text:
Wikipedia talk:Fancruft/Geogre's thoughts

Geogre's Thoughts on Lost and Found Information
I'm sorry if I duplicate anyone else's points, as I'm coming to this late, but it seems to me that there are a few ways of looking at this issue. I apologize in advance for going long on the subject, but I've thought about it rather a lot. Anyway, thus run my thoughts on the subject, or at least the ones I could marshal at this late hour. Geogre 04:50, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Why do we put in "fancruft?" The first way to think about this is strictly from the point of view of the contributor.  I remember, when I was young, that a lot of conversations I had with friends ran along these lines:  "Umm, 'member when they said Let's go to Camelot, and then one guy says, It's only a model?  That was cool."  I don't mean to denigrate with this characterization.  There is an impulse of reliving by repeating that persists in all of our communications with friends.  Part of the reason people put in fancruft articles is the same impulse.  "Remember Dr. Chaos?  Butters turned into Dr. Chaos.  (That was so cool.)"  However, another impulse is setting the record straight.  "It is not 'excuse my while I kiss this guy!' Look at the article I just made, ok?  It's very clearly, "Kiss the sky!"  Or, for that matter, "The phase warp bubble is the crisis that beset the Enterprise on Star Trek the Next Generation in the episode 'Wesley Save the Ship.'"  The impulse is, again, to set out a clear hierarchy of facts in a frequently discussed fiction.  This is something I might call the bar-bet impulse.  The reason a contributor wants to put it in is to codify something that came up in conversation.
 * 2) What does a person get from fancruft? What does useful fancruft do?  If there were doubt about the existence or priority of these items, then it would be worthwhile to have a record.  So, if it was likely that someone was out there encountering "warp phase bubble" and had no idea what it meant and needed to know, then the fancruft article would answer the question.  If someone heard about Queen Beryl and needed to have doubt dispelled, the article would serve that need.
 * 3) What separates "fancruft" from an encyclopedic article. Let's consider Queen Beryl and my own Glumdalclitch.  I consider one of them fancruft.  Why?  They're both about characters, after all.  One is from an old book, and one is from a new show.  The operative difference, to me, is that the term "Glumdalclitch" will be mentioned in a context wholly alien from its master work, and therefore someone reading the daily newspaper might well hit the term and be given absolutely no clue where it came from.  That person needs an encyclopedia to explain the term.  Is anyone going to hit "Queen Beryl" in any context outside of Sailor Moon and need the Sailor Moon meaning explained?  I.e. can the function of #2 above actually be achieved?  The "Hey, 'member when" impulse I disregard as being non-encyclopedic.  To me, "fancruft" is detail from a fiction or mythos that does not exist in a context other than its fiction or mythos.  Will you hit "Endymion" outside of reading Ovid?  Yes.  Will you hit "Borg" outside of watching Star Trek? Yes.  Will you hit Digimon Clobbersaurus outside of the game/movie/TV show?  No.
 * 4) Games: Games are particularly evil in the fancruft realm.  The reason is that there is yet another aspect of fancruft not mentioned above: games without documentation (whether real life or fictional) that generate multiple items get written up in an attempt at providing the documentation.  That's what happens with all the Pokemen.  The reason that I reject them is that the information is, like the stuff mentioned in #3, not known or desired except within the self-referential context of the game.  Granted, the games have sprawling (and, in fact, open-ended by nature) realms.  Imagine that we had someone writing an article on Mickey Mantle rookie year card.  That's a baseball card, for the non-USonians.  That card is traded in real life for hundreds of dollars.  Two or three chewing gum companies issue baseball cards on every single player in the major leagues every year. Thus, there is the Mickey Mantle 2nd year card, 3rd year card, 4th year card, etc.  But there is also one for Phil Nekro.  There is one for Catfish Hunter.  In fact, now that multiple gum companies are in the business, there may be 3 for every year.  Fans/traders of baseball cards have enormous websites that do nothing but track the sale values of these cards.  The money involved is enormous.  The same industry exists for hockey and basketball in the US.  I gather that it exists for football in the UK, too.  It isn't that there is nothing to say about these cards, but rather that no one except a card trader -- i.e. not the general public, but devotees of a particular enterprise -- will need or want to know.  We avoid getting into the super-precise details of gene splicing, sewage engineering, etc., because we're a general knowledge encyclopedia, and not a trade encyclopedia.
 * 5) The balance of contributor and user: Do we care more about the people making articles or the people reading the encyclopedia?  VfD is entirely biased, because the people who go there are, by necessity, authors.  Therefore, its results are distorted by people who think like authors.  Think about the users, rather than the contributors, and ask whether an article serves the researcher.  How much should we bend to keep happy authors?  How much should we be willing to tell people, "Write about what you want, but not that -- that's silly?"  It's difficult and mean to do the latter, but I think we have to sometimes.
 * 6) Lost information. My biggest crusade on VfD with "fancruft" is not to suppress information, but rather to ensure that information is logically organized.  The static warp bubble might be important.  I'm not a Star Trek fanatic, so I don't know how much of a cause celeb it is.  However, having it as a stand alone article strands the information.  Also, it occupies a name space position.  Granted, there may not be another article dying for that spot, and there may be a disambiguation in the future, but let's be clear:  the information is stranded.  Someone has to be typing in that exact phrase to find it.  If it's linked from the master fiction, then why isn't it just included in the master fiction?  Do we have a choice only of every aspect an article and all aspects in one article?  Can't we subdivide a topic a level or two before we get to the point where "The Entertainment Unit" is an article (instead of a thing in the Friends article)?  Can't we have Items in Star Trek and Star Trek engines?  Can't we have Sailor Moon villains?  There must be a logical location where the information can be of use, per #2 above, for the people who need and want it, where they might in fact gain a context for the information that places it logically within the larger topic.

I only recently stumbled onto your user page, Geogre, and I wish I had done that much earlier. You not only have outspoken opinions on the subject, but are on of the most eloquent people I've seen on the Wiki (not to belittle the contributions of others, of course). I just wanted to say that, because I actually have no time to delve into your arguments now, which is a dirty rotten shame. I will do so eventually, however, because there's a lot of merit in them. JRM 09:27, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)

 * Thanks a lot. I appreciate the compliment.  The more I think about the case I made above, the more I think that it comes down to specialist vs. general reference.  Folks who do basic research know that there are hundreds of real world items of great importance (to them) that are specialist information.  When I worked in a lab, we did research on IGFBP-3 and IGF-I and how they could be used together to lower insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes mellitus.  All real.  We had 20+ publications on the subject.  I've never been tempted to write it up.  Never been tempted to write up Son of Sevenless (a protein), either.  The reason is that this is information that the general researcher will not need and that these compounds have not yet passed into the general world.  Mass-market fictions are different, but the principle is the same:  a specialist needs to know the specialist information.  The way we tell whether something is specialist or not is whether the thing appears in several contexts.  If it doesn't, I still think we can talk about it -- just not at a stand-alone article.  Anyway, that's one way to approach it.  Geogre 13:30, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

JRM's response to Geogre
Yes, I get my own sections and subsections! But I'm not greedy; free sections for everyone!
 * Then I will subsub my responses, just because I can't hold a long thought in my head. Geogre 01:13, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

What (fan)cruft is
''[...] will be mentioned in a context wholly alien from its master work, and therefore someone reading the daily newspaper might well hit the term and be given absolutely no clue where it came from. That person needs an encyclopedia to explain the term.''

Up to a point, this is a compelling argument. However, this "it's all a matter of publicized degree" is of course as considerate as it is inconvenient. How about The Quatrain of Seven Steps, to take one of my pet examples? The article doesn't convince me it's of inherent significance out of context, but I trust the claim that it's "famed"—in ancient Chinese literature. It is featured in the Romance of Three Kingdoms, which is demonstrably significant in a broader cultural context. (Incidentally, the Quatrain is not put into context anywhere in the main article, which we should probably consider a flaw—it is only very indirectly referenced through Cao Zhi.) Now, how likely is it that someone will encounter it out of context, that is, "reading the daily newspaper" or something of similar scope? Is it even meaningful to have detailed discussions over whether this might or might not so? And encounter it out of context where? In English-speaking countries? Chinese? Among scholars of Chinese literature? Among American high school students? Wikipedians? Or "the general public", whoever they are? Should this be a basis for extensive discussion on whether something deserves its own article?

Volley
I call it a volley because I don't think that it's an answer. I don't necessarily think answers are going to be found, much less offered, but I will attempt to push what part of the birdie back over the net I think belongs there. (-10 points for mixed metaphor, I know.) I may have been hasty with the "newspaper" example. Certainly, I don't expect Westminster Assembly to appear in the paper tomorrow. I wouldn't see Battle of Acteon in USA Today, either. My point was not such mass coverage, but rather the need for explanation. The need for explanation is going to have to arise from somewhere. The hypothetical I draw is someone reading something else -- even if it's a videogame based on Chinese history -- and needing to know something. However, what's missing from this criterion is that there is yet another function of an article, a function that doesn't come up in the fancruft debate and therefore wasn't mentioned in my thoughts: An article can explain what something is, and it can explain the relevance of a thing outside of itself.  For example, an artilce on Newton's 2nd Law might just say, "Well, here it is.  Newton thought it up." If it did that, it would nearly be a merge and redirect case (as most fancruft is). What it would do better is explain how the 2nd law can be seen in the work of rockets, how it is involved in orbiting satelites, how it explains drag, etc. I.e. it expands the knowledge into new contextual environments. Most fancruft can't really do that. I think that your Chinese quatrain could, though. It could have a literary and a historical context, and then it can have a cultural context of the production of poetry at that time, etc. In other words, it isn't just "what is this thing I hit in the paper over my coffee," but "what is there to learn from this thing?" Show me Queen Beryl that way, and I'll say that the interest is worth keeping solo, provided folks will look for it. Geogre 01:13, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Whether Wikipedia can or should be specialist
At this point we are still not talking about whether fancruft should stay or go (to either oblivion or a more relevant context), merely what it is. We avoid getting into the super-precise details of gene splicing, sewage engineering, etc., because we're a general knowledge encyclopedia, and not a trade encyclopedia. Here, however, we hit upon a fundamental snag, namely the belief (I say belief) that Wikipedia is a general knowledge encyclopedia.

