This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please stop playing with reverts over such minor details. Discuss it here and reach a consensus or in a week I will ask this page to be protected and other Wiki mediation procedures are started.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:14, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
As the edit war is not stopping. Here is what is going and will happen if you don't stop: Regardless of whether or not the activity should properly be called an "edit war", most users consider sustained episodes of animated cut-and-thrust editing to be undesirable, and if they observe it happening and cannot talk the parties out of it or encourage them to enter the dispute resolution process, they may request protection of the article to enforce a cool down period. Users who persist in this behaviour may be subject to, in severe cases, arbitration. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 08:54, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
As promised, I have requested protection for this page for a cool down period (Wikipedia:Requests for page protection). If it doesnt help, I will have to consider further and more direct actions. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 09:56, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
And honestly, wasting your time on former name or not...it is childish, all of you concerned. Toss a coin, agree on a result, and go do some constructive stuff I know you are all very capable off. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 10:13, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Please join my request for a temporary injunction regarding Gzornenplatz at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Gzornenplatz,_Kevin_Baas,_Shorne,_VeryVerily#Request_for_temporary_injunction Fred Bauder 14:45, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
I wonder whether historical synopsis of Katowice is correct – e.g. “The area was owned by the Poles since the 10th century, being ruled by Silesian Piasts dynasty until partitions of Poland in 1795”. AFAIK, the Katowice region was annexed by Prussia after Wrocław (Breslau) Treaty, 1742 – that would indicate, that prior to that date it was not local Piast duchy, but integral part of Silesia (under direct Austrian rules).--MWeinz 11:14, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
the most districts of katowice had never a German name, Why should they have it now? New European 17:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Trade_hall_collapse_in_Poland - at the moment, in top Google News stories too.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
These are not appropriate right at the top.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 15:02, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
Source: [1] Space Cadet (talk) 14:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
The source appears to my sight as quite credible and objective, indeed one can easly say it is to a keen reader of Wikipedian resources quite a boon. Rarely one finds a sight of usefull additions to the article that extend the knowledge of etymology regarding settlements such as this particular one. I would consider it most unsettling to see such interesting info to be erased from this page entry. Best regards.--Molobo (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Please write more clearly. Third point is not understandable. As to village/city, Katowice was a village once just like most of the towns and cities.--Molobo (talk) 23:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
I deleted Kątowicze. It caused too much unnecessary BS. Space Cadet (talk) 15:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
After Silesian plebiscite the city was included in Poland, because its overall votes were for Poland. Only the precise urban area voted for German, while the neighbouring Katowice suburbs and rural areas voted for Poland. The voting distrcit was composed of the city, rural areas and castle area(strange I know).--Molobo (talk) 15:12, 22 March 2009 (UTC) Ok, rephrased per agreement with LUCPOL(on his talk page).--Molobo (talk) 17:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
The graph on demographics in the article needs some tweaking. Is it correct that the population of the city in 1783 was 284 people? Anyway, the graph needs a better explanation as to what it is representing. Maybe a legend or something else to explain it. Dr. Dan (talk) 15:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Shouldn't this article mention the fact that Katowice is one of the most polluted cities in Europe? Rkarlsba (talk) 16:17, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
Failed due to insufficient citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 22:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC)Reply
The numbers for Urban (2,746,000) and Metro (4,620,624) in the infobox are unreferenced. Can anybody provide refs? Otherwise we should remove them. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
I am in the process of expanding and cleaning up the article. My goal is to raise the classification from C to B. Oliszydlowski (TALK) 01:56, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Katowice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:32, 3 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Katowice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:47, 7 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
In my view, the infobox's image collage would better suit a theoretical article about Katowice's contemporary architecture rather than represent a city that has existed since the sixteenth century and boasts many examples of architecture that serve as testament to such effect. NipponGinko (talk) 19:48, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
I felt racism to many times in this city!!! Maybe I looks like an asian but its not my fault!!! I just trying to be nice and friendly when I travel 195.116.232.19 (talk) 22:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
In light of the Wikipedia conference in august is scheduled to be held here in Katowice, Poland from the 7th to the 10th. There may be potential vandalism in the coming days, so until then should we protect this page? This is my first request for such a policy after surpassing 500 edits Republic of Selmaria (talk) 14:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply