Jump to content

User talk:Agnieszka653

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


October 2025

[edit]

Information icon Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Hasan Piker. Thank you. --Hipal (talk) 19:48, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is a quote from an interview with the New York Times. Agnieszka653 (talk) 19:54, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be excessive to warn for adding a piece from the NY Times, and not in the lead as well. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:05, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
An opinion piece, published in the New York Times or anywhere else, is generally not going to meet BLP policy requirements. Please gain consensus for it. --Hipal (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Please also see MOS:DEADNAME. Relm (talk) 23:28, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Information icon You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. Additionally, editors must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Cambial — foliar❧ 19:17, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I have an awareness template above for this exact topic why are you putting this on my talk page? @Cambial Yellowing Agnieszka653 (talk) 19:50, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, missed your aware template Cambial — foliar❧ 20:07, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Schmear" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Schmear has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 4 § Schmear until a consensus is reached. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 17:45, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zaher Birawi

[edit]

Hello, I've raised multiple BLP and POV issues on the Talk page. Please discuss rather than continue to edit war them back in. Thanks. Rainsage (talk) 17:16, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, please stop adding undue, inaccurate, and/or poorly sourced content about this living person:
[1][2][3][4]
Thanks! Rainsage (talk) 04:11, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the talk page. I left multiple posts about the issues with Zaher Birawi including your removal of green sources. Thank you. Agnieszka653 (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Removal of green sources" is not incorrect if the content is undue/incorrect, does not mention the subject, or if it is the Jerusalem Post being used to make claims about Israel/Palestine (per WP:JERUSALEMPOST). I have responded to your posts on the Talk page and also made a previous post on the Talk page explaining the serious BLP issues on this page. Rainsage (talk) 17:05, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jerusalem Post was not the only source used, you also removed The Telegraph and the Times of London. It is quite well sourced that the Israeli govt designated him the Hamas operative label as well as the UK Parliament. Your edit summary mentions that UK parliament did not designate him a terrorist (which is false, check the sources provided on the TP), you also remove the Israel claim. Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:16, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've explained multiple times on the Talk page why that is not true. Please engage on the talk page. Rainsage (talk) 17:31, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Birawi also has enough evidence that he participated in two flotillas with Thunberg--the Freedom Flotilla and the Sumud Flotilla making his connection to her DUE-since he's been connected to multiple flotillas plus the two she participated in. Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:23, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
please engage in the discussion on the Talk page Rainsage (talk) 17:32, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hi Agnieszka653. Thank you for your work on Ahmad Muaffaq Zaidan. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Please fix the errors in footnotes 2, 6 and 7. Thanks and have a wonderful day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 13:42, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! Will do. Agnieszka653 (talk) 15:06, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:01, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please be wary of potential plagiarism

[edit]

Please be careful to avoid WP:PLAGIARISM when editing. Your edit to Al Jazeera controversies included several lines directly taken from the cited articles without quoting them, as well as copying a sentence from a Haaretz article that wasn't cited.

I've done some work in an attempt to remove these issues while keeping added content, but wanted you to be aware of this for future editing. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 01:13, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I apologize I really thought I added the proper citations to the Haaretz edit--and I did attempt to change language to the best of my ability but these things sometimes happen thank you for making me aware. Agnieszka653 (talk) 23:00, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]
Hello and welcome Agnieszka653! Thank you for your contributions related to Poland. You may be interested in visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland, joining the project, joining our discussions and sharing your creations with our community.

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:30, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Al Sharq Forum

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Al Sharq Forum, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:54, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok--will do. Thank you! Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:05, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to COVID-19, broadly construed, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

TarnishedPathtalk 01:49, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Litvinism

[edit]

You put a wrong external link there. --Altenmann >talk 22:14, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank's I'll check it. Agnieszka653 (talk) 00:31, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note on original research

[edit]

Hello! I wanted to send you a courtesy note regarding a comment you left on AfD. You said of course it's "original" as support for your position, but what is meant by original research in this context is that the content of the article is not supported by any WP:RS; this can be true when there are citations, but the citations do no support the content in the article. Revolving Doormat (talk) 20:40, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah got it--thanks for the note! Agnieszka653 (talk) 20:44, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Number of independent spatial modes inside a spherical volume

[edit]

Hi, if you want the original text, i have a copy for you. Just ping me or send an email. Cheers Harold Foppele (talk) 16:35, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I love that. Thank you. Agnieszka653 (talk) 18:30, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Agnieszka653: I cannot email you, not enabled. Can you please emai me? Thank you. Harold Foppele (talk) 22:00, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
harold.foppele@gmail.com 😄 Harold Foppele (talk) 09:36, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Agnieszka653: ?? Harold Foppele (talk) 12:04, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open Secrets

[edit]

