User talk:Cplakidas/Archive 18

Salandu
Hi. Could you try to help me to solve a problem? According to Yazaman al-Khadim, Salandu is probably Tzamandos, while according to Ahmad ibn Tughan al-Ujayfi is Traianopolis. Do you have any idea about it? It could have more then one name, but I have no memory on a Traianopolis so east indeed.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 23:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi! Thanks for pointing this out. The problem is that Fields in Yazaman's article identifies Salandu with Tzamandos, while the PmbZ in al-Ujayfi's article identifies it with Selinus/Traianopolis. The Das byzantinische Strassensystem in Kappadokien has the Arabic name of Tzamandos as "Samandu", so perhaps Fields mixed this up. Constantine  ✍  09:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Augment (linguistics)
Hello, C -- I was just looking at the article on Augment (linguistics) and trying to follow the examples from Ancient and modern Greek. Some of the examples from Ancient and modern Greek give the English transliteration (is that the right word?) right under or next to the Greek words and others do not. I would find it interesting and helpful to understanding the examples if all the Greek words had English transliteration right under or next to the Greek. Would you be able to add those? CorinneSD (talk) 01:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I have added those where they were missing. It only remains to add Greek text where there are only transliterations now.--Jpbrenna (talk) 22:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Gregorios Bernardakis
Please see the talk page for my rationale on using this namespace and not a pure transcription of his name. --Jpbrenna (talk) 22:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Marianos Argyros
Hello! Your submission of Marianos Argyros at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 15:48, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks
Hello, Constantine :) Thank you very much for the Barnstar! I really appreciate receiving this award from the person that is in my opinion (I believe shared by most Wikipedians) the most competent and productive contributor to Byzantine Empire-related topics in Wikipedia. I would like to use this opportunity to also thank you for the edits of the article about the Byzantine–Bulgarian war of 913–927 - the quality of my prose is the most challenging issue in a GA or FA nomination, and I greatly appreciate any input that can improve it. Best regards, --Gligan (talk) 21:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC) ---

Αξιότιμε Κύριε, επειδή γράφω από Ελλάδα παρακαλώ επιτρέψτε μου να χρησιμοποιήσω την Ελληνική. Θέτω υπ όψιν σας ότι ο βασιλέας ,μακαριστός Νικηφόρος Β΄Φωκάς όταν κατέλαβε την Κρήτη έφερε και το αξίωμα του "Μαγίστρου" (Magister). Αναφορικά με τα οφφίκια και αξιώματα του Νικηφόρου Β΄ Φωκά, αν ενδιαφέρεσθε, προσφύγετε σε Βιβλιοθήκες ημεδαπής και αλλοδαπής. Για ερευνητές και αναγνώστες υφίσταται εν προκειμένω άπλετη βιβλιογραφία στην Ελληνική και άλλες Γλώσσες Κατά συνέπεια φρονώ πως κακώς αφαιρέσατε τον εν λόγω τίτλο από άρθρο που επεξεργαστήκατε. ΄Οπως καταλαβαίνετε "και οι κρίνοντες κρίνονται" ! Καλή συνέχεια στα έργα σας.--- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.129.130.189 (talk) 10:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Αξιότιμε κύριε, τυγχάνει να γνωρίζω πολύ καλά την βυζαντινή ιστορία και να είμαι κάτοχος ευρείας βιβλιογραφίας γύρω από το Βυζάντιο, και έχω γράψει άνω των 500 άρθρων σχετικά με τη βυζαντινή ιστορία εδώ. Προτού αρχίσετε λοιπόν να κατηγορείτε και να εξαπολύετε αφορισμούς περί κρινομένων, σκεφτείτε ότι ίσως κίνητρό μου δεν ήταν η άγνοια. Πολύ απλά, αντέδρασα στην εμβόλιμη προσθήκη από μέρους σας μιας παραπομπής σε νέα πηγή στο ήδη υπάρχον κείμενο απλά και μόνο για να στηρίξετε τον τίτλο του Νικηφόρου Φωκά, πράγμα ασήμαντο στα πλαίσια του άρθρου, προθήκη η οποία "έσπαζε" όμως έτσι την σύνδεση του αποσπάσματος αυτού και των υπολοίπων περιεχομένων του με την αρχική παραπομπή στο τέλος της παραγράφου. Επειδή στην Βικιπαίδεια το ζήτημα του WP:REFERENCE είναι σημαντικό, αυτή η πρακτική εν γένει δεν θεωρείται καλή, και έτσι το αναίρεσα. Καλή σας ημέρα. Constantine  ✍  11:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Αξιότιμε Κύριε, η προσθήκη δεν έγινε για υποστήριξη του εν λόγω τίτλου του Αυτοκράτορος Νικηφόρου Β΄Φωκά, πράγμα εμφανές στην παρατεθείσα βιβλιογραφία αναφορικά με την κατάληψη της νήσου Κρήτης απ τις δυνάμεις του τότε Μαγίστρου και Μ.Δομεστίκου των Σχολών της Ανατολής Νικηφόρου Φωκά. Απλώς έγινε επισήμανση λάθους, η δε αναφορά στο "και οι κρίνοντες κρίνονται" δεν συνιστά κατηγορία ή αφορισμό για οτιδήποτε. Σημαίνει πως κανένας δεν είναι πάνω από κρίση (και μάλιστα καλοπροαίρετη). Πολύ δε περισσότερο όταν έχει την "εξουσία" να διαγράφει, να εξετάζει και να κρίνει. Δεν αμφισβητώ τις γνώσεις σας, τις οποίες παραθέτετε συνοπτικά. Πιθανόν δε ο γράφων να έχει αναλωθεί σε χώρους Ιστορίας και Δικαίων της περιόδου. Ας αφήσουμε λοιπόν τις παραθέσεις σεβαστών γνώσεων. Θεωρώ σφάλμα την εν λόγω αναίρεση. Αλλά δεν θα ασχοληθώ περισσότερο με αυτό. ΄Ενας νομικός και διδάκτωρ του Δικαίου. Υ.Γ. Καλή πορεία προς "διδακτορία" αν επιδιώκετε τέτοια τιμή. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.129.130.189 (talk) 12:09, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Αν τα περί κρινομένων δεν συνιστούν κατηγορία, για ποιό λόγο τα συμπεριλάβατε? Αν η κριτική σας ήταν εξαρχής καλοπροαίρετη, τότε προς τί τα σχόλια του είδους "προσφύγετε σε Βιβλιοθήκες ημεδαπής και αλλοδαπής."? Σχετικά με το "η προσθήκη δεν έγινε για υποστήριξη του εν λόγω τίτλου", λοιπόν, η μοναδική αλλαγή που κάνατε στο άρθρο ήταν να προσθέσετε τον τίτλο και μία παραπομπή. Τα υπόλοιπα λεγόμενα του άρθρου ήδη είχαν πολλαπλές παραπομπές σε εξόχως έγκυρες πηγές. Οπότε α) η προσθήκη σας αντικειμενικά ήταν δευτερευούσης σημασίας για το εν λόγω άρθρο και β) όπως ανέφερα πιο πάνω, ανέκυπτε πρόβλημα με τις παραπομπές. Ως διδάκτωρ θα ξέρετε σίγουρα ότι δεν είναι καλή ιδέα σε ένα υπάρχον κείμενο να βάζουμε εμβόλιμα στοιχεία και παραπομπές χωρίς να γίνεται σαφές ποιά παραπομπή αναφέρεται σε ποιό κομμάτι του κειμένου. Τα περί δικτατορίας τα αφήνω ασχολίαστα... Και πάλι καλή σας ημέρα. Constantine  ✍  12:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Απορώ και εξίσταμαι ! Σας εύχομαι καλή "διδακτορία", δηλαδή καλό διδακτορικό για να το πούμε απλά, και εσείς το ερμηνεύετε σαν "δικτατορία" ? Θεέ και Κύριε !!! Και κάτι τελευταίο : Να γνωρίζετε πως όπως κρίνετε, κρίνεσθε. Εμμένω σε ό,τι έγραψα και λυπάμαι αν ο λόγος μου παρερμηνεύεται. Πάσα άλλη κριτική εν προκειμένω παρέλκη αγαπητέ. Καλή τύχη στα επιτηδεύματα σας.--- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.129.130.189 (talk) 12:30, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Με συγχωρείτε που παρερμήνευσα τα λεγόμενά σας. Mea culpa και ειλικρινά λυπάμαι που δεν διάβασα καλά τί γράψατε. Προφανώς όλοι κρίνονται και ο καθείς δύναται να κρίνει οποιονδήποτε. Και προφανώς ούτε αλάνθαστος είμαι (όπως μόλις αποδείχτηκε) ούτε υπεράνω κριτικής. Θεωρώ όμως ότι θα αρκούσε μια απλή ερώτηση για ποιό λόγο αφαίρεσα τις προσθήκες σας, χωρίς περαιτέρω σχόλια που μπορούν να παρερμηνευτούν ως "μπηχτές"... Οι περιορισμοί του γραπτού λόγου, και δη στο ίντερνετ μεταξύ αγνώστων, δίνουν εύκολα χώρο για παρεξηγήσεις. Constantine  ✍  12:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Από εμένα το θέμα θεωρείται λήξαν. Αναφορικά με την παραπομπή : κάλυπτε πλήρως την κατάληψη της νήσου Κρήτης από τις δυνάμεις του Νικηφόρου Β΄Φωκά "(Ελ) Νικφούρ". Στο αρχείο σας υφίσταταιη αναφορά στο σχετικό βιβλίο και υπάρχει στη Βιβλιονέτ, Worldcat κ.ά. Σκοπός της παραπομπής δεν ήταν η καταγραφή του τίτλου "Μάγιστρος" (Magister), η οποία απλώς προέκυψε. Γνωρίζω το σχετικό βιβλίο (δίτομο) το έχω μελετήσει και στις τρείς εκδόσεις του Στη Β΄. και Γ΄. των εκδόσεων του φέρει "τιμής ένεκεν" συγχαρητήριο Πατριαρχικό και Αρχιερατικό Γράμμα. Η εν λόγω Ιστορική Μελέτη έχει κριθεί θετικά απ την εποχή που κατετέθη μέχρι σήμερα. Το κείμενο είναι γραμμένο στην Ελληνική. Αυτά είναι τα γεγονότα και η άποψη μου. Δεν έχω να προσθέσω τίποτε άλλο. Και πάλι, τα άριστα.(79.129.130.189 (talk) 13:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC))

Επιτρέψτε μου να επανέλθω χωρίς καμιά εριστική διάθεση και ελπίζω να μην θεωρηθεί ο λόγος μου σαν "παρενόχληση". Μελέτησα πλήρως το καθεστώς της ΒΙΚΙΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ και τα δικαιώματα των αρμοδίων, διαχειριστών κ.λ.π. Αν και διαφωνώ με κάθε είδους "υπερεξουσία" σαν πολίτης και νομικός, αποδέχομαι τους ισχύοντες κανονισμούς και εύχομαι τα καλύτερα σε κάθε χρήστη που θα εξακολουθήσει να προσφέρει γνώσεις, κόπο, εμπειρία ή και κύρος στη ΒΙΚΙΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ, της οποίας η αίγλη εύχομαι να αυξάνεται. Ανέμενα μετά τις ανωτέρω εξηγήσεις αναθεώρηση της εν λόγω αναίρεσης σας. Ενημερώθηκα για τίς "εξόχως έγκυρες πηγές". Ακατανόητο παραμένει για την ταπεινότητα μου γιατί αφαιρέθηκε τέτοια πηγή απ τη βιβλιογραφία ή δεν υφίσταται στην ίδια βιβλιογραφία (σαν πηγή) πόνημα του κ.Γ. Τσερεβελάκη ή άλλων ικανών, που υφίστανται στο λήμμα "Νικηφόρος Β΄Φωκάς". Μήπως επειδή είναι στην Ελληνική ? Θα ήταν αδιανόητος επιστημονικά ο αποκλεισμός βιβλιογραφίας λόγω "γλώσσας" ! Δεν θέλω να σας κουράσω περισσότερο με τις εν προκειμένω σκέψεις μου, ούτε (προς Θεού) να θεωρηθεί ότι επιδιώκω εύνοια ουδενός. "Εξουσίαν έχετε και αυθεντίαν ασκείτε" ! Η διαφωνία μου παραμένει και απέρχομαι. Εύχομαι η πορεία της ΒΙΚΙΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ και πάντων των εν αυτή να είναι μεστή φωτισμού και δικαιοσύνης79.129.130.189 (talk) 13:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Καλησπέρα σας. Ο αποκλεισμός βιβλιογραφίας λόγω γλώσσας φυσικά και είναι αντιεπιστημονικός και δεν αποτελεί σοβαρό επιχείρημα. Από την άλλη, σε μια αγγλόφωνη εγκυκλοπαίδεια είναι φυσικό να προτιμούνται οι αγγλόφωνες πηγές, εφόσον καλύπτουν το ίδιο περιεχόμενο, απλά και μόνο εξαιτίας πιο εύκολης εξακρίβωσης. Εάν φυσικά κάποια λεπτομέρεια ή άποψη υπάρχει μόνο σε ελληνικό, γερμανικό, κλπ. πόνημα, ή τα βασικά έργα επί συγκεκριμένου θέματος είναι μη αγγλόφωνα, τότε αυτά θα προτιμηθούν. Εάν δείτε τα άρθρα στα οποία γράφω, λ.