Now, before you declare me a nutter: of course items of general knowledge should be featured. If I want to know about mortgage or the Eiffel tower or General Custer, I should find comprehensive articles on them. But Wikipedia is not (to name the elephant) Britannica. It is not now, and will never be like Britannica. I do not say this based on Wikipedia's current biases and tendencies; I say this based on the fundamentally different medium and modus operandi.

One can argue that these do not matter. An encyclopedia is an encyclopedia, whether it is obtained by a committee of editors carefully scrutinizing the brilliant prose of experts in their fields, or a million monkeys on a million typewriters hammering out everything from patent nonsense to subtle hoaxes to the perfect article, building upon each other's work as they do so. (To drop a reference: METHINKSITISLIKEAWEASEL. :-) That's a possible stance, but it's unclear why we should limit ourselves in this manner.

I am talking, of course, about that great bugaboo of the standards advocates: Wiki is not paper. People have loved and hated this from day one.

On the one hand, it seems perfectly reasonable to argue that, because Wikipedia has no effective size limits, the threshold for topics is zero. Put in anything you like! We can easily store it! It'll become a factually neutral, NPOV article eventually, and that equates usefulness! Have faith!

On the other hand, Wikipedia calls itself an encyclopedia. No matter how you extend that word, it cannot possibly cover everything. Wikipedia is not a specially formatted World Wide Web. We have to ask ourselves what an encyclopedia is good for, and what would make Wikipedia meet those demands. There are a great deal of denials on what Wikipedia is not, but all this still leaves in a great deal in principle.

There's a good reason for that: there has not yet been any consensus as to what should and what should not be in, and consensus, as unfortunate as it may be, is the only reasonable way to go on something as big as Wikipedia.

The demands for factual accuracy and the neutral point of view have been remarkably uncontroversial (though not unchallenged), but most of the rest has not been. Importance is still a hotbed of discussion. No consensus is to be expected in the near future, and it is not impossible that there may not be one without fundamentally respecifying Wikipedia's mission statement.

All this has created worrisome outcroppings. We now have the experimental wikicities.com, for example. This sounds like a very positive project, until you realize that it fundamentally overlaps with Wikipedia. Should there be a Wikipedia article on Pokémon? Of course. Should there be one on Wikicities? Well, obviously. But wait a minute—what goes here and what goes there? Are we going to have people who are experts on both their standards shuttle back and forth with information? That seems terribly wasteful. Wikicities is just a lollipop for people who have their Wikipedia article deleted, and a good way for Wikipedians to feel justified in their judgement (since the article will not be irrevocably deleted, just shuttled off to Siberia).

And where does it end? Should we have math Wikicity for specialized math knowledge? But what's specialized? Were adjoint functors ever featured in a newspaper? No—so transwiki, then! But what about the related context? Before we spawn a hundred forks and child projects that are not as uncontroversially different as Wiktionary or Wikiquotes (as if these were ever uncontroversial!) we might want to rethink the structure of the Wikisomethings as a whole. In particular, I believe most of these categorization schemes are too ad-hoc to properly scale.

More than one person has advocated to simply keep everything on Wikipedia. That's not realistic with the current structure of Wikipedia: we'd have quotes, dicdefs, semi-original research, trivia lists and Lord knows what mixed in with supposedly encyclopedic articles. We might as well redirect to Everything2 and throw in the towel.

Yes, we need standards. But I don't think we need to lay them down once and for all, or go off establishing holding cells (sorry, I mean "fertile grounds for enthusiast discussions") for material we summarily judge inappropriate. We need a structure that can establish them by consensus, and update as consensus moves. In short: we need new mechanisms for deciding what "stays", what "goes" and what should be "different" or "not available to the general public, but maybe to a specialized one", and VfD won't cut the mustard.

Volley
And here I disagree. I'm afraid that I have to take a "tough noogies" attitude, to some degree, with the loss to Wikicities. I know that's mean and heartless, and I wish I didn't feel that way. It may be too much time on VfD that makes me that way. (I have found that everyone should to go wp:fac and read the articles there at least once a day as an antidote to the poison one gets from VfD.) I recognize that it is not spelled out that we are a general knowledge encyclopedia, but I think it's not spelled out in the way that air has no color. It's the licensing assumption behind every other policy. Were we not to have that assumption, then we would allow vanity articles, for example ("Hey, he's a real person!"), and CV's and endless music minutia. Furthermore, we have encyclopedia as a distinction to dictionary (move to Wiktionary), documentation (Wikisource), foreign language (the various wikis in other languages, including Latin and Klingon), etc. We have these other projects to hold distinctly non-encyclopedic content that is of worth. These places are only Siberia if contributors bring their own snow. There really shouldn't be a priority. This isn't the good one and those junk, I hope, or it doesn't have to be that way. The reason that I say we're general knowledge is that there are worlds nad worlds of specialist information that we're not carrying, from business listings (to choose the vulgarity that does end up at VfD) to extraordinarily minute scientific terminology. We do have to debate whether something is too specialized, and I agree that no general rule will cover it, except to say that the consensus must be reached and that we ought not be so specialized as to be inaccessible or worthless. Tris is a really important buffer in cellular biology. If we have a Tris article, I hope it's not about the buffer. Chinese hamster ovaries are cells of choice for everyone doing in vitro cell biology, and they're always called CHO. I really hope we're not covering it. Some specialist information is on Wikipedia (literary stuff is represented even when it's nearly incomprehensible (and, from what I can tell, incomprehensible to the authors, too, because some of our articles, like semiotics, are just plain wrong (and no, I'm not going to fix them; I don't like edit wars with eager upperclassmen and master's students -- I had my fill to overflow))), but I think there is a level of detail and granularity that is too fine to be useful. I will admit that I regard specialist information from pop culture more loathesome than specialist information from the sciences or literature or history, but I hope I'm consistent enough to vote to merge or delete regardless of the height of the culture that spawned it. Geogre 01:26, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

What's wrong with our current mechanisms
When you condense it into one phrase, "'"fancruft" is detail from a fiction or mythos that does not exist in a context other than its fiction or mythos''" you are presenting a very valuable criterion. Unfortunately, also a very debatable one. And one which Votes for Deletion may be manifestly unsuitable to decide upon.

To take the aforementioned Quatrain, how would non-experts establish that it exists in an independent context? (We are assuming that the article mentions its context, of course, otherwise things look even more gloomy.) If we are lucky, Google will help us, or an expert Wikipedian (perhaps the original contributor) is present. But what if we're not lucky, at least not immediately? Should we be bold and put the Quatrain in in the main article? If there's no supporting frame for it in the article, should we just go ahead and insert it anyway, decreasing the quality? The answer is probably "yes, because excessively detailed information in context is more valuable than excessively detailed information in an unlinked article".

There must be a logical location where the information can be of use, per #2 above, for the people who need and want it, where they might in fact gain a context for the information that places it logically within the larger topic.

We are in perfect agreement here. I'd like to see much more aggressive merging and redirecting. VfD is demonstrably broken when it comes to handling these cases. Instead of finding a context with which to merge, the first instinct of people will be to list an out-of-context article for deletion. This would be fine if they kept to voting merge and redirect once a context had been established—but they do not. Even if a context is manifestly available, people will vote to delete, possibly on the grounds mentioned above, possibly on personal predilections. (I am not arguing that many keep votes are not similarly biased, of course.)

This is demonstrably counterproductive—we lose the information, and force potential future contributors to reinvent the wheel (not necessarily as well as the first attempt). It's also an incredible waste of time and resources for VfD voters, because if such merging is used as the first option, the result is simply subject to the wiki editing process, which has a strong tendency to keep information unless manifestly wrong or out of context. (Discussing ways to encourage the tendency to weed out "cruft" from articles, fan or no, is another matter.) Finally, having any resulting inappropriate redirects deleted (of which there only be few) is much less controversial, time-consuming and atmosphere-poisoning than deleting the article.

''Do we care more about the people making articles or the people reading the encyclopedia? VfD is entirely biased, because the people who go there are, by necessity, authors. Therefore, its results are distorted by people who think like authors.''

This is a very good point. Eventually, we should probably have a mechanism that works by appreciation of the readers, not the writers. Many writers are competent and unbiased judges of work, based on how they would decide as a reader. Unfortunately, many more writers aren't. I have yet to see the first Wikipedian unencumbered by any sort of pride or ego, and such a Wikipedian would probably not be the very dedicated sort in the first place.

