral relations between two countries. All articles related to foreign relations between countries are now under the scope of WikiProject Foreign relations, a newly created project. We hope that the discussion will result in a more clean and organized way of explaining such relationships. Thank you.  Ed  ¿Cómo estás? 18:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

68 Publishers
If anyone is familiar with the Canadian-based 68 Publishers, which published books by Czech and Slovak exiles after the Prague Spring, please help out the article. I have made a translation request, to translate the version from the Czech Wikipedia. Thanks! − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 10:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Music of the Czech Republic needs help
I came across Music of the Czech Republic by accident, and added it to your WikiProject. It looks like it deffinitley definitely needs help. --Ling.Nut 11:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I copyedited it. Milkbreath 19:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Zaolzie up for GA review at WP:GA/R
Hey y'all, this is two problematic articles I've run across &amp; notified your WikiProject, and I'm not even a member. ;-)

Zaolzie is up for GA review at WP:GA/R. --Ling.Nut 12:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Navajo!
Hey, I have a request for the Czech members. The article on Battle of Vaslui has been translated into Czech, but the translation is located on some weird site, which is using the Wiki engine. See here. I don't speak Czech, but I think it's written in Czech. I would appreciate if someone could post the article on the Czech Wikipedia and update some of the info from the English article and upload the necessary pictures. That article which was translated into Czech must be a few months old. Thanks. --Thus Spake Anittas 01:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey! Ehm, it is morning only and I am narky again... :-( Projekt Navajo is osina v zadku české wikipedie. Sorry, exact translation of this spicy phrase is except of me knowledge of english. May be it is good.


 * Project Navajo creates automatic translations from en wikipedia with translator program. Outcomes (as this) are absolutely terrific (poetry from Vogons is more better and more understable from this), because czech language have other word-order and complicated declension from english and translator is not capable manage it. His oucomes are illegible, unintelligible and ridiculous. And many people confuse Navajo and cs.wikipedia - Navajo makes a great shame and negative PR for cs.wikipedia. :-(


 * So, this is not czech language, this is Navajo-czech-speak - outcome of translate english->czech l. makes from automatic translator. Total unusable.


 * I can try to reverse translate. The first sentence: Battle Vaslui (linked too as Battle Podul Înalt a Battle Racova) (I hope, without of is it similar grammatic nonsense in english as in czech language without u :-) ) (january 10 1475) was overpower between Moldawian (Rumunian) prince Stephen The Great and Beylerbeyi Rumelia,, Hadân Suleiman Pasha. I hope, this reverse translation is comparable horrible as in navajo czech sentence, but I am afraid, this rev. trans. is better and more intelligible. :-( --Cinik 04:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I figured it would be too good to be true. :S Well, then maybe you guys can write a short stub about it or something. :p --Thus Spake Anittas 07:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Dominik Hašek
Greetings Czech Republic Wikiprojecters. I just wanted to let you all know that Dominik Hašek has been put up for FA-consideration. Me and several others have done a lot of work on it and I think it has a good chance of passing. Fingers crossed. Sportskido8 08:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Pictures of CZ
If you really need some pictures of Prague (or meybe some other place of Czech too), you can writte me and I try make the pictures. Or on czech wikipedie we have a project about making photo of Czech republic, so I (or you :) can writte there too. We are making now pictures of all czech articles about Prague, so the pictures will be on Commons in few months. --Chmee2 09:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Prague Spring for FA?
Dobrý den, my good Czech friends! I have an idea to share with you: last year, a group of editors (in which I participated) turned Hungarian Revolution of 1956 from an utter worthless mess into a real gem of a Featured Article, and got it on the Main Page on the 50th anniversary of the uprising. With the 40th anniversary of 1968 coming up next spring, I would love to repeat that success with Prague Spring. I know it's a long time until the actual anniversary, but the sooner we start, the better. (It got pretty hectic with 56, we started in August and the anniversary was in October, which led to a real mad dash to the finish--we barely made it.) Is anyone else interested? K. Lásztocska 23:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