Thank you for expressing a view about the reliability of OpenSecrets at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Is "OpenSecrets" / the Center for Responsive Politics reliable?. Several editors in that discussion distinguish between the databases at OpenSecrets, and their reporting/analysis. I've created a format there to allow you to do the same, if you would like to weigh in on each. Thank you! Novellasyes (talk) 21:57, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hello Agnieszka653! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Becoming a member of WikiProject Science, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:08, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hello Agnieszka653! The thread you created at the Teahouse, WP: Art Projects?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatives to deletion at AFD

[edit]

Hi Agnieszka653! Thank you for your participation at AFD, I've come across several of your votes and am very happy to see a new regular participant at AFD! I just wanted to leave a quick note here to encourage you to review our guidelines around alternatives to deletion. I've noticed you often propose ATDs in your AFD votes, which is great — too often, I think people jump straight to a delete vote. However, I think a few of your votes might be a bit confused about our standards for apt WP:REDIRECT/WP:MERGE targets; for a redirect, it should be a page that mentions or could mention the topic, and for a merge, the same applies but there also should be sourced content in the nominated article that is worth saving in the target, and is not already present there. For example, in this vote, a redirect would not be appropriate given that the topic of the nominated article is not (and should not be) mentioned at the target article. This is not at all an attack on your participation at AFD or meant to discourage you — just the opposite, especially for a relatively new user, your votes are excellent and this is just meant to be a pointer to make them even better. Cheers and looking forward to seeing you around! 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the constructive feedback! I'll look over your suggestions when I have more time today! Agnieszka653 (talk) 19:34, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
After looking at the Redirect example-I understand what you mean. My logic was that he was a figure in the war in Yugoslavia so that is where my logic came from but I definitely need to understand Merge versus Redirect better so I really appreciate the talk page message. Thanks again! Agnieszka653 (talk) 18:22, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pasterski–Strominger–Zhiboedov triangle

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Pasterski–Strominger–Zhiboedov triangle, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Revolving Doormat (talk) 17:34, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Revolving Doormat I guess I am confused as to how it qualifies as violating NPOV and WP:PROMO? At least from what I have read it fits into the arena of optics in Quantum Mechanics. Would you mind clarifying who or whom this piece is promoting and what skewed POV is present here? Agnieszka653 (talk) 18:25, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This concept was created by Pasterski's PhD advisor. In 2017 shortly after he (Strominger) published his lecture series as a book, including the coining of the term, one of many persistent WP:COI editors added the term crediting Pasterski to her biography, it was repeatedly removed by other editors and restored along with other unsourced or poorly sourced promotional material. The only references to this term (not the concept) are biographies about Pasterski or the like, which came from Wikipedia, thus would be citogenesis (see also WP:CIRCULAR).
The only references to this concept credit it to Strominger and call it the infrared triangle. He did not elect to name it after himself. This can be reasonably explained by the fact that he argues that these have been connected for centuries in physics and credits those who connect each segment between two points. They were not yet formalized as an infrared/soft physics relation, which is what Strominger did. If you are interested, you can watch his lecture on it: [5].
The creator of this term was a COI editor to promote Pasterski (though I don't know the motivation of the creator of the page itself in 2023), but there is some curious timing with a New Science article in 2023, which remains the only independent, secondary RS of the concept (which only credits Strominger and calls it the infrared triangle). Revolving Doormat (talk) 18:38, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see. And I understand the reasoning now. Thank you so much for the clarification. I'll watch the lecture. Thank you! Agnieszka653 (talk) 18:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hi

[edit]