What these mechanisms should be and how we should transition to them is, fortunately, out of the scope of this discussion. (I say fortunately, because I've already talked for too long. Fortunately, Wiki is not paper... JRM 00:06, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)

Volley and Confessio
I'm going to be honest: You will very often see a vote from me that reads, "Delete: Probably could be discussed in the Dragonball Z article." I have my moments of deep stupidity like anyone, but most of the time I am very aware of what I have just voted. Most of the time I am saying, and I admit it, "If the author wants to merge the material and create a redirect, groovy, but let's not put yet another overly microscopic article that was too hastily written into the merge queue." This is because of the back side of VfD -- the dispensation phase. On VfD/old, we have a backlog like you wouldn't believe. The backlog for keeping and deleting is over a month. The merge load is unbelievable. I admit that I am making a value judgment on the article author. I hope I'm wrong, but I keep thinking of a kid who is desperately looking for a topic that isn't covered on Wikipedia so that he or she can write an article. That kid grabs their favorite thing -- some trading card game or cartoon -- and writes about The Castle Where It Blowed Up or something. When the VfD tag hits the page, the author doesn't debate it, doesn't show up at all -- just wanted to write an article. I feel like the rest of the community is being told to walk along the highway with a stick with a nail on the end of it. Worse, we're being asked to spear the garbage and not throw it away, but, rather, to recycle it and make a lovely cottage out of it. Maybe it's a bad attitude on my part, but I feel like merging should be done only with truly valuable information, and I am, I admit, judging the information. How many readers will we lose if we don't explain that Lord Viperscorpion has a web comic? How many readers will we lose if we can't explain what power crystal is needed to turn Clobbersaurus into Supermegatroid? If I don't think we're going to hurt our users much, I won't vote merge, even when I think that a merge would be acceptable. If there is a volunteer, I'm delighted. I used to vote "Clean Up" a lot more. I also used to work on the Clean Up pages more. I don't feel guilty about not doing that anymore, either, as I've gotten into creating more new content and working on Featured Articles. One reason I quit was that a lot of folks were sending desperately bad stuff to clean up because they were opposed to using the speedy delete tag. Clean Up was getting 20 miles long. Thus, people doing clean up pretty much stopped actually trying to save articles and began...wikifying. (sigh) I can't say "Send to clean up" if all it needs is wikifying. If that's all an article needs, I'll do it myself. So, we don't have a way to channel people (especially the blanket "keep" voters of recent vintage) to clean up or the merge queue. That makes me, anyway, a lot meaner about these things. I don't want to be, but we need a lot more help, and I mean a lot more help on serious clean up and merging, and we need a way for the Clean Up page to just plain ditch stuff. (I have just today gotten tasked with "You should spend you energy helping the project instead of deleting on VfD." This came from someone who refused in the past to expand a stub after voting "keep" and from someone who obviously hasn't seen my user page.)  The older "keep" voters ("inclusionists") used to never do that until they'd edited the article to try to save it. Sorry.... got off the beam there. Enough cane shaking from me. Geogre 01:39, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

JRM's final note
I could reply to the above points, but I actually feel they make nice summaries of both our stances, and equally nice illustrations of some of the fundamental disagreements. I will not say "inclusionist" versus "deletionist", because I feel that vastly oversimplifies the issues—I am not principally for including everything debatable, and Geogre is not principally for deleting everything debatable. I rather think that both groups tend to emphasize different aspects of Wikipedia, and that is what's causing all the discrepancies. In any case, as if it's not already clear, the last word certainly has not been said about these matters. But I trust you can make up your own mind on that. JRM 11:40, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)


text:
Kowalski

Kowalski (feminine: Kowalska, plural: Kowalscy) is the second most common surname in Poland (140,471 people in 2009). Kowalski surname is derived from the word kowal, meaning "[black]smith".

"Jan Kowalski" is used as a placeholder name in Poland to mean "Average Joe", much as "John Smith" is used in English-speaking countries (though a more direct translation would be "John Smithson").

Notable people

 * Alexander Kowalski (1902–1940), Polish ice hockey player killed in the Katyn massacre
 * Aleksander Kowalski (1930–2009), Polish Nordic combined skier
 * Alexander Kowalski (musician) (born 1978), German DJ, electronic music artist
 * Alfred Kowalski (1849–1915), Polish painter
 * Annette Kowalski (born 1936), American producer, business partner of Bob Ross
 * Bernard Louis Kowalski (1929–2007), American director
 * Bronisława Kowalska (1955–2020), Polish politician
 * Chana Kowalska (1899-1942), Polish Jewish painter and journalist
 * Craig Kowalski (born 1981), American ice hockey player
 * Daniel Kowalski (born 1975), Australian Olympic swimmer
 * Faustyna Kowalska (1905–1938), Polish Catholic saint, nun and mystic
 * Frank Kowalski (1907–1974), American US Army soldier and United States Representative
 * Gary A. Kowalski (born 1953), American author
 * Grzegorz Kowalski (disambiguation)
 * James Kowalski (born 1954), United States Air Force Lieutenant General, Commander of Air Force Global Strike Command Barksdale AFB
 * Janusz Kowalski (born 1952), Polish cyclist
 * Jerzy Kowalski (disambiguation)
 * Jochen Kowalski (born 1954), German singer
 * John Kowalski (born c. 1951), American soccer coach
 * Józef Kowalski (1900–2013), Polish supercentenarian and second-to-last Polish-Soviet war veteran
 * Józef Kowalski (1911–1942), Polish Roman Catholic priest killed at Auschwitz, beatified
 * Józef Wierusz-Kowalski (1866–1927), Polish physicist and diplomat
 * Kasia Kowalska (born 1973), Polish pop rock singer and songwriter
 * Katarzyna Kowalska (born 1985), Polish long distance runner
 * Kazimierz Kowalski, Polish singer
 * Ken Kowalski (born 1945), Canadian politician
 * Kerstin Kowalski (born 1976), German rower
 * Ludwik Kowalski (born 1931), Polish-American nuclear physicist and professor emeritus
 * Łukasz Kowalski, Polish footballer
 * Manja Kowalski (born 1976), German rower
 * Lech Kowalski (born 1951), American film director
 * Maria Kowalska, Polish alpine skier
 * Marian Albertovich Kowalski (1821–1884), Polish astronomer
 * Saint Faustina Kowalska (1905–1938), Catholic saint
 * Myron Kowalsky (1941–2022), Canadian politician
 * Natalia Kowalska (born 1989), Polish racing driver
 * Natalia Kowalska (1918–unknown), Polish chess master
 * Piotr Kowalski (1927-2004), French-Polish artist
 * Richard Kowalski (born 1963), American astronomer
 * Robert Kowalski (born 1941), British logician
 * Sharon Kowalski, subject of groundbreaking disability and LGBT legal rights case
 * Tadeusz Kowalski (1889–1948), Polish orientalist, expert on Middle East Muslim culture and languages
 * Thomas Schmidt-Kowalski (1949–2013), German composer
 * Wacław Kowalski, Polish actor
 * William Kowalski (born 1970), American author
 * Wladek Kowalski (AKA "Killer" Kowalski) (1926–2008), Polish-Canadian professional wrestler, trainer
 * Władysław Kowalski (politician) (1894–1958), Polish trade union activist, writer and politician (PSL, ZSL)
 * Yelizaveta Kovalskaya (1851–1943), Russian revolutionary
 * Stanisław Kowalski (1910–2022), Polish supercentenarian masters athlete.

Fictional characters

 * Kowalski, character in the 1991 parody film Hot Shots!, played by Kristy Swanson
 * Kowalski, main character in the 1971 film Vanishing Point, played by Barry Newman
 * Kowalski, character in the PlayStation 2 game Syphon Filter 2
 * Kowalski, character in Madagascar and the TV series The Penguins of Madagascar
 * Mr Kowalski, original owner of Kowalski's, Rosie Duncan's florist store in the novel Fairytale of New York
 * Mrs. Kowalski, Miriam Margolyes' character in the film How to Lose Friends & Alienate People (2008)
 * Baby Kowalski, supporting character in The Ren & Stimpy Show
 * Benjamin "Ben" Kowalski in the comic series Templar, Arizona
 * Major Charles Kawalsky, a character in the science fiction movie Stargate and subsequent television series Stargate SG-1
 * Dick Kowalsky, character in the French animated series Funky Cops (2003)
 * Felix Kawalski, character in the British television series EastEnders
 * Jacob Kowalski, Dan Fogler's character in the film Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)
 * Joe Kowalski, character in SIGMA Force book series by author James Rollins
 * Kitty Kowalski, Lex Luthor's companion in 2006 film Superman Returns, played by Parker Posey
 * Leon Kowalski, character in the 1982 film Blade Runner played by Brion James
 * Matt Kowalsky, George Clooney's character in the movie Gravity
 * Peter "Petey" Kowalski in the video game Bully
 * Private Kowalski, character in the video game Fallout: New Vegas
 * Roch Kowalski, character in Sienkiewicz's novel With Fire and Sword
 * Roxanne Kowalski, Daryl Hannah's character in Roxanne, the 1987 remake of Cyrano de Bergerac with Steve Martin
 * Seaman Kowalski, crewman assigned aboard the submarine SSRN Seaview, on the 1964–68 TV series Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, played by Del Monroe
 * Sergei Kowalski, the titular character in the Spaghetti Western The Mercenary, played by Franco Nero.
 * Sgt. Kowalski, character in Raising Arizona
 * Sgt. Kowalski, character in video game Call of Duty 3
 * Sophie Kowalski, Marion Cotillard's character in the 2005 French film Jeux d'Enfants, also known by its English title, Love Me If You Dare
 * Stanley and Stella Kowalski, characters in the Pulitzer Prize–winning play by Tennessee Williams and 1951 film, A Streetcar Named Desire
 * Detective Stanley Kowalski, character in the 1994–1999 television series Due South (named after the above Streetcar character)
 * Steve Kowalski, character in the 2007 film Devil's Diary
 * Viktor Kowalski, member of the OAS in The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth
 * Walt Kowalski, protagonist of the 2008 film Gran Torino played by Clint Eastwood
 * Meryl Lee Kowalski, character in the Gary D. Schmidt book The Wednesday Wars

Other uses

 * Kowalski's Markets, supermarket chain

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Kowalski


text:
General Motors U platform

The U-platform (or U-body) is a front wheel drive minivan and crossover SUV platform from General Motors produced since 1990. North American sales ended in 2009, but Chinese production continues. The minivans were divided into three generations, 1990–1996, 1997–2005 and 2005-current. The U-body was also used for General Motors' first generation crossovers from 2001-2005.