....anyone? Anyone at all? K. Lásztocska 18:50, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll help. What exactly do you want to do?--Dominik92 06:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

orphan image Image:Velhartice Castle.jpg
I believe this ( Image:Velhartice Castle.jpg) is in the Czech Republic, right? Anyhow, it needs to be put into an article somewhere.. it's an orphan... Ling.Nut 05:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it is castle in Czech republic on the position here. If I look [there I thinkg that the picture is copyright protect... --[[User:Chmee2|Chmee2]] 11:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * .. if it's copyrighted then it should be ifd ... Ling.Nut 11:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * OK thanks I put a prod tag on it for deletion... Ling.Nut 11:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Ivan Mladek
I'm shocked that noone has already started an article on him. I started one and got it farther then a stub category but unfortunately it's not very good, is terribly formatted (I suck at that) and doesn't cite any sources, if you wish to work on it please do so, Dekuju.--Dominik92 06:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Sokol
Partly using the content of the English article, I wrote an article in French about the Sokol movement and intend to make it a FA. For those of you who can speak French, your help is welcome: Reading the article and checking there is no major mistake. Many thanks --Bombastus 15:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Order of T. G. Masaryk
I have expanded the article to include its recipients in 1991 and 1992 before the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, and done some other fixes (the article was a rough translation from Czech Wikipedia). - Mike Rosoft 10:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * great :)  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 10:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Soviet occupation of Czechoslovaka
Soviet occupation of Czechoslovakia article has been recently created and needs expanding.--Molobo 08:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Karel Zich
I created an article mainly based on the info from cs wiki, please someone check the english. thx.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 23:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

RFC
There is a Request for Comment going on whether to include the Beneš decrees in the article about Slovakia or not. Please add your comments if interested at Talk:Slovakia. Squash Racket 15:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD on Denial of Soviet occupation
This AfD may be of interest to members of this project. Comments are welcome. K. Lásztocska 11:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars - delete !
They want to delete our barnstars, add your opinion here please.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 08:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

German natives of...
At WP:GSWN, I raised the issue of Category:German natives of Bohemia and Category:German natives of Moravia. Personally, I think it would be better to rename the former to Category:German Bohemians or Category:Bohemian Germans, both of which have been used in English literature. Moravia presents a more confusing picture, as "German Moravians" or "Moravian Germans" (especially the former), often refer in English to members of the Moravian Church. Another question is how the Bohemian and Moravian categories should be in relation to Category:Sudeten Germans. Is a merger needed? Thoughts and suggestions would be appreciated. Olessi 18:34, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * As to the terminology, "Sudeten Germans" sounds like the right order. I'm a native speaker of American English, and the USA has no common term of this exact type. We have "Italian-American" (with and without the hyphen), for example, but this means "American of Italian birth or extraction", not "Italian living on American soil". Therefore "American Italian", if we had such a term, would mean the latter. I'm just trying to convince you that I'm right with some kind of evidence, but to put it plainly, "Bohemian Germans" is normal American English for the thing.
 * "German natives of Bohemia" doesn't sound right. The reader's mind flip-flops between "German natives of Bohemia" and "German natives of Bohemia", for one thing. "In Bohemia" doesn't work, either. "Ethnic Germans of Bohemia" would convey the correct meaning, but would put too fine a point on it, in my opinion.
 * Americans are used to ambiguity, I think. If "Moravian Germans" conjures the Church at first glance, too bad. The reader will adjust quickly, and no harm done. Anyway, if the term were meant to refer to the religion, it would be "German Moravians". We wouldn't say "Catholic French", for instance, but rather "French Catholics".
 * I think that the Sudetenland has a special place in history, enough to merit a category of its own. --Milkbreath 19:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)


