User talk:Cplakidas

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following:

Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed.
Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply.

I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.


Userpage	Talk page	E-mail	Articles	Sources	Sandbox	Awards

Archives

I (through 6/2007) • II (7/2007 – 2/2008) • III (3/2008 – 9/2008) • IV (10/2008 – 3/2009) • V (4/2009 – 8/2009) • VI (9/2009 – 1/2010) • VII (2/2010 – 5/2010) • VIII (6/2010 – 9/2010) • IX (10/2010 – 2/2011) • X (2/2011 – 7/2011) • XI (8/2011 – 6/2012) • XII (7/2012 – 12/2012) • XIII (1/2013 – 7/2013) • XIV (8/2013 – 12/2013) • XV (1/2014 – 6/2014)

Hi

Isn't 'voyvoda' the title of the vassal princes of Moldavia and Wallachia? The governor was called 'vali' in Ottoman times. elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 09:04, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. In Greece at least, voevoda was a common title for local governors (district or sub-province level) or rather the chief fiscal agents, especially for places with a degree of local autonomy where there was no "regular" governor. For Athens in particular, due to its status as a vakf under the Kizlar Agha, it was separate from the surrounding province, the Sanjak of Egriboz, so that the voevoda, who represented the Kizlar Agha, was the chief local Ottoman official (alongside the commander of the Acropolis garrison, the kadi, etc of course). Cheers, Constantine ✍ 09:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doukas family

Hello Cplakidas I see you deleted this coat of an article in Spanish . What was the coat of arms of Despotate of Epirus. A greetingKardam (talk) 06:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kardam! There was no specific coat of arms of Epirus, as far as anyone knows. And this particular coat of arms is not even that of the Doukas family, it is a far later attributed coat of arms, with no basis in actual Byzantine usage. Constantine ✍ 06:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA

Hi, any chance you could review Esbjerg for me? Caponer seems to have gone AWOL. Anything you want reviewed?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:36, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strange to say, I've never actually done a GA review before, but I'll do it. Expect a review tomorrow and during the weekend. You could review Chlemoutsi if you want, which is the only outstanding GA nom I have right now, but if it is not your cup of tea, no problem. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 11:12, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tis OK, I've asked Jaguar to review it, I only just saw your message here. Sure I'll review Chlemoutsi. Surprised you've never done a GA review before though!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:28, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, all right then. I've gone through the article a first time though, and found it pretty much OK (only a minor issue with duplicating the info on the Dansk Andels Smørpakkeri stood out). It was a nice read, and informative. As for my lack of GA reviews, I have informally reviewed articles for others, and done a few MILHIST ACRs and FAs, but I am rather uncomfortable with judging other people's work, and am all the more hesitant to do it for subjects where I don't have some knowledge myself so that I know what to look for. I see that in some of my own GA noms, where the reviewer may be experienced and thorough, but his obvious unfamiliarity with the subject practically leads to taking my word for it on whether it meets the comprehensiveness criteria. For subjects where I do have knowledge, I am sadly one of a handful of editors active in WP, so it almost never get to see a GA nom and say "I'd like to review/know what to review in this!". Anyhow, thanks for taking on Chlemoutsi, looking forward to your review! Constantine ✍ 10:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Chlemoutsi

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chlemoutsi you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 21:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Battle of Constantinople (1147)

On 6 July 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Constantinople (1147), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Byzantine emperor Manuel I deliberately provoked the German contingent of the Second Crusade into fighting a battle just to make them leave? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Constantinople (1147). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 11:33, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for nominating the article! Constantini tu vincas!Urselius (talk) 16:49, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but the kudos goes to you for creating it. It is a nice article, just right for a little DYK. As always, keep it up! Constantine ✍ 19:15, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a link

Hallo Constantine
I hope that you are still in sunny Greece and not in stormy mitteleuropa. I have a question about this link. This web site has been designed by a fellow countryman of you, who lives in beautiful Kastellorizo. We removed the link from the island`s article since it has lists of hotels, restaurants, phone numbers, and the like, but there is also quite a bit of interesting info. The creator of this web site has been very hurt because of the link`s removal (you can read his comments on the discussion page of the article). I wanted to know your opinion about this web site (especially the Greek version :-)) and, if positive, if you think if there is a way to leave the link in the article without hurting our guidelines. The fact is that I was three times there and I know that that island is really an outpost of Hellenism, and also a web site can mean a lot to the (few) Hellenes who live there: on the other side, a guideline is a guideline. Thanks and Guten Abend aus der regnerischen Schweiz :-) Alex2006 (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alex! Yes, I am still in sunny (although rather sweltering right now) Greece. I will pray that some sunshine finds its way to the bleak north, where the trouser-wearing barbarians dwell... ;-) As to the website, it is an interesting case and a pity that it falls victim of our guidelines, it is obviously a product of love and interest, but it is not indispensable either. There is a roundabout way of keeping the site in, if it is cited as a source in the article, but the article seems to be well-referenced as it is, and I am not sure that the site qualifies as a WP:RS. Ultimately it comes down to the judgement of the users involved in and knowledgeable about the article: if it is felt that the inclusion of the website is beneficial to the average reader's knowledge and understanding of the subject, i.e. that it covers aspects not yet covered or not possible to be covered in our article, and does so in a reasonably serious way, then I'd say ignore the rules and just keep it. The bar would have to be set rather high, however, as then we might also include the Kastellorizian Association of Victoria, etc. Constantine ✍ 18:28, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic! I didn't know that there is a guideline which order us to ignore all the others...But, as you say, in this case it would be hardly justified. Thanks!
P.S. Please pray a little bit harder: here we are all under wasser, people with leather trousers, Metics and also we poor Helots :-( Alex2006 (talk) 11:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Chlemoutsi

The article Chlemoutsi you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chlemoutsi for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 18:42, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vangjel Zhapa's Nationality is not an question in Albania ! He was born in Labovë e Kryqit , an place known to be inhabitated by Albanians ( Like the Zhapa family is ) and Aromanians or Vllahs ( Like the Meksi family is )

"Zhapa" is an Albanian word ( Meaning "Losse skin " ) and also a very common name in the rest of Albania He lived in Romania because that was one of the most popular migration place for Christian Albanians at the time ! But "Yes " , he is yours , he belongs to Greece as he never did anything about his homeland !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Engjell.mehmeti (talk • contribs) 12:29, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vangjel Zhapa's Nationality is not an question in Albania ! He was born in Labovë e Kryqit , an place known to be inhabitated by Albanians ( Like the Zhapa family is ) and Aromanians or Vllahs ( Like the Meksi family is )

"Zhapa" is an Albanian word ( Meaning "Losse skin " ) and also a very common name in the rest of Albania He lived in Romania because that was one of the most popular migration place for Christian Albanians at the time ! But "Yes " , he is yours , he belongs to Greece as he never did anything about his homeland !!

12:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)Engjell.mehmeti (talk)

Piacerino

Hallo Kostas, if you have time and lust in the next days, could you please have a read of this new article? I think that this guy, important for Italy and even more for Greece, deserved an article since years, and now that I lie in bed :-( I found the occasion to write it...Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 14:14, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With pleasure :). Interesting subject. If you are ill, I hope you get well soon. Περαστικά, as we say in Greece! Constantine ✍ 16:21, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kostas! What I would need here is a doctor with some diagnostic capacity. Swiss doctors have the best machinery in the world, but most of them are incapable to interpret the data that they get. I hope that in Austria the matter is different... :-) Alex2006 (talk) 18:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt

Hallo Kostas, I have a doubt: Philenes (as I found written in the article) or Phileni? The name should be Punic, but it comes from Sallustius (Bellum Jugurtinum) and there is spelled Philaeni. What is Philenes, the greek version or the english one? I would like to rename the article (I find "Marble arch" rather vague and also wrong, since the arch was plastered with Travertine) but if I don't find the real name of the brothers it is better to leave it as it is...Cheers Alex2006 (talk) 07:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea where Philenes comes from, that is the form I found in the article. If the original Latin term is Philaeni, I suppose that this is what we should use, not Philenes or Phileni. Constantine ✍ 07:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would also be for Philaeni, but I am always afraid that some yankee comes and tell me how pedantic I am (It would not be the first time..) Anyway, I looked at the sources, and mostly are military diaries of WWII. it can well be that these soldiers wrote the name as they understood it, trying to anglicize (or francisize) it... Thanks! Alex2006 (talk) 07:58, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I prefer generally the soundless job. Thank u vm Greco22 (talk) 17:28, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kolokotronis

It appears that the article is a target of an old account. I've informed [Bbb23] about the block evading user.Alexikoua (talk) 20:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I suspected something like this was up. Thanks for the heads up. Constantine ✍ 07:20, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help sources Gazaria

Hi, I'm doing a research. May you help me to find the sources of the "castles" in Georgia reported on this page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gazaria_(Genoese_colonies) Is the source a map? or a book? if you prefer also by email duke.ottavio@hotmail.it thank you! Matteo from Italy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.34.78.172 (talk) 00:10, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! While this is not my area of expertise and my involvement with this article is minimal, after a search I found a reference that could be useful: [1]. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 07:14, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book reviews: Jonas Vinther and Nick-D look at examples of electronic media
Op-ed: TomStar81 on the shot heard around the world

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Lykourgos Logothetis

Hi, I'm Noahk11. Cplakidas, thanks for creating Lykourgos Logothetis!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hello, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! The page you created (Lykourgos Logothetis), does not have any sources/references. Please add some or the page may be marked for deletion.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Noahk11 (talk) 19:49, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Noahk11:. Thank you for your notice, but a word of advice: please a) wait a while before tagging just-created articles to see if references are going to be added, as new articles are generally a work in progress, and b) it is generally considered bad manners to send bot messages of this kind to editors who have been around long enough to presumably know what they are doing. I don't doubt your sincere intentions, but after eight years on this site, it is a bit irritating to be addressed like a newbie who has never heard of references. In other words, if I don't for the moment add references, rest assured that I have good reasons for doing so. Please exercise more discretion in the future. Constantine ✍ 19:57, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Cplakidas:. Thank you, I understand your concern and irritation. Happy editing!