Keeping with its EPA designation as a light truck, the fifth character in the VIN for a U-body is "U", instead of the fourth, as is standard for cars.

Confusingly, GM also used the "U-body" (or "U-car") designation in the mid 1970s for its mid-sized European models - principally the Opel Ascona and Vauxhall Cavalier.

First generation
Released in the fall of 1989 for the 1990 model year, the U platform (GMT199) utilized a galvanized steel space frame underneath composite plastic dent resistant panels similar to those used in Saturn models and the Pontiac Fiero. The vans feature unconventional styling, which some commenters likened it to a DustBuster vacuum cleaner.

All models used a 120-hp, 3.1L V6 mated to a 3-speed automatic transmission. In 1992, the 3800 Series I V6 became available with a four speed automatic. Both were replaced by the LA1 3400 V6 in 1996.

1990–1996
The vehicles in this generation included:
 * Chevrolet Lumina APV ("APV" was dropped from the model name in 1994)
 * Oldsmobile Silhouette
 * Pontiac Trans Sport

In 1994, The Lumina and Trans Sport received a facelift, which shortened the nose and gave them a more conventional look. The Silhouette did not receive this update, however, and while it did receive a facelift in 1993, it was very minimalistic with only the front bumper being slightly changed. The rest of the front end remained unchanged.

International
The Pontiac Trans Sport was sold in Europe as a rebadged Oldsmobile Silhouette with European safety specifications.

European customers had grown accustomed to sleek minivans, thanks to vehicles such as the Renault Espace, and did not object to the Trans Sport's futuristic styling. In 1994, when the Trans Sport was updated, the European version retained the original shape with a minor facelift, with the Oldsmobile Silhouette being sold as a badge-engineered Pontiac Trans Sport.

The European Trans Sport was also available with two options that were never offered on a North American specification U-body: A four-cylinder engine (the LD2 Quad 4) and a 5-speed manual transmission.

Second generation
In 1996 (for the 1997 model year), the second U-body (platform) minivans arrived, also known as the GMT200. The new minivans were of unibody steel construction and the styling was intentionally conventional to such an extent that contemporary reviewers remarked that without looking closely at the badging and grille treatments, these minivans could be mistaken for their primary competitors, the Dodge Caravan and Plymouth Voyager, which at the time commanded a 50% share of the minivan market. Production of this generation was performed at GM's Doraville, Georgia facility, and later at GM Shanghai.

1996–1999 (Europe)

 * Opel/Vauxhall Sintra

1997–2005
The vehicles in this generation included:
 * Chevrolet Venture
 * Oldsmobile Silhouette
 * Pontiac Trans Sport
 * Pontiac Montana (Montana was a trim level of the Trans Sport prior to 1999)

2000–2005 (China)

 * Buick GL8

International

 * The Opel Sintra (badged as the Vauxhall Sintra in the United Kingdom) was an export built in the US alongside other vans for the European market. The Sintra used Opel engines instead of the LA1 3400 V6 engine that the US vans used.
 * The Buick GL8 is sold by Buick only in China, but was exported to the Philippines as a Chevrolet Venture.
 * The Pontiac Trans Sport of this generation was also sold in Europe, badged as a Chevrolet Trans Sport.

Third generation
The U-body was updated once again in 2004 for the 2005 model year, also known as the GMT201. These vans were referred to as "Crossover Sport Vans" (CSV) by General Motors, in reference to their SUV-inspired styling. North American vans were built in GM's plant in Doraville, Georgia. General Motors stopped minivan sales in the United States as of 2008. The Pontiac Montana and Chevrolet Uplander continued to be sold in Canada and Mexico for 2009. Production of the Buick GL8 continues in Shanghai, China.

2005–2009
The vehicles in this generation include:
 * Buick GL8 (China only, produced until 2016)
 * Buick Terraza (2005-2007)
 * Chevrolet Uplander
 * Pontiac Montana SV6 (2005-2006 in the US)
 * Saturn Relay (2005-2007)

Fourth generation
In 2010, Shanghai GM introduced a new version (SGM258) of the Buick GL8 called GL8 Luxury Business Edition. The previous generation remains on sale as the Business Edition.

Prior to the car's release, a concept car called the Buick Business was shown at the 2009 Shanghai Auto Show.

Fifth generation

In 2016, Shanghai GM introduced a new version (SGM358) of the Buick GL8 in 2 versions: ES and top of the line Avenir. The previous generation remains on sale as the Land Business Class. The exterior was completely redesigned but the platform was retained. However, the platform was updated with a new, more sophisticated independent rear suspension. The only engine is a 2.0-liter turbocharged inline-4 cylinder engine. This generation of GL8 is produced in Shanghai rather than Shenyang where the older generations of GL8 have been produced since 2004.

Crossover SUVs
In 2001 General Motors decided to produce its first entry into the Crossover SUV category using a shortened U-body platform.

Vehicles:
 * 2001–2005 Pontiac Aztek (GMT250)
 * 2002–2007 Buick Rendezvous (GMT257)

title: General Motors U platform


text:
Talk:Rose Tattoo

Should?
Should this be linked to the Tennessee Williams play for which it's (directly or indirectly) named (The Rose Tattoo)? DS 00:07, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Except that the band was probably named after a decoration on one of their girlfriends *lol* Grant65 (Talk) 14:15, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Regardless of where the band got the name from, I put a disambiguation link at the top of the page. GentlemanGhost 17:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Pete Wells
Guys, the first section says Wells died after a 'long' battle wih cancer, the final para that it was after a 'brief' battle with cancer. I don't know which is correct but it can't be both...! Cheers, Ian Rose 12:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Since no-one has been able to provide enlightenment on this, I've removed for the moment both 'long' and 'brief' and said simply that he died from cancer; also merged the mention of his death in the intro with the one at the end. Cheers, Ian Rose 01:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Pete Wells was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2002 and he finally passed away in March 2007, so I guess it was a long battle. News Archive '06 of Peter Gormley's Rose Tattoo Homepage

Band leader?
I removed "and slide guitarist Peter Wells." from the introducing sentence about by whom the band is led, because Wells recently passed away and therefor is unable to lead the band anymore.

Wrong Album Link
The album "Scarred for Life" listed under the discography section links to the wrong album: It links to an album of the same name by some wizard rock group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.94.211.57 (talk) 18:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposed major edits
As an ARIA Hall of Fame group, the article should be B-class or higher. I intend to improve this article steadily over the next week or so. I've already started with a members section, and better references section. Interim edits may seem incomplete or disjointed.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:24, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Should now be at B-class.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Paul DeMarco Arrest
Arrested today (April Fools Day, but apparently true) in connection with a gun supply ring. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-01/three-arrests-in-western-sydney-over-gun-supply-ring/5358986. Probably not worth a mention in the page yet. A conviction would be, I imagine. - 220  of  Borg 05:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Now in article. He was sent to trial where he pled guilty. He was sentenced to six years minimum jail: due out in 2020 with remissions.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 04:02, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * According to this DeMarco has served his time by late May 2020. His return to RT is complicated by Covid-19 restrictions and whether he can obtain touring visas with his conviction/criminal record.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 04:33, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Rose Tattoo. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for //www.whammo.com.au/index.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 22:08, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rose Tattoo. 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:
 * Added tag to http://www.ariaawards.com.au/archives/media-centre/2006/Press%20release%20%23%205%20-%20FINAL.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100206202429/http://2008.downloadfestival.co.uk/lineup/index.aspx to http://2008.downloadfestival.co.uk/lineup/index.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100226015153/http://undercover.com.au/News-Story.aspx?id=9871_Rose_Tattoo_Founder_Mick_Cocks_Dies_From_Liver_Cancer to http://www.undercover.com.au/News-Story.aspx?id=9871_Rose_Tattoo_Founder_Mick_Cocks_Dies_From_Liver_Cancer

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:37, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rose Tattoo


text:
Wiśniewski

Wiśniewski (feminine: Wiśniewska, plural Wiśniewscy) is the third most common surname in Poland (111,174 people in 2009). It is a toponymic surname derived from any of locations named Wiśniewa, Wiśniewo, Wiśniowa, Wiśniew. It is related to the following surnames in other languages:

History

 * House of Wiśniowiecki, a Polish princely family of Ruthenian-Lithuanian origin

Wisniewski

 * Andreas Wisniewski (born 1959), German actor and dancer
 * Connie Wisniewski (1922–1995), American baseball pitcher
 * David Wisniewski (1953–2002), British children's author
 * Edgar Wisniewski (1930–2007), German architect
 * James Wisniewski (born 1984), American ice hockey player
 * John S. Wisniewski (born 1962), American politician
 * Jonathan Wisniewski, French rugby player
 * Keith Wisniewski (born 1981), American mixed martial arts fighter
 * Leo Wisniewski (born 1959), American football player
 * Margarethe Wisniewski known professionally as Margarete Schlegel (1899–1987), German theatre and film actress and soprano operetta singer
 * Maryan Wisniewski (1937–2022), French footballer
 * Paul Wisniewski (born 1949), British radio broadcaster and television reporter
 * Stefan Wisniewski (born 1953), German member of the Red Army Faction
 * Stefen Wisniewski, American football player
 * Steve Wisniewski (born 1967), American football player
 * Matt Wisniewski (born 1990), American artist

