Hello Orestek! 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. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Vox Rationis04:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
With the reference from the Jerusalem Post that you added, I would say that notability is now asserted. That was the only roadblock, in my opinion. I put the reference into proper Wikipedia form (which is a bit tricky, so don't feel bad if you're not up on the technique — I have to check a "cheat sheet" myself, and I've done this a number of times), and I removed the warning tags. You're good to go. Realkyhick17:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Orestek. I wanted to extend a personal welcome and let you know about potentially helpful resources.
If you are interested in Ukraine-related themes, you may want to check out the Ukraine Portal, particularly the Portal:Ukraine/New article announcements and Portal:Ukraine/Ukraine-related Wikipedia notice board. The New article announcements board is probably the most important and the most attended one. Please don't forget to announce there the new articles you create. Adding both boards to your watchlist is probably a good idea.
Finally, in case you are interested, similar boards exist at Russia portal as many editors contribute to topics related to both countries. The respective boards there are: Portal:Russia/New article announcements and Portal:Russia/Russia-related Wikipedia notice board. Of course there are also many other portals at Wikipedia or you may just get right into editing.
A tag has been placed on List of American artists, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how List of American artists is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}}underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:List of American artists saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions.
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of American artists. There is currently a discussion taking place on the article talk page with a view to recreating this list in a more viable format. It should not be recreated until consensus on this has been reached. I am also not happy about the large number of red links you placed on the list, as this is meant for notable artists, who would normally have their own article. Red links are likely to be removed if there is no evidence presented of notability. Tyrenius01:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I wantedd to tell you that I am adding the link to Tolerance Monument to List of places in Jerusalem instead of Jerusalem, since I think that is a more appropriate place for it. I also was interested in reading your Polish church article. As I passed by on the way to O'Hare, I would always pass by and wonder about those grandiose buildings. Best, nadav23:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent idea, Piotr. I'm just fascinated by this article and these churches. There must be plenty folks reading Did You Know would like to know about. KP Botany21:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While not an expert on the matter, I am sure a large number of synagogues in Israel (mostly older ones I suspect) are built in styles from the diaspora. However, synagogues in Europe were usually not built to be as large or imposing as the churches. For more information, I would ask someone more knowledgable about such things. Maybe Chesdovi or someone else at Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism. nadav16:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to the wikiproject - here's the bulletin - if you don't like it just delete it from your talk page, otherwise, it automatically updates. Please give me or one of the other project members a shout if you need any help. Kind regards --Mcginnly | Natter19:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Articles related to architecture over the past two weeks are listed automatically by AlexNewArtBot.
This list was generated from these rules. Questions and feedback are always welcome! The search is being run daily with the most recent ~14 days of results. Note: Some articles may not be relevant to this project.
I was thinking about music samples, not pronunciation. Believe me, my voice is not intented to such samples :) However, I have requested Halibutt to do so. Thanks and best regards. —Visor (talk·contribs) 08:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering what your plans are for this article. At present it needs reliable sources to show some level of notability. Without it, it could face deletion. I did not mark it for deletion but someone else may. JodyB talk00:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On 31 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Supraśl Lavra, 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.
Suprasl was not recognized as a lavra in the Russian Empire. Numerous Orthodox monasteries claim to have been called lavras from times immemorial, but that doesn't make the title official. We should always take ecclesiastical legends with a grain of salt. --Ghirla-трёп-18:23, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that contribution. EurekaLott has unilaterally struck a lot of material out of that article that they felt didn't belong. It's too bad they don't rely on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines as much as they do on their preferences. Makes it hard for people making good faith and properly supported edits. MARussellPESE02:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I'm more familiar with the Wilmette House of Worship than most. I lived within ten miles of it for fifteen years, and spent a year-long internship there while in college. Have you visited?
One thing I think is very interesting is that the interior and exterior concrete work is of decidedly distinct styles in detail, with the exterior Sullivanesque and the interior more Deco, yet they blend quite naturally. Louis Bourgeois is credited with the building, but he didn't finish plans for the interior prior to his demise. The interior was designed in the late '40s by Alfred Shaw of Shaw, Metz & Dolio. The successful blending of these styles is a credit to Shaw, and something I should add to those articles.