χ. τελευταία περί των Κομνηνοδουκών, θα δείτε ότι αντλώ και από ελληνικά, και από γαλλικά, και απο γερμανικά συγγράμματα παράλληλα με τα αγγλικά. Δεν θα μπορούσε να είναι αλλιώς. Τώρα, σχετικά με τα άλλα ζητήματα που θίξατε, το άρθρο του Νικηφόρου Β' Φωκά επί της παρούσης μάλλον είναι κάτι λιγότερο από ημιτελές, οπότε δεν ενδείκνυται για συζήτηση περί πηγών και πολιτικής πηγών. Θέλω να πω ότι όταν απουσιάζουν πηγές γενικά, το να παραπονιέται κανείς για το ότι απουσιάζει συγκεκριμένη πηγή, ή ελληνόγλωσσες πηγές γενικά, είναι μάλλον περιττό. Αναφορικά με το έργο του κ. Τσερεβελάκη (φαντάζομαι εννοείτε το βιβλίο περί της ανακτήσεως της Κρήτης), πρώτον, δεν τυγχάνει να το έχω. Δεύτερον, δεν είναι απαραίτητο, ούτε προσθέτει εγκυκλοπαιδικότητα, να αναφέρουμε σε ένα άρθρο όλα τα σχετικά πονήματα που πιθανώς να υπάρχουν, ειδικά αν δεν είναι πολύ γνωστά και σε άλλη γλώσσα. Για να είμαι σαφής: εάν γράψω αύριο άρθρο για την ανάκτηση της Κρήτης, κύριες πηγές μου θα είναι η έγκριτη αγγλική έκδοση του Λέοντος του Διακόνου, μερικές ακόμα πρωτογενείς πηγές, και κατόπιν ορισμένα δευτερογενή και τριτογενή έργα περί του Φωκά, της εποχής του, και του Βυζαντίου, λ.χ. η μονογραφία του Diehl για τον Φωκά, του Χρηστίδη περί του εμιράτου της Κρήτης, ίσως το ODB για συμπληρώματα εδώ κι εκεί, κλπ. Ακριβώς δηλαδή τα έργα που αναφέρονται και χρησιμοποιούνται κατά κόρον και στη διεθνή βιβλιογραφία. Δεν είναι θέμα "σνομπαρίσματος", απλά πρέπει να επιλέξω με βάση α) την προσβασιμότητα σε εμένα των έργων και β) την εγκυρότητά τους. Μη έχοντας στα χέρια μου το εν λόγω έργο, δεν μπορώ να κρίνω περί του β), οπότε θα δουλέψω με ό,τι έχω. Αυτό βεβαίως δεν σημαίνει ότι αν στο μέλλον ανακαλύψω (ή ο οποιοσδήποτε χρήστης) ότι κάτι λείπει ή είναι ανακριβές και το έχει μόνο το έργο του κ. Τσερεβελάκη (ή οποιοδήποτε άλλο ελληνόγλωσσο, γερμανόγλωσσο, κλπ. πόνημα, δεν είναι εκεί το θέμα) δεν μπορεί να το προσθέσει. Περί του λήμματος της Κρήτης, σας απάντησα ήδη πιο πάνω: εάν η μοναδική προσθήκη είναι ο τίτλος του μαγίστρου, τότε δεν βλέπω τί το ουσιώδες προσφέρει, ο τρόπος δε με τον οποίο παρεμβλήθηκε η παραπομπή στο υπάρχον κείμενο ήταν μάλλον ατυχής. Constantine   ✍  14:14, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Σας συγχαίρω για τα άρθρα σας ! 'Ομως θέλω να επισημάνω πως παρακάμπτετε (?) την εξήγηση μου ότι η τοποθέτηση του οφφικίου του "Μαγίστρου" (Magister) στον Νικηφόρο Φωκά (κάτι που δικαιούται ο μακαριστός), απλώς προέκυψε. Η δε τοποθέτηση της βιβλιογραφίας ως είχε ήταν για την κατάληψη της Κρήτης απ τον Νικηφόρο Φωκά. Πάντως χαριτολογών θα ήθελα να επισημάνω πως καλόν θα είναι η ΒΙΚΙΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ να αναρτήσει επιγραφή στην οποία να εξηγεί στους μελλοντικούς χρήστες πως πρέπει να θέτουν τις συνεισφορές τους ενώπιον της κρίσεως των διαχειριστών και κατόπιν της εγκρίσεως τους να τις παρουσιάζουν (!) Θέλετε να παραδεχτώ πως κακώς προσέθεσα τον τίτλο magister στον τότε στρατηγό Νικηφόρο Φωκά, αν και τον κατείχε ο άνθρωπος ? Να το πράξω, καθ επιθυμίαν σας. ΄Ομως ξανακαταθέτω και τελειώνω οτι ο σκοπός της παρεμβολής και προσφοράς βιβλιογραφίας ήταν ο ως άνω. Εγώ κατέθεσα και εγώ φυσικά γνωρίζω τι έπραξα. Πάσα άλλη ερμηνεία είναι εν προκειμένω εσφαλμένη και αυθαίρετος ως προς τις προθέσεις μου και κατά συνέπεια δεν μπορώ να την δεχτώ. Γι αυτό και σας παρακαλώ να μην με ερμηνεύσετε πλέον επ αυτού εφ όσον εξηγήθηκα κατ επανάληψιν σεβόμενος πλήρως την δικαιοδοσία σας. Τα λοιπά που ευγενώς αναγράφετε τα διάβασα. Η εν προκειμένω διαφωνία μου παραμένει και εύχομαι η άλλη άποψη να είναι πάντα σεβαστή79.129.130.189 (talk) 15:06, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Amorium