Wiśniewski

 * Adam Wiśniewski (born 1980), Polish handballer
 * Adam Wiśniewski-Snerg (1937–1995), Polish science fiction author
 * Andrzej Wiśniewski, Polish football manager
 * Jacek Wiśniewski (born 1974), Polish footballer
 * Jan Wiktor Wiśniewski (1922-2006), Polish footballer
 * Janek Wiśniewski, fictional name for Zbigniew Godlewski (1952–1970), Polish demonstrator
 * Janusz Leon Wiśniewski (born 1954), Polish writer and chemist
 * Józef Wiśniewski (1940–1996), Polish ice hockey player
 * Łukasz Wiśniewski (born 1989), Polish volleyball player
 * Michał Wiśniewski (born 1972), Polish pop vocalist
 * Mieczysław Wiśniewski (1892–1952), Polish footballer
 * Piotr Wiśniewski (born 1982), Polish footballer
 * Przemysław Wiśniewski, Polish footballer
 * Radosław Wiśniewski, Polish footballer
 * Wiesław Z. Wiśniewski (1931–1994), Polish astronomer
 * 2256 Wiśniewski, an asteroid named in his honour
 * Zenon Wiśniewski (born 1959), Polish politician

Wiśniewska

 * Aleksandra Wiśniewska (born 1994), Polish politician, political scientist, humanitarian, and activist
 * Ania Wiśniewska (born 1977), Polish pop singer
 * Ewa Wiśniewska (born 1942), Polish actress
 * Jadwiga Wiśniewska (born 1963), Polish politician
 * Joanna Wiśniewska (born 1972), Polish discus thrower
 * Lucyna Wiśniewska (1955–2022), Polish politician
 * Marta Wiśniewska (born 1978), Polish dancer and singer, also known as Mandaryna
 * Maria Pasło-Wiśniewska (born 1959), Polish politician
 * Olimpia Bartosik-Wiśniewska (born 1976), Polish chess master

Wischnewski

 * Anke Wischnewski (born 1978), German luger
 * Hans-Jürgen Wischnewski (1922–2005), German politician
 * Siegfried Wischnewski (1922–1989), German actor

Wiśniowski

 * Łukasz Wiśniowski (born 1991), Polish racing cyclist
 * Michal Wisniowski (born 1980), Polish artist

Places

 * Wólka Wiśniewska, a village in east-central Poland
 * Wiśniew, Siedlce County, a village in Poland
 * Wiśniew, Mińsk County, a village in Poland
 * Wiśniewo (disambiguation), other places in Poland

title: Wiśniewski


text:
P. J. Plauger

Phillip James (P.J. or Bill) Plauger (born January 13, 1944, Petersburg, West Virginia) is an author, entrepreneur and computer programmer. He has written and co-written articles and books about programming style, software tools, and the C programming language, as well as works of science fiction.

Personal life and career
Plauger worked at Bell Labs from 1969 to 1975, where he coauthored Elements of Programming Style and Software Tools with Brian Kernighan. In 1978, he founded Whitesmiths, the first company to sell a C compiler and Unix-like operating system (Idris). He has since been involved in C and C++ standardization and is now the president of Dinkumware. In January 2009 he became the convener of the ISO C++ standards committee, but in October 2009 he tendered his resignation after failing to pass a resolution to stop processing any new features in order to facilitate the promised shipping date for the C++0x standard.

Plauger has been credited with inventing pair programming while leading Whitesmiths Ltd.

Plauger has written a number of science fiction stories, notably "Child of All Ages", first published in the March 1975 issue of Analog, which features a protagonist who has achieved immortality at the cost of never growing beyond childhood. The story was nominated for the Hugo and Nebula awards in 1976. Plauger won the John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer in 1975—notably beating John Varley for the award—and subsequently sold a story to The Last Dangerous Visions.

Plauger holds a bachelor's degree in physics from Princeton University and a PhD in nuclear physics from Michigan State University.

Dinkumware
Dinkumware is an American software company specializing in core libraries for C/C++, owned and operated by P.J. Plauger. It is based in Concord, Massachusetts.

The company has provided the C++ Standard Library implementation that ships with Microsoft Visual C++ since 1996 and Embarcadero C++Builder since 2005, and supplies C++ and Embedded C++ libraries to the embedded community. It also provides libraries for Java and other tools, including "proofers" to test for library adherence to the standard.

Nonfiction works

 * The Elements of Programming Style (1974, revised 1978) with Brian W. Kernighan
 * Software Tools (1976) with Brian W. Kernighan
 * Software Tools in Pascal (1981) with Brian W. Kernighan
 * The Standard C library (1992)
 * Programming on Purpose, collected essays from the magazine Computer Language
 * Volume I: Essays on Software Design (1992)
 * Volume II: Essays on Software People (1993)
 * Volume III: Essays on Software Technology (1993)
 * The Draft Standard C++ Library (1995)
 * Standard C: A Reference (1989, revised 1992, revised 1996) with Jim Brodie
 * The C++ Standard Template Library (2001) with Alexander Stepanov, Meng Lee, and David Musser

title: P. J. Plauger


text:
Wójcik

Wójcik, Wojczik, Wojczyk, Wojszyk (also variants of phonetic spelling: Woicik, Woycik, Woyczik, Woytik, etc. ) is one of the oldest Polish surnames, and the fourth most common in Poland (100,064 in 2009). Archaic feminine forms are derived by adding suffixes: -owa for married woman and -ówna for maiden name.

There are several suggested origins of the surname: diminutive from the occupation of wójt or from the given name Wojciech. It may also be a nickname by the bird wójcik (greenish warbler).

Feminine forms are Wójcik, Wójcikówna, Wójcikowa. Over the centuries, from many dialects arose multiple spellings for the Wójcik surname, including Woichik, Wojczyk, Woyzeck, Wojszyk, Wujcik, etc.

History
Early record of the Wójcik surname may be found in the Chronicles of Little Poland (13th century). The knight Wójcik was a companion of King Wladyslaw of Poland and a member of his bodyguard. According to medieval Łęczyca Court Files (14th century), in 1395, Michno Wójcik of Wójciki pursued legal action against City of Łęczyca to take back part of his estate that was illegally annexed during his absence.

Noble families named Wójcik bear different coats of arms:
 * Wójcik of Bialynia
 * Wójcik and Wojczyk of Pobog
 * Wójcik and Wójcikowski of Korab
 * Wójcik of German origin: Silver, an eagle black, crowned gold.
 * de Wojcza, Wojczik and Wojszyk of Ogończyk
 * Wójcik and Wójsik of Ostoja
 * Wojszyk of Szeliga
 * Wojszek and Wójszyk of Łodzia
 * Wójcik of Lubicz
 * Wójcik of Rola
 * Wojsik and Wojszik of Łabędź
 * Wojszek and Wojszik of Piława
 * Wójsik and Wojszyk of Janina
 * In the 17th century appeared the family Wójcikiewicz (derived from family Wójcik) of the Bialynia coat of arms
 * Wójcikowski of the Nałęcz coat of arms.

However, most families bearing the surnames Wójcik, Wójczyk, Wojszik, etc. (c. 90%) are derived from peasantry or burghers, as a result of popular adoptions of this surname between the 17th and 19th centuries. These families derived their surname from the named office of wójt or the first name Wojciech: son of Wojciech is also Wojcik.

Wójcik

 * Adam Wójcik (1970–2017), Polish basketball player
 * Aleksandra Wójcik (volleyball) (born 1994), Polish volleyball player
 * Alexandra Wójcik (gymnast) (born 1985), Polish rhythmic gymnast
 * Andżelika Wójcik (born 1996), Polish speed skater
 * Dave Wojcik (born 1968), American college basketball coach
 * Denis Wojcik, American author
 * Doug Wojcik (born 1964), American college basketball coach and former player
 * Janusz Wójcik (1953–2017), Polish politician and former footballer and coach
 * Jerzy Wójcik (fencer) (1916–2004), Polish fencer
 * John Wojcik (born 1942), American baseball player
 * Jolanta Wójcik (born 1984), Polish athlete
 * Katarzyna Wójcik (born 1983), Polish modern pentathlete
 * Krzysztof Wójcik (disambiguation), several people
 * Łukasz Wójcik, Polish glider pilot
 * Magdalena Wójcik (born 1975), Polish singer, member of the band Goya
 * Marek Wójcik (born 1980), Polish politician
 * Michał Wójcik (born 1971), Polish politician
 * Piotr Wójcik (born 1965), Polish athlete
 * Rafał Wójcik (born 1972), Polish long distance runner
 * Ryszard Wójcik (born 1956), Polish football referee
 * Wacław Wójcik, Polish cyclist
 * Ludvika Sivickaja-Vojcik

Wujcik

 * Erick Wujcik (1951–2008), American role-playing game designer
 * Theo Wujcik (1936–2014), American artist

title: Wójcik


text:
Kowalczyk

Kowalczyk is the fifth most common surname in Poland (98,739 people in 2009). The name comes from the word "blacksmith".

