Hello Montessquieu! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. If you're already loving Wikipedia and plan on becoming a Wikipedian you might consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor, just paste {{Adoptme}} into your userpage. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. You might also consider joining a WikiProject so as to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! --Lysytalk17:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are right. they are both either in western Europe entirely (Poland) or southern Europe (Romania), taken the geographic centre of Europe into account. See below.--Martina Moreau (talk) 19:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, while I support the idea of creating the article, it should be prepared in a sandbox. For now, I'm nominating it for SD (just a title there). Pundit|utter17:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your problems. If you refer to geographical region than is something useless. If you refer to culturally one, than you need to include more states. In either case Median Europe is not the solution. Marc KJH (talk) 18:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
AfD nomination of Median Europe
An editor has nominated Median Europe, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Median Europe and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed that you are active in the area of Europe. I just wanted to let you know that a European Space Agency task force has been set up to improve the presently very poor condition of articles about ESA and related topics. If you are interested, please join the task force here. We sure could use your help. Thanks.U5K0 (talk) 19:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to WikiProject European Union!
Hello, Montessquieu, and welcome to WikiProject European Union! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a European Union Project Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your edits. Again, welcome, and happy editing!
Hi Mont. I just added the sources mentioned in the discussion page re the view of the balkans as part of eastern europe.
It was not my intention to delete your work. But with the reference added, the balkans have their place in this article, just as the rest of the othe regions mentioned. It seem redundant to talk about the same countries in different parts of the article for the same topic.
I like the way you have rewritten the Southeastern Europe section. It shows an argumented view of how and why are these countries associated with Southern and Eastern Europe. Admiral Norton(talk)14:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PC
Hey, I once again moved your edit out of the first sentence of "Polish Corridor", because the information is already in the second sentence (and at least once in the body). The second sentence is in fact exclusively dealing with the Polish period and links Polish Crown as well as Royal Prussia. There is also a more detailed background in the history section. Please note that there is no dispute whether this territory had been Polish earlier - it had, and that is prominently mentioned. Yet it is somehow contentious to call it "originally" Polish as you put it (when is "originally" supposed to be? Ice Age? Germanic period? Veneti period? Pomeranian tribal period? Mieszko period? Samboride period? Brandenburg period? Teutonic knights' period?), and to delete "West Prussia" from the lead which was the immediate predecessor as a province and a widely known alternative name for the region. Please reconsider your edit, there is no need to get heated about the issue in question :). Skäpperöd (talk) 06:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations. Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland has reviewed your contributions and decided you are an active member. Thank you for your encyclopedic contributions! But creating content by yourself is only part of the collaborative Wikipedia user experience, there is an active community of editors discussing how to better improve the Poland-related content; please consider joining our discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland. There are many editors who would like to work more closely with you, benefit from your insight, and help you with their experience! PS. Please also consider editing your entry in our participants list to state your areas of expertise/interest. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Hornbook -- a new WP:Law task force for the J.D. curriculum
Over the course of a semester, each subpage will shift its focus to track the unfolding curriculum(s) for classes using that casebook around the country.
It will also feature an extensive, hyperlinked "index" or "outline" to that casebook, pointing to pages, headers, or {{anchors}} in Wikipedia (example).
Individual law schools can freely adapt our casebook outlines to the idiosyncratic curriculum devised by each individual professor.
I'm encouraging law students around the country to create local chapters of the club I'm starting at my own law school, "Student WP:Hornbook Editors". Using WP:Hornbook as our headquarters, we're hoping to create a study group so inclusive that nobody will dare not join.
We are doing another activity check on members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland. I've noticed that you have not been active in the Poland-related articles in the past few months (we define it as doing 10 or more Poland-related edits per month in the last three months period), and as such I took the liberty to adjust your position in our Participants list from active to semi-active. Please note that this is just a method of keeping track of how many editors are currently active on Poland-related topics. Feel free to move yourself back if you disagree with this, and/or comment on WT:POLAND. In case you are not aware of that, our project has many active discussions on its talk page, we also list Poland-related article news (hee), Poland-related new articles for review (hee), Poland-related articles in need of cleanup (here), a listing of most popula Poland-related articles (here), a portal (here), and other tools. If the activity incrases, we would like to implement other tools, such as project A-class reviews and a newsletter. We are looking forward to seeing you around more often! Take care, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
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:
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.
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
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?
I am Marina. I am writing to you in order to clarify my fears. One of the users have been reverting my edits on Western Europe, as well as other European-related issues. I noticed, that his or her page is full of talk page entries related just to that. Would you mind to stay in touch with me? I read about vandalism on Wikipedia and I fear this is one of these cases... I hope, of course that I am wrong but... the evidence seems to suggest otherwise. By evidence I mean Arcilla's talk page as well as entry, and the fact that rather than move a critical comment from user page to a talk page, it was simply reverted. --Martina Moreau (talk) 22:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Poland Newsletter • January 2014 • Issue II
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; we get close to a hundred discussion threads each year and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised. Last year we were featured in the Signpost, and our interviewer was amazed at our activity. In the end, however, even as active as we are, we are just a tiny group - you can easily become one of our core members!
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 83,000 pages as Poland-related - that's an improvement of over 3,000 new pages since the last newsletter. Out of which 30 still need a quality assessment, and 2,000, importance assessment. We have done a lot to clear the backlog here (3 years ago those numbers were 1,500 and 20,000, respectively). Can you help assess a few pages?
assessing articles is as easy as filling in the class= and importance= parameters on the talk page in the {{WPPOLAND|class=|importance=}} template. See here for a how-to guide.
once an article has an assessment template, 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 a good place to watchlist if you just want to stay up to date on possible deletions of Poland-related content)
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. In addition to this automated list, you are also encouraged to help review articles from our B-class reviews requested list found here.
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. We have tens of thousands articles in need of cleanup there, so if you ever need something to do, just look at this gigantic list. (I am currently reviewing the articles tagged with notability, either proving them notable or nominating for deletion; there are still several dozens left if you want to help!).
did you know that newly created Poland-related articles are listed here. They need to be reviewed, often cleaned-up, occasionally nominated for deletion, and their creators may need to be welcomed and invited to our project if they show promise as new authors of Poland-related content.
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?
It took me three years to finish this issue. Feel free to help out getting the next one before 2017 by being more active in WikiProject management :)
Hello, Montessquieu. 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.