Battle of Myriokephalon

Hi Constantine,

There seems to be some interest in this article from a number of people pushing a Hungarian slant on things, also adding dubious flags and every sub-commander mentioned in the text into the info box. Plus there is an article called Palatine of Hungary, which is meaningless in the English language as 'palatine' is an adjective and needs a noun to refer to. It might be useful to keep an eye on developments. Urselius (talk) 07:45, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Megali Idea

I dont think that N.Epirus was annexed but anyway. If I put only the Zone of Smyrna is ok? It is indeed important and it ts different an annexation and the administration-dependency-protectorate or colony Greco22 (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

N. Epirus was fully annexed in 1914-16, and administered as two prefectures with MPs in Parliament. Smyrna was a special case, but really all these territories belong to the same category. Greece was not a colonial power, so the metropolis/colonical empire dichotomy does not apply. Smyrna was de facto annexed and would have been de jure after five years. Navboxes are not suited for subtle distinctions, they are for broad categories. Constantine ✍ 08:51, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tedisio Zaccaria

Hola Cplakidas, gracias por el comentario sobre el artículo Tedisio Zaccaria, aunque tengo una duda sobre este. En algunos otros artículos dicen que Tedisio era hermano de Benedetto I Zaccaria, pero en otros dicen que era su primo o habia dos Tedisio Zaccaria, por favor aclarame esta duda. A greetings. Kardam (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias para comencar el articulo, y por que no conocia que existe una duda. Si tengo tiempo, voy a echar un ojo a las fuentes relevantes. Constantine ✍ 16:56, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your expertise is needed

Hallo Constantine, could you please, if you have time and lust, give your opinion here about this question which arose because of the edit of an IP on the Phanariotes article? Ich bin mit meinem Rumänisch am Ende, :-) but you know for sure much more about the subject. Alex2006 (talk) 11:12, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Svetoslav invasion of Bulgaria

I've added the source, however your sources don't say anything about most of Bulgaria occupied let alone vassal status. Please, back your changes. Walker.D.Pace (talk) 23:00, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 7

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 7, June-July 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

Seven new donations, two expanded partnerships
TWL's Final Report up, read the summary
Adventures in Las Vegas, WikiConference USA, and updates from TWL coordinators
Spotlight: Blog post on BNA's impact on one editor's research

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Chlemoutsi

On 1 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chlemoutsi, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Chlemoutsi castle (pictured) from the early 1220s is perhaps the finest example of a fortification of the early period of Frankish rule in Greece? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chlemoutsi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OUP access

Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to Oxford University Press's humanities materials through the TWL partnership described at WP:OUP . You should have recieved a Wikipedia email from User:Nikkimaria several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:OUP/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 22:11, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are receiving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:OUP/Approved.[reply]

Old Great Bulgaria

Hi! The IP who tried to add his own dubious info to the Old Great Bulgaria -article is back and is (among other things) trying to change the start date to 165. As source he listed some russian (according to google translate) site[2] which says that some ancient source claims that bulgarians lived north of danube 515 years before they defeated the Byzantines in 680. And because substracting 515 from 680 is 165, Old Great Bulgaria somehow existed already in the 2nd century. The site and all this sounds kinda dubious to me so can you lend me a hand? Maybe write to Administrators noticeboard? Maybe even get the page protected? I don't know En-wiki policies very well and my english is probably not the best for it. I was not sure what to do and didn't know if any administrator was aware of it. So I decided to write to you. I hope that is okay. Thanks.--Barosaurus Lentus (talk) 08:45, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book reviews: Wrap-up of some recent external reviews
Interview: World War I editors
Op-ed: TomStar81 on the outbreak of World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Old "good" map game

Hi Constantine, hope you have a nice hot time there. It appears that an old issue has been raised from the tomb, i.e. the addition of 19th century ethnological maps of the Balkans in every article possible. The topic is active in Epirus and Northern Epirus. I've proposed the full removal of such maps, considering (apart from the pov they present) that the article concern just a tiny part of the Balkans, so they are also geographically not representative. Alternatively I've suggested the addition of 2 maps (each one representing the pov of each side) with the same caption.Alexikoua (talk) 13:52, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is and will be an endlessly recurring topic, but IMO the more extreme POV maps, Lejean and Gennadius, must go. They are rather ridiculous, with their sweeping claims in favour of one or the other ethnicity and with their complete absence of reliance on any serious on-the-ground demographic study. I'll keep an eye on the issue, so far it appears to be a single user's pet peeve. I'd also suggest contacting Future Perfect, if you have not already done so. Some form of indef semi-protection of the articles in question might be in order. Constantine ✍ 15:39, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Precious again

Arab–Byzantine wars
Thank you, user from "mostly harmless" Earth with oodles of languages, for quality articles on battles, from Dodecanese Campaign in 2007 to Sack of Amorium of the Arab–Byzantine wars today, and for your service in categories and sensible page moves, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 580th recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:12, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kontoskalion

Hallo Constantine, thank for the review! Did you notice that in your map of the City the harbours are two? Where it comes from the info, Van Millingen? I followed Müller-Wiener, who was a specialist (he wrote also a book dedicated to the ports of Constantinople) and writes that Julian harbour and Kontoskalion are the same thing. I think that Janin, when he wrote about the harbours was under Raki influence :-), since he mentions 5 different harbours, partly with the same name, and in the last page confesses that he does not understand what`s going on...Well, as long as my wife remains at Hagios Stephanos :-) I will have access to the computer, so there is hope that I can write some other article! Cheers from the Helvetia Felix. Alex2006 (talk) 17:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my pleasure, as always, splendid work! Yes, I noticed the discrepancy, and will have to look it up further. My version 2.0 of the map has been left standing for some time now, perhaps this will be an impetus for restarting it. Take care, be well, and write more articles! Cheers from Achaea not-so-felix! Constantine ✍ 10:43, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I manage to reach it, I will go to the ZB and borrow the Häfen of Müller-Wiener...Maybe on that work there is something more. Why not-so-felix? I read that the crisis is over in Greece, and that the economy is booming. I came to the conclusion that the only hope for Italy is a "Greek" solution, with the troika imposing what we should do. Otherwise, the lobbies are too strong, they are blocking every attempt of reform.

BTW, at end of November I will stay for a week in the capital of Austria Felix (insch'Allah) :-) If you will be there we can have a schnitzel or a Sacher together (if you won't already be allergic to them at that time)... Gyros in Athen would have been better and healthier, but we cannot have all. :-) Cheers aus dem herbstlichen Zürich Alex2006 (talk) 11:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the state of the economy is best summarized thus: there is light at the end of the tunnel, but the light is that of the express train rushing onto us. To more pleasant issues, kudos on one more article, and I am very happy to hear that you'll come to Vienna! We'll definitely arrange to meet, and we can combine both a Schnitzel and a Sachertorte! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 11:12, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So, same story as in Italy, with the (huge) difference that we didn't do the Hausaufgaben yet...:-) Thanks, I am looking forward to the Sacherschitzel :-) together! Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 11:36, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A question about the Sasanian civil war of 589-590

Hello there, its been some time since we wrote to each other :). I have question about the Sasanian civil war of 589-590; do you think the fall of Bahram Chobin to Khosrau II and the Byzantines should be included as a part of the civil war? which thus would make the civil war end in 591. --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 21:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Indeed, I hope you are well! On the article, I think the best way would be to cover it comprehensively, from Bahram's revolt to his downfall. Accordingly, I am against the name change: the whole issue was precisely the revolt and usurpation of Bahram Chobin, and I think that this is the more common way of referring to this event. The new name is unnecessarily obfuscating. Constantine ✍ 10:50, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A bit late reply here; Well, didn't the rebellion of Bahram technically end when he usurped the throne in 590? --Mossadegh-e Mihan-dust (talk) 12:37, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Christos Manolas

You may prefer to use this photo: File:Major General Christos Manolas.jpg It is a portrait of General Manolas extracted from the MFA original. SV1XV (talk) 14:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also see EXIF for possible copyright problem with this photo, I have just noticed it. SV1XV (talk) 18:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantine conquest of Bulgaria ‎

Hi Kostas. FYI, two brand new accounts are move-warring on this article. Best. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 13:33, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hallo Constantine, thanks for the Barnstar, I really appreciated it! I did not know that you are also architect, you are really a polymath... :-) I see that you started your Schnitzel-Sacher training, I envy you! Greetings from Rösti-land, und bis bald (Insch'Allah :-) ) Alex2006 (talk) 06:37, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Byzantine dromon reconstruction.png

Thanks for uploading File:Byzantine dromon reconstruction.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 10:22, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've disputed this.Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 16:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Sardinia

Dear Sir, you are right, but this banner is not a personal one, but the banner of the (Eastern) Roman Empire. It was tha banner of the State, not of the Basileus, the emperor. As the banner is still in use in Amalfi (Italy) as the symbol of the Duchy of Amalfi, semi-indipendent state of the 8th and 9th century), vassal of the Roman Empire, and as it is regarded to the times of Emperor Rangabe, we can resonably states that it was in use in all Byzantine world untile the latin conquest of Costantinople. Anyway, the Greek Cross is spread everywhere in sardinian byzantine period art and architecture. Sincerely Mauro Podda — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.13.16.218 (talk) 11:56, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, sorry, but no. This was not a state banner, imperial banner or anything of the sort. This is a later, Western European invented set of arms (see attributed arms), which has little to do with actual Byzantine usage. Please see Talk:Byzantine flags and insignia for a discussion, and the actual article for actual Byzantine insignia and heraldry, in so far as it existed. Constantine ✍ 16:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry again Sir, ok, no Rangabe, no byzantine empire, but sure Duchy of Amalfi (and in the actual coat of Arms of the city)and everywhere in Sardinia. The Duchy of Amalfi was a semi-independent State, born after the Langobards conquest of Italy and for weakness of Roman rule in southern Italy. It was a Roman State, not a Roman-Germanic State and so was Sardinia. Sardinian Arcont was προτοσπαθαριου of Constantine VII. 2+2=4 but no matter. You retain Byzantine history, I retain Sardinian and Italian history. Peace & love. Mauro — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.15.78.89 (talk) 21:51, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstand. It is not a matter of turf wars over Byzantium or Sardinia, it is a matter of historical accuracy. You simply cannot claim that an image, which is in itself ahistorical, first represents the Byzantine Empire and then Sardinia. This is simply dishonest, violates WP:VERIFY and does a disservice to our aim of being a serious encyclopedia. Constantine ✍ 08:42, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not here to make wars !!! You claim that image is in itself ahistorical, so we can states that the flag of Amalfi and of its Duchy is ahistorical, that's absurd. I remember you that the Duchy od Amalfi was fully integrated in Byzantine οἰκουμένη and it never was part of the Western empire in high middle age until norman conquest in the 11th century. Your accuse is ridiculous, so ridiculous that the Amalfi flag is inserted in today flag of the Italian navy. You evidently know nothing about Italian and Sardinian history, and you will justify your offenses on allegations of dishonesty. That's not an acceptable wiki behavior. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.15.78.89 (talk) 06:11, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say anything about Amalfi. I am not disputing the fact that Amalfi used a very similar design, but a) this was the case much later in the Middle Ages, b) this design ou insist on inclusding bears only a passing resemblance, c) it is supposed to depict something much much earlier and thoroughly unrelated (the family arms of the Rhangabe), d) this discussion is about Sardinia, not Amalfi, and e) there is no evidence of a link between the two, which is only natural as the image is a post-fact attributed arms. In short, you propose to use an image that is inherently ahistorical, unrelated to the area and subject in question, simply by changing the description to make it represent something it is not. If that is not intellectual dishonesty, then I don't know what it is. Constantine ✍ 07:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, dear Sir Constantine, what do you know about Sardinian history? Do you even know where is Sardinia? Did you study art and architecture history of Sardinia? Did you read the references I mentioned? No ?? Now, perhaps I'm intellectual dishonest, but you simply are ignorant. I am not an expert of byzantine heraldry (even if I found difficult to believe that eastern roman empire had no banner between the 8th and the 13th century, as you wrote), but I know the symbols of middle ages Sardinia. You do not, I presume. Mauro — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robur.q (talk • contribs) 14:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly know where Sardinia is and I certainly know what the arms of Amalfi look like. I also certainly know more than you about Byzantine heraldry, and it is very probable you know more than I do about medieval Sardinia. What I don't know is where the "references you mentioned" were mentioned. Because all I can see is you making suppositions without any shred of actual textual or pictorial evidence, other than the similarity of two images, one of which is not even historical, and the other having nothing to do with Sardinia either way. If you cannot see that this is wrong, there is no reason to continue talking. Give me a serious, reliable source that shows this particular design as being in use in Sardinia in this period and I will gladly accept you are right. I seriously doubt you will though. Constantine ✍ 20:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Byzantine dromon reconstruction.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Byzantine dromon reconstruction.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:17, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi Constantine, there is a guy that removes titles from Panathinaikos A.O. article How I can refer him? Thanks Greco22 (talk) 14:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Co-ordinator election

G'day, Constantine, not sure if you are keen, but have you thought about running in the Milhist co-ordinator election this year? We need a few more bodies in the line if we are going to complete our frontage this year, and with your experience I think you would be a good candidate, particularly as you have fulfilled the role before. Nominations close at the end of 14 September, so if you are keen you would need to nominate soon. The nomination page is here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2014. Cheers and have a great weekend. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@AustralianRupert: Thanks for the offer, but I've just begun a PhD and am so busy I haven't had time to keep up even with my own pet projects (or check my talk page, sorry for the late reply) hereabouts bar the occasional copyedit. This year will be rather hectic, so I'd be an absentee coord at best, and there are plenty eager members of the MilHist project who can make more of a contribution. Constantine ✍ 07:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, good luck with the PhD! Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Constantine ✍ 08:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aristeidis Metallinos

Hi. The academic concerned - Ευρυδίκη Αντζουλάτου-Ρετσίλα - has just emailed me and says that she uses 'Eurydice' in her English translated name. I thought I was correct using the first name to which you have reverted. What do you think? Simon Baddeley (talk) 09:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If she has a preferred form, then that of course overrides the transliteration. I've reverted my revert ;). Cheers, Constantine ✍ 10:03, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CII, September 2014

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at the military history of Austria-Hungary
Timeleine: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Cplakidas. Thanks for helping me with my articles. But I have a question Corinth was a Barony or Lordship in the Principality of Achaea. Is only a question. A greetings Kardam (talk) 06:02, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, my pleasure! Corinth was neither, as it was within the princely domain (the Prince's own lands). It was held for the Prince by a castellan on the Acrocorinth, but he was status-wise more of a public official than a feudal lord. It became a distinct lordship only under Nerio I Acciaioli. Constantine ✍ 07:28, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Battle of Halmyros

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Halmyros you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 00:40, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Battle of Halmyros

The article Battle of Halmyros you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of Halmyros for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 16:00, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Battle of Halmyros

The article Battle of Halmyros you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Halmyros for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 22:02, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for your exceptional editorial efforts. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Epipelagic submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

User Cplakidas, aka Constantine, is an exceptionally prolific creator of high quality content who does not indulge in drama for drama's sake. Cplakidas contributes particularly to articles related to the history of the Mediterranean region during the classical and post classical eras. He has made over 110,000 edits since 2005, produced 5 featured articles and 200 DYKs, and contributed to nearly 100 good or A-class articles.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}

Cplakidas

A Storm on a Mediterranean Coast

Editor of the Week
for the week beginning September 28, 2014

An exceptionally prolific creator of high quality content who does not indulge in drama for drama's sake.

Recognized for

contributing to articles related to the history of the Mediterranean region during the classical and post classical eras.

Notable work(s)

Over 110,000 edits since 2005, produced 5 featured articles and 200 DYKs, and contributed to nearly 100 good or A-class articles.

