User talk:Mkosmul

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --JYolkowski // talk 14:32, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Morasko

Any realiable soucers to provide that Morasko craters are only "suspected" to be impact craters? Radomil talk 13:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I am a member of the Polish Meteoritical Society and whether the formations in Morasko are impact craters is still disputed (the idea that they are of meteoritic origin is certainly the most common opinion, however). There is some doubt because the shape and position of the craters doesn't fit the locations of meteorite specimens that were found too well. The area around Morasko has also been sculpted by glaciers during the last few thousand years and different dating methods give different ages for the meteorites and for the craters, in some cases they don't fit each other well. Some theories say the meteorites could have fallen elsewhere and then be dragged by the glacier to their current location (the craters would in such case be places where the ice melted, creating circular lakes). So, while most researchers do believe the craters to be impact craters, the dispute is not settled yet. Michał Kosmulski 18:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, but on wikipedia we cannot belive just because somebody (even recipent of Nobel Prize) said something. You need to give any realiable soucre - Wikipedia:Verifiability (also on pl-wiki pl:Wikipedia:Weryfikowalość). You also need to keep proper style. "probably impcat" suggest that opinions are divide 50-50 or 40-60 per cent. As for number of publications I suspect that vaste (85-90% or more) specialists are on position that this are impacat craters (especialy after last findings) Radomil talk 19:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Badagoni

Thanks for marking this article for speedy deletion as spam. However, the CSD criterion in question requires that the article be written in such a biased way that rewriting it encyclopedically would be impossible; this does not appear to be the case here. If you think the article should still be deleted, WP:PROD or WP:AFD would probably be best. Johnleemk | Talk 10:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I could rewrite the article to be unbiased but the company's notability is a bit questionable - it seems to be one of the biggest Georgian wine exporters, but I'm not sure whether that alone is enough for it to get an article of its own in enwiki. Michał Kosmulski 14:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

If notability is the issue, the fact that it is a large company in Georgia would probably preclude speedy deletion; a discussion on WP:AFD would be your best bet then. Johnleemk | Talk 07:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I removed the most blatant advertising (one of the sentences even used wording such as "our products") and I guess I'll leave this article alone now. Michał Kosmulski 17:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mkosmul. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mkosmul. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mkosmul. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mkosmul. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Please add a citation

To the John Brown poem in Polish. Also, is there an English translation? deisenbe (talk) 11:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

@Deisenbe

I've seen an English translation online. Is a web link good as a citation?

How about the original - what kind of source do I need to confirm the poem? It's in each paper book edition of his work I have on my shelf and part of the school curriculum. Michał Kosmulski (talk) 08:31, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

If the best source is a Web link, use that. But if it's ALSO in a book, and the Web page is just copying the book, then you have to cite them both. As far as the book, you need the publication info. that would be in a good footnote. Make a draft and I'll check it. deisenbe (talk) 10:07, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

For the English version, I have just the web link: https://www.mission.net/poland/warsaw/literature/poems/citizen.htm

The translation does match the Polish original.

I noticed the original is available in Polish Wikisource (https://pl.wikisource.org/wiki/Do_obywatela_Johna_Braun) which lists an edition from the 1930's as the source (Dzieła Cyprjana Norwida (Works of Cyprian Norwid), edited by Tadeusz Pini, published by Spółka Wydawnicza „Parnas Polski”, 1934).

I also found online two articles from print journals in English which mention the poem: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25776494 and https://www.jstor.org/stable/25778512 - should I list them in the footnote as well? Michał Kosmulski (talk) 21:14, 14 March 2022 (UTC)