User talk:Nihil novi

When you write a message here, I will respond to it here. Likewise, when I write a message on your Talk page, I will watch that page for your response. That will maintain continuity of discussion.

Archives

/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. ToeSchmoker (talk) 12:23, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have responded at the discussion.

Nihil novi (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At Talk:Jazz à Vienne you will find an appropriate COI declaration. You should probably add such a declaration to your autobiography. I do understand the frustration about en.wp's insufficient coverage of clearly notable topics (like festivals with hundreds of thousands of visitors annually), but I imagine if the subject truly is notable, someone will come... -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 15:05, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of empires

With regards to your recent undoing of my edit of List of empires, was my original edit not sourced enough or was there another reason it was reverted? Sushidude21! (talk) 06:36, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources that you adduced seemed to undermine, rather than support, the disputability of that country's inclusion in the list. Nihil novi (talk) 08:21, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia

Could you revert a questionable edit in the Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia article. This article is locked and open only to established editors and that is why I'm asking. It appears that user Marcelus, changed the death toll numbers removing the high estimate from the Institute of National Remembrance of 120,000.

The original text stated: "The UPA's actions resulted in up to 100,000 Polish deaths. Estimates of the death toll range from 60,000 to 120,000." new text reads "The UPA's actions resulted in up to 100,000 Polish deaths." Also, the info box numbers were changed at some point as well. Finally, it might be worth noting in the introduction paragraph that this event is recognized as genocide in Poland. 84.40.152.160 (talk) 11:54, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perfection

I came to this article on the report of a close paraphrasing copyright violation. I mistakenly removed the content and tagged the page. Then, reading further into the source, I realized much of the article was closely paraphrased. Something didn't feel right. I looked up Polish copyright law and the source material paraphrased entered the public domain twenty-four years ago. So. Am I correct in assuming that nothing needs to be done but for me to remove the close paraphrasing tag and explain why to the editor who set it? Why not enter the text of the public domain sources into WikiSource so future editors don't repeat the tagging error? Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:41, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, can you assure me, @Nihil novi, that the Tatarkiewicz material actually is in the public domain? I read further into Polish copyright law. The law in effect when the 1979 journal was published was revised in 1952. That extended his copyright to twenty years after his death. However fourteen years later, in 1994, that law was revised to extend copyright to seventy years after his death.

Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 02:14, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

The "Perfection" article's history shows that the "close-paraphrasing" notice was placed on the "Physics and chemistry" section at 19:05, 27 May 2025, by user:ToeSchmoker.

He had begun his involvement, deleting swaths of the article without discussion.

On 10 June 2025 (please see the article's talk page) he nominated the article for deletion. The decision was to keep the article (which has siblings on 25 non-English Wikipedias).

The "close-paraphrasing" tag should be deleted.

When I click on the "1954 law" and "1994 law" links, I get only "Bad title".

Nihil novi (talk) 02:58, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nihil novi, when Mr. Tatarkiewicz died in 1980, Polish copyright law prevalent at that time extended protection of his works to the year 2000. However in 1994, when his works were still under protection, Poland revised the law and extended protection to seventy years after the death of the author. In the United States, the protection is either seventy or ninety years. So this is not a subject for discussion. Carrying content closely paraphrased like this leaves English Wikipedia legally vulnerable to Mr. Tatarkiewicz's heirs or estate. Having 25 non-English Wikipedia versions does not protect English Wikipedia from this. I'm removing the content for this reason.

I carefully read this article and I strongly suspect you have the talent to write this article very well in your own words. You clearly understand Poland's rich intellectual history. Why not pay true tribute to Mr. Tatarkiewicz's erudition and scholarship? Why not internalize his concepts, put his book aside and write the article as if you were explaining the ideas to your best friend? Show that you truly understand what he's saying and and don't just mimic what he wrote. From what I understand of Poland's intelligentsia, they deserve that. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 06:45, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oona Wikiwalker:

Tatarkiewicz, whom I had the privilege of assisting as a translator over several years, was Poland's greatest historian of western philosophy. My various studies were not in that field. If, however, you leave the article up, I will do my poor best to alter the present text sufficiently to avert any concerns about potential copyright infringement.

Thank you.