Nomination page

Thanks again for your efforts! ```Buster Seven Talk 00:11, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I am sorry if I'm disturbing Wikipedia. I won't do it again.Shqiperia1234567 (talk) 16:22, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Zoste patrikia

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Zoste patrikia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 23:01, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Zoste patrikia

The article Zoste patrikia you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Zoste patrikia for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 00:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Komnenos (governor of Dyrrhachium)

Hello Constantine, do you have information about the obvious chronological inconsistency concerning the dating of John's plot: spring 1091 (your article) or spring 1094 (PBW)? Perhaps confusion with plot of Nikephoros Diogenes? --SJuergen (talk) 10:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! It apparently depends on varying interpretations of the text by modern scholars. Skoulatos has a note (p. 136, note 4) in this regard: "Chalandon places this event (the conspiracy) soon after the arrival of John at Dyrrhachium, i.e. in 1091. Gautier disputes this date and proposes 1093/94. But Anna Komnene places clearly the event soon after the nomination of John as duke". I don't know if the debate has been carried further by more recent scholarship, but this view indeed seems to be confirmed by the placement of the event within the Alexiad's narrative, i.e. at about the same time as the Battle of Levounion and the expedition against Constantine Bodin. Constantine ✍ 12:01, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Battle of Halmyros

On 6 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Halmyros, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in the Battle of Halmyros, the Catalan Company annihilated much of the nobility of Frankish Greece and conquered the Duchy of Athens? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Halmyros. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 8

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 8, August-September2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

TWL now a Wikimedia Foundation program, moves on from grant status
Four new donations, including large DeGruyter parntership, pilot with Elsevier
New TWL coordinators, Wikimania news, new library platform discussions, Wiki Loves Libraries update, and more
Spotlight: "Traveling Through History" - an editor talks about his experiences with a TWL newspaper archive, Newspapers.com

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Count of Cephalonia

Hi Cplakidas, I have a question, about two Matthew Orsini, or existed only one. In the German version there two [[{{{1}}}]] [] and [[{{{1}}}]] [], and the second is the father of Richard I Orsini, but in other versions is the first. Can you please help me with this doubt. Greetings Kardam (talk) 15:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kardam! No, this is yet another case where Karl Hopf hypothesized multiple people of the same name. Modern historiography considers that there was a single Matthew Orsini, the father of Richard. In these issues, better follow either the French or the English Wikipedias, the articles and the sources they use are more up-to-date. Constantine ✍ 16:39, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. A greetings Kardam (talk) 16:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hallo Constantine
if you have time and lust, can you please give your opinion about the relevance of some information in the Roman Italy article? You find a thread on the talk page. I know, at that time there were no Byzantines yet there, but I think that you should have an idea about that period... :-) Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 18:57, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help with sources in Greek

Hi, I am need of some help with Greek texts introduced by a POV warrior to a number of Bulgaria-related articles. I would really appreciate some help in dealing with the matter. Take the article about Todor Panitsa, for example. The editor introduced a number of Greek sources, which I have no way of verifying or even reading. Are they reliable sources? Do they support the claims made by the editor? I genuinely have no idea. If you have the time, could you look at them? I would appreciate any input on the matter. Thanks in advance.--Laveol ^T 07:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Laveol! The author of the book cited is a very interesting figure: Eleftherios Stavridis was General Secretary of the KKE, and was among those who pioneered SEKE's transformation into the KKE, but he later went through an ideological volte-face and became a far-right activist, founding the fascist 3E group. In the occupation he collaborated with the Germans and in the post-war years he was a well-known anti-communist propagandist. On the basis of his career alone, his book is not a reliable source per se: it is not only a primary source (a memoir of sorts, coupled with a "revealing" expose of the "dark machinations" of the KKE), but also 200% biased on account of his own experiences and the time it was written in (full-scale anti-communist witch-hunt in post-Civil War Greece). While the individual facts contained therein may be true to an extent, it is certain that they have been spinned to suit the writer's POV. Therefore I would not use it but sparingly, and then only where complemented/corroborated by a critical commentary by another, third-party source. Constantine ✍ 07:53, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You've been of great help. I had the feeling that this would be the case, but had to give it a chance nevertheless. Thanks again. --Laveol ^T 08:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Featured Article: Notification

This is to inform you that Byzantine civil war of 1341–47, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 26 October 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 16:45, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Orphanotrophos

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Orphanotrophos you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 21:22, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book review: Nick-D on Britain in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars
Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions about a newly created map

Hallo Constantine! The Ohi anniversary is approaching, so I've thought it might be a good idea to create a map on the military developments. Suggestions are appreciated.

Hello Alexi, this is a great idea! I have been intending for years to do it, but never got around to it. There are some aesthetic issues which I will probably change myself if you don't mind, otherwise I've got a couple of suggestions:

I'd suggest adding the initial maximum Italian penetration into Greek territory (ca. 10 November), because that was the starting point of the counter-offensive
The "Axis" in "Axis Italy" is really unnecessary, there was only one Italy at the time
I'd also suggest adding the order of battle of the major Italian units as of Dec. 1940 as well, if you have that information
related to the above, perhaps an arrow indicating the location of the Italian spring offensive as well

If you want to give me a few days to look up my sources too, I may come up with a few more suggestions. Either way, well done! Constantine ✍ 20:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips Constantine. I have access to the necessary info (about the Italian positions too) & I'm going to work on them soon. Off course fell free to work on the map too (not only on aesthetical issues).Alexikoua (talk)

By the way & since we are on topic, an issue is raised about the WWII period in Albania. Talk:Albania#Regarding_the_term_occupation here.Alexikoua (talk) 18:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I feel I'm ok with the map improvemnts.Alexikoua (talk) 15:01, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the other map about the initial Italian invasion based on the same backround.Alexikoua (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great work! Sorry I couldn't be of help thus far, I tried to begin working on the first map but didn't have time, and then I left it be. I'll try to find some time over Christmas to polish both a bit. Constantine ✍ 14:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIII, October 2014, Redux

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book reviews: Nick-D on Britain in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars
Timeline: This month in World War I

NOTE: This replaces the earlier October 2014 Bugle message, which had incorrect links -- please ignore/delete the previous message. Thank uou!

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Medieval Thessaly

Hi Cplakidas, there is an article in the Polish Wikipedia called Tesalia Angelosów. In English would be translated Thessaly under the Angelos dynasty or Medieval rulers of Thessaly or Despotate of Thessaly. I would like create, but would like to know your opinion if there was a medieval state in Thessaly, and what was his name. A greetings Kardam (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there was a state, ruled by a cadet branch of the Komnenoi-Doukai of Epirus (called Angeloi in earlier literature, thence the Polish name), but its history is a bit complicated (it was always dependent on one of its larger neighbours), and there is no real term that can be used for it like "Despotate of X". Medieval Thessaly, which is currently a redirect to a section of the History of Thessaly article, is about the best term you could use, but it is of course far broader in scope than just the hundred or so years of Komnenoi-Doukai rule. From what I can see, Tesalia Angelosów pretty much replicates the same thing, only with far less detail, and with an inaccurate name (since it includes all late medieval rulers of the region, not just the Komnenoi-Doukai/Angeloi). For now I would leave it be. Constantine ✍ 17:38, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Cplakidas. So I will not edit, because it would be a confusion. A Greeting Kardam (talk) 23:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have a created two articles, Family of Verona and Marulla of Verona, I thought naming da Verona instead of of Verona. I would like to know your opinion, because you have more experience. A Greeting Kardam (talk) 23:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yamaks and Martoloses

Hi,

I created an article about Yamaks. It seems to me that it is important and interesting Ottoman-related topics, so additional pair of eyes would not hurt. All the best. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are Martoloses = Armatoloi?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Antidiskriminator. To your question, yes it is one of the anglicized forms of the name. I'll throw a look on the article and on my sources during the weekend and see what I can add. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 17:40, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that sh.wiki have different articles for Martoloses and Armatoloi. Their interwikilinks are different.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:38, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interwikis are irrelevant, the synchronization between the various versions of WP is not perfect, it happens rather often that the same subject is covered by two different iw groups. Odd what the Serbo-Croat WP has there, the two articles should be merged. Constantine ✍ 19:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:52, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Antidiskriminator, I had a look on the topic of the yamaks. I couldn't find much material except for scattered references here and there, but there is one thing you might consider adding, namely their role in the fall of Selim III and the end of his reforms. Constantine ✍ 10:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Al-Jarrah ibn Abdallah

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Al-Jarrah ibn Abdallah you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:00, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Orphanotrophos

The article Orphanotrophos you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Orphanotrophos for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 23:02, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Son of Michael II Komnenos Doukas

Hi, Constantine! Could yuo please help me with something? In your opinion, is there any reason to supose that a "Michael Doukas Komnenos Koutroules", cited as a son of Michael II Komnenos Doukas and Theodora Petraliphaina in Nikephoros II Orsini (and also in Ana Terter and Andronikos Palaiologos Angelos) is the same "Demetrios (renamed Michael) Komnenos Doukas" in Michael's article or is it just another genealogical fantasy? Thank you! José Luiz ^talk 23:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello José Luiz! Long time no see! Yes, it is. I'll set up an article on him ASAP. Constantine ✍ 19:57, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 20:33, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Thank you! José Luiz ^talk 20:50, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Purposeful misinformation on the Orban page

Hi - I noticed by chance that earlier this month a user from Malaysia decided to use a modified version of the script of the Fetih 1453 movie to alter the text of the Orban article. He continued with some minor changes and someone else just did another grammar change. The modifications are both unsubstantiated and ridiculous (both in terms of the language used and the obvious ideological angle). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orban&diff=629385234&oldid=621348395 I would fix it myself but I have no time to keep up with what I expect will become an edit war on WP (plus have had in the past enough experience with Fut.Perf. and his gang that I've got little interest in getting involved with that crowd again once higher powers :-) get involved in the resulting edit war). I am hoping you can help since I am already seeing people outside of WP cite the article (which is how I noticed it).

