Talk:Tomasz Misiak

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Possible Defamation Case

Dear Wikipedia Editors, I am writing from Poland to express concerns regarding the Wikipedia page associated with Mr. Misiak. It has come to my attention that the content currently published may be significantly influenced by individuals openly in conflict with Mr. Misiak. I suspect that the contributions might even be coordinated with or influenced by Mr. Misiak's wife. The information, as it stands, appears to be predominantly inaccurate or misleading. I had previously made edits to this page, aiming to correct the misrepresented facts with information supported by public sources. Unfortunately, my changes were reverted, which I believe undermines the integrity and purpose of Wikipedia as a platform for factual and unbiased information. In light of this, I respectfully suggest a reevaluation of the edits I submitted last month. The objective is to ensure that the page reflects accurate information and does not serve as a medium for defamation. Upholding the principles of veracity and neutrality is paramount, and I trust that the Wikipedia community shares these values. Thank you for considering my recommendation and for your ongoing commitment to maintaining the reliability of Wikipedia. Sincerely, Greg GrzegorzNews (talk) 21:43, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question for administrator

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

I have observed that there appears to be an individual actively engaged in modifying published information, removing verified details, and participating in actions that could be construed as defamation, seemingly at the behest of another party. This activity not only undermines the integrity of the information but also potentially harms the reputation of individuals or entities through the dissemination of untruths. I believe it is crucial to address this behavior promptly and ensure that all published information remains accurate, factual, and free from malicious tampering. I urge the relevant authorities or platforms to investigate these alterations thoroughly and take appropriate measures to rectify any inaccuracies and prevent further instances of such conduct — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrzegorzNews (talk • contribs)

GrzegorzNews Wikipedia has no central authority to address grievances. Admins like me have no more authority than any other editor, just additional tools. Do you have a particular interest in regards to this subject? Please discuss your specific grievances here.

Accusations of a conspiracy are serious, and require serious evidence. Please give your evidence(which is not just disagreement with your edits); if off wiki information is involved, you will need to communicate it to a checkuser privately, see WP:CHECKUSER. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The information you are attempting to add is poorly written and questionably sourced. Please discuss this here before editing. 331dot (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion on this matter stems from the structure of the material in the English version, which is completely different from the Polish version. It can be considered manipulated.

== Examples==

1. The section regarding leaving politics includes false media information for which, in a later period, these media outlets apologized following court decisions on the violation of personal rights; this information is absent in the English version.

https://wiadomosci.dziennik.pl/polityka/artykuly/154995,afery-senatora-misiaka-nie-bylo.html

https://archive.is/20120905142506/http://www.misiak.org/media.html

Information about the visa tender contains false suggestions published by media involved on the side of one of the companies participating in the tender. The tender was ultimately settled in public procurement arbitration, did not raise any controversies, nor was it non-transparent. Suggesting connections with Russian intelligence in the biography of a living person based on the publication of a niche newspaper is a strong deviation from Wikipedia's principles. The material in WP.PL, one of the largest Polish internet portals, describes unethical practices of one of the parties in this procedure. Despite this, the text remains present in the biography.

https://wiadomosci.wp.pl/wszystkie-chwyty-dozwolone-ostra-walka-o-obsluge-ukraincow-i-gore-pieniedzy-6693338645912224a

The material concerning the arrest and charges does not include that the court of first instance determined that it saw no crime in the cases of Mr. Witucki and Mr. Misiak. It also lacks information that this matter became an element of the appeal of several non-governmental organizations and numerous authorities led by Lech Walesa, as an example of so-called malicious political investigations conducted by the undemocratic government of PiS. The Minister of Justice committed to reviewing these cases. The detention of Maciej Witucki and Tomasz Misiak was considered a scandal and an attempt to intimidate business circles by the business community. Maciej Witucki was detained during Poland's largest economic conference, EFNI, of which he was the main organizer.

https://cornerstone-im.com/news/an-appeal-for-a-review-of-politically-motivated-prosecutorial-proceedings-in-20152023-and-the-rehabilitation-of-the-victims

https://en.odfoundation.eu/content/uploads/2023/10/2023.10-odf-malicious-prosecution-report-v01.pdf page 58

https://en.odfoundation.eu/a/725327,bodnars-open-letter-to-walesa-on-investigations-from-pis-days/ GrzegorzNews (talk) 22:41, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a partial block from editing this page has now been answered.