Nihil novi (talk) 08:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nihil novi, I think the conversation we're having should be part of the history of this article, so I'm going to cut and paste it to the Talk page there, where we can continue the discussion. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 09:45, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I fixed the bad title problem above, the links should work now. That said, since Tatarkiewicz died in 1980, I don't think his stuff will be in PD until 2050 or so, which is why Wikisource has no texts of his. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:29, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nihil_novi. The entire article closely paraphrases the source. You used the same structure as the source. You didn't bother to change the order of the paragraphs at all. You also sometimes used the exact same words as the source. When you didn't use the exact same words, you paraphrased very closely, only changing a couple of words here or there. Your explanation behind why the article isn't closely paraphrased doesn't really make sense; the number of paragraphs in the article compared to the source nor the fact that the article survived an AFD have anything to do with the article being a close paraphrase. To put it simply, the article is a copyright violation and must be completely rewritten in order to stay on Wikipedia. The4lines |||| (talk) 00:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not the order of information is the same as in Tatarkiewicz's book is irrelevant.

As to your other comments, please familiarize yourself with his book, as serialized in English, before making inaccurate assertions. Nihil novi (talk) 01:03, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I never said the order per say was the main issue. The order by itself may not matter, but mixed in with the other elements I describe above, it shows that the article follows the exact structure as the original source, which does matter. Either the words were copied exactly, or they were reworded slightly, which isn’t enough. If you want to believe the article isn’t closely paraphrased or a copyright violation, fine. I’m just telling you the truth. The4lines |||| (talk) 04:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A thought on cutting the Gordian know of copyvio issue at perfection

If you could reach to Tatarkiewicz's estate (heirs), i.e. the people who own (have inherited) the copyright to his work(s) after his death, and convince them to release it under public domain, it would solve all the problems. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:54, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Christopher Kasparek for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christopher Kasparek 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/Christopher Kasparek until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

ToeSchmoker (talk) 19:04, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Joseph Conrad has failed

Your good article nomination of the article Joseph Conrad has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of It is a wonderful world -- It is a wonderful world (talk) 14:22, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Józef Kasparek for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Józef Kasparek 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/Józef Kasparek until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

ToeSchmoker (talk) 08:07, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Logology (science), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aether.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:58, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Error corrected.

Many thanks!

Nihil novi (talk) 20:08, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Polish American Historical Association, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polonia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wording adjusted.

Thank you!

Nihil novi (talk) 08:03, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

Hello. Please refrain from adding any new text or restoring any deleted text to the article Logology (science) that does not include specific mention of the term logology in the source material. Thank you. If you wish to aid with cleanup you can begin moving all text sourced to articles not containing the term out of the article to a sandbox in your user space.

For reference, the discussion at COIN.

Best wishes, -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 16:46, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Logology (science) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Logology (science), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logology (science) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:19, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Historic recurrence for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Historic recurrence, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Historic recurrence (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:07, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Three Crosses Sq.

Hi. With respect, can you please halt in pushing the 'Triple Cross' agenda in the Three Crosses Square article. Firstly, that is not the article title, secondly 'Three Crosses' is much more frequent in sources, and thirdly it sounds crude in comparison with 'Three Crosses'. A better variation and translation would be 'Square of the Three Crosses', and not the 'Square of Triple Crosses'. Triple directly means 'potrójny', which is not part of the name. Thank you. Merangs (talk) 20:24, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Polish toponym "Plac Trzech Krzyży" is pretty unequivocal in meaning, because each of its three component Polish words has a fairly unequivocal meaning.

The article's present English rendering of that toponym, "Three Crosses Square", lacks the same unequivocability. Both "cross" and "square" can be a noun, verb, adjective, or adverb.

Thus "Three Crosses Square" can readily be disorienting and -- yes -- crude.

If you look up "Triple Crown" on Wikipedia, you'll find dozens of events or other things that are simply "three" of something (fill in the blank).

"Triple Cross Square" is a rather unequivocal English equivalent of the Polish "Plac Trzech Krzyży" and unlikely to strike a native Anglophone as awkward.

Another satisfactory alternative to "Three Crosses Square" would be "Three-Cross Square".

Best,

Nihil novi (talk) 02:58, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Close paraphrasing on Historical recurrence

Hi Nihil novi. A few of your additions to Historical recurrence from several years ago have been removed because they seem to have copied directly from a source in violation of Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and Wikipedia:Copyright violations. For example, [1] appears to have copied from [2]. It seems over the years you have been warned a few times about this, e.g. [3][4], so I won't belabor this point. Please just make sure to be more careful moving forward. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 03:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Mz7, for this helpful reminder. I can see that it would have been better to have summarized certain extended citations, or to have presented them explicitly, in blockquotes, as quotations. Nihil novi (talk) 06:17, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed 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 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos for "About us, without us" parallel

I came to wiki to quote the Czechoslovakian version of Nothing about us without us and noticed that you [an edit] to add parallel saying in the scope of Russo-Ukrainian war and I just wanted to say: Thank you. Michal Bryxí (talk) 07:39, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I only did some copy-editing on the article. I separated out the Ukraine paragraph, as it discussed a topic distinct from that of its original paragraph.