Thanks, Constantinos Ce107 (talk) 05:43, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ce107. Thanks for the pointer. This has been taken care of by another user, but I will keep my eye on it. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 11:03, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Orphanotrophos

The article Orphanotrophos you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Orphanotrophos for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jonas Vinther -- Jonas Vinther (talk) 13:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Cplakidas...

The article you started (and that I worked on) was nominated for Article of the Day - Good Work... :) Dinkytown talk 07:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks to you too. It's a nice thing to see, is it not? Constantine ✍ 10:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is. I thought "Hey, I know that page!" Too bad the Byzantines didn't reap the rewards... :( Take care... Dinkytown talk 18:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Cplakidas:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– JudeccaXIII (talk) 18:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Greetings from Animasyros

Hi Constantine,

i' sending you from Greece, and i would like to have a look and help me with the completion of the "Animasyros" page, i've started today. Probably there's something wrong with the all procedure made by me. I guess there is a problem with the title of my article "Animasyros". I would be grateful if gou assist me with your pro skills on Wikipedia.

Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fotismar (talk • contribs) 22:00, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Antioch on the Meander

Hola Cplakidas encontre un imagen, pero no se si es sobre esta batalla http://www.istorikathemata.com/2012/03/blog-post_26.html, lo iba a subir pero desconozco el autor, aunque creo que es Jorge Acropolita. Un saludo Kardam (talk) 09:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hola Kardam! Este imagen no tiene relacion con aquella batalla, es del romance de Alejandro Magno en una version griega del siglo XIV (ver aqui). Sin embargo, puedes usarlo como imagen generica. Saludos, Constantine ✍ 09:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias Cplakidas por la aclaración. Un saludo Kardam (talk) 05:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! and a question about GLQ ...

Wow! My first Barnstar. It is greatly appreciated. Thank you!

And while I'm here, I wonder if I could ask you for some advice? I'm a bit uneasy about the growing length of the Greek Language Question article. I was going to outline my concerns here, but then realised a more appropriate place might be the talk page of the article. So if you have time, perhaps you could take a look at Talk:Greek_language_question#Is GLQ too long?

Many thanks again,

SteepLearningCurve (talk) 13:53, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Al-Jarrah ibn Abdallah

The article Al-Jarrah ibn Abdallah you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Al-Jarrah ibn Abdallah for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Cutzinas

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cutzinas you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Death date of John Komnenos Vatatzes

Hi Constantine, something doesn't fit here. Greets --SJuergen (talk) 20:52, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Andronikos Kontostephanos

Hi Constantine,

You have a found a fund of detail from Varzos, but I think that it is necessary to keep the citation level of English language references high in all sections, even if they describe matters in much less detail. This for the simple reason that a Greek language publication would not be accessible to a large proportion of readers. Cheers Urselius (talk) 15:44, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Urselius! Generally, you have a point, but it depends on the individual case. In other words, when there are equivalent English sources, then of course you are right, but the fact is that Varzos is the chief biographical study on the Komnenoi, and if you check English studies on the period, they all reference him (e.g. Magdalino in his own seminal work on Manuel I). So it makes sense to rely directly on Varzos (who of course draws about 80% of his stuff from Choniates and Kinnamos, but crucially complements this with other primary sources and modern critical studies) and add English sources for more specific details or context that Varzos may be lacking. That at least is my intention and practice in all articles where I make use of any non-English source. If I gave precedence to English-language sources, then a host of articles would never get written at all, because the chief sources are in German or French. Simply put, if there is a choice between having to use four or five English sources who make scattered references on a subject in order to compose a coherent narrative, with all the dangers of inaccuracies, WP:OR and WP:SYNTH (remember, I am not a trained historian) lurking in such a course, when a dedicated non-English source provides it in one go, then of course I'll prefer to rely on the latter. Varzos' work is very well-written and referenced, I have yet to find any major error except for some issues of competing chronologies (but even here he is consistent with himself in his usage of one set of dates over another) or stuff that was not known at the time he wrote his study. He mentions alternative views, has excellent notes, and is super-comprehensive in the info he provides (even laudatory poems or the inscriptions of seals). On verification, yes, it is unfortunate, but is it really important? No. If I can claim AGF on the part of readers for an English source that is offline and inaccessible to anyone who does not have a university library card or owns a hard copy, I certainly won't concern myself too much with a source that is publicly available. Anyone who is interested for more or mistrustful of my references is welcome to check up on Google Translate or learn Greek ;). Constantine ✍ 16:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was not suggesting that any detail must be backed up by English language sources, just that any major event, such as the Siege of Damietta, Battle of Sirmium etc., which do have English language sources, should have at least one such reference included alongside Varzos. I don't see much latitude for WP:OR and WP:SYNTH in this type of approach. I did once read Chalandon's Les Comnenes because the English language histories available were poor. Urselius (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. You are right, of course, but this is what I said above: I try to create the bulk the article from my main source, and then I look to see if I can find additional references. Since Varzos provides a very complete narrative, it has not yet been necessary to search too much elsewhere. After I finish incorporating him in the article, I do intend to see what English sources I can find for the individual episodes, although, between us, Heath simply had to go, and Finlay, although great for his time, is also not the best source, so he too will be eliminated. The areas I have already added stuff in are mostly done Varzos-wise, so if you want, feel free to add anything from English sources you have. Constantine ✍ 17:30, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The pity is that narrative history is no longer written, or almost no longer written, and in modern histories the 'thematic approach' often leads to the loss of both detail and anecdote. I'm unashamedly fond of Finlay and Runciman, though you have to read them with a firm intention to ignore their socio-economic and moral analysis. As for military investigations, they are few on the ground. The overtly academic books almost delight in ignoring operational and especially equipment detail (Birkenmeier/Haldon), whilst those works that do address these themes are unashamedly populist (Osprey - though I would defend Timothy Dawson's academic credentials, which are as good as any). Incidentally, I have made my first foray into Arab/Turk biography with Gökböri. Urselius (talk) 18:07, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you almost 100%. I love Finlay, Runciman, and even Gibbon as narrators, but unfortunately as sources they are outdated (Runciman not so much, the others definitely so). Heck, my love with Byzantine history began with Norwich, so I definitely appreciate that a more florid literary style has its advantages over dry technicalities ;). Osprey has some good works, and many of its latest books (especially the larger formats, like Campaign) are quite up to scratch, plus there is info one cannot find anywhere else, but the older books are very, very dated in style, content, or POV. On Gökböri, great, there's one more area where lots of work needs to be done! I'll check the article over the next few days. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 19:02, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Damarchus

I see that you recently stumbled across the Damarchus article. I wanted to thank you for your recent edit and also make a slightly cheeky request of you. Having looked at the article, and taken the time to improve it, I assume it is of at least some interest to you. Therefore I thought you might be willing to review it for the purpose of it becoming good article. The nomination can be found at WP:GAN#MYTH. You'll know, having seen it, that it's very small so it shouldn't be quite as much work as a normal review. I'd be very grateful if you'd consider the request but completely understand if you'd rather spend your time elsewhere. Nyctimene (talk) 15:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nyctimene! The article is nice, but mythology is not really my area of expertise. My two cents regarding it, which I am sure will come up at GA as well: while there is theoretically no lower size limit, I feel the article is too short and "bare bones" to become a GA. Are you sure you have exhausted the topic? I would not attempt a GA nomination until I was reasonably sure that I had covered the subject pretty comprehensively, and that means going beyond the bare facts that are already in the article to impact, interpretation, etc. You might consider a) adding a bit more context, e.g. on lycanthropy in Greek mythology, for the uninitiated reader, b) any other literary references, not necessarily by ancient authors, and c) any modern scholarly sources discussing the subject, if they exist. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 16:19, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cplakidas! Thanks for all your advice, I'll try my best to take it on board when I take another crack at the article tonight. If I can ever do you a favour in return please don't hesitate to ask! Nyctimene (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman capture of Adrianople