Request to keep the article about the Baharwa, with the new sources, especially in the language section, showing that they are a group with their own dialects, and also comparing them to the people of Upper Egypt (Sa'idi people). Turning the article into a Nile Delta topic is not good because this is a geographical subject, while the Bahrawa are a large population group that deserves a separate article on Wikipedia. Germanyka1 (talk) 01:06, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I was trying to find sources--but was having a hard time. Do you have any you can give me as references here that I can look at? Agnieszka653 (talk) 01:22, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[1][2][3] Germanyka1 (talk) 02:09, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found an article about them on Egyptian Wikipedia
https://arz.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%87 Germanyka1 (talk) 02:19, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I will take a look-I'm actually learning Arabic but I'm not great haha so I'll try translating into English first. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:28, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The administrator requested another comment in the discussion about deleting baharwa Germanyka1 (talk) 02:31, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so after looking over what you gave me and listening to the differences in the dialects--it appears that it is derived in part from Coptic? is that correct? And was a version of a language that existed prior to the Arab conquest of Egypt in the 7th century. This is helpful because I think we can use these terms to search for scholarly articles on google scholar that may save the page. Let me know if anything I typed above is incorrect. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:43, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://menbareltahrir.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B1-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AD%D8%AB-%D8%AF%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%8A%D8%B4-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%88%D8%B7%D9%8A-%D9%8A%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87%D8%AC%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%AD%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%8A%D8%A9
In this source, it says that the dialect of Lower Egypt has always differed from the dialect of Upper Egypt. Even when Coptic was the language of the Egyptians, there was a Coptic dialect for Lower Egypt and a Coptic dialect for Upper Egypt. Then it goes on to say that the dialect of Lower Egypt is a fully Arabic dialect specific to Lower Egypt. Germanyka1 (talk) 03:39, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.bayut.com/mybayut/ar/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87%D8%AC%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9/
In this source, it talks about the Egyptian dialect and its types, and discusses the dialects of the population in Egypt. It divides them into four categories: the residents of Cairo and Alexandria, which are the two largest cities in Egypt and the major urban centers; Baharwa, who are the residents of Lower Egypt excluding Cairo and Alexandria; and the Sa'idi people, who are the residents of southern Egypt. Germanyka1 (talk) 03:42, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I read those about the dialects--which makes sense Egypt is a large country and ethnically diverse. Ok. I will comment and strike my delete. Hold on. Agnieszka653 (talk) 03:46, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh--right I did vote keep haha I thought so. I am adding a comment with sources. Agnieszka653 (talk) 03:47, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When will the discussion about deleting Baharwa end ? Germanyka1 (talk) 14:32, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes it can go one for several weeks especially if there is no consensus. Were you the person who originally made the page? Agnieszka653 (talk) 16:39, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No Germanyka1 (talk) 17:09, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Adding more sources to bolster notability helps. References from google scholar which is why I tried looking can be strong detractors from deleting a page--because they are harder to refute as being "unreliable." Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:14, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://soundeals.com/voices/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87%D8%AC%D8%A9/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%86
In this source, it talks about the Baharwa dialect and describes its speakers as rural Egyptians in northern Egypt (meaning in the northern governorates, away from Cairo and Alexandria). It mentions some areas where their distinctive dialect is spoken in the northern governorates, such as Monufia, Gharbia, Sharqia, and Qalyubia. Germanyka1 (talk) 03:47, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Germanyka1 I am assuming you speak German? Can you check out this source? [[6]] Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:59, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They have submitted a request to comment again on the article about Baharwa. I commented that the page should remain. You should also comment with your opinion. Germanyka1 (talk) 17:41, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I commented a few days ago--I will check it out again in a bit. Also Happy New Year! Tangential but how do you say Happy New Year in Arabic? I started learning Arabic in early spring of this year--but I can only say silly phrases like "good fish" and "I have a rich paternal uncle." haha Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Happy New Year my friend.
I have some knowledge of the Arabic language. For “Happy New Year,” you can say “كل عام وأنت بخير” like this, which is in Modern Standard Arabic, or “كل سنة وأنت طيب”, which is in the Egyptian dialect. Germanyka1 (talk) 18:03, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why didn’t you give your opinion in the discussion ? Germanyka1 (talk) 05:49, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I added a comment on the articles for deletion page a week ago under "comment" if you do this too often you can be accused of brigading--is there a talk page discussion as well or is it still the AfD page? Agnieszka653 (talk) 15:09, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is still limited to the AfD page. Germanyka1 (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
then the statement I made last week under *comment* is all I can do as of now--more people besides us need to have keep votes. If it's only us two making statements--even more statements it will not bolster the keeps unfortunately. We need extra voices besides us advocating for the page. Agnieszka653 (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

[edit]

Hi Agnieszka653,

Looks like you have forgotten to sign this comment. This happens with me too. Feel free to fix this. Thanks! signed, Kvinnen (talk) 22:32, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I think you are right! Thanks for letting me know! Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:26, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just checked--discussion is already closed. boo! Thanks anyway. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:27, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. signed, Kvinnen (talk) 04:30, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New page reviewer granted

[edit]

Hi Agnieszka653, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! Sohom (talk) 08:23, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! I'll read through New Pages Patrol as soon as possible. Agnieszka653 (talk) 15:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Agnieszka653!

[edit]
Happy New Year!

Agnieszka653,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
BhikhariInformer (talk) 17:33, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

BhikhariInformer (talk) 17:33, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thanks so much-It's still the 31st in Chicago! I hope your new year is wonderful and prosperous as well! Agnieszka653 (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ "تعليق صوتي المصرية البحاروة (الفلاحين) - التعليق الصوتي". سونديلز (in Arabic). Retrieved 2025-12-24.
  2. ^ "اللهجة المصرية: أصل اللهجة المصرية، أنواعها، كلمات بالمصريه | ماي بيوت". مدونة تشمل مواضيع تتعلق بالعقارات و أنماط الحياة المختلفة في الإمارات | ماي بيوت (in Arabic). Retrieved 2025-12-24.
  3. ^ Codingest (2025-02-04). "الشاعر والباحث درويش الأسيوطي يكتب:اللهجة البحراوية". منبر التحرير (in Arabic). Retrieved 2025-12-24.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Agnieszka653&oldid=1330790542"