(editor making request is parblocked from the article itself)

What I think should be changed (format using {{}}): {{the following fragment described below does not apply to Mr. Tomasz Misiak and his BLP - regarding the "Post-political scandals" tab - Mr. Tomasz Misiak has not been convicted in any case related to selling drugs to celebrities, he was also never accused of drug dealing - it has not been legally confirmed that he was involved in this practice - there is no final court decision confirming such unfounded accusations. Articles that are supposed to justify information about Mr. Tomasz Misiak do not concern him but concern a "star dealer" - they are in no way related to Mr. Misiak (note 11 and 12 of the English version) - such article describing these facts should be created for " "star dealer" and not for Mr. Tomasz Misiak - there is no confirmation of Mr. Tomasz Misiak's participation in this practice. Article references in this section do not mention at all the Tomasz Misiak - Mr. Tomasz Misiak's name is not mentioned in the articles(note 10 and 11). This fragment contains information that is not directly related to the activity or life of the person described in the article. The sources on which this fragment is based concern other people or events, which misleads the reader and may cause false associations. In this case, the fragment is based on information that does not directly refer to the person in question, which can be recognized as inconsistent with Wikipedia's policy on accurate reporting of facts. The No Original Research policy also states that article should not include information that could be interpreted as suggestions that are not supported by actual and reliable sources (Fakt.pl in the sources only mention the name of Tomasz Misiak). Fakt.pl should not be considered a reliable source for biographies of living people on Wikipedia. Fakt.pl is a tabloid newspaper, which means that its publications often focus on sensational and emotionally charged content, rather than objective and reliable presentation of facts. Fakt.pl often publishes content that may be exaggerated or focus on controversial topics in order to attract the attention of readers, which affects its perceived credibility. Wikipedia has special rules for biographies of living persons (BLP), requiring the use of only the highest quality sources in order to protect the privacy and good name of the people described. This policy emphasizes that information about living people must be fully verifiable and come from reliable, neutral sources. Fakt.pl, due to its tabloid profile and tendency to publish sensational information, does not meet these high standards, making it an inappropriate source for use in biographies on Wikipedia.The article about the wp.pl news (footnote 12) is also entirely based on and quotes articles from the fakt.pl tabloid. In order to keep the article in line with Wikipedia's guidelines, I suggest removing the part that does not refer to this person.}}
Why it should be changed:{{I am writing to provide a detailed justification for the proposed changes to the article on Tomasz Misiak (English version). These edits adhere to Wikipedia’s policies on neutrality, verifiability, and reliability. The information provided is factual, presented without bias, and intended to improve the article’s balance by including recent developments. The current article contains information that, may not fully capture recent developments regarding Tomasz Misiak (English version). This missing context creates a partial view, which could unintentionally mislead readers by omitting significant recent events. By including the proposed updates, the article will provide a comprehensive, balanced overview, fulfilling Wikipedia’s commitment to an accurate and complete representation of topics related to Tomasz Misiak. Recognizing the collaborative nature of Wikipedia, I am fully committed to transparency regarding these additions and am open to discussing any concerns on the article’s talk page. My intent is to contribute constructively by enhancing the quality and of the article, strictly in alignment with Wikipedia’s standards.Thank you in advance for considering this request. }}
References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):https://expatriate.pl/polish-celebrities-drug-dealer-apprehended-in-warsaw/

https://www.pap.pl/aktualnosci/news%2C1511375%2Csprzedawal-narkotyki-znanym-osobom-diler-gwiazd-uslyszy-prawomocny-wyrok https://wiadomosci.wp.pl/byly-senator-po-klientem-dilera-gwiazd-mial-kupowac-kokaine-6280682476112001a