Hi Cplakidas. Can you share any article of Zachariadou about the Ottoman capture of Adrianople? I would use it to improve the article in Turkish Wikipedia. Any other reliable sources would be useful too. Have a nice day.--Rapsar (talk) 19:15, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rapsar! The ideal thing would be to write a proper article on the conquest in the English WP, but I unfortunately haven't got the time for it. However I can send you the material I have if you want, so please send me an email address you use so that I can do it. And of course you are welcome to edit on the English article as well, because otherwise no-one will :(. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 21:13, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help :) My English is not good enough to write a proper article, so it is better to stay away :) I also found this thesis, it contains some information about the conquest. Not detailed as İnalcık's article, but can be useful to see other historians' opinions.--Rapsar (talk) 21:58, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added more information to the article in Turkish Wikipedia, but they are not detailed as İnalcık's opinions. It needs more information from Zachariadou to be neutral.--Rapsar (talk) 11:10, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (November 2014)

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
- English signup
- Deutsch signup
Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

DYK for Orphanotrophos

On 6 November 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Orphanotrophos, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in the Byzantine Empire, the office of orphanotrophos, head of the imperial orphanage, ranked among the higher offices of state? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Orphanotrophos. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:04, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish sources

Hi Cplakidas. If you need any Turkish sources to use, I'll do my best to help you :)--Rapsar (talk) 19:44, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Theodore Doukas in the Battle of Pelagonia

Hi Cplakidas, who was Theodore Doukas. He is mentioned as the brother of Michael II Komnenos Doukas, but he is not mentioned as a child of Michael I Komnenos Doukas or it is a confusion with Theodore Komnenos Doukas. I think this article should be created because their contribution was decisive in the battle. A greeting --Kardam (talk) 05:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kardam! This "Theodore Doukas" was probably the result of a very weird mix-up of numerous different people, chiefly deceived, I think, by the very inaccurate account in the Chronicle of the Morea, where "Theodore Doukas" is the name given to John I the Bastard, and where he indeed is the Nicaean commander. Once more this shows that one should use primary sources only with the greatest caution, unlike what the Greek equivalent has done here and elsewhere. I've added/corrected the info in the article, I may work further on it in the next few days. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 13:04, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greek fire

Okay you win. What isn't already on the article? Come on I wanna add stuff to it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.186.229.189 (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It's not about "winning" and "losing". You are more than welcome to help Wikipedia with your contributions, but to do this you need to read books, articles or other studies, research a subject properly, and then add whatever may be missing. Just browsing the web and quoting websites is not research. The article on Greek fire is quite complete, because I spent considerable time researching and writing it a few years back, but there still is stuff you could add, for instance on use of liquid fire analogues in the Muslim world. However, getting involved in an already well-developed article is tricky, as you have found out. Alternatively, there are literally hundreds of thousands of articles that are stubs, which you can write practically from scratch. As a new user, I'd suggest beginning there. Constantine ✍ 20:44, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"read books, articles or other studies, research a subject properly" now that's just rude. I did that though, with my reference to Andrew Marr's A History of the World, don't tell me he's not a proper historian because he's a journalist, his book was written not just by him but others too to accompany his documentary, A History of the World, and I have read books about it. Why did you take the Marr reference off? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.186.229.189 (talk) 17:12, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did not mean to be rude, but it is a plain fact that reliable sources are usually printed specialist works, not websites, nor generic popular history books. As for removing your material, I have already explained it: a) it was redundant to what was already in the article and b) it was (mostly) badly sourced. Even if you use Britannica, when it really has nothing substantial to add to the present article, then it is redundant. Just adding tidbits for the sake of adding something is worse than pointless, it is harmful as it clutters the article. And adding sub-par sources is also harmful, as it detracts from its quality. Don't take my criticism too hard. If you want to contribute, there are a million ways to do so. Constantine ✍ 17:58, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

River of Stars

Hi, you've categorized the article River of Stars within Category:Novels set in Ancient China, but it was an error. Ancient China was set between Xia dynasty (c. 2100 – c. 1600 BC) to Warring States period (476–221 BC). The setting of the novel is set within the Song dynasty, which was set within the periods of Imperial China. I have corrected it by adding Category:Novels set in the Song dynasty and Category:Novels set in the Jin dynasty (1115–1234). Next time, please refer to History of China to figure out which period to categorize an article related to China.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 09:19, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Nazi Germany's Eastern Front allies
Op-ed: TomStar81 on the origins and legacy of trench warfare
Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

News

Hallo Constantine, there is mail for you. :-) Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 12:38, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alex! Great news! I've replied via mail as well :) Constantine ✍ 12:56, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Cutzinas

The article Cutzinas you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cutzinas for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kostas

He is never credited by his full name, only ever as Kostas (example: [3]). I moved the page again to "Kostas (songwriter)" because of this. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:35, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools)

On 3 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that according to one source, John Komnenos was offered the crown of the Byzantine Empire after the abdication of his brother, Isaac I Komnenos, but refused? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

More from the great DYK project. Thanks for your help and support. Victuallers (talk) 19:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of John Doukas (sebastokrator)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Doukas (sebastokrator) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3family6 -- 3family6 (talk) 17:21, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3family6 -- 3family6 (talk) 17:23, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Graitzas Palaiologos

Hello Cplakidas this website has some really about http://acwfanon.wikia.com/wiki/Graitzas_Palaiologos. A greetings Kardam (talk) 06:07, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, Kardam, you realize this is half history and half Assassin's Creed fan-fiction, do you not? Please do not trust whatever you may find randomly on the internet as accurate information, even if it partially is correct, there are bound to be errors, omissions and original views. Constantine ✍ 06:11, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Thanks for the clarification. Kardam (talk) 06:14, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bagrat II Bagratuni

On 6 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bagrat II Bagratuni, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Bagrat II Bagratuni, prince of princes of Arab-ruled Armenia, led a revolt against the Abbasid Caliphate from 849 until his treacherous capture and transfer to Samarra in 851? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bagrat II Bagratuni. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:02, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history Wikiproject's Historian and Newcomer of the Year Awards are now open!

The Military history Wikiproject has opened nominations for the Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year. Nominations will be accepted until 13 December at 23:59 GMT, with voting to begin at 0:00 GMT 14 December. The voting will conclude on 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Mistake

My mistake, yes it was a repetition. Smart Nomad (talk) 22:48, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greek presidential elections

Hello Cplakidas. Thanks for creating the articles on presidential elections in Greece. Just one bit of advice – the template set that includes {{Greek elections}} covers direct elections only. When there are series of indirect elections, they have a separate template (see e.g. {{Albanian presidential elections}}, {{Moldovan presidential elections}}, {{German presidential elections}} etc). As a result, I've created {{Greek presidential elections}} and added it to the articles. Cheers, Number 5 7 22:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the clarification. Constantine ✍ 23:14, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantine Saints category - Vandalism

Hi Constantine. Just an FYI...There is a user (User:Roltz) who has gone through all of the articles with the "Category:Byzantine Saints" - a very high number of articles, and he has removed this category comepletely, and added instead the category "Byzantine Roman Catholic Saints". I am going through the articles slowly and re-adding "Byzantine Saints". This is vandalism in my view. The Byzantine Saints category was almost completely empty when I viewed it, but I am slowly reverting the numerous edits he has done. Salut, ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 18:46, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note, he has also gone through the "Category:Spanish Saints", and removed that category completely from numerous pre-schism saints (which are also deemed Orthodox), and replaced it with the "Category:Spanish Roman Catholic saints". This kind of agenda is a no-no. He should be warned or banned. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 19:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Exact same story for "Category:Ethnic Armenian Saints"; all converted to Roman Catholic!!! Who knows what else has been done. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 20:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've seen this and was intending having a word with him. I don't know if it is deliberate POV-pushing or merely negligence (the way for instance that articles on old episcopal sees in Asia Minor used to make it seem as if they were only ever Roman Catholic, because the authors writing them were only interested in this aspect), but this is not the way to proceed, that much is certain, since it obliterates any notion that a Catholic saint can also be a saint of other Christian denominations. Constantine ✍ 20:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Constantine. Well, the user has completely erased their talk page, erasing your comments and my comments. This is also a pattern I see on their talk page where they have erased all previous comments. Isn't there any policy direction on Wikipedia for users who do that (especially if it is a sensitive topic where the comments form a record)? The user continues to make the same type of edits as above, non-stop. I fully maintain that to exclusively code ALL Saints from ALL Local Churches (especially the pre-schism Saints) as exclusively R.C. is not only factually an error, but also smacks of an evident agenda, and what is more there is no reason to remove additional descriptive categories like "Welsh Saint" or "Greek Saint" or "Spanish Saint" or "Anatolian Saint". This is wrong and leads to misinformation.. My two cents. Thanks for your comments thus far, much appreciated. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 19:48, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he has been warned, and quite clearly, that his edits are problematic. If he keeps it up regardless, and instead of engaging in a discussion ignores and deletes our comments, then there is clear basis to assume that he is not acting in good faith but has an agenda. I don't know nearly enough about saints to judge whether the ones he has edited since are also worshipped by the Orthodox or others, though (from what I have seen, the articles themselves claim they are indeed solely RC saints). If there are such cases, the best thing would be to first remind him of our objections and warn him that continued editing along this vein can lead to sanctions, and if this also fails, a report at WP:ANI would be in order. Constantine ✍ 23:02, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of John Doukas (sebastokrator)

The article John Doukas (sebastokrator) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:John Doukas (sebastokrator) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3family6 -- 3family6 (talk) 20:40, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools)

The article John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3family6 -- 3family6 (talk) 21:21, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools)

The article John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Komnenos (Domestic of the Schools) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3family6 -- 3family6 (talk) 18:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!

Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of John Doukas (sebastokrator)

The article John Doukas (sebastokrator) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Doukas (sebastokrator) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 3family6 -- 3family6 (talk) 18:41, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikipedia Library Accounts Now Available (December 2014)

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

Elsevier - science and medicine journals and books
Royal Society of Chemistry - chemistry journals
Pelican Books - ebook monographs
Public Catalogue Foundation- art books

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Utility/Legitimacy of “People of Levantine-Greek Orthodox Christian Descent” Category

Dear Cplakidas, You seem to have a good grasp of Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman history and cultural anthropology, notably re: the role of Byzantine communities in Turkey and the MENA area and the subtle ethno-cultural nuances of Levantine Christian minorities and their relatives in the (mostly US and Latin American) diasporas. Some Wikipedians have reopened an old CfD debate, purportedly aiming at removing the “People of Levantine-Greek Orthodox Christian descent” category– see discussion below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_December_16#Category:People_of_Levantine-Greek_Orthodox_Christian_descent Can you please help us with your learned arguments & let us know if you’re in favor of keeping it? I, personally, think it shouldn’t be removed. Thanks in advance for your scholarly help, BA B.Andersohn (talk) 15:51, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CV, December 2014

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book reviews: Hawkeye7 on armoured reconnaissance and German scientists, Nick-D on time travelling historians
Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the World War I Christmas truce
Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Theme of Seleucia

Hi, Cplakidas, hope you are well. In Theme of Seleucia is stated that Seleucia in Isauria (Silifke) was its capital. On the other hand, Seleucia (Pamphylia) cites itself as the capital and provides ODB as a source. What do you think? Thanks. José Luiz ^talk 22:54, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thanks for the heads up! The Seleucia (Pamphylia) was wrong, Pamphylia was not even part of the Theme of Seleucia. I've corrected it. Best of wishes and a happy new year to you! Constantine ✍ 23:37, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Cplakidas! Happy new year to you as well! José Luiz ^talk 11:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Diadochus disambig

Fine. You might want to do something along that line with Epigonus (disambiguation).Botteville (talk) 13:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for creating them, and a Happy New Year :) Constantine ✍ 13:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Same to you. Ciao. Don't get too cold over there. It's almost tropical over here. It could drop 30-40 degrees in just a few hours however. I always wondered what the light, airy and open Palace of Knossos did when there was a foot of snow blowing through the air.Botteville (talk) 01:29, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

	Happy New Year !
	Hello Costantine, I wish the very best for you and the world in 2015. Cheers, Nedim Ardoğa (talk)

Thank toy very much, Nedim! To you and your loved ones likewise a happy and felicitous New Year! Constantine ✍ 17:25, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 21, 2015

Hi Constantine. A summary of the Featured Article you nominated will appear on the Main Page soon. I had to squeeze the text down to about 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank (push to talk) 22:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dank and happy new year! No, it looks fine, except one thing: the picture of the walls is a little dull, and seeing as the siege was mostly decided on the sea, I would suggest using the well-known Greek fire image instead. Constantine ✍ 08:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, glad the text is good ... I handle that part. User:Crisco 1492 handles the images. - Dank (push to talk) 14:36, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see and read today, precious again! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is scuola brotherhood?

Hi,

Can you please help? Is Scuola dei Greci = Greek Orthodox Brotherhood of St Nicholas?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:25, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Well, the History of the Greek Nation, Vol. X, p. 240, says that in 1498 the local Greek community put in a request to form an association, the Scuola di San Nicolo della nazion Greca, but does not go into too much detail concerning its activities; it speaks of the community rather than the scuola thereafter, but it implies the two to be about the same as the Scuola di San Nicolo that provided the Greek community's legal framework of operation in Venice, and there is no mention of a second association. In short, the answer to your question appears to be "yes". Cheers, Constantine ✍ 10:09, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Nikephoros Phokas the Elder

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nikephoros Phokas the Elder you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 02:01, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting article—thanks for writing it! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:25, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I concur Cplakidas! I've completed my review here. Outstanding job, as always. Once you've addressed all my comments and questions, this article will be good to go forward to Good Article status! -- Caponer (talk) 03:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on a job well done Cplakidas! It has been a sincere pleasure and a privilege reviewing your article. I have hereby passed it to Good Article status! -- Caponer (talk) 11:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Nikephoros Phokas the Elder

The article Nikephoros Phokas the Elder you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nikephoros Phokas the Elder for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 12:01, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 9

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 9, November-December 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

New donations, including real-paper-and-everything books, e-books, science journal databases, and more
New TWL coordinators, conference news, a new open-access journal database, summary of library-related WMF grants, and more
Spotlight: "Global Impact: The Wikipedia Library and Persian Wikipedia" - a Persian Wikipedia editor talks about their experiences with database access in Iran, writing on the Persian project and the JSTOR partnership

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Theodore Synadenos

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Theodore Synadenos you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Theodore Synadenos

The article Theodore Synadenos you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Theodore Synadenos for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am Andreana Dakanali (Andreana Dak). I Try to give an article in wikipedia but I found many proplems because of my english. The greek wikipedia has not the same forms so I dont Know exactly what is that I have to do so to make you sure about the article. Is sure that is not copied from anywhere, the singer Giannis Haroulis gave it to me. I Hope to understand how it works before you have to do all the delete things you say. I'm really sorry for the bad english and I hope you can understand me. What ever you want you can text me. Thank you for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreana dak (talk • contribs) 17:34, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of indentation in favor of bullets in list of sources

Here you changed my source list which used indentation to bullets. I've reverted it because I see no reason for the change, but I'm grateful for your other correction in that article (which I've left intact). What was your reason for changing to bullets? I never see bullets being used for source lists in scientific journal articles or books? --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 10:38, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's the usual style in Wikipedia, as you can see in most pages and in WP:CITE. Constantine ✍ 10:58, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. However, since Template:Refbegin doesn't discourage it's use and WP:CITE doesn't even mention it, it's still my personal preference. Of course I won't change it in pages were bullets are already in use, but for articles I (re)write myself I'll keep using indentation for the list of sources. I guess I should deliberate with the people behind WP:CITE to revise the policy. --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 15:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ein kleiner Gefallen

Hallo Constantine
how are you? On 9th January I greeted on your behalf your homeland on the way back to Rome :-) . There was clear weather, and from my left window seat I could see in the glorious afternoon light Thracia, Lemnos, Samotracia, Chalcidica, Thessaly, Eubea, Attica and Epirus, plus the snow capped Olympus... If you have time and lust, could you please do some ce on this article. It was a redirect, so that no copyediting busy bees are coming so far. :-) Greeting from Helvetia Felix. Alex2006 (talk) 10:12, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alex! I've had to go urgently to Greece due to some family troubles and was a bit out of touch. I'll gladly check the article and make a copyedit. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 20:03, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Costas! I hope it was nothing serious...Take care! Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 06:36, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Alex, it is, as always, a pleasure. A small favour in return, could you try to communicate with this IP who edits on Longobardia? Unless I am very much mistaken, his native language is Italian, and I cannot seem to have a meaningful interaction in English with him. Constantine ✍ 09:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Actually, yesterday I ask for half-protectection both articles, and one is now protected. :-) I will try to speak with him, altough I don't think that there the problem is the language...Moreover, I noticed that he is using at least 3 different ips (all coming from Sicily). Alex2006 (talk) 09:20, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Costas, yesterday I wrote to that guy at the talk page of the admin who protected the article, because he complained with him, but until now he did not answer...Alex2006 (talk) 19:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, thanks. He answered below, but he is still as unwilling to give a straight answer as ever. Constantine ✍ 19:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non ti curar di lor, ma guarda e passa :-) Alex2006 (talk) 19:39, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Longobardia