 * If "Italian Americans" are "Americans of Italian origin", than I think that "American Italians" are "Italians of American origin". Similarly, "Bohemian Germans" would suggest the meaning of "Germans of Bohemian origin", and not "Germans living on Bohemian soil". Therefore I would prefer "Ethnic Germans of Bohemia". Jan.Kamenicek 21:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

How should we categorize "Sudeten Germans"? Should we include only Germans from the Sudeten Mountains or from the more general Sudetengau? Olessi 18:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I would include Germans from Sudetengau because this way is, I think, more complex. As for the second issue, I would prefer Bohemian Germans and Moravian Germans - with short info in this category, something like "This category includes Ethnic Germans from Moravia.". - Darwinek 21:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The majority of categories at Category:German people by ethnic or national origin are in the form "Foo(-)Germans", which lends additional support to "Bohemian Germans" and "Moravian Germans". One thing to consider, however, is that the Germans of Bohemia are usually not associated with the modern German state but Habsburg Austria, and most of the aforementioned Foo-Germans seem to reference modern Germany. With that in mind, "Ethnic Germans of Bohemia" might indeed be a better title.


 * To be more exact regarding Sudeten Germans and the Sudetengau, that category should only include "Sudeten Germans" in the 19th and 20th century concept? ie someone from Liberec/Reichenberg in the 15th century should not be included... Olessi 00:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Addition to my previous contribution: Name of the category "Bohemian Germans" suggests a similar concept as the Category:Czech Germans (although their meanings are opposite), which can cause confusion. Jan.Kamenicek 06:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I just found another related category- Category:German-Czech people. Olessi 17:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Hevstäf
Does this village exist? Thank you.--Victor falk 21:09, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Per my long spent time searching for anything I must conclude I bet my own pants it doesn't exist and is a hoax. - Darwinek 21:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I second.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 21:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe that Victor falk was looking for verification from someone from WP Czech Republic who is NOT already involved in the dispute/discussion and who has NOT already weighed in their opinions on the Articles for deletion/Hevstäf. Your responses here are just redundant and show no new information from either of you. Zebraic 21:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Result: deleted as a hoax.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 16:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Polish occupation of Czechoslovakia
The fate of this redirect is discussed at this deletion discussion. See also this, a newly created disambig. I believe that this is not a content created with the best of intentions. There is no denying that Poles and Hungarians capitalized on Czechoslovaian weakness in 1938; but to equate them with Nazi Germany seems designed to hide the party primarily responsible for Munich. Your comments would be appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Strange categories
What do you think about these categories Cat:Bohemian Czechs and Cat:Moravian Czechs ? I think they should be speedy deleted, because: -- Darwinek (talk) 11:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) They can't be used even for the Middle Ages, because no modern Czech nation existed then.
 * 2) It is really dangerous and can set a dangerous precedent. Are we going to categorize every single Czech person under these categories?
 * 3) When we exclude Czechs from Silesia, more than 90% of Czech people can be categorised with these categories. Many people would also be categorised twice, e.g. those who were born in Moravia but then moved to Bohemia.
 * I second speedy deletion. They are really silly.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 11:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed. At the current time, there's a single person in each of these categories. They aren't useful, and would never be complete. Puchiko (Talk-email) 13:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I nominated both for speedy deletion, creator informed.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 14:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Another strange category
... is this cat Cat:People from the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. What do you think? Are we going to categorise people by each and every political entity? Imagine "People from Czechoslovakia", "People from Ukrainian SSR" and similar. In my opinion it is completely redundant. Maybe Cat:Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia should be created and these people placed here? - Darwinek (talk) 16:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Clear to go.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 16:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I nominated it for deletion .  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 21:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)



