User talk:Katarzyna

Welcome to the Wikipedia[edit]

Here are some links I find useful

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Cheers, Sam [Spade] 00:41, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

GDP Ranking of Poland: In the article GDP, Poland is listed on 24th position. You update it to 25th. Maybe you should update also rankings on GDP site.

Belarus[edit]

Just noticed you added GDP data on Belarus. And decided to say "hi". Are you also interested in Belarus' history? ;) rydel 15:18, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I like all countries of Central and Eastern Europe, so Belarus certainly fits that bill. Belarussian history is kinda harsh though, since its right there between Poland and Russia and so it has seen lots of wars. But then wars are what make history interresting. Katarzyna 01:51, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yes, we got a lot of sh&*t from Russian Empire (especially the 13-year war, 350 years ago, when 50% of ethnic Litvin-Belarusan population was killed). But why do you think having Poland as a neighbor is bad? I think Poland has been a good neighbor. And we were quite OK together in Rzecz Pospolita of the Two Nations. I guess apart from certain small incidents, for example, Polish Pilsudzki's policies (himself having Belarusian ethnicity, btw) or certain clashed between Armia Krajowa and Belarusans in WW2, otherwise the two neighbors were always good and nice to each other. Some people say that Polonization in our lands was bad, because people like Adam Mickiewicz and Tadeusz Kosciuszko and Radziwill's became to be viewed as Polish and that was the result of Polish cultural expansion. But I think that was the only way to go back then. At that point our GDL was essentially destroyed and you had two choices only: you could go under the Russian empire or build ties with the Polish crown and accept the Polish culture (which was not foriegn to them at all, but in fact very close to them). - rydel

Danzig/Gdansk[edit]

Katarzyna, don't be hard on Space Cadet. You just have jumped right into middle of war lasting for few years. The arguments you have provided were also quoted (by SC too, i think) many, many times, and finally, when we have something resembling compromise, you are trying to start it all anew, with arguments EVERYONE have read for at least dozen times. Szopen 07:36, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Szopen. Yeah, Kasiu, I was only being sarcastic and it just went over your head. Love from Los. Kosmonauta Pieszy przestrasza, tumani i śmieszy.

I guess I tend to be a hothead at times (and sarcasm is really hard to detect on here). I'll leave the Gdansk issue to you guys, just make sure those German nationalists don't succeed in posting their "historically German" propaganda on here as fact. Katarzyna 07:21, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Kasiu, nie zostawiaj nas, co my bez Ciebie poczniemy, nieszczęsne krasnale? Space Cadet 10:17, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

No worries, I'm not leaving, just severly limiting my access. Not going to argue as much (on here), no point in it. Katarzyna 04:21, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Polish Air Forces[edit]

File:SPRP1.jpg

Are You sure that this are Polish helicopters? Polih army never used this type. Radomil 11:08, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It came off of their public website, under galeria->pokazy lotnicze.[1] I assume that their gallery has pictures of their planes/helicopters. Katarzyna 16:03, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm removing this from article Polish Air Forces. This are guests (lke this one [2]), I supose that from France or Italy. One thing I'm sure - those helicopters aren't Polish. Radomil 19:29, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

These are PZL SW-4 Helicopters. The tail fin construction, the rotary blade orientation, and the frontal aspect all look like PZL SW-4. But if the picture bothers you that much, I don't really care either way and wont add it. Katarzyna 21:05, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Polish army have only one SW-4 - it is in Airforce Academy in Dęblin. Also SW-4 is a little bit different. Fore me is not problm, but I know all of used types. Polish Kawaleria powietrzna ("air cavalery") use only PZL W-3 Sokół, Mi-2, Mi-8, Mi-17 and Mi-24. Other types in polish army are: Mi-14 and Bell 412 (only one - for goverment officials). So this picture was so strange to me that I decide to ask. I spupose that these are Aerospatiale Gazelle [3]

SW-4 - most visible difference - shape of nose

They are definitely Gazelle. Pibwl 22:04, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No worries, if its not their helicopters then no point in the pic being on the page. Katarzyna 23:27, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Polish army vs. wojsko[edit]

My first impression was - and still is - this needs to be merged. Could you tell me why did u split the PA article? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:29, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The term Wojsko can mean either Army or Military. But there is obviously a difference between the land forces and the military as a whole. I thought using Wojsko, similar to the German Army article being under Bundeswehr, and then having a seperate page specifically for the Polish Army, could help non-Polish speaking individuals in understanding the distinction. Merging the two makes it seem like Polish military structure has no seperate branches, but this is not true. Katarzyna 16:11, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I see the logic, however current problem is lack of material. I think that the article Polish Armed Forces (aka Wojsko Polskie) should be the main one, and Polish Army, Polish Navy and Polish Air Force could be its subarticles. In any case, contact User:Halibutt on this, I think he wrote most of the current articles in that section. You may want to coordinate this with WikiProject Polish Army as well. And please reply on my talk page, as I don't check yours that often :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:16, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Photos[edit]

Hi, what's the source and licence of Image:ORP Czernicki.jpg, Image:ORP Piorun.jpg, Image:ORP Rolnik.jpg? Pibwl 22:04, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

These images are all public domain, posted on the Polish Navy Website. Katarzyna 20:17, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:JozefArkusz.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:JozefArkusz.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or {{fairuse}}. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by going to "Your contributions" from your user page and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Agnte 23:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Leopard2 PL.jpg has been listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Leopard2 PL.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Image Tagging Image:ORP Sokol.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:ORP Sokol.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Longhair 07:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MW Marines.jpg[edit]