Hello...as regards Longobardia, Celsius (1727) noted that the name was used to indicate Longobardia Italy only after the destruction of the Lombard kingdom in 774. Therefore, he believed that the warriors mentioned in the stele belonged to the shipment of Federico II in Italy. This view was also accepted by Brocman (1762) believed that the warriors killed in battle against the Byzantine Emperor. The von Friesen (1913) noted, however, that in the inscriptions there was referring to Lombardy, but the lands of the south known as the eleventh century Langobardia that belonged to Byzantium, where he fought many battles between the Greeks and Normans and where perished men mentioned in the pieces.--79.19.99.123 (talk) 18:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. First, the sources you cite here are way beyond outdated, second, I am afraid you fail to explain what exactly your sources are supposed to assert, and third, I don't see what they have to do with you reverting my changes, to whit: the name of the province was given by the Byzantines, not the Varangians, so that is the one that should be mentioned in the lede; what it was known as to the Varangians or other Germanics is secondary to the fact that it was a Byzantine province. Whether it was the first or second or n-th state entity known as Longobardia is neither here nor there, and smacks of WP:OR: since the name was given after the Langobards, it is self-evident that, at least as a colloquial name, the term existed before the Byzantines created the province, i.e. for Longorbardia major and minor, as attested by Theophanes. Whether it was an "official" name or not is pedantry and irrelevant: if the term was applied to the Lombard kingdom and/or the Duchy of Benevento, then the statement that the Byz. province was the "first state entity" to bear it is most likely false, and stating otherwise requires sources of extraordinary reputability, certainly not from the 18th century... Please read WP:RS, WP:CITE and WP:EXTRAORDINARY in this regard... Constantine ✍ 00:52, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sorry but your opinion is unclear ... Theophanes does not make a name within the Italian territory, but a distinction of the Lombards to the north and south of Rome. There are no government entity or official names of certain territories before thema Byzantine Longobardia ... the only real name of the Lombard kingdom is "Regnum Langobardorum". There is no connection between the name of "Langobardia majors" and the future region "Lombardy". Poi..le sources of my previous intervention ripendono lively debate a precise historical and not absolete, contemporary sources shows: Erik Brate, Elias Wessen.--80.182.9.48 (talk) 02:06, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting, or you risk getting blocked. From the moment there is a dispute, the rules are to not revert until an agreement is reached. Now, it may be that you are not proficient in English, but I really cannot understand the point you are trying to make and why you revert even my cosmetic and style edits. For instance, the Germanic name is irrelevant to the lede section, as it was not an official name; you do not address that in your counter-arguments, but revert nonetheless. You also revert the source formatting of the sources you added, which makes them look odd next to the existing ones. And as far as the assertion about Longobardia is concerned, I need to see a page reference and quote from a modern, reliable source to the effect of what you claim, not vague references to 18th-century books. More importantly, you need to a) read the policy links I gave above and b) try and use correct and coherent English, because this is the English WP, and if you cannot make yourself understood, you'll only get into trouble. Constantine ✍ 12:05, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that your speech is unfounded. There are no sources and links about the rest of Italy under the name "Longbardland". Here we want sources that attest to the use of the word in the Germanic form Longobardia and not fairy tales. When you mentioned Theophanes I understand that your speech is baseless. The Wessen Langbardland is clear the term is used only after the fall of the Regnum Langobardorum and only to indicate the Byzantine thema of southern Italy under the name Longobardia or Langobardia, place called Langbardland by Germanic warriors Varangians of the battles in the ground against Byzantine and Norman . The previous speaker I talked about the historical debate with sources and modern sources are: Erik Brate,Elias Wessen, Sveriges runinskrifter: III. Södermanlands runinskrifter, publisher Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien, Stockholm, 1924-1936, ISSN 0562-8016;E.Wessén, Jansson, SB F, Sveriges runinskrifter: VI. Upplands runinskrifter of 1 publisher Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien, Stockholm, 1940-1943, ISSN 0562-8016

Your rollback are meaningless ... you have some reliable sources to talk ???--79.18.110.123 (talk) 12:31, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh... I am the guy who began the article and put whatever references were in there in the first place, so please spare me the "you have some reliable sources to talk ???" crap. The article focuses on a Byzantine province, so the Germanic name is incidental and secondary, and has no place in the lede. The article makes clear, with impeccable sources, that the term "Longobardia" was used by Theophanes, one of the major sources on the early medieval Mediterranean, beyond the Byzantine province for Lombard territories in Italy; whether as a geographic or shorthand form instead of an official one is irrelevant to the point. You try to push through a specific interpretation, and parrot a couple of books to this effect. All right, I want to see page numbers and quotes from the books to support your opinion, because until then it is just that, an opinion, which apparently directly contradicts authorities like the ODB and Pertusi. And please take time to write proper English, I can often scarcely understand what you are writing. Constantine ✍ 19:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is based on sources...you have some reliable sources to talk ? please...--95.233.199.151 (talk) 00:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell if you are trolling or not, but for the moment I am assuming you are not. It is very simple: you have made a very definite statement about the use of the name Longobardia, which prima facie seems to contradict already extant and well-referenced information, and referred to a few sources to back up your claim. Per WP:EXTRAORDINARY, please give the relevant page numbers and quotes from the sources. Constantine ✍ 09:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

involving some administrators for your goals ... in note Longobardia have deleted the information ..without a valid reason--87.17.107.33 (talk) 18:51, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My "goals" are you giving a proper reference to a contested statement you try to introduce. Yet you persist with off-topic remarks while humming loudly with your fingers in your ears. I cannot help you if you refuse to give a straight answer. Constantine ✍ 18:54, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greek problem

Hello Constantine! Could you help me with a buying problem? I would like to buy the ebook Halcyon Days in Crete II. ΤΗΕ VIA EGNATIA UNDER OTTOMAN RULE 1380-1699, but I don't know if this site is reliable or not. Do you have any idea about it?--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 18:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Renato! The site is reliable, it is the publishing house of the University of Crete, so no worries. Constantine ✍ 00:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content
Book reviews: Jonas Vinther on Hitler and Cliftonian on the Rhodesia Regiment
Interview: 2014 Military History Newcomer Award nominees
Review essay: Nick-D on the Australian War Memorial
Op-ed: TomStar81 on the birth of strategic bombing
Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greek presidential elections

Dear Sir could you give me some information on the following:

I would be grateful. Mr Hall of England (talk) 15:16, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inside Hitler's Greece

Hallo Constantine, hope you have a great time. I can recall that you have access to Mazower's specific work and it may be helpfull to clear some things in the Greco-Italian War article: a failed verification tag has been placed here [[4]] (although I can confirm the specific event from alternative works). Also, here [[5]]: Mazower's work has been characterized as trashy and poorly researched book. I believe you may shed some light on this.Alexikoua (talk) 20:42, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alexi. I'll have a look into it. As for Mazower being "trashy and poorly researched", I am speechless, although in retrospect that's not surprising, when it comes from the guy whose view on the war is essentially that Greece should have surrendered immediately, so that the Germans would not have had to invade... Instead of dismissing one of the most expert historians on Balkan and WW2 history like this, this self-proclaimed historian might for once bother to be specific with his concerns and bring some actual, honest-to-god reliable sources into the discussion. Constantine ✍ 21:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had the feeling that something is really wrong with the specific editor. By the way (not to be confused with history), WWWII Italians are never presented as villains in any Hoolywood movie, as far I can remember.Alexikoua (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 22:01, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Constantine, you've written another masterpiece my friend. I was a bit nitpicky though and left some comments and suggestions at Talk:Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid/GA1. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, and please let me know if I'm off base on anything. Thank you for all your great work on this article! -- Caponer (talk) 20:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid

The article Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 21:20, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Anti-Judaism

I want to thank you again for the edit, and perhaps I should have double checked before restoring a WP:Redlink. But it really does help move to the project forward when you bother to fill out the WP:edit summary field in the first place! -- Kendrick7^talk 14:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and no hard feelings, I was going through several pages cleaning up and was too bored to paste the explanation everywhere (admittedly, it's not as if I am very conscientious re the use edit summaries). I should have expected someone to object. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 14:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid

The article Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caponer -- Caponer (talk) 11:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Muslim conquest of Sicily

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Muslim conquest of Sicily you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simon Burchell -- Simon Burchell (talk) 17:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Dear Cplakidas, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, especially your recent creation of Rhaiktor. Keep up the good work! You are making a difference here! With regards, Anupam^Talk 19:42, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, much appreciated, but if I may ask, why exactly did you single out the Rhaiktor article? It's certainly not among my most impressive work :P... Constantine ✍ 19:47, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Muslim conquest of Sicily

The article Muslim conquest of Sicily you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Muslim conquest of Sicily for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simon Burchell -- Simon Burchell (talk) 10:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome :-). Thanks for your help in many articles --Odythal (talk) 14:05, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RX

Hi, I was wondering if you would be able to assist with the following source requested at the WP:RX -

"The origin of the lords of Karytaina in the Frankish Morea". Evergates, Theodore. (1994). Medieval prosopography vol. 15, 1 (1994) p. 81-114

You've included it as a reference when you created Geoffrey of Briel. Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance. - NQ (talk) 10:44, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I was fortunate as I had found a partial version online. It is no longer available though, and although I have searched, I too could not find the source anywhere else. Constantine ✍ 12:11, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your efforts. Do you happen to have a link to the no longer available partial version? - NQ (talk) 12:47, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is some time ago, and I deleted the link since it no longer worked :(. Constantine ✍ 13:22, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Chrysostomos I of Athens for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chrysostomos I of Athens is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chrysostomos I of Athens until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Richard C. Stone (talk) 05:32, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]