Category question
I would like to create a category for people from Cieszyn Silesia (Těšínské Slezsko), it is a region divided between Poland and the Czech Republic, so it would group together people from both sides of the border and also people from this area from the time it wasn't divided yet. It would be a inclusive category since Cieszyn Silesia is a distinct region with shared history. Cat:People from Austrian Silesia already exists, proposed one would be even more inclusive as Cieszyn Silesia is a far smaller area. Czech Wikipedia have a category "Osobnosti Slezska", Czech equivalent to proposed one would be "Osobnosti Těšínska". Any objections? - Darwinek (talk) 22:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It is fine with me. Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 22:24, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Created and populated. - Darwinek (talk) 19:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * as Category:People from Cieszyn Silesia, I presume? -- Matthead DisOuß   02:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Jawohl. - Darwinek (talk) 12:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Duchies of Silesia
Various duchies are currently undergoing requested moves. I have created redirects from Polish and German names, but I wonder, if there are applicable Czech names? Most of those Duchies were under Bohemian control for quite a few centuries.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 13:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have created redirect Duchy of Těšín, because Google found a couple of pages with this collocation, but collocations with Czech equivallents of other names (such as Duchy of Hlohov) do not seem to be established in English, and so it is probably not necessary to make such redirects. Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 15:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Qxz-ad114.png
I've added a little banner for this Wikiproject to run within Template:Wikipedia ads (as number 114), so keep an eye out for it and if you want improve and do whatever to it. (Public domain) The PSD is linked to from the image, but I think my name-servers are borked so if you want the psd message me. Here's an example of the template in action displaying my ad:

And just the template as it normally appears (reading a random ad):

