Talk:Chilonis (daughter of Leotychidas)

Untitled
Plutarch does not say she was commander nor that she fought. She helped with the trench-building, that's all, — Preceding unsigned comment added by RurikTheGreat (talk • contribs) 23:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Jessica Amanda Salmonson is a horror and fanatasy author. She is also the only source in this article. If no one gives us a better source, I recommene we delete this article.

Sensemaker — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.183.79.53 (talk) 09:46, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * An entire article can not be deleted because some of its content is questioned. It is rather a question of deleting some of its information. Referenced information can be removed if the reference is deemed to be insufficient. Before that, it must be thoroughly discussed and judged to be insufficient by several neutral users, not just by one. The author is not as important as the truth. Also a non-historian can write a reference book, if his/her work is supported by sufficient references. You are questioning this article also on Swedish wp, were you are engaging in an editing-war. There are two editors there, both newly registered, who both have done noting on Swedish wp but questioning this article in exactly the same way. I strongly suggest, that you let this be judged impartially by the majority, what ever the outcome. Have a nice day. --Aciram (talk) 15:18, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Your source is not valid, she is a writer of fictional novels and has no references. RurikTheGreat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC).
 * Aciram it is time to stop adding false information to the article. Jessica Amanda Salmonsson has made that up since it is not in the original sources. She is a fantasy fiction writer.RurikTheGreat (talk)


 * RurikTheGreat, it is time you stop editwaring and removal of references. Wether the information is false or not should be determined by a neutral party, which does not signify your attitude. This very same discussion is going on at Swedish wp. You have no regard what so ever for the fact that you ignore wikpedia guide rules, and when I have pointed this out to you, you have accused me of "gender-war". This does not signify that you are a neutral party capable of editing this article. I will not engage in what you choose to refer to as a "gender war". I will welcome any truthful change to the article in line with wikipedia guide rules made by a neutral party. By your act and your way of communication, you have not only succeeded in breaking wikipedia guide rules, but you also have also broken wikiquette and disqualified your self from being considered neutral enough to make those changes. Thank you --Aciram (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The important thing here is not us users, it is the information itself, the information we have from Plutarchos is reliable, Jessica Salmonsson is not. RurikTheGreat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:33, 9 November 2011 (UTC).


 * Disregard of others users opinions and the rules of the project is unconstructive. The communication with other users is important as Wikipedia is a project with multiple participation. Neutrality is crucial to determine whether a user's information and participation is to be regarded as usefull and trustworthy or not. Your attitude displayed in your communication with me has not displayed you as a neutral party. I have asked you to respect wikipedia guide lines and let the matter be judged by a neutral third party. Instead of respecting this, as one would expect from some one who have indeed the right information, you have chosen to say that I, for some reason, are engaging in a "Gender War". This does not in any way make you a trustworthy contributor. Even if you are indeed correct, your attitude prevents me from considering you so because of this attitude. I can give you a second chance in this regard if you apologize for your insult and disrepectful manner. An ongoing discussion is now taking place at Swedish wp. If it determins that your information is indeed correct, despite the fact that you have damaged your own credibility by your behavior, then I will be happy to see the criticized information be removed. That is not yet the case. Your behavior have deprived you from your credibility as a neutral user in regard to this article, and it will therefore require confirmation from a third party before the article can be changed. --Aciram (talk) 18:45, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Update: the information in question has now been resolved by a neutral third party to be false. The user RurikTheGreat has, however, been warned for trolling on Swediswp. He is not to be regarded as a serious user and his critic is not to be taken seriously. --Aciram (talk) 17:05, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I have always been neutral and pertinent about this. It is you who have been forced by your unstable emotionality to run to administrators all the time instead of taking the discussion with me. See what the articles look like now, it is obvious that they needed the updates and correction i provided. It is time for self-examination for you. RurikTheGreat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC).
 * User:RurikTheGreat has now been blocked from Swedish Wikipedia for trolling--Aciram (talk) 19:01, 16 November 2011 (UTC)