Thanks for this article. Looks like you contribute quite a few! Could you provide the reference for your information? I found little on Google, probably because this is not too recent. thanks! —Gaffταλκ07:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, two images of Belz Coat of Arms (1508 and 1772) ought to be presented in the article (like in Polish version). I am trying to add an image of Belz Coat of Arms, 1508 but unfortunately without success. Would you be so kind to do it ? All the best, Mibelz17:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(also posted on WP:WPChi talk page) I would be cautious with just changing importance ratings merely because of AIA inclusion. By default an individual building listed on the National Register of Historic Places gets a "mid" and those not but listed as Chicago Landmarks by the city are listed as low. Chicago architecture represents the cumulative importance of all the individual buildings, archictects, styles, techniques, etc. Many individual buildings may be high for international cultural reasons. However, don't go down a road similar to the WP:ILIKEIT used in deletion discussions for changing our ratings. Review our assessment scale for more info as suggested above. TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for contributions to St. John Cantius in Chicago. Also, thanks for calling our attention to this ratings oversight. During ratings often cursory glances at pages are used to determine a rating that follows an article around. Unfortunately, due to the limited volunteer manpower available in comparison to the volumes of work to be done this is necessary. If you have any further rating problems, call our attention to them at WP:CHIASSESS. I have set up a new section for importance assessments and reassessments. TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, a Landmark District should have its own page if at all possible. Many people feel very strongly about neighborhoods having separate articles from the official Community areas of Chicago. In general we have been at a pretty good equilibrium with respect to this issue. What neighborhoods did you redirect?
Gateway Theatre (Chicago) has the same problem as the above article. The problem with an article with a bunch of interesting facts that are not cited inline is when the WP:NPP guys come by and look at your page they may see it has a lot of interesting claims that they can't find very easily. If the line was too long at Starbucks that day, they might WP:AFD your page because they don't know how to find all your claims. If they are interested in putting you to work they might tag it with all kinds of things that make your article look bad like {{unreferenced}}, {{Citations missing}}, {{cleanup}} or {{wikify}}. Whether or not they put these tags on the article they might put it on a watchlist to be AFDed in 6 months or a year as unsourced blatherings. I strongly encourage you to cite the articles inline while you remember where all the interesting facts came from.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:49, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Orestek, not to be nit-picky, but instead of using See Also sections to connect your articles, please consider just mentioning them inline, or creating (or using existing) categories, infoboxes and templates. Ask TonyTheTiger for advice in this regard. Speciate05:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ciesze się, że podjęłeś próbę stworzenia angielskiego hasła o katedrze PNKK w Chicago. Hasła związane z Polskim Narodowym Kościołem Katolickim (PNCC) są mi niezwykle bliskie, bowiem jako członek Kościoła Polskokatolickiego (Polish Catholic Church), jestem też członkiem PNCC. Narazie jednak opisuje głównie parafie i katedry Kościoła Polskokatolickiego. Wyrażenie "Cement Stone", można przetłumaczyć jako "cegła".
Opisywanie kościołów PNKK (Polski Narodowy Kościół Katolicki (PNCC)) jest dla mnie troche niełatwe, ponieważ nie znam, aż tak dobrze języka angielskiego. Ciesze się natomiast, że ty interesujesz się Kościołami PNKK (PNCC). Spróbuje skontaktować się z ks. bp dr Janem Dawidziukiem, ale nie wiem czy zna on na tyle dobrze j.polski. Wierni Kościoła Polskokatolickiego (jak pisałem Kościół Polskokatolicki (PCC)) jest w unii z PNCC) z obawą obserwują zanik polskich tradycji, obrzędów i języka w działalności parafii PNCC. Jest nam przykro, że narodowi katolicy ze Stanów Zjednoczonych i Kamady rezygnują z liturgii w j.polskim, oraz że oba kościoły nie współpracują ściśle ze sobą. A ty Orestek jesteś członkiem Polskiego Narodowego Kościoła Katolickiego, jeżeli tak to z jakiej parafii i czy w waszym kościele są kultywowane jakieś polskie tradycje, obrzędowe lub językowe?