Notable people
The surname may refer to:

 * Adam Kowalczyk (born 1975), American musician, brother of Ed Kowalczyk
 * August Kowalczyk (1921–2012), Polish actor
 * Bartosz Kowalczyk, Polish handball player
 * Bogdan Kowalczyk (born 1946), Polish handball player
 * Ed Kowalczyk (born 1971), American rock singer, brother of Adam Kowalczyk
 * Henryk Kowalczyk (born 1956), Polish politician
 * Ignace Kowalczyk (1913–1996), German-French footballer
 * Jacek Kowalczyk (born 1981), Polish footballer
 * Jan Kowalczyk (1941–2020), Polish show jumping champion
 * Jarosław Kowalczyk (born 1989), Polish cyclist
 * Józef Kowalczyk (born 1938), Polish clergyman, archbishop of Gniezno
 * Justyna Kowalczyk (born 1983), Polish cross-country skier
 * Kamil Kowalczyk, Polish footballer
 * Maciej Kowalczyk (born 1977), Polish footballer
 * Marcin Kowalczyk (born 1985), Polish footballer
 * Marek Kowalczyk, Polish footballer
 * Mariano Kowalczyk (born 1971), Argentine rower
 * Mateusz Kowalczyk (tennis) (born 1987), Polish tennis player
 * Mateusz Kowalczyk (footballer) (born 2004), Polish tennis player
 * Sebastian Kowalczyk, Polish footballer
 * Sugar Kowalczyk, 1959 American crime comedy Some Like It Hot character
 * Tod Kowalczyk (born 1966), American college basketball coach
 * Ulrich Kowalczyk, German football manager
 * Walt Kowalczyk (1935–2018), American football player in the National Football League
 * Wojciech Kowalczyk (born 1972), Polish footballer
 * Kowalczyk brothers (1937-2017), Polish scientists who planted a bomb at the University of Opole in 1971

title: Kowalczyk


text:
Sandbagging (racing)

Sandbagging describes someone who underperforms (usually deliberately) in an event. The term has multiple uses, such as a driver who competes in an event in a series below their level of expertise to finish high. In bracket drag racing and short track motor racing when a racer has a dial-in time / qualifying speed much slower than the car can actually perform. The term can also be used to describe a fast driver who holds back during a race until just before the end, when they suddenly pass up through the field to win the event.

Drag racing
The function of sandbagging is to guarantee a win by outperforming the slower opponent at first, and then hitting the brakes near the finish line in time to just barely beat the opponent. However, sandbaggers run the risk of beating their dial-in time, thus disqualifying them from the race. Sandbaggers must be experienced in controlling this technique, and therefore, it should not be attempted by beginners. Sandbagging faces much criticism, as many argue that it is essentially cheating. Television shows such as Pinks and bracket racing rules discourage sandbagging by creating automatic disqualification for breakouts. However, if both cars run faster than their dial-in time, the car that runs faster by the least amount is the winner.

Example
Racer A has a car that consistently runs a quarter-mile drag race in 12 seconds. Racer A gives a dial-in time of 15 seconds, therefore claiming that the car is 3 seconds slower than it actually is. Racer A goes against Racer B in an E.T. bracket race. In bracket races, both racers are supposedly equal since both have similar times. However, Racer B has an accurate dial-in time of 15 seconds while Racer A has an inaccurate dial-in time that gives Racer A the advantage. During the race, Racer A gets a clear advantage off the starting line. But to not be disqualified by racing faster than the dial-in time, Racer A slows near the finish line to just barely beat Racer B.

Short track racing
The term is frequently used in for deliberately qualifying poorly at short track racing events. Some tracks/series start the fastest qualifiers at the rear of the field and the slowest qualifiers at the front of the field. So faster cars sometimes deliberately qualify poorly so they have to pass fewer cars (and only slower cars). To counteract sandbagging, tracks and series often invert some of the fastest qualifiers and start slower cars behind them. The number of cars to be inverted are typically not known to the drivers as they qualify, and often the fastest qualifier (who wins a cash bonus) will typically participate in a random drawing to determine the number of inverted cars after qualifying has concluded. Other tracks give bonus points to the fastest qualifier(s), which can drastically affect end of season awards. Still other tracks use "passing points" to reward the most cars passed in a heat race with a better chance to advance to the feature.

Usually, the sandbagging is used only in shorter races where a pit stop is not used, such as heat races and in feature races of fewer than 100 laps in a United States Auto Club or World of Outlaws event. In most races of 125 laps or greater where a pit stop is required, inversion of fields is impossible because pit strategy negates the need for the inversion.

To prevent sandbagging in World of Outlaws sprint car races, the winner and runner-up in each heat race, along with the two fastest qualifiers who have qualified for the feature but are not one of the top two drivers, participate in a short heat race-length race that determines the starting order for the first ten (or twelve if there are five heat races) starting positions in the feature.

Demolition derby
In demolition derby, a driver may hit other cars weakly or avoid contact with other cars to lessen the damage to their cars to ensure better odds of surviving to win the derby as the last car running. Events often require a car to hit another car within a certain time limit, usually every 120 seconds or less, or be disqualified.

Rallying
In some rallying series such as the World Rally Championship, the starting order in each race leg is determined by the overall standings of the previous leg. Because some track surfaces are faster once a few cars have passed, leading drivers may slow down in the final meters of the last stage of the first (and sometimes second) leg of the race and therefore let others clean the track the next leg.

BMX racing
USA: In BMX Racing, there are typically three levels of proficiency for amateur riders (ABA: Novice, Intermediate, Expert; NBL: Rookie, Novice, Expert). Generally, a racer is considered to be sandbagging when they deliberately avoid winning races, thus avoiding so-called "move up points" (which require a rider to race the next highest proficiency after a given number of races won). Sandbagging in BMX Racing is often practiced to ensure the rider stays at a lower proficiency long enough to compete in the NBL or ABA Grand National (held each year in September and November, respectively). This race is traditionally when year-end titles and awards are decided. Deliberate sandbagging is difficult to prove and, though track personnel have the authority to report such activity to their respective sanctioning body, disciplinary action or involuntary reclassification is seemingly quite rare. Sandbagging is a hotly debated issue in the BMX Racing community, and is such taboo that "call out threads" are sometimes started on message boards to publicly alert others in the community of a specific rider(s) conduct.

Video games
Sandbagging is also prevalent in some racing games, particularly those that feature power-ups that either aid the user or hinder the opponent. In the Mario Kart video game series, players will sometimes sandbag to get powerful items such as the Star or Lightning in order to batter the other racers, take shortcuts or defend themselves from other oncoming items. Team Race Sandbagging has become infamous with players holding back and getting the Lightning Item, which only affects racers on the opposing team, allowing the user's team to get a clear advantage. In Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing, players may sandbag in order to get the powerful All-Star Moves, just to use them on the other players.

RC car racing
In radio controlled car racing, participants can usually choose the classes in which they want to compete. Many tracks have levels such as rookie, sportsman, intermediate, and expert, for the same type of vehicle. So a driver may claim to be at the sportsman level when in fact they are easily fast enough to be competitive in intermediate, but they know they will have a much easier time winning if they compete in the lower class. This may happen more often at larger races that award trophies and other prizes, compared with local club races that usually award the winner only with a podium photo. Sandbagging is frowned upon by track owners and fellow competitors since it is clearly not a fair way to compete, so some race directors will bump someone up or ask them to move up if they feel they are in the wrong class. Some tracks have explicit rules where you have to bump up if you have won a certain number of races in one class. Often apparent sandbagging is not intentional, and is actually the result of someone sincerely misjudging their own skill level. This can happen if someone is new to the track and doesn't know their level in comparison to others, or if they have not competed for some time and are not sure they can immediately regain their previous skill level.

title: Sandbagging (racing)


text:
William Scroggs

Sir William Scroggs (c. 1623 – 25 October 1683) was Lord Chief Justice of England from 1678 to 1681. He is best remembered for presiding over the Popish Plot trials, where he was accused of showing bias against the accused.

Youth and early career
Scroggs was the son of an Oxford landowner; the story of him being the son of a butcher of sufficient means to give his son a university education is merely a rumour, although one which was widely believed. He spent his youth in Stifford. He went to Oriel College, and later to Pembroke College, Oxford, where he graduated in 1640, having acquired a fair knowledge of the classics. There is some evidence that he fought on the royalist side during the Civil War; certainly, his loyalty to the Crown was never doubted in later years. In 1653 he was called to the bar, and soon gained good practice in the courts.

He was appointed a judge of the Common Pleas in 1676. Two years later he was promoted to the office of Lord Chief Justice on the recommendation of the Earl of Danby, the King's chief minister, who was his patron, and knew that he was both a good lawyer and a staunch supporter of the Crown. His hatred of Roman Catholic priests, which was to play so large a part in the Popish Plot trials, was not a fault in the eyes of Danby, who although he was the son of a Catholic mother, adhered to his father's Protestant faith. The King, although he was himself in all but outward appearance a Catholic, also accepted the need to maintain a public appearance of conformity to the Church of England, and to favour staunchly Protestant officeholders. Also, like Danby, he was anxious that the High Court judges should be good "King's men".

Scroggs on Roman Catholicism
Scroggs was noted for his violent hatred of, and public outbursts against Catholic priests, of which perhaps the most notorious was: "they eat their God, they kill their King, and saint the murderer!". His attitude towards Catholic laymen was far less hostile: even in 1678, at the height of the Plot fever, he admitted that there were hundreds of honest Catholic gentlemen in England who would never engage in any conspiracy against the King. Lay Catholics who gave evidence at the Plot trials were, in general, accorded more courtesy than were priests: at the trial of Sir George Wakeman, Ellen Rigby, the former housekeeper of the Benedictine order's house in London, was treated by Scroggs (who was reputed to be something of a misogynist) with the utmost respect.