Mocca20 (talk) 13:22, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

This request is almost unintelligible. Please be much clearer about the exact edit we want to be made. And we won't let you proxy in the very changes you tried to make before. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:09, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback on our initial request to amend the article regarding Tomasz Misiak. We understand that our previous communication may not have been sufficiently clear. We are submitting this response to provide detailed clarification on the exact changes we are requesting and the rationale behind them, all in adherence to Wikipedia’s guidelines.

We are specifically requesting the removal of the section under the "Post-political scandals" tab in the English-language article on Tomasz Misiak. This section contains information that erroneously implies Mr. Tomasz Misiak’s involvement in drug dealing or associations with a "star dealer." The content in question is factually incorrect, not substantiated by reliable sources, and violates Wikipedia’s Biographies of Living Persons (BLP) policy.

Justification for the Change

- Factual Inaccuracy - The current section mentions allegations that Tomasz Misiak was involved in purchasing drugs from a "star dealer." However, no reliable source confirms this information. The sources referenced in the article (e.g., Fakt.pl and wp.pl) do not directly connect Mr. Misiak to these allegations. Notably, footnotes 10, 11, and 12 in the English version of the article reference events unrelated to Mr. Misiak: Footnote 10 and 11: These articles discuss a "star dealer" but do not mention Tomasz Misiak’s name. Footnote 12: This article, hosted on wp.pl, relies entirely on content from Fakt.pl, a tabloid known for sensationalism and not meeting Wikipedia’s reliability standards.

- Violation of Wikipedia's BLP Policy - According to Wikipedia’s BLP policy, information about living persons must be supported by reliable, high-quality sources. Tabloid sources like Fakt.pl fail to meet this standard due to their sensationalist nature and lack of verifiable reporting. The policy further emphasizes that unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. The implication of drug-related activities without credible evidence harms Mr. Misiak’s reputation and contradicts the principles of neutrality and verifiability.

- Misleading Content - The section as written misleads readers into associating Mr. Misiak with criminal activities without any legal basis or confirmed allegations. There is no court ruling or verified accusation connecting him to the "star dealer" case. This creates a false narrative, unfairly impacting Mr. Misiak’s reputation.

We request that the whole following text under the section "Post-political scandals" be removed. This removal will ensure that the article aligns with Wikipedia’s guidelines and accurately represents Mr. Misiak’s biography without unverified or misleading claims. The following sources illustrate the lack of evidence connecting Mr. Misiak to the allegations and support the removal of the contested section:

Expatriate.pl: "Polish Celebrities Drug Dealer Apprehended in Warsaw" - This article discusses the "star dealer" case but does not mention Tomasz Misiak.

Link: https://expatriate.pl/polish-celebrities-drug-dealer-apprehended-in-warsaw/

PAP.pl: "Sprzedawał narkotyki znanym osobom diler gwiazd usłyszy prawomocny wyrok" - This article details the case but does not implicate Tomasz Misiak.

Link: https://www.pap.pl/aktualnosci/news%2C1511375%2Csprzedawal-narkotyki-znanym-osobom-diler-gwiazd-uslyszy-prawomocny-wyrok

WP.pl: "Były senator PO klientem dilera gwiazd - miał kupować kokainę" - This article, citing Fakt.pl, is not a reliable source under Wikipedia’s standards.

Link: https://wiadomosci.wp.pl/byly-senator-po-klientem-dilera-gwiazd-mial-kupowac-kokaine-6280682476112001a

This request adheres to Wikipedia’s core content policies: Neutral Point of View (NPOV): The removal of misleading and unsupported claims ensures a fair and unbiased representation of Mr. Misiak. Verifiability: Only verified and high-quality sources should support claims about living persons. Tabloids like Fakt.pl do not meet this criterion. No Original Research (NOR): The contested section relies on sources that suggest interpretations unsupported by direct evidence.

