User talk:Mikołajski

This is Mikołajski's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Thank you for your Poland-related contributions[edit]

Hello and welcome Mikołajski! Thank you for your contributions related to Poland. You may be interested in visiting Portal:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board, joining our discussions and sharing your creations with our community.

By all means, add yourself as a member. Templates: we have Template:Infobox Szlachcic, although it is not widely used. WP:TREE may have some info on genealogical trees and such; best trick is to imitate other articles. References are discussed at WP:CITE and WP:V; again - see how it is done in other articles (ex. Stanisław Koniecpolski is a good example).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. I figured it already that i can just watch other users edits, but i was wondering if there`s some standard tree template which should be used for gentry related articles, or is there any desired by wikiprojects for Polish-Lithuanian gentry. Mikołajski (talk) 22:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of any standard tree templates, but I don't use them. There is one in featured Jogaila, but I don't know if it is a standard; I've seen several different variants on wiki. Again, WP:TREE is probably the best place to ask, but you can always try the WP:PWNB, too.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

House vs family Ostrogski[edit]

User:Piotrus might correct me, but Jogaila has not been and by any means, he could not imagine to be a member of szlachta. And Ostrogski family does not qualify to be szlachta even, since they were orthodox. Lithuanian nobility probably, for quite long time. A House, since you did ask me - IMO, no. Family - yes. See Radvila family, and there is no house, despite the Grand Duchess/Qeen Barbara Radziwiłł. Best regards.--Lokyz (talk) 22:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our talk with Piotrus had nothing to do with it, besides at the times of Jogaila society was completly different, but if it goes for nobelity look at this. Szlachta (from German Geschlecht) is nothing else but Polish name for upper class (nobility) and religion not necessary had something to do with it (depends when), i`v got no doubts that by this mean Ostrogski, Radvila (most were protestant btw) or any other Lithuanian/Ruthenian influent family can be considered as a szlachta/nobility, especially if there was equality amongst nobles (well, in theory). I`m not askeing you, but reffering to examples and meaning of a "House" in this context as a synonym of family, clan etc. I only wanted to be sure that i`m not mistaken. Sorry, but that this name isn`t used to Radvila (or plenty other familyies) doesn`t proove that it`s reserved for Royal Houses.
Mikołajski (talk) 23:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh. My trzy groszhy. Pierwszy: (Sigh) No - User:Piotrus has nothing to do with our discussion, and I did pointed him as a more experienced/active user. Secundo: There was a completely disaster to esablish who is who?. I'll not go as far as Belarus nobility, and if you'd follow my advice - please take time reading textbooks and monographs. Trečias: I'm well aware about legal (or rather estate-legal) status. Lithuanian nobility, and especially House of Gediminas ruled two Nations for several centuries not being Polish nobility. If you'd have some questions, I'd be glad to respond.--Lokyz (talk) 23:32, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not nervous by any means:) By who is who disaster - I'm referring to failed attempt find at least some common point wit Polish editors here on who was szlachta member, and who was not. Sometimes it does seem that many people were assigned to szlachta much later than they have died. There is also no common ground who the szlachta were - Polish, Polish-Lithuanian or Polish and Lithuanian (since the Republic of Both Nations), or maybe Polish, Lithuanian, Ruthenian and Livonian nobility? Cheers.--Lokyz (talk) 09:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for continuing our discussion, rather than going into edit warring. It is a really a gulp of fresh air into Wikipedia and our common history, that was going into wrong direction(rather kickstand, than constructive edits).

Regarding who is who? question - I only tried humble to introduce you into ongoing, once again IMO, kickstand between Lithuanian and Polish (and as a matter Ukrainian and Belarus, in some cases involing Latvian) editors. I'm well aware of the nationality/language/ethnicity/religion issues, and their representation in national histriograhies. If you'd ask me, I'd rather stick with national borders as for now, with several exceptions - like the ethnic borders, known since 19th century. Ethnic - means based on ethnographic data rather than language (at least in the first half of 19th century). Hope you would not mind to, that we would stick to the idea, the modern Nationality was formed after French revolution, and German philosophers, notably, Fichte works (one of German university dwellers, that did look after a way to identify himself as German rather than francophonic German nobility). And, it does not apply to the previous ages, when Polish (Crown) and Lithuanian (Duchy) selfidentification - political, including foreign policy, actions were rather different, and were based not on language.