In any case, it was kind of you to get in touch. It's nice to receive expressions of approval for our efforts!

Best, Nihil novi (talk) 10:42, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2026: your recreation of logology (science)

Hello. Please refrain from adding any new text or restoring any deleted text to the previously deleted entry Logology (science) that does not include specific mention of the term logology in the source material. Thank you for respecting the consensus of the deletion discussion by doing so. If you wish to aid with cleanup you can begin moving all text sourced to articles not containing the term out of the article to a sandbox in your user space.

For reference, the discussion at COIN.

Best wishes, -- -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 17:38, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Logology (science)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Logology (science) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 06:10, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Destubathon of the Americas

You are invited to participate in the Destubathon of the Americas, a contest/editathon which will run from May 1 to May 31. The goal is to destub as many of our 475,000+ stubs for the Americas (from Alaska down to Chile) as possible. A good chance to have fun in expanding many of our old stale stubs and win up to £2000 ($2680) in Amazon vouchers for expanding stub articles. Sign up in the Contestants/participants section on the contest page if interested. Even if not interested in prizes you are still warmly welcome to participate in it as an editathon! Hopefully we can achieve something significant in the month of May together! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:21, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bibliography of Donald Trump, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fury was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:04, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. Thanks. Nihil novi (talk) 18:13, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My new Prus article

On pl wiki: pl:Dziwna historia (Prus). Cheers, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:53, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good choice of a Bolesław Prus science-fiction story! Nihil novi (talk) 05:46, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Next: pl:Sen (Prus). There are still quite a few on my to-do list (several novels, plus his two unfinished books). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:48, 16 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy: pl:Widziadła, pl:Sen Jakuba (Prus), pl:Sława (Prus). I guess I am on a roll :) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:08, 9 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wiknic & edit-a-thon/salon in Southern California

Great American Wiknic logo
Vacation Isle, Mission Bay, San Diego, California
Fire within a fire ring on Vacation Isle, Mission Bay.
San Diego Wikimedians User Group logo

San Diego Wiknic Potluck 2026

Who: All members of the public, especially active Wikimedians. What: Mission Bay Wiknic & Bonfire. When: Saturday 1 August, 4:00PM/1600 PDT until 10:00PM/2200 PDT Where: Vacation Isle, Mission Bay

The next day: Chula Vista edit-a-thon/salon When: Sunday 2 August, 1:15PM/1315 PDT until 4:15PM/1615 PDT Where: Chula Vista Public Library Civic Center Branch

The City of Chula Vista Public Library does not advocate nor endorse the views or positions expressed by the users of its facilities. — Chula Vista Public Library Meeting Room Policy

Sponsor: San Diego Wikimedians User Group ( US-SAN ) Your host: RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs) Please add your username to our attendees list so we know how many will be attending. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject San Diego at 22:21, 15 May 2026 (UTC). You can unsubscribe from future invitations to San Diego Wikimedians User Group events by removing your name from the WikiProject San Diego mass mailing list, from the Southern California meet-up group by removing your name from the LA meet-ups mailing list, and from future San Diego Wiknic invitations by removing your name from the San Diego Wiknic mail list.[reply]

This and that

I don't know how interested you are in copyediting, but I just found out Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. 20+ years on Wiki and there are still so many things I don't know about.

In other news: pl:Sen Jakuba (Prus) (another Prus story). If you are curious, I have several more Prus novels I want to tackle, listed at pl:Wikipedysta:Piotrus/brudnopis#Hasła_do_poprawy. Once I am done, I'll pen a Prus entry for SFE (not all of these novels have SF elements, but some might; which is why I need to research them :>). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:39, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We're on vacation, and I just got an internet connection and found your 26 May note.

I'm sure you know the difference between the Polish "nowela" and the English "novel". As I recollect, the Prus novels in your list are Slawa (from early in his writing career) and Przemiany (his last try at a novel), both incomplete.

I gather you're working on English-language SFE entries. Please let me know if you'd like me to take a look at them prior to submission.

Too bad there seems to be no way to connect here to alphabets that include diacritical marks.

Yes, the Wikis comprise a huge labyrinthine structure that demands life-long learning.

Best, Nihil novi (talk) 08:11, 30 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between nowela and novel merits some wiki writeup. A while ago I worked on pl wiki articles for nowela and opowiadanie, but much remains to be done, from adding some content to en wiki, to figuring out how to deal with his on pl wiki. There are lots of false friends and confusions. Ex. pl:Nagroda Nebula za najlepszą nowelę is not awarded for what pl wiki article defines as nowela, and the content of pl:nowela and novella is quite different, sigh (and yes, novel vs novella vs novellete is a headache too). I just have so many wiki rabit holes to deal with... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:24, 30 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]