Just letting you know. +Hexagon1 (t) 04:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It looks professional! Hope it will attract some newcomers. - Darwinek (talk) 09:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, looks really good.--The Dominator (talk) 15:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yay, recognition! Thanks. :) +Hexagon1 (t) 07:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Czechs
I have been working on the article Czechs a top priority on this WikiProject, and have managed to expand it from a mere stub and find over thirty sources. I would like to say, that anybody who is interested, I wish to bring it up to GA status. Any help would be appreciated.--The Dominator (talk) 05:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Images of Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia (1968)
The Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia (1968) article has no images of the invasion. Can anyone track down some PD photos of tanks/protestors, etc? - TheMightyQuill (talk) 17:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hope some photos will appear in the future. Great article, by the way ;). - Darwinek (talk) 19:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Castle Stub
Do we have a Czech-castle-stub template? If we don't, I think we need one, we have the Czech-struc-stub which I think is insufficient because many of the articles use two stub templates, the structure one and a separate Castle-stub one. We have more than enough articles in the category to justify stub creation.--The Dominator (talk) 17:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Then go ahead and propose it at WP:WSS/P. Zdar. - Darwinek (talk) 17:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Horakova process.jpg
I wonder - can it be verified that the image is actually legally exempt from copyright? (I really don't think that §3a of the copyright law applies here.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 09:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar Image
Hmm, I was looking at the current highest Barnstar and I noticed it could use a little touch-up. I've posted a suggestion on the here, have a look. It's basically the same as the existing one with some fancy straight Photoshop lines and shapes. PSD version here if you feel like having a look. So, any ideas? +Hexagon1 (t) 13:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks better for its closeup that's for sure, the other one I think just has a more "real" feel to it. Not that your version is bad, but I think we should keep the metallic look of the actual star.--The Dominator (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was thinking that too but I can't seem to cut it out of the old picture with anti-aliasing intact, which is why I nicked this one, which is a vector version of the Barnstar of National Merit. I'll see again as soon as I have time if I can stick the metallic one in there. The problem is also that the metallic one is too small and has to be stretched, which gives it a pixellated look. +Hexagon1 (t) 00:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * How about this one? I've used the metallic star but I must indicate my preference for the other proposed version, what do people think? +Hexagon1 (t) 07:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I like it better than the first one, it would be cooler if the ribbon looked more 3 dimensional, but nice work on getting the metallic star in without making it look all screwy.--The Dominator (talk) 14:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do but it may take a little while, sort of busy, unfortunately. +Hexagon1 (t) 00:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It's just my opinion, maybe I'm an idiot. Get a third person's opinion before you @#$% around with it too much.--The Dominator (talk) 01:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Nah, no time unfortunately. :( I was hoping I could sneak some work on it in but it looks doubtful. I'll leave the .psd up if anyone else wants it. +Hexagon1 (t) 00:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandal targetting Czech related articles
Hey, maybe it's stupid to be posting this here, but I wanted to get some outside help. There seems to be a vandal that has been going on for months removing legitimate terms from Wikipedia as a way of propaganda specifically the main article Czech Republic and the article Czechs. This user has a dynamic IP and many sockpuppets which could be found here. I'd just like to tell everyone to look out for the IP starting 71.99, I noticed that some editors on this project have been lucky enough to meet this person, such as user:Tulkolahten and user:Jan.Kamenicek. So as a message of good faith I would like to say that the edits made by this person are most likely vandalism/bad faith, so don't let the edit summaries mislead, and immediately report the person. Thank you for your time and any suggestions to how to deal with this person would be appreciated.--The Dominator (talk) 04:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you will have problems again with related disruptive IPs, just let me know. I will block them for month or longer. Disruptive vandalizing sockpuppets should be eradicated. -- Darwinek (talk) 11:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Darwinek, I will certainly notify you next time the vandal strikes, he seems to relentlessly edit for one evening, until blocked (sometimes even after through a different IP address) and then returns about a week later doing exactly the same thing. For now he is blocked for three days by user:Kubigula but will undoubtedly return again.--The Dominator (talk) 06:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note, vandal has recently returned with an IP starting 71.122.--The Dominator (talk) 21:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Note, the vandal has attempted to remove this section from the page on at least one occasion that I reverted. Travellingcari (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Removed the section three times to be exact.--The Dominator (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Czech governmental photos: public domain?
Anyone know if photos taken by the Czech government are, like photos taken by the American government, in the public domain?  Czech Out  ☎ |  ✍  20:30, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello. "Check out" :) this template: or try to find the exact part of the Czech law. - Darwinek (talk) 21:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahhh, easy enough. Thanks very much :)  Czech Out   ☎ |  ✍  02:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Commons
Do you think it would be appropriate to link to the Czech Republic's category on Wikimedia Commons from the project page? The Dominator (talk) 04:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen that in other WikiProjects. - Darwinek (talk) 16:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see why that should be a reason not to have it here, I was thinking about just adding the little template that some articles have that says "Wikimedia commons has media related to Czech Republic". The category:Czech Republic on commons links to its subcategories and could be useful. The Dominator (talk) 23:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Then maybe would be the best. - Darwinek (talk) 23:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah sure, I'll put it at the bottom, somewhere under "Resources". The Dominator (talk) 23:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Duplicity in the article
You might be interested in this.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 17:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You also might be interested that it was the Czechs who in the 19th century demanded a split of the Charles-Ferdinand University. The university was accordingly split into two separate universities, and thus two articles are needed to cover their fate. Yet, some try to deny the article, if not the existence, of the German Charles-Ferdinand University in Prague. -- Matthead Discuß   20:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Let's keep the discussion on the AfD page fellas. The Dominator (talk) 20:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Help
I'd like to bring to attention this thread: Czech Republic and it would be helpful if anybody could clarify this, because we seem to be puzzled and have no idea :) The Dominator (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Prague Spring
I am pleased to announce that Prague Spring has been promoted to GA status, thanks to all who have worked on it.--The Dominator (talk) 23:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * ANNOUNCEMENT: Prague Spring is up for FAC at Featured article candidates/Prague Spring if anybody is interested in helping. The Dominator (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Czechoslovakia in World War Two
I created a new template that covers and takes all actions and people from Czechoslovakia during the World War Two to one place. It needs to be expanded, prefer mainly the soldiers, resistance, but avoid politicians.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 12:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks good. The Dominator (talk) 14:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration and review
What's the point of the section "Collaboration and review" on the project page? Isn't that usually the place where WikiProjects put their own system of evaluation? So why have the section here when it just links to WP:PR and WP:COW etc. We should either establish a peer review system modeled on other projects or just delete the section. Also, there is a section for announcements but there is also a talk page, subpage for help, to do list, wanted article list, candidate list, AfD list, and nobody really uses the announcement section anyway, thoughts? The Dominator (talk) 20:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I would prefer deletion. We can always solve such issues flexibly here on project talk page. - Darwinek (talk) 20:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've deleted the two sections. The Dominator (talk) 20:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Church of Saints Cyril and Methodius
Question, does anyone happen to know the proper English name of Church of Saints Cyril and Methodius? From Google and the hits that actually come from Prague, I'm thinking it's ''Orthodox Cathedral of Sts. Cyril and Methodius'', but I can't actually remember from my time in Prague. Thoughts? TRAVELLINGCARI My storyTell me yours 17:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the current name is good. No reason to change it. - Darwinek (talk) 17:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No reason to change it, if it's right -- that's what I'm questioning. I know St. Vitus is a cathedral and reflects correctly here: St. Vitus Cathedral, I 'm not sure that the other isn't a cathedral as well, hence my question. TRAVELLINGCARI My storyTell me yours 17:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hm, hard to tell... The more proper name should be "Church of St. Cyril and St. Methodius", Dominator should know this, he is profi-czech-english interpreter.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 18:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I knew there was someone fluent in Czech but I couldn't remember who it was so that's why I posted here. FWIW, Prague Experience has it as a cathedral when they mention the "National Memorial to the Heydrich Terror" but apart from that I can't find much either way -- would help if I remembered the Czech name. TRAVELLINGCARI My storyTell me yours 18:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I believe the Czech name is Katedrální chrám sv. Cyrila a Metoděje which does name it as a cathedral and from a Google search, many credible sources do in fact call it the "Orthodox Cathedral..." so I assume that would be the proper name, but a Google search for the current title of the article shows many results from good sources as well. I think it is safe to assume that Orthodox Cathedral of Saints Cyril and Methodius" is the proper name while "Church of Saints Cyril and Methodius" would be sort of the short name. Now it depends on how common each term is; my opinion would be to move to the proper title reserving the "Church" title as a redirect. The Dominator (talk) 18:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and since that's what I was leaning toward when I posted this thread, I've gone ahead and made the move with the 'church' title re-directing. People could likely look for it under either. Thanks for your help! TRAVELLINGCARI My storyTell me yours 19:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Why is (Prague) in the title, I've moved it to Orthodox Cathedral of Saints Cyril and Methodius, since there are no articles with a similar title. The Dominator (talk) 18:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

