List of topics related to current Polish territories

List of topics related to former German territories
would be a more correct term, since ''current Polish territories'' also include cities like Nextel ringtones Cracow and Abbey Diaz Warsaw which were never German. However, Free ringtones East Prussia is partially situated in Russia now and Majo Mills Kaliningrad could be included here.

This list should not be restricted to currently disputed articles, it could also present some widely accepted solutions. The current status of an article could be indicated by bolding:
*'''Well accepted compromise'''
*''Disputed article''

Mosquito ringtone 80.134.122.49/80.134.122.49 21:49, 16 Feb 2004


I have moved these comment to the talk page here:

''Wikipedia already shows disclaimers somewhere else. However there are topics featured in Wikipedia, which are particularly targeted for massive inserts and rapid editings.
All these articles have to be considered as greatly confusing due to the massive names and opinions inserted.
Therefore wikipedia articles on any of these topics dealing with places and peoples origination from Poland cannot be considered as true and correct. As they are now they reflect opinions of 20th and 21th century laypersons. One day an article might be considered fairly representative of actual facts. In just a short time, often being changed by the seconds, the opposit is established.''

Note
''Please add articles to this list as you come across them and add the following advisory note to the affected article:''
Please be advised that Sabrina Martins Wikipedia articles dealing with topics related to current Polish territories, foremost Danzig/Gdansk, are continously subjected to confusing and misleading statements.

Nextel ringtones Charles Matthews/Charles Matthews 20:06, 11 Feb 2004

Removed further editorial:


:All these articles have to be considered as greatly confusing due to some editors which insist on replacing the common (German-based) English names with Polish names and Polish revisionist history.

Therefore Wikipedia articles on German territories which are since Abbey Diaz 1945 a part of Poland, and demographics of those areas, will change drastically over edits: while some editors try and add correct information, some Polish nationalists will quickly edit those articles to remove any trace of the long German history.

If you come across such an article, please add a link to it leading here, and list the article here.

A disclaimer such as:

: Please be advised that the factual accuracy of Free ringtones List of topics related to current Polish territories/Wikipedia articles dealing with topics related to the Oder-Neisse Line is often disputed.

may be added to those articles.



Majo Mills User:Darkelf, please note that this page can be useful as a list. Please discuss it here, on the Talk page.

Cingular Ringtones Charles Matthews/Charles Matthews 20:28, 11 Feb 2004

:n average Charles Matthews, please note that this page is currently only linked to because of the disclaimer: removing it is a form of vandalism. The "editorial" as you call it indeed can go here. building enormous User:Darkelf/Joshredded pork User talk:Darkelf/'''r''' 20:33, 11 Feb 2004

Two points:

- the page as it now stands is reasonable; I'm going to leave it as is;

- the page once created is there for everyone to use (to edit, to link to, to refer to RelatedChanges and so on).

dole mumble Charles Matthews/Charles Matthews 20:38, 11 Feb 2004
-
I agree to current message. It is very good and points to the disputed status of the articles, without constantly having to go to (edit) wars. ( I had started a similar list some time back, but at that time was severely attacked for it. Things seem to be better at wikipedia at the moment. A list like this could have averted countless edit wars and frustrations). This list and the disclaimers will notify the public, that reads these wikipedia articles, to be aware of the accuracy. Wikipedia gets copied multiple time by a number of different websites. They show outdated, discredited wiki articles, often without showing the disclaimers on the bottom and without showing the important facts on the Talk pages. Thereby Wikipedia has become a source of multiple inaccurate articles out there on internet.
Perhaps this advisors will help to better the situation a little.
-

I strongly object to existence of this page. The only reason of it seems to increasing xenophoby. In fact I shall add it to deletions now. mirnyi currently Przepla/Przepla 21:42, 11 Feb 2004

:I agree. This page will only worsen the current situation. Recently there was some progress towards more NPOV in the articles. This disclaimer is not helpful at all. set minus Baldhur/Baldhur 08:44, 12 Feb 2004

user:Disno

Please stop deleting the content. This page exist to create a clear list of Wikipedia pages which are often confusingly edited and thereby obscure the region's history, and thus historical territories belong here. nestorian crosses Darkelf/Jobe severe User talk:Darkelf/'''r''' 22:01, 11 Feb 2004

It clearly would better that anyone who disagrees with edits related to this page should come here and state a case, in this one place.