Thanks for your "thanks". I wonder if you have any more on the history of Amorion and Emirdağ. The Emirdağ article is very vague about its pre-modern history and even its Ottoman name! Was it named Emirdağ until it was renamed to Aziziyye? --Macrakis (talk) 15:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi! Unfortunately I don't have access to more sources than you; ODB, EI2, etc. I'll try to have a look over the next few days whether I find anything, however. Constantine  ✍  17:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways: Sign up now Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
 * Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
 * Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
 * Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
 * Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
 * Research coordinators: run reference services

Elena Kountoura translation help
In translating this article, I had some trouble with the clause "...παρότι το 2007 συγκέντρωσε περισσότερους σταυρούς σε σχέση με το 2004 που εξελέγη." I know what σταυρός means, of course, but in this context I had trouble translating it. I put "...although 2007 consolidated most points in connexion to the 2004 election." I am assuming that σταυρός here means cross as in "cross/X on ballot", but I also considered that it might have something to do with the places where electoral sub-boundaries cross, i.e. "districts", "precincts" in English. Since I wasn't sure, I used "points" which can imply either total vote points earned or the points on a map in English. The Greek phrase in the original source cited by the Greek article I would translate by adapting an American English phrase "Always a parliamentary bridesmaid, never a parliamentary bride" in reference to her 2007 and 2009 candidacies, but it's still not clear to me what the "crosses" are. (Παρά τα ομολογουμένως πολλά προσόντα της, στις εκλογικές αναμετρήσεις του 2007 και του 2009 έμεινε εκτός βουλευτικού νυμφώνος. Ακόμη όμως και η αποτυχία για μια Ελενα Κουντουρά μεταφράζεται τελικώς σε επιτυχία. Μπορεί, λοιπόν, για παράδειγμα το 2007, να μην εξελέγη, αλλά από την άλλη είχε αυξήσει τους σταυρούς της σε σχέση με το 2004). Can you help me translate this more precisely? Also, in the same article, I cited a Greek source saying (I believe) that her husband was a fixer, but again I'm not positive, since it just says that he was fixing. The source says "...επιχειρηματίας και φτιάχνει την εκδοτική εταιρεία Δάφνη Επικοινωνίες..." I'm more confident on that section, but I still wanted to ask what you think.--Jpbrenna (talk) 19:43, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Michael I Komnenos Doukas
The article Michael I Komnenos Doukas 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:Michael I Komnenos Doukas for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar for You!