As for the house, well, I might be wrong, but until now i did perceive it as a Royal house. There is allways a way to improve things, even my perception. Maybe I was mislead by the infamous Familia. Well, Czartoryski have their ow House.

I do not want to raise the question on whether szlachta did exist after partitons - as far I'm aware, it was abolished as a class, but such things could make an unnncessary fuss.

Once again - thanks for our discussion, it may improve the climate over here.--Lokyz (talk) 12:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, nice to hear that words, thanks. Well, i think that all of it made etchnic confusion amongst many people, if it goes for present historiographies, there are some biased/POVed sources, but it`s nothing compared to medieval "scholars", who in most of cases were "humble servants" of thier masters. Ok, but if you mean national borders tell me 4 example where`s Lt/Bel border, or Bel/Ukr? I wish it would be so easy. I agree, French revolution and romantism, supression of Russian Empire also made our both national identityies to develop, as well as literature. But look at persons like Mickiewicz, can you tell me which nationality/ethnicy he was?? Royal no doubt, but Princely/Knyaz familyies were "by blood" also royal, only Emperor could give the princely title (like in case of Radvila). Jagiellons were also "elected", so i`m not sure if we can consider it as a typical royal house, neither as some casual szlachta. I really don`t get why to give Polish nobility so exotic meaning in comparation to rest of feudal-elitar Europe, i mean that there were differences, but rule was everywhere similar. So it doesn`t matter if we consider Ostrogski or other clans as a szlachta, they were noble-elite familyies anyway and as i said religion not necessary was related to it. If it goes for Ostrogski, i`m not sure when they adopted catholicism, or if they ever did it before Zasławscy and Wiśniowieccy inherited thier possesions. Mikołajski (talk) 00:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I agree that Jogaila was not a member of szlachta, but Ostrogoscy certainly were (without doubt after 1569 and likely after the Union of Horodło). Do we know when they converted to Catholicism/Protestantism? Legal priviliges of szlachta were abolished I believe only after 1918, as a class they existed until 1939 (I'd have to look for some more data for specific dates, but certainly nobility was recognized by the partitioners - if not all the poorer ones, perhaps). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so sure about Russian Empire times. Any references?--Lokyz (talk) 17:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. just remembered - Jozef Pilsudski article does state some things, that catholics could not be landowners in Rusian Empire, and also could not hold any state offices. Please correct me if I'm wrong.--Lokyz (talk) 17:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was some discrimination, but I am pretty sure some Catholic nobles were allowed to hold land and some minor offices. This is not however something I've researched extensively, User:Molobo may know more, perhaps you could ask him? PS. I can't find the passage you mention in Piłsudski's article? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It might be copyedited, those things do happen (more often than one would expect). References question on szlachta legal status in Russian Empire is still open.--Lokyz (talk) 18:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Diminuitive forms[edit]

Thanks alot, but name Halszka seems to be in various sources also used, is it another name or maybe another language (for example old-Russian)? I feel confused with that names issues, especially Dniil had about four different names in different sources (Daszko, Detko etc.) as well as Feodor. How about that Danylko, is it diminuitive form of Daniil? Another thing i wish to ask is what`s wikipedia policy about such things like names and how can i redirect various names to one correct (i hope) page. Unfortunatelly i`v got no "move" button, is it question of my accounts set-up? Regards.Mikołajski (talk) 18:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not familiar with the form Halszka. I can't say something definite on this issue but I have doubts it was used for Elizaveta. Yes, Danylko is a diminuitive form of Daniil, Dashko probably too, while Detko is just a dimunuitive form of "child". The policy is that the articles should be found under the most common and the most used name. You can do redirect by starting a new article and then write #redirect[[]] with the main name inside. Yes, probably the move opting is not yet accessable for new users. If you want to move an article, you can ask me or other users to do it. Copy-pasting of the content to a new place is not welcomed, because edit history gets lost. Regards, Voyevoda (talk) 11:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. May it be that Halszka was just Latinised/Polonised name, anyway i`v got finally that "move" button and i`ll just redirect Elżbieta/Halszka to "Elizaveta" and similar with others. If it goes for "Detko", i found it in many sources, exactly Det`ko, similar with Feodor and Fed`ko. If i can i wish you to tell me if Feodor (Fiodor/Teodor) and Ilia (Eliasz/Elias) are correct names. Mikołajski (talk) 00:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:[edit]