We are committed to working collaboratively to ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s standards. If further clarification or edits are required, we welcome constructive dialogue on the talk page to address any concerns. Mocca20 (talk) 10:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia Team, I would like to address that I have provided a detailed and comprehensive justification for the requested edits, fully adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines on neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing. I kindly request Wikipedia’s response and position regarding the proposed changes. Additionally, I ask for the reconsideration of my account's restriction. The proposed edits aim solely to improve the article and ensure compliance with Wikipedia’s principles and policies. Thank you for your attention and consideration. Mocca20 (talk) 10:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your request was responded to. You may make another. Appealing your block from the article itself is done on your user page as the block notice instructs, or you may go to the administrators noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 10:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia Team, I would like to address that I have provided a detailed and comprehensive justification for the requested edits, fully adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines on neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing. I kindly requested Wikipedia’s response and position regarding the proposed changes.

Despite my efforts, the additional explanations and justifications I provided do not appear to have been considered. Therefore, I do not understand the response from Wikipedia stating that "Your request was responded to." It seems that the proposed changes, along with the detailed reasoning provided, were not adequately reviewed or taken into account.

I kindly request clarification and a substantive answer from Wikipedia regarding this matter, as the issue remains unresolved. Thank you for your attention and consideration, and I look forward to your response. Mocca20 (talk) 12:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel the reviewer of your request did not abide by policy, I suggest you first take that up with them- but that they did not do what you want does not mean policy was violated. 331dot (talk) 13:27, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I have not received any substantive response regarding the proposed and supplemented changes. A detailed explanation was provided to the Wikipedia member's response that "This request is almost unintelligible. Please be much clearer about the exact edit we want to be made." After giving such a detailed response, the Wikipedia member did not present any position, so we cannot speak of presenting an answer in this metter. I kindly request clarification and a substantive answer from Wikipedia regarding this matter, as the issue remains unresolved. Thank you for your attention and consideration, and I look forward to your response. Mocca20 (talk) 12:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're getting your "answer from Wikipedia"; we are Wikipedia, there is no central authority. You got an answer, "This request is almost unintelligible. Please be much clearer about the exact edit we want to be made. And we won't let you proxy in the very changes you tried to make before." If you want your edit requests to be considered and possibly accepted, I would suggest that you make them shorter- propose a single, incremental change, not a wholesale rewrite- this is much more likely to get a volunteer to spend their time to evaluate it; the bigger the request, the more time it takes to evaluate, and the less likely a volunteer will do so. If it's easier, I would suggest the edit request wizard. 331dot (talk) 13:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Any unblock request you make is unlikely to succeed until you have some successful edit requests to point to. 331dot (talk) 11:03, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

proposed changes

This edit request by an editor with a partial block from editing this page has now been answered.

We are specifically requesting the removal of the section under the "Post-political scandals" tab in the English-language article on Tomasz Misiak. This section contains information that erroneously implies Mr. Tomasz Misiak’s involvement in drug dealing or associations with a "star dealer." The content in question is factually incorrect, not substantiated by reliable sources (factual inaccuracy), and violates Wikipedia’s Biographies of Living Persons (BLP) policy. The following sources illustrate the lack of evidence connecting Mr. Misiak to the allegations and support the removal of the contested section. This request adheres to Wikipedia’s core content policies: Neutral Point of View (NPOV).

The current section mentions allegations that Tomasz Misiak was involved in purchasing drugs from a "star dealer." However, no reliable source confirms this information. The sources referenced in the article (e.g., Fakt.pl and wp.pl) do not directly connect Mr. Misiak to these allegations. Notably, footnotes 10, 11, and 12 in the English version of the article reference events unrelated to Mr. Misiak: Footnote 10 and 11: These articles discuss a "star dealer" but do not mention Tomasz Misiak’s name. Footnote 12: This article, hosted on wp.pl, relies entirely on content from Fakt.pl, a tabloid known for sensationalism and not meeting Wikipedia’s reliability standards.