Lord Chief Justice and the Popish Plot
As Lord Chief Justice, Scroggs presided at the trial of the persons denounced by Titus Oates and other informers for complicity in the fabricated "Popish Plot", and he treated these prisoners with characteristic violence and brutality, overwhelming them with sarcasm and abuse while on their trial, and taunting them when sentencing them to death. So careless was he of the rights of the accused that at one trial he admitted to the jury during his summing-up that he had forgotten much of the evidence. In fairness to Scroggs, he seems to have been a sincere believer in the existence of the Plot, as was much of the general public and Parliament, but he did nothing to test the credibility of witnesses like Oates, William Bedloe, Miles Prance and Thomas Dangerfield, even though he knew well that Bedloe and Dangerfield were leading figures in the criminal underworld. He also knew that Prance had made his confession only after a threat of torture. Another leading informer, Stephen Dugdale, was arguably a case apart as he was a person of good social standing, and was generally regarded as "a man of sense and temper", with "something in his manner which disposed people to believe him". Scroggs, like many others (even the King, who was in general a complete sceptic about the veracity of the Plot), can be excused for finding his evidence credible, at least in the early stages of the Plot.

William Staley
In November 1678 William Staley, a young Catholic banker, was executed for treason, the precise charge being that he had "imagined (i.e. threatened) the King's death". Gilbert Burnet later made a violent attack on the character and credibility of William Carstares, the Crown's chief witness, who testified that while dining in the Black Lion Pub in Convent Garden he had heard Staley say in French: "the King is a great heretic...this is the hand that shall kill him". His speaking in French (this was confirmed by another witness) attracted suspicion, although in fact, it was perfectly understandable since the guest he was dining with, one Monsieur Fromante, was a Frenchman. Despite Burnet's low opinion of Carstares, it is likely enough that he told the truth when he testified that Staley, who was a heavy drinker, had made this threat against the King when he was inebriated, but in less disturbed times Staley could have hoped to escape with a severe reprimand. Scroggs in his summing up did tell the jury that in case of a man's life, he would have no regard paid to "the rumours and disorders of the time" but the rest of his charge was wholly in favour of a guilty verdict, which the jury duly brought in without even leaving the box. Staley was hung, drawn and quartered, but as a gesture of clemency, the Government released his body to his family for proper burial. The family unwisely had a series of requiem masses said for his soul, followed by a magnificent funeral at the Anglican St. Paul's Church, Convent Garden. The Government, infuriated, ordered that Staley's body be dug up and quartered, and his head cut off and placed on London Bridge.

Edward Colman
A week later Edward Colman, former private secretary to the Duke of York, was executed for his allegedly treasonable correspondence with Louis XIV of France. Again Scroggs drove hard for a conviction, despite Colman's standing as a Government official. Colman's letters, in which he urged Louis to press Charles II for dissolution of Parliament, by bribery if necessary, showed a grave lack of political judgement, but it was straining the law very far to call them treasonable. The correspondence, which had apparently ended in 1674 or 1675, had no effect whatever on English foreign policy, and was of such little importance that Colman, until he was confronted with the letters after his arrest, had apparently forgotten writing them. Scroggs told Colman that he had been condemned on his own papers; this was fortunate for the Crown, since the evidence of Oates and Bedloe of overt acts of treason was so feeble that Scroggs in his summing-up simply ignored it. Scroggs later boasted that he had hanged Colman "against the will of the Court", but in fact, it seems that the King was happy enough to sacrifice Colman, whom he had long regarded as a troublemaker.

Berry, Green and Hill
At the trial in February 1679 of the prisoners Henry Berry, Robert Green, and Lawrence Hill, accused of the murder of Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey, Scroggs gave a characteristic exhibition of his methods, indulging in a tirade against the Roman Catholic religion, and loudly proclaiming his belief in the guilt of the accused. When Lawrence Hill's wife boldly accused Miles Prance, the Crown's chief witness, of perjury in open court, Scroggs said incredulously "You cannot think that he will swear three men out of their lives for nothing?". All three defendants were put to death. As Mrs. Hill had correctly predicted, Prance later confessed that he had perjured himself under the threat of torture and that the three men executed were wholly innocent.

Scroggs turns against the Plot
It was only when, in July of the same year, Oates's accusation against the Queen's physician, Sir George Wakeman, appeared likely to involve the Queen herself in the ramifications of the plot, that Scroggs began to think matters were going too far; he was probably also influenced by the discovery that the Court regarded the plot with disbelief and disfavour, and that the Country Party led by Lord Shaftesbury had less influence than he had supposed with the King. The Chief Justice on this occasion threw grave doubt on the trustworthiness of Bedloe and Oates as witnesses, and warned the jury to be careful in accepting their evidence. Wakeman and three priests, including the leading Benedictine Maurus Corker, who were tried with him, were duly acquitted. Scroggs for the first time observed that even a Catholic priest might be innocent of anything but being a priest (which was itself a capital crime under the Jesuits, etc. Act 1584, although Corker and the others were spared the death penalty, and were all released after spending some time in jail).

This inflamed public opinion against Scroggs, for the popular belief in the plot was still strong. He was accused of taking bribes from the Portuguese Ambassador, the Marquis of Arronches, acting on behalf of the Portuguese-born Queen, to secure Wakeman's acquittal. In the circumstances, the decision of the Ambassador to call on Scroggs the day after the trial to thank him for securing an acquittal has been described as an act of "incredible folly'.

In August 1679 the King fell desperately ill at Windsor, and for some days his life was despaired of. Scroggs, fearing for his future, rushed to Windsor to find the King making a slow recovery: seeing Scroggs hovering anxiously in the background, the King told him that he had nothing to fear: "for we shall stand or fall together".

Scroggs continued in his poor treatment of Catholic priests who came before him for trial, as he showed when he sentenced Andrew Bromwich to death at Stafford in the summer of 1679 (although it must be said that he recommended Bromwich for mercy, and he was duly reprieved). Nevertheless, his proposing the Duke of York's health at the Lord Mayor's dinner a few months later, in the presence of Shaftesbury, indicated his determination not to support the Exclusionists against the known wishes of the King. At the opening of the Michaelmas Term he delivered a speech on the need for judicial independence: "the people ought to be pleased with public justice and not justice seek to please the people... justice should flow like a mighty stream... neither for my part do I think we live in so corrupted an age that no man can with safety be just and follow his own conscience." Kenyon remarks that whatever Scroggs's faults, this speech shows that he was far more than the "brainless bully" he is sometimes portrayed as.

Scroggs and Samuel Pepys
When Samuel Pepys was accused of treason, Scroggs, no doubt mindful that both Charles II and his brother the Duke of York had a high regard for Pepys, treated him with the utmost courtesy, and he never actually stood trial. As a result, the picture of Scroggs in Pepys's third diary, the so-called King's Bench Journal, is surprisingly favourable. Pepys was particularly impressed by a remark of Scroggs that Pepys and his co-accused Sir Anthony Deane were Englishmen and "should have the rights of Englishmen".

Scroggs had already directed the acquittal of Pepys's clerk Samuel Atkins on the charge of having conspired to murder Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey, a charge which was clearly designed to damage Pepys himself. Scroggs conducted Atkins's trial with refreshing humanity and good humour. When Atkins' alibi witness, Captain Vittles, testified that Atkins had drunk so much wine on the night in question that he could not possibly have killed anyone, Scroggs, himself a notably heavy drinker, cheerfully said: "Do you both go out and share another bottle of wine".

Last years on the Bench
Acting in the assurance of popular sympathy, Oates and Bedloe now arraigned the Chief Justice before the Privy Council for having discredited their evidence and misdirected the jury in the Wakeman case, accusing him at the same time of several other misdemeanours on the bench, including a habit of excessive drinking and foul language (the charge of heavy drinking at least was probably true enough). In January 1680 the case was argued before the Council and Scroggs was acquitted. Scroggs repeated the attacks he had made on Oates' credibility at Wakeman's trial, and the King expressed his full confidence in him. At the trials of Elizabeth Cellier and of Lord Castlemaine in June of the same year, both of whom were acquitted, he discredited Dangerfield's evidence, calling him "a notorious villain ... he was in Chelmsford gaol", and on the former occasion committed the witness to prison. In the same month, he discharged the grand jury of Middlesex before the end of term in order to save the Duke of York from indictment as a popish recusant, a proceeding which the House of Commons declared to be illegal, and which was made an article in the impeachment of Scroggs in January 1681. The dissolution of Parliament put an end to the impeachment, but the King now felt secure enough to dispense with his services, and in April Scroggs, much it seems to his own surprise, was removed from the bench, although with a generous pension. He retired to his country home at South Weald in Essex; he also had a townhouse at Chancery Lane in London, where he died on 25 October 1683.

Family
Scroggs married Anne Fettyplace (d. 1689 ), daughter of Edmund Fettyplace of Berkshire: they had four children:

 * Sir William Scroggs junior (died 1695), who like his father was a barrister
 * Mary (died 1675)
 * Anne (died 1713 ), who married as his third wife Sir Robert Wright, who like her father became Lord Chief Justice of England but died in prison after the Glorious Revolution
 * Elizabeth (died 1724), who married firstly Anthony Gylby and secondly Charles Hatton, younger son of Christopher Hatton, 1st Baron Hatton.

Scroggs' opinion of his wife, and of women in general, may perhaps be inferred from an irritable remark he made at the trial for treason of the barrister Richard Langhorne in 1679. Despite objections from William Bedloe, Scroggs permitted female observers like Mary, Lady Worcester to take notes of the evidence, on the ground that "a woman's notes will not signify, truly - no more than her tongue". On the other hand, at Wakeman's trial, he treated Ellen Rigby, the former housekeeper at the Benedictine house in London, with great respect, and told the jury to treat her evidence for the defence as credible, a tribute to her forceful personality.