No there is no article on Augustinus Rotundus. I think this spelling form is most common. There is an article of Albinas Jovaišas, Augusto Rotundo Lietuvos valstybės vizija (Vision of Lithuanian State by Augustus Rotundus) in Šešioliktojo amžiaus raštija (Sixteenth century writings), Senoji Lietuvos lteratūra V (Old Litherature of Lithuania, vol. 5), Vilnius 2000.

As for Genute Kirkienė - she seems to be a Ph.D from Vilnius University, I cannot say anything more. Her publications are published in respected journals like [1], and she has been working on Publications of Lithuanian Metrica together with other respected historians (LIETUVOS METRIKA (1522–1530). 4-oji Teismų bylų knyga (XVI a. pabaigos kopija). Parengė S. Lazutka, I. Valikonytė, G. Kirkienė, E. Gudavičius, J. Karpavičienė S. Viskantaitė, Vilnius, 1997) so she seems to be reliable. hope this helps.--Lokyz (talk) 11:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do suggest to move this discussion onto related talk page - i.e. Talk:Augustinus Rotundus, hope you don't mind that I moved your questions there, and I provided my answers also there. Cheers.--Lokyz (talk) 15:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE[edit]

Hello, Mikołajski. You have new messages at Dominik92's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I think I found it, I left a link to a website that explains it on my talk page. The Dominator^Talk_Edits 06:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, why did you revert my edit? all it was was several spelling, grammar and MoS fixes. The Dominator^Talk_Edits 20:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I see it now, no problem. The Dominator^Talk_Edits 21:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mikołajski. You have new messages at Dominik92's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

5/5 DYK[edit]

On 5 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Feodor Ostrogski, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford 03:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

B/D cats[edit]

Please don't forget to add birth and date categories to the biographical articles you write - Category:1555 births and such.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Danzig/Gdańsk[edit]

This is a dead horse. If you don't believe me, ask on WP:PWNB or talk to users such as User:Molobo or User:Space Cadet, who often deal with Talk:Gdansk/Vote. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:25, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple way to improve your contributions[edit]

Use a browser with build in English spellchecker (SeaMoneky, Firefox, etc.). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stanisław Orzechowski - undeletion.[edit]

Article, which i just started yesterday, was deleated before i could even expand it. Maybe i should keep it in sandbox, at least there it would survive 12h. So please, undelete it and if it`s possible paste in User:Mikołajski/Sandbox2. Thanks in advance. Mikołajski (talk) 18:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Stifle (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maps[edit]

What do you want to use my maps for? Sure, you can (hence the license), but I'm just curious. If it's for publication - I could send you some better version, BTW. //Halibu tt 23:38, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my god... why don't you use GIMP, or any decent program. Paint is for painting walls, not graphics... //Halibu tt 06:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed description (and a legend) is available here:

. //Halibu tt 10:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now I feel my map's in good hands. Do with it whatever you want :) (BTW, there's also a layered version available, I guess it makes work easier). //Halibu tt 11:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Communication[edit]

Don't hesitate to send me (and other users) a message on GG and activate your email.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 12:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Emailing users.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Union 1499[edit]