According to Wikipedia’s BLP policy, information about living persons must be supported by reliable, high-quality sources. Tabloid sources like Fakt.pl fail to meet this standard due to their sensationalist nature and lack of verifiable reporting. Only verified and high-quality sources should support claims about living persons.

The section as written misleads readers into associating Mr. Misiak with criminal activities without any legal basis or confirmed allegations. There is no court ruling or verified accusation connecting him to the "star dealer" case.

We request that the whole following text under the section "Post-political scandals" be removed and the section. This removal will ensure that the article aligns with Wikipedia’s guidelines and accurately represents Mr. Misiak’s biography without unverified or misleading claims.

Expatriate.pl: "Polish Celebrities Drug Dealer Apprehended in Warsaw" - This article discusses the "star dealer" case but does not mention Tomasz Misiak.

Link: https://expatriate.pl/polish-celebrities-drug-dealer-apprehended-in-warsaw/

PAP.pl: "Sprzedawał narkotyki znanym osobom diler gwiazd usłyszy prawomocny wyrok" - This article details the case but does not implicate Tomasz Misiak.

Link: https://www.pap.pl/aktualnosci/news%2C1511375%2Csprzedawal-narkotyki-znanym-osobom-diler-gwiazd-uslyszy-prawomocny-wyrok

WP.pl: "Były senator PO klientem dilera gwiazd - miał kupować kokainę" - This article, citing Fakt.pl, is not a reliable source under Wikipedia’s standards.

Link: https://wiadomosci.wp.pl/byly-senator-po-klientem-dilera-gwiazd-mial-kupowac-kokaine-6280682476112001a Mocca20 (talk) 11:13, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mocca20 You didn't mark this as an edit request, I did so as a courtesy. Up to this point you have asserted you have no connection to this man, but you use "we" in this request, suggesting you represent him or are a group. You will need to clarify this or better explain the source of your strong interest in this man. 331dot (talk) 13:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. I would like to clarify that the use of "we" was not intended to imply that I represent Mr. Tomasz Misiak, nor does should suggest any conflict of interest as defined in Wikipedia's guidelines - as I explained before. The choice of "we" was made to reflect a general or inclusive tone, as I believed it conveyed a broader intention to align the article with Wikipedia’s standards and principles. I would also like to highlight that English is not my native language, which may have contributed to this misunderstanding. From this point onward, I will be more carefull to use pronouns more carefully to ensure clarity and avoid any unintended implications. I would like to point again, my request and involvement are solely focused on ensuring the article adheres to Wikipedia’s policies on neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing. My actions are guided by a genuine interest in improving the quality of the content. Mocca20 (talk) 10:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can the shortened proposed changes now be considered by you? The changes have been described as briefly as possible, but their justification requires detailed justification to include all arguments related to the article and the applicable Wikipedia rules, thank you in advance Mocca20 (talk) 10:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would be unfair to you for me to consider your changes as I've been extensively involved in your block from the article itself. Per WP:INVOLVED I can't do so. 331dot (talk) 10:50, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so what's next in this situation? would another user from the wikipedia community consider proposed changes now? Mocca20 (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the request is open and visible to others who monitor edit requests.(that's the main purpose of the box at the top of this section) 331dot (talk) 11:01, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanak you for your replay, so I am waiting to consider by others the proposed changes Mocca20 (talk) 11:13, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done: I have removed the first two paragraphs. However, everything else is sourced; please clarify why you believe they should be removed. Thanks. Kovcszaln6 (talk) 16:28, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marked as answered per above. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 00:41, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the removal of these two pharagraps. As per your request - I would like to clarify another significant concern regarding the section „Detention and criminal charges” in the article on Tomasz Misiak that states: "In October 2024, Misiak was again detained and interrogated by officers of Central Anticorruption Bureau and the Special Prosecution Office. Another three board members of Misiak's former agency were arrested as well."