store once Charles Matthews/Charles Matthews 08:30, 12 Feb 2004

I don't care about the existence of a List of topics related to current Polish territories, but I don't think that disclaimer should be added to any articles. There are many subjects about which the facts are often disputed if we don't think we can achieve a difficult holmes NPOV on these subjects, something is majorly wrong with the project's goals. Adding a disclaimer like that is unprofessional. If an article is not neutral or factually sound, then make it conform to NPOV. If you can not get agreement on these subjects, go through asia drug Conflict resolution until an agreement is reached. elite could TUF-KAT/Tuf-Kat 08:39, Feb 12, 2004

I'm a neutral in the substantive matters under dispute - honestly - but in a matter of hours observing changes here and in the related pages I have seen quite a lot of disturbing behaviour. For example, one edit of a page under dispute, a large edit was made at the same time as the disclaimer was removed. That suggests to me a one-sided attitude.

I shall continue to observe here, in order to try to get a feel for who is being reasonable, and acting within accepted WP norms. No doubt the page itself could be improved - in fact I think 'present-day' for 'current' in the title would be better English, and better from the point of view that it is less open to suspicion of nationalism.

I'd agree that the situation is not satisfactory, but if edits are simply carried out without use of talk pages, it is very hard to see how a better consensus can emerge. Something seems required (a) to ring-fence the dispute and (b) bring different points of view into some better type of dialogue.

down windows Charles Matthews/Charles Matthews 15:54, 12 Feb 2004

Moved discussion from article

The actual list of places and histories in Wikipedia dealing with east of the Oder and Neisse rivers topics with incorrect statements, is much larger, but these articles and the list are often edit-warred over or vandalized. Wikipedia articles therefore depict disputed, incorrect or slanted information. - banner declaring User:66.47.62.78

From pyramids monuments Votes for deletion/VfD

*List of topics related to current Polish territories related to pointless, unathorised disclaimer, inciting hate. I shall not reverse inserted disclaimers on referenced pages, as I don't want edit wars in all referenced pages. Przepla 21:41, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Whatever anyone may think about the disclaimer (and I think it is in line with ordinary WP practice, and also a step in the right direction), the page itself is a valid list of topics. Charles Matthews 21:45, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. The disclaimer and the page itself are a good step towards solving the constant edit wars for these pages. Jor 21:51, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***I know there are edit wars on those pages. But I object on topic based factual accuracy disclaimers. For instance Szczecin page had reached consensus, and yet it has been listed as disputed solely on fact that it is within scope of article. Besides, correct me if I am wrong, main namespace is not intended for disclaimers. If this would be permitted, why don't insert such disclaimers in all God based articles, since they are also often changed. I object to very idea of generic topic based disclaimers to disputed pages. Przepla 22:02, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****In that case remove the disclaimer and link it from See also. The article itself is useful still for the same reasons. Jor 22:07, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*I already stated my opinion. I understand that I may be wrong and that is the reason I put here to consult community. I still think that factual accuracy should be resolved separately for each article. Even Israel/Palestine conflict pages does not have such disclaimer.Przepla 22:19, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*I agree with Przepla that we do not need such a disclaimer. This page is not helpful at all. Recently there was some progress towards more NPOV in some of the articles, and I don't know why we should need this disclaimer now. Delete. Baldhur 08:46, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - Removed text in article requesting text be added to other polish articles and reference to talk page (not appropriate for the article itself) - This appears to be trying to be some kind of meta-page - I assume we are not going to try to create meta pages for each controvertial issue but are going to use existing talk pages. - Texture 15:47, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete 1st the authors of this page are complete ignorants. They put the disclaimer on the areas, which never been a part of moden Germany. The main issue with thie page, is that the cities are currently Polish and are not subject of any international dispute. Why people of those cities should be denied right to express their view on the history of their cities? Cautious 17:29, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Can I make the point that it would be good for Wikipedia to resolve all the differences about articles in this area before May 1, when Poland accedes to the EU? And that this will require discussion with all Wikipedians interested in these matters? Simply calling for deletions doesn't help this process.Charles Matthews 17:38, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Good index page keep.BL 04:16, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete or rename the page. Let say Polish_German view points. Do not include any disclaimers. Disno 10:11, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)


Since this page will not be deleted as it seems there is no support for it may I advice that all inserted disclaimers will utilize has pictures MediaWiki custom messages service. That way, those disclaimers, can be easily changed without separately changing each article when it appears. activities associated Przepla/Przepla 23:19, 16 Feb 2004