West Slavic WikiProject
I know in many aspects the different editors from West Slavic nations have not seen eye to eye, and the community has suffered due to childish naming disputes that usually deteriorate into edit wars. That's why, in the interest of common West Slavic participation on Wikipedia I have proposed a West Slavic WikiProject, that would aim and try to bridge the gaps between us and strive for fair representation of West Slavic interests, be they Czech, Slovak, Polish or Sorbian on the English Wikipedia, as well as effective multilateral debates on a multitude of contentious articles. So, just have a look and voice your support if you want. +Hexagon1 (t) 23:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Isn't that splitting of our strengths ?  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 00:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I for one think it's excellent, there would be one project and all the others would be sub-projects. The Dominator (talk) 00:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Naming debate at Sněžka-Śnieżka
Since it falls within the purview of this WikiProject, I thought I should advise of a new debate to move the article about Sněžka-Śnieżka. As participants in the associated project with the great interest and knowledge in the specific political and cultural ramifications of this Czech/Polish mountain debate, your views would be especially welcome.  Czech Out  ☎ |  ✍  05:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Naming conventions
Hello. I have considered the issue of naming conventions for places in the Czech Republic. They are already pretty clear, per magic precedential use (or bandwagon effect). I thereby propose them to be officially codified and posted at our WikiProject page. Reasons are several
 * 1) Codification will prevent users from saying obvious "It isn't written nowhere".
 * 2) It will help new users get oriented.