Bardzo się ciesze i dziękuje za zainteresowanie Polskim Narodowym Kościołem Katolickim. Szkoda, ze juz tak mało polaków w Stanach Zjednoczonych wie o istnieniu PNCC. Jeszcze raz dziękuje za przekład artykułu o kotadrze PNCC w Chicago. Spróbuje więc nawiązać z bp Dawidziukiem korespondencje w j.polskim - może uda mi się uzyskać od niego jakieś ciekawe informacje lub fotografie.
Odczytałem Twój wpis na mojej stronie w pl-wiki na temat Kościoła św. Trójcy. Masz absolutnie rację, że trzeba to hasło po polsku rozbudować i chyba mogę to zrobić, ale za chwilę, bo pracuję teraz nad innym projektem. Rozumiem, że Twój polski to jest Twój Second Language, ale radzisz sobie znakomicie, brawo! Ja dość rzadko zjawiam się na swojej stronie w en-wiki, dlatego raczej proszę o kontakt na mailu: belissarius26@gmail.com. You may use both Polish and English language, I shall respond. Pozdrawiam belissarius03:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
...redirected to Polish Cathedral Style. Przeczytałem - bardzo dobry artykuł, gratuluję! W wolnej chwili (bo teraz pracuję nad hasłem Austro-Węgierska Marynarka Wojenna, przede wszystkim w oparciu o artykuły w en-wiki i de-wiki) jeśli pozwolisz zajmę się tłumaczeniem "Polskiego stylu katedralnego" na język polski. And one more thing - Orestek, please, do not call me "Panie Belissarius"! W wikipedii nie ma "panów". Ty jesteś Orestek, ja Belissarius i to wystarczy. Nobody's age counts, OK? Pozdrawiam serdecznie belissarius19:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The date syntax is: {{Merge|other arguments|date=August 2007}}, but if you leave the date off it will be added by a WP:BOT. RichFarmbrough, 10:57 18 September2007 (GMT).
I wonder if the average English speaker knows what Polonia means. There was a category, "Chicagoans", that was replaced with "People from Chicago" because (it was argued that) people from outside Chicago wouldn't know that it wasn't Chicagoers, Chicagoites or Chicagoians or whatever. As an example, what are people from Seattle called?
Anyway, since nearly all the other members of the Category:Diasporas have the word "diaspora" in them, and no others use their native language's word for it, "Polonia" stands alone. Is diaspora a distastful word for Poles? If not, what objections do you foresee with renaming the category "Polish diaspora"? Thanks, Speciate02:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Polonia would be fine as the title of the article on the Polish community outside of eatern Europe, but as a category I am sure "Polish diaspora" would be better received. Anyway, there's no rush to change anything, maybe I'll look around at other ethnic groups' talk pages for inspiration. Speciate18:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It’s good for me that you’ve visited both the Czech republic and PR, because this allows me to easily compare their flags. Many similarities, but also many differences
Along these lines it is also good for me that you have visited both Poland and Monaco. (though naturally, I thought at first that one of these flags was Indonesia’s flag) (I often forget which of these flags have red on top, and which have white on top.). Since you’ve already visited the Ukraine, you only need to go to Sweden to accomplish a rare flag hat trick. (I class these two together because their flags share the same colors. If they play a televised soccer match against each other, videotape it for me). Or since you’ve already visited Lithuania, you could accomplish this feat by visiting any number of nations with red, green, and yellow flags. I have studied flags, because I think they are symbols that tell us something about people who use them.
Not to be a killjoy, but since this is the English Wikipedia, I suggest using the English names. Even better than those lists would be a nice map. Speciate08:04, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
Michcik 15:32, 3 September 2007 (Warszawa) Poland 