These fragment is not true and reference 22 links to an article from Onet.pl titled "Były senator Tomasz Misiak zatrzymany. Był przesłuchiwany do późnej nocy" – which article was published in 2022, not 2024, and pertains to a completely different event. Furthermore, the claim itself is false. No such incident involving Tomasz Misiak's detainment or interrogation in October 2024 occurred, nor is there any evidence in source or factual basis to substantiate this statement. The inclusion of this unverified and incorrect information misleads readers and fails to meet Wikipedia's stringent standards, particularly those outlined in the Biographies of Living Persons (BLP) policy.

The beforementioned pharagraph does not have any reliable source to support it. The referenced article (from 2022) is unrelated to the alleged event in 2024 and therefore does not verify the statement. Wikipedia articles should remain neutral and factual, especially concerning living individuals. Wikipedia’s BLP policy explicitly states that any material likely to cause harm must be supported by high-quality, reliable sources.

I respectfully request the removal of this section „"In October 2024, Misiak was again detained and interrogated by officers of Central Anticorruption Bureau and the Special Prosecution Office. Another three board members of Misiak's former agency were arrested as well." and the corresponding claim about events in October 2024, as they are factually incorrect and unsupported by the source provided. Allowing such information to remain in the article compromises Wikipedia’s integrity and fails to uphold its commitment to accuracy. Thank you for your time and for considering this correction. Mocca20 (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying, I have removed those two sentences. Kovcszaln6 (talk) 14:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The user below has a request that an edit be made to Tomasz Misiak. That user has been partially blocked from editing it. There are currently 1 requests waiting for review.

Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies.

I am submitting this message as a continuation of my earlier request to address inaccuracies in the article on Tomasz Misiak. Alongside my prior request to remove the false statement regarding alleged events in October 2024, I would like to propose the inclusion of new, accurate, and verifiable information that aligns with Wikipedia’s Biographies of Living Persons (BLP) policy and its core principles of neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing.

Proposed Addition:

„In February 2024, Misiak's case was included (along with the cases of 10 other entrepreneurs and former managers) in an appeal by non-governmental organizations and public figures, the signatories of which called on Prosecutor General Adam Bodnar to "review politically motivated prosecutorial proceedings in 2015–2023 and rehabilitate the victims." In response to the appeal, the Prosecutor General published an open letter in which he declared the establishment of special teams of prosecutors to review and analyze specific cases” - which is confirmed by the following articles:

Additionally - „On 30 September 2024, Members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) from 16 CoE Member States issued a Written Declaration urging the Polish government to conduct a full and transparent audit of politically motivated criminal cases from 2015–2023, listing Misiak’s case among other high-profile cases of allegedly persecuted entrepreneurs.” This is corroborated by the official Written Declaration on the PACE website:

PACE Written Declaration No. 737.

The proposed addition is supported by multiple high-quality, reliable sources, including reputable news outlets and official documents from government and international organizations (archived Ministry of Justice content and PACE declarations). Moreover this information provides context about Misiak’s legal situation, ensuring a more balanced perspective in the article. It neither promotes nor discredits Misiak but outlines verifiable facts relevant to his public biography. Thus, the addition aligns with Wikipedia’s BLP policy, ensuring that content about living individuals is factual, neutrally presented, and reliably sourced. The actions of NGOs, public figures, and international bodies regarding politically motivated cases are directly relevant to Misiak’s biography. These developments have been widely reported and are significant to his public life and career.

Taking above into consideration, I respectfully request the inclusion of the above-proposed addition to provide a factual and balanced account in accordance with Wikipedia’s guidelines and policies.

I appreciate your careful consideration of these changes. Mocca20 (talk) 11:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)— Mocca20 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Mocca20 You should mark new requests with {{Edit partially-blocked}}. I've done this for you. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you Mocca20 (talk) 13:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]