So, to the conventions themselves. If we have some ambiguous placenames, existing rules are following (I will use fictional names):
 * 1) Municipalities (obce) are disambiguated by name of the district (okres) in parentheses, e.g. Radlice (Klatovy District).
 * 2) Parts of municipalities (části obce, městské části) are disambiguated by name of municipality/town in parentheses, e.g. Radlice (Kladno).
 * 3) Rivers are subject to geographical naming conventions, "River" after name of the river should be used, e.g. Radlice River.
 * 4) Dams and reservoirs are subject to geographical naming conventions, "Dam" or "Reservoir" after the name should be used, e.g. Radlice Dam.
 * 5) If there is an ambiguity between mountain or hill and other geographical feature, "Mountain" or "hill" should be added to parentheses, because it is deemed prefix "Mount" is somewhat silly for the Czech Republic, e.g. Radlice (mountain) or Radlice (hill).
 * 6) If there is an ambiguity between several mountains or hills, mountain range should be added to parentheses, e.g. Radlice (Sokol Mountains).
 * 7) If there is an ambiguity between several rivers, name of the river to which it empties should be added to parentheses, e.g. Radlice River (Sokol's tributary).
 * 8) Castles are subject to other naming conventions, "Castle" after the name should be used, e.g. Radlice Castle.
 * 9) Rules presented above should be used also when there is an ambiguity between a placename and non-geographical feature, e.g. if Radlice would be also a magazine or a brand of beer.
 * 10) Geographical features that are shared by the Czech Republic and its neighbours should follow the rule "name given by article creator is good", to avoid edit wars and controversies. Name could be however subjected to discussion and proper Request for move.

So what do you think? I think it is fairly simple and most important, it is already used, so some dramatic changes would be harmful and would affect hundreds of articles and cause hard work for involved users. - Darwinek (talk) 22:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, but would it be Radlice River, Radlice Castle etc. or Radlice castle Radlice river as they aren't actually names? What's the general policy? Also, if a same-named mountain is in the same mountain range it should be disambiguated by metres above sea level, ex. Radlice (Sokol Mountains, 1205 m), huh? I also think that this should be made as a subpage of this page under "Guidelines" so "Article titles" finally has a companion! The Dominator (talk) 22:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * General policy is to have capitalised all names, also those generic, i.e. "River" and "Castle". Your mountain note is good and should be added to the rules (I just added space between the number and "m"). Note that all rules are already in use, including rule no. 10. There are many articles about geographical features shared by the Czech Republic and Germany/Poland which bear only one name in the article title and throughout all these years we've had no problems at all, which is admirable I think. - Darwinek (talk) 23:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've created a link to the page from the project page WikiProject Czech Republic/Guidelines/Geographical names. The Dominator (talk) 23:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I will kill the redlink tomorrow (today) :) after I get some sleep. - Darwinek (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The Makropulos Affair
Hello. I am planning to separate the play and the opera into two separate articles. The current article is almost entirely about the opera, so the article about the play will be a very short stub (see also my comments of some months ago on the opera's Talk page about the difficulty of establishing the premiere date of the play and other matters). Any help in creating a viable article on the play will be very welcome. Best. --GuillaumeTell 21:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Very good idea, support. - Darwinek (talk) 21:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The link above will now take you to a short stub that I've created for the play. I've renamed the article on the opera as The Makropulos Affair (opera), altered the wording a bit and re-linked to it most of the links that clearly referred to the opera and not to the play (exceptions: occurrences on User pages and suchlike).  I've transferred the play-related categories over, and I gave the play article the stub category  - was that correct?  If not, please alter it.  I'll add in any other information that I can find, but I don't know Czech and have never seen or read the play, so I hope there are people here who can expand the article.  I'll put a note on Capek's talk page as well.  Best wishes to all. --GuillaumeTell 14:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Adolf Opálka
This article was recently put through a GA review, but the article failed for now, any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks. The DominatorTalkEdits 03:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)