I would like to ask you where did you get this picture? I am 100% sure these soldiers are not polish marines proof - polish marines do not use M16 rifles, Alice backpacks, fritz kevlar helmets, and woodland camuflage. These might be NATO soldiers participating in joint exercises together with polish navy Mieciu K 23:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is straight off of the Polish Navy website, so I seriously doubt they would post pictures of soldiers that are not from the Polish Navy.

http://www.mw.mil.pl/index.php?akcja=galeriacwiczenia

check it yourself if you dont believe me. Katarzyna 15:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:MW_Manewry.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:MW_Manewry.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 02:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:MW_Rescue.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:MW_Rescue.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 15:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:ORP_Kosciuszko3.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:ORP_Kosciuszko3.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 12:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:ORP-Orzel.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:ORP-Orzel.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 09:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maritime military history task force[edit]

I just wanted to let you know that a Maritime warfare task force has been established. Hope to see you there:) Inge 12:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:JArkusz.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:JArkusz.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 00:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical Weapons in Poland 1939[edit]

Hi!

As you seem to be knowledgable on the subject, I was wondering if you could point me towards some sources and/or literature dealing with the Jasło incident of September 8, 1939 when apparently mustard gas was used by Polish troops intentionally or accidentally against the advancing Germans. They - naturally - made a big fuss about it, but I haven't come across the Polish version of events. Maybe you know more.

Best regards --Dodo19 10:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry but I don't know anything about the Jaslo incident, best I could do would be to google it, but then you can do the same :) sorry. Katarzyna 22:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway! --Dodo19 15:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your Poland-related contributions[edit]

Hello Katarzyna! 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 us.

Appleseed (Talk) 19:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/discussion of article World War II[edit]

Hello, Katarzyna. As a prominent contributor to World War II, you may want to be aware that a request for comments has been filed about it. The RFC can be found by the article's name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found on Talk:World War II, in case you wish to participate. Thank you for your contributions. -- Krellis 01:16, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:Warsaw1880-2000.jpg[edit]

File:Warsaw1880-2000.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Population of Warsaw, 1880 - 2000.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Population of Warsaw, 1880 - 2000.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 13:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Belarus[edit]

You claim to be removing biased text, but the text is sourced. Could you discuss this on the article's Talk page first? I don't know anything about the subject, so I'm not saying you're wrong. Woogee (talk) 08:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I did discuss it in the discussion page, under History. I say it is biased because words are used such as "reunite" to describe conquests by Russia of Belarussian territory, when even in the cited sources the actual text is "acquired." Using the term reuinte makes it seem like these territories are somehow naturally Russian, which is biased wording. Katarzyna (talk) 08:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Woogee (talk) 08:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that pani Kasia is calling names. Russian control of Belarusian territory she calls conquest, but she seems not to like the term "Western Belarus occupation by Poland". Maybe Kasia would provide any legal document from Belarusian People's Republic government or the government of Belarusian Soviet Socialist Republic which asks Poland to occupy Western Belarus, or agrees to the occupation by Poland of these territories, or assigns these territories to Poland? The term "reunited" was used because Western Belarus was a part of Belarus, whether occupied by Russians or by Poles. I would like to learn more from pani on how the "reunite" gives any reason for her Polish mind to believe that Western Belarus is Russian. Occupation of the occupied territory? But Polish colleagues twisted so many things in their article Soviet invasion of Poland, that they finally ocasionally forgot (ommitted, deleted, whatever) that Poland itself gained this territory illegaly. It's equal crime. If you name Russian taking control of Western Belarus - occupation, then taking of Western Belarus by Poland is equally illegal.

Just to pay your attention, look between which parties Riga treaty was actually made. Riga treaty is a damn straight equvivalent of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Vlad fedorov (talk) 15:35, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you have some deep down anger against Poland don't you? My "Polish brain"? I think you forgot to take your medication this morning, funny how you point out that other articles on here are lies too... well I guess the whole world must be a bunch of liars and only you know the true history? Get an education and then we can discuss history, it's not something you can just make up and hope people believe you. I'm not going to argue with someone like you on here, it would be beneath me. Katarzyna (talk) 12:48, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Czesc. You may have to consult Polonization article with section on Western Belarus. You may note that majority of sources cited there are neutral Western books taken from Google books project, which supports this version more than Polish one, especially considering that modern Belarusian sources are in line with them. Please assume good faith and stop your incivilties about education amd medication immediately, before I bring this to admin attention. My point is that you edit Belarus from Polish POV, which is not reasonable, since Belarusians view those issues differently. Please cool down your anger and come with reasonable proposals to discuss. Na razie. Vlad fedorov (talk) 04:26, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Czesc Vlad, I "keep editing the article" ? I last edited Belarus over a month ago, where have you been? "Stop your invicilities"? "Cool down my anger" ? What are you talking about? I have been quite civil, and my changes have always been neutral POV as opposed to the revisionist history that I have been trying to keep out. I just looked at the version that is up and although I don't agree with it 100% lets just leave it as is, ok? I haven't touched it for over a month so you can't say that I've been editing it. If you don't understand my edits that's fine, ask me for clarification, but don't insult me and don't try and scare me with admins. History is based on fact, when people try and rewrite it or change known facts its something that I cannot let stand. Look on the Russification page and how Russians have tried to rewrite Belarussian history, and eliminate the Belarussian language and people. That's what I'm trying to prevent... so if you claim to be trying to represent Belarussian people than we are working with the same goal. Trzymaj sie kolego Katarzyna (talk) 20:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to try and fix the article. As I said before, I am not from E. Europe but I wrote the article between 2005-2007. It needs an overhaul, so I hope for your help. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 17:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:ORP Kosciuszko2.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:ORP Kosciuszko2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Black Africans in Poland for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Black Africans in Poland is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Africans in Poland until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:43, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]