Personality and lifestyle
Scroggs was a judge at a time when many members of the High Court Bench were considered corrupt and unfair, and his temper and treatment of defendants were an example of the endemic problems with the judiciary, whose coarse and brutal manners shocked most educated laymen. He served on the bench during the same period as Judge Jeffreys who has been criticised for similarly poor treatment of defendants and witnesses. Kenyon notes that while their behaviour in Court seems "degrading and disgusting" by modern standards, at the time it was taken for granted: "the judges' manners were rough because they were a rough lot".

Scroggs was the subject of many contemporary satires; he was reputed to live a debauched lifestyle, he was undoubtedly a heavy drinker, and his manners during trials were considered 'coarse' and 'violent'. Roger North, who knew him well, described him as a man of great wit and fluency, but "scandalous, violent, intemperate and extreme". Forty years after his death, Jonathan Swift in his celebrated attack on William Whitshed, Lord Chief Justice of Ireland, called him "as vile and profligate a villain as Scroggs".

Legal writings
Scroggs was the author of a work on the Practice of Courts-Leet and Courts-Baron (published posthumously in London, 1701), and he edited reports of the state trials over which he presided.

Authorities

 * William Cobbett, Complete Collection of State Trials (vols. i.-x. of State Trials, 33 vols, London, 1809)
 * Roger North, Life of Lord Guilford, etc., edited by A Jessopp (3 vols, London, 1890), and Examen (London, 1740)
 * Narcissus Luttrell, A Brief Relation of State Affairs, 1678-1714 (6 vols, Oxford, 1857)
 * Anthony à Wood, Athenae Oxonienses, edited by P Bliss (4 vols, London, 1813–1820)
 * Correspondence of the Family of Hatton, edited by Edward Maunde Thompson (2 vols, Camden Society 22, 23, London, 1878)
 * Lord Campbell, Lives of the Chief Justices of England (3 vols, London, 1849–1857)
 * Edward Foss, The Judges of England (9 vols, London, 1848–1864)
 * Sir JF Stephen, History of the Criminal Law of England (3 vols, London, 1883)
 * Harry Brodribb Irving, Life of Judge Jeffreys (London, 1898).
 * John Philipps Kenyon The Popish Plot Phoenix Press Reissue 2000

title: William Scroggs


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gippsland Railway

Gippsland Railway
Delete vote from me. See Talk:Gippsland Railway for why. Somebody in the WWW 00:11, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Note: the talk page says:
 * "There is no railway called the "Gippsland Railway" or a line called the "Gippsland Railway line". The writing style of this article is bad and it is riddled with errors (i.e: RFR upgrades won't be completed until 2005) and does not fit in with the others railways in Victoria pages (see: List of regional railway stations in Victoria) which are categorised by line, not area. All the information on this page is confusing as it talks about multiple unrelated lines as being all linked to eachother. I vote it should be deleted. Somebody in the WWW 23:28, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)"

 * Keep. Should be placed on WP:AWNB or on Cleanup, not on VfD. Significant. Ta bu shi da yu 05:01, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. This railway is significant and played a siginificant part of the development of not only Gippsland but eastern Melbourne. Should be place on Cleanup. Capitalistroadster 11:04, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, way more notable than Sollog (seriously, RRs are mostly notable) Wyss 23:17, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep on grounds of being notable and encyclopedic. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 23:47, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I have fixed the article added sections on significance both for Gippsland and Melbourne and on tourism railways and rail trails. I have put the test of the original article into a section called services and hopefully tidied up the text. Capitalistroadster 10:33, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. The content is on its own notable, but this organisation (which effectively amounts to having "Railways by Region" articles) is illogical at best - and the "Gippsland Railway" is not known as a single entity. Ambi 10:36, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Especially after that last re-write. It's got the potential to be useful and, IMHO, that's a good reason for keeping anything.  P Ingerson 11:43, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)


text:
Lewandowski

Lewandowski (feminine Lewandowska, plural Lewandowscy) is a Polish-language surname. In other languages it may be transliterated as Lewandowsky, Levandovski, Levandovsky, Levandovskyy, Levandoski, Levandovskiy.

It is the seventh most common surname in Poland (93,404 people in 2009).

It is derived from the place name Lewandów, itself derived from the Old Polish word lewanda – 'lavender' (lawenda in modern Polish). It is most frequent in mid-northern Poland, making up as much as 1.1% of the Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodeship's population (the record of Poland). The surname was recorded for the first time in 1673, although Lavendowski, which is probably its variant, is known since 1608.

Lewandowski

 * Adolph J. Lewandowski (1905–1961), American football and basketball coach
 * Corey Lewandowski (born 1973), American political consultant
 * Edmund Lewandowski (1914–1998), American artist
 * Eduard Lewandowski (born 1980), German ice hockey player
 * Gina Lewandowski (born 1985), American soccer player
 * Grzegorz Lewandowski (born 1969), Polish footballer
 * Janusz Lewandowski (born 1951), Polish economist and politician
 * Janusz Lewandowski (1931–2013), Polish diplomat
 * Jozef Lewandowski (1923–2007), Polish-Swedish historian and writer
 * Józef R. Lewandowski, Polish chemist
 * Konrad T. Lewandowski (born 1966), Polish writer
 * Louis Lewandowski (1821–1894), German composer
 * Marcin Lewandowski (born 1987), Polish middle distance runner
 * Mariusz Lewandowski (born 1979), Polish footballer
 * Mateusz Lewandowski (born 1993), Polish footballer
 * Michał Lewandowski (born 1996), Polish footballer
 * Michel Lewandowski (1914–1990), French footballer
 * Przemysław Lewandowski (born 1975) Polish rower
 * Ricardo Lewandowski (born 1948), Minister of the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil
 * Robert Lewandowski (born 1988), Polish footballer
 * Sascha Lewandowski (1971–2016), German football manager
 * Brothers Lewandowski, royal court merchants to the Bavarian court for lingerie

Levandowski

 * Anthony Levandowski (born 1980), American engineer

Lewandowsky

 * Max Lewandowsky (1876–1916), German neurologist
 * Felix Lewandowsky (1879–1921), German dermatologist
 * Stephan Lewandowsky (born 1958), Australian psychologist
 * Via Lewandowsky (born 1963), German artist
 * Klaus Lewandowsky (born 1937), West German sprint canoer

Lewandowska

 * Anna Lewandowska (born 1988), Polish karateka, personal trainer and entrepreneur
 * Iwona Lewandowska (born 1985), Polish athlete
 * Janina Lewandowska (1908–1940), Polish pilot
 * Sandra Lewandowska (born 1977), Polish politician
 * Sylwia Lewandowska (born 1991), Polish rower

Other

 * Mikhail Levandovsky (1890–1938), Soviet military leader

title: Lewandowski


text:
Talk:Melting Close + Sabotage

Fair use rationale for Image:Klinik-Melting Close Sabotage.jpg
Image:Klinik-Melting Close Sabotage.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Melting Close + Sabotage


text:
Elliptic (company)

Elliptic is a British blockchain analytics firm headquartered in London, with offices in New York and Singapore. The company was co-founded by Adam Joyce, Tom Robinson and James Smith in 2013. It is the first company to develop cryptoasset anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance tools based on blockchain analytics. Its clients are primarily financial and institutions and crypto businesses, although it also provides blockchain investigation tools and data to government agencies. Customers have included Coinbase, Santander, BitGo, Internal Revenue Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Drug Enforcement Administration and United States Department of the Treasury.

Investors in Elliptic include JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, SoftBank Vision Fund and SBI Group.

In 2020 Elliptic was named as a Technology Pioneer by the World Economic Forum, for its contributions in the field of fighting financial crime and anti-money laundering detection in crypto markets.

title: Elliptic (company)


text:
Szymański

Szymański (feminine: Szymańska, plural Szymańscy) is the ninth most common surname in Poland with about 114 075 people (0.3% of Polish population) sharing it by 2015.

Notable people

 * Adam Szymański (1852–1916), Polish writer
 * Antoni Szymański (1894–1973), Polish Army general
 * Beata Szymańska (born 1938), Polish poet and writer
 * Bolesław Szymański (born 1950), Polish-American computer scientist
 * Damian Szymański (born 1995), Polish footballer
 * Dick Szymanski (1932–2021), American football player
 * Frank Szymanski (1923–1987), American football player
 * Grzegorz Szymański (born 1978), Polish volleyball player
 * Halina Szymańska (1906–1989), Polish spy
 * Henry Szymanski (1898–1959), American wrestler
 * Ignacy Szymański (1806–1874), Polish soldier
 * Iwonka Bogumila Szymanska (born 1943), Polish composer
 * Jake Toranzo Szymanski (born 1994), American actor
 * Jakub Szymanski (born 1983), Czech handball player
 * Jakub Szymański (born 1998), Polish volleyball player
 * Jan Szymański (born 1989), Polish speed skater
 * Jan Szymański (1960–2005), Polish wrestler
 * Józef Szymański (1926–2016), Polish bobsledder
 * Karol Szymański (born 1993), Polish footballer
 * Konrad Szymański (born 1969), Polish politician
 * Krystyna Szymańska-Lara (born 1969), Polish basketball player
 * Maciej Szymański (born 1957), Polish diplomat
 * Marcin Szymański (born 1972), Polish footballer
 * Marcin Szymański (born 1983), Polish chess master
 * Maria Mickiewicz (née Szymańska in 1984), Polish chess master
 * Marija Šimanska (1922–1995), Latvian chemist
 * Paweł Szymański (born 1954), Polish composer
 * Roman Szymański (1840–1908), Polish political activist
 * Sebastian Szymański (born 1999), Polish footballer
 * Stanisław Szymański (1862–1944), Polish industrialist
 * Stanisław Szymański (1930–1999), Polish ballet dancer
 * Timothy Szymanski, American navy admiral

title: Szymański