User talk:Adelphoi En Kardia Dia Biou

Kappa Sigma motto source
Hi, you added the Kappa Sigma motto to Kappa Sigma, but did not provide a source. Please see the discussion at Talk:Kappa Sigma. NYCRuss  ☎  12:47, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Choice of Username?
I am personally concerned about your username, given your non-membership in Kappa Sigma and your interest in publication of information which, as far as I can tell, a Kappa Sigma brother would consider to be inappropriate to post in public. I am a member of a Greek Letter Organization, and would feel uncomfortable if an equivalent username was created for my Greek Letter Organization. I thought I would drop you a note with my thoughts. Note that the Wikipedia Policy on Usernames can be found at WP:BADNAME

In regards to posting of the meanings of AEKDB/ΑΕΚΔΒ, as a member of a Greek Letter Organization, I am uncomfortable with it being posted, but in this case, the lack of a reference is the governing principle. I have been told that this information is not even in the ritual books, so a reference even from Wikileaks will be Problematic.Naraht (talk) 15:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I share the concern that numerous Wikipedia policies seem to be in violation. Another editor posted an inquiry about referencing the translation, and an expert said that the translation is wrong. So we have an inappropriate user name, improperly sourced material being posted, and potentially incorrect information being posted. This account only seems to make edits about this one topic, and none of the edits appear to be constructive.  NYCRuss   ☎  15:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The translation is not wrong, but the switch from Greek to English characters was. Your reference desk link was helpful in that regard.  I have disclosed that I am not a Kappa Sigma member, but a secret society/freemasonry enthusiast.  There is a clear Conflict of interest on this (and possibly other) fraternity-related articles when it comes to fraternity/society editors WP:CENSORing material.  Wikipedia is not censored for the sake of what a Mason or a fraternity member "would consider to be inappropriate to post in public."  KappaSigmaAEKDB (talk) 17:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The ΑΕΚΔΒ issue is not censorship, it is a lack of a reference. Without a reference, it doesn't belong on the page at all, other than as a mention that it exists on the crest and *perhaps* as a closing to letters used by Kappa Sigma brothers.Naraht (talk) 17:11, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I did not add its translation to the Kappa Sigma article. Blacklisting the very letters "AEKDB" from the article when their motto is present on their CREST is very concerning. KappaSigmaAEKDB (talk) 17:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Then add the crest under the fair use provisions. NYCRuss   ☎  17:18, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I do not have to upload the crest when I can link to it on Kappa Sigma's home page, Russ. KappaSigmaAEKDB (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, AEKDB is on their crest. The fact that it is their motto is not referenced. I would agree that it is *likely* from a Greek Letter Organization that greek letters on their crest that aren't their letters are likely to have a meaning to them. However, it being a referencable fact that it is an abbreviation for their motto is something else as well as what the letters stand for.


 * Disclaimer, I am a member of a Greek Letter Organization, but one with no more connection with Kappa Sigma than it does with Circle K.Naraht (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk about not being courteous! Naraht is at Help desk, and NYCRuss is at Usernames for administrator attention, but neither of them had the courtesy to inform me of these discussions. I welcome it though, and I hope this will draw additional attention to the serious conflict of interest editing taking place on fraternity articles. KappaSigmaAEKDB (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Why are you overly concerned about a conflict of interest on fraternity articles? What evidence do you have - except for the motto revert wars on the Kappa Sigma page, and even then there may be some dispute about what is the public motto of the fraternity? I applaud you for creating a wikiprofile, but I wonder if you would be willing to explain your concerns in more depth.--Enos733 (talk) 01:15, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Kappa Sigma, like any other organization is not immune from criticism, but we all have a responsibility to ensure that all information presented on this page and across Wikipedia is verifiable. I look forward to reading your responses, and I am not, nor have I hid my affiliation.--Enos733 (talk) 06:37, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

You may have disclosed your affiliation with Kappa Sigma, Enos, but you have not come remotely close to abiding by WP:COI where your editing/edit-warring is concerned:
 * "In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits in mainspace where there is a clear conflict of interest, or where such a conflict can be reasonably assumed, are strongly discouraged [...] Editors who may have a conflict of interest may nevertheless add material that accords with the Photographs and media files or Subject and culture sector professionals sections below, and are allowed to make certain kinds of non-controversial edits [...] If another editor objects for any reason, then it's a controversial edit."

You need to not only acknowledge your COI, but act in accordance with it. The fact is that your fraternity, like the Masons, does not allow atheists to become members. Let editors who aren't Kappa Sigma members determine how to handle that information in the article. Adelphoi En Kardia Dia Biou (talk) 08:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

As a Kappa Sigma Brother, it disgusts me that you think you have the right (AS A NON-BROTHER) to divulge privileged information about Kappa Sigma. As a 3rd Degree Master Mason, it disgusts me that you obviously did not pay attention during your initiation. Ritual is kept secret for a reason, nobody except true and lawful brothers have the right to know about it. You do not understand the meaning of a a brotherhood or a fraternity. It is not your place to inquire why some things are kept secret and others are not, because you are not a Kappa Sigma and never will be one. Thus, the fact that you divulge these secrets is immoral and wrong. People like you truly make me sad and angry. --KappaSigma989 (talk) 18:13, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Reported
Please note: you've been reported for your disruptive edits and edit warring here. jheiv (talk) 21:31, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You should report yourself, you misleading hypocrite. Adelphoi En Kardia Dia Biou (talk) 21:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Please be more careful in seeking consensus at the article talkpage and be more mindful of Edit warring. I have protected the article from editing for now in the expectation that civil discussion can resolve this matter. Good luck, - 2/0 (cont.) 04:11, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

You were asked to seek consensus before editing the article, please do not edit the article again with the same contentious edits. jheiv (talk) 19:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Abide by the Conflict of Interest policy and stop trying to own your fraternity's article. Adelphoi En Kardia Dia Biou (talk) 19:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Again, because of your continued refusal to seek consensus and insert contentious material and your insistence on being disruptive, you have been reported. jheiv (talk)

Help
You've said that I know more about wikipedia policies than you, which seems to be the case.

But anyway, here are some suggestions if you really think what you have written:
 * If you think my edits are unfairly pushing my POV over wikipedia policies -- please consider the WP:COIN
 * If you think the sources that you add and are repeatedly removed are, in fact, legitimate -- please consider WP:RSN

I am confident my actions will be vindicated, but I'm not immune to reasoned criticism. jheiv (talk) 21:39, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I did go to WP:COIN over a week ago. The request attracted the attention of Fences&Windows, who added an NPOV tag to the article which you have repeatedly deleted. Adelphoi En Kardia Dia Biou (talk) 19:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Editing other areas of Wikipedia?
May I suggest that working on a wider variety of articles in addition to the ones that you have worked on so far, and thus making concerns about being a Single Purpose Account, might work better for everyone.Naraht (talk) 13:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not concerned with your opinion essay. WP:COI, on the other hand, is a real Wikipedia policy that is being ignored. Adelphoi En Kardia Dia Biou (talk) 21:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

AEKDB listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect AEKDB. Since you had some involvement with the AEKDB redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). jheiv talk  contribs 07:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

It's a start...
I'm not sure expressing an opinion on four Redirects for Discussion makes you no longer an SPA, but it is a start. 1/2 :)

August 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Kappa Sigma. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 21:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Adelphoi En Kardia Dia Biou. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Adelphoi En Kardia Dia Biou~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 21:38, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:KappaSigmaCrest-AEKDB.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:KappaSigmaCrest-AEKDB.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:08, 11 August 2016 (UTC)