Hello, the discussion for move here was already closed (I added markers to see it clearly now). However you are more then welcome to reopen it by resubmitting move request in accordance with WP:RM (I may support your newest proposal). You also may be interested in here,as currently is proposed to impose and use a just a single name, instead of dual and more neutral one. M.K. (talk) 08:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, answering to your question: if majority voted for move, why there`s still old name? it depend mostly on closing admin's decision. Actually I have no problems and naming that article, in this context, with Both Nations too. Cheers, M.K. (talk) 10:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Horodlo Union[edit]

Zobacze jak z czasem bede stal. Moze poprosic o pomoc innych na WP:PWNB? Dobre miejsce to takich prosb i ogloszen.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mikołajski/Zasławski[edit]

I am decategorizing your article, as it is in userpace. Please note that we now have an article on the Zasławski family.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:46, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS. I have merged and redirect your article there.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:54, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles in your userpage[edit]

I will soon merge and redirect them all into proper article. I hope you don't mind; I am just sad to see good work you put into them wasted. In the future, please don't work on articles in your userspace, but directly in mainspace - so no work of yours will be forgotten and wasted. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles needing translation from Lithuanian Wikipedia[edit]

Hi just to let you know there are some new stubs on painters that need translation from Lithuanian. Your help is needed! Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 15:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland misses you! Please consider coming back to Wikipedia, and editing with us again! You may want to look at our current discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland and look at our article news to see what we are currently doing! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monitor. WikiProject Poland Newsletter: Issue 1 (April 2011)[edit]

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • April 2011
For our freedom and yours

Welcome to our first issue of WikiProject Poland newsletter, the Monitor (named after the first Polish newspaper).

Our Project has been operational since 1 June, 2005, and also serves as the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board. I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions. We hope you will join us in them, if you haven't done so already! Unlike many other WikiProjects, we are quite active; in this year alone about 40 threads have been started on our discussion page, and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised.

In addition to a lively encyclopedic, Poland-related, English-language discussion forum, we have numerous useful tools that can be of use to you - and that you could help us maintain and develop:

we have an active assessment department. As of now, our project has tagged almost 80,000 pages as Poland-related, out of which 1,500 still need a quality assessment, and 20,000, importance assessment.
we have also begun B-class quality reviews on our talk page, and if our activity increases, hopefully we will be able to institute our own A-class quality reviews. As of now, we have about 500 C-class articles in need of a B-class review. If you'd like to help with them, instructions for doing B-class reviews are to be found in point 10 of our assessment FAQ.
once an article is assessed it will appear in our article alerts and news feed, which provides information on which Poland-related articles are considered for deletion, move, or are undergoing a Good or Featured review. Watchlisting that feed, in addition to watchlisting our project's main page, is a good way to make sure you stay up to date on most Poland-related discussions.
you can also see detailed deletion discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland (which is another good place to watchlist!)
also, those articles will be included in our cleanup listing, which allows us to see which top-importance articles are in need for attention, and so on
newly created Poland-related articles are listed here. They need to be reviewed, often cleaned-up, and its creators may need to be welcomed and invited to our project
we are maintaining a Portal:Poland
automated Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Popular pages lists the most popular Poland-related pages from the previous month(s)

This is not all; on our page you can find a list of useful templates (including userboxes), awards and other tools!

With all that said, how about you join our discussions at WT:POLAND? Surely, there must be something you could help others with, or perhaps you are in need of assistance yourself?

You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a [member link] at WikiProject Poland. • _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Please add sources[edit]

To your ancestry section ([2]); otherwise it will has to be removed. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:54, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion[edit]

Hi, i would like to have your opinion about a discussion which i started here, thank.Kingroyos (talk) 23:20, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Baltic)[edit]

Hi. I see you are listed as a member of a WikiProject of a Baltic state. I was wondering if anybody who actively works on Estonian, Lithuanian or Latvian articles, would be interested in launching your own Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Baltic), based on the Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic) and Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea would be to try to bring about 1000 article improvements and creations on this region as an enjoyable challenge and potentially things like National Contests with prizes. If you'd be interested and think it's something you might regularly contribute to, comment and sign up at Talk:Baltic states. If there is interest we can move this to a project somewhere and set something up, thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:26, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite[edit]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]