 * Thank you very much, and thanks for the thorough review. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  11:24, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Michael I Komnenos Doukas
The article Michael I Komnenos Doukas you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Michael I Komnenos Doukas 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 Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 10:41, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eustathios Argyros (general under Leo VI)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eustathios Argyros (general under Leo VI) 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) 22:01, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eustathios Argyros (general under Leo VI)
The article Eustathios Argyros (general under Leo VI) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Eustathios Argyros (general under Leo VI) 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) 17:41, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 1630 Crete earthquake
Hello! Your submission of 1630 Crete earthquake at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 18:34, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 12
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 12, May-June 2015 by, , ,

 Read the full newsletter The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
 * Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
 * Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
 * American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco

DYK for 1630 Crete earthquake
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:16, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Tocco rule in southern Albania
Unfortunately Rolandi+ is still editing in an inappropriate way. I wonder why he insists that the Tocco-era despotate included also regions of southern Albania []. Correspondent bibliography (Nicole etc) claims that nothing north of Filiates-Pogoni was under Tocco's rule. To be precise, Argyrokastron-Zagorie-Dropull-Vouthroton (all regions in the Albania part of the present border) were not part of his realm.Alexikoua (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

If this is true,everything is OK.The article said Despotate of Epirus which has controlled areas from northern Greece to southern Albania.However it OK,and maybe a peer reviewed material would help in the future.

And maybe Alexikoua doesn't need to say "typical manipulation of sourced content" in the future,as all editors have an explanation for their contributions.Rolandi+ (talk) 08:18, 19 July 2015 (UTC)


 * @Rol.: I assume this is some sort of apology for still being disruptive while the wp:ani is active. Nevertheless you didn't care to post a word in the correspodent talkpage.Alexikoua (talk) 13:52, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Marianos Argyros
Gatoclass (talk) 12:52, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Simeon of Verkhoturye
I responded to a request at WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests to copy-edit the article Simeon of Verkhoturye. I've left a comment or two at the editor's talk page at User talk:Tomcat7/2015/July, but left more as notes to editors (visible only in Edit Mode) after a number of "clarification needed" tags that I placed as I was reading the article. I figured Tomcat7 would remove them as s/he addressed the issues I raised. In spite of the user name, I believe this editor may be a non-native speaker of English, so there was a lot of work to do. I thought you might like to read this article. You might give the editor a day or two to read and respond to my questions and concerns, but after that you might be able to help him/her or make some other edits to the article. I am particularly concerned with the large number of terms for religious clergy that don't seem to be English terms, or at least are unusual to the average reader. Maybe some links could be added. CorinneSD (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi! Its not as if I am an expert on Orthodox stuff, especially Russian, but I'll keep an eye on it. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  08:16, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015
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) 22:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Thomas Asen Palaiologos
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:16, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Matthew Palaiologos Asen
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:16, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Empire of Thessalonica
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn al-Ash'ath
Materialscientist (talk) 05:52, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Michael I Komnenos Doukas
Gatoclass (talk) 11:12, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Iberia to Georgia
Hi Cplakidas, I was just wondering if you know by chance when exactly the Greeks started to use name "Γεωργία" for Georgia in Greek and when and why they stopped to call it as Iberia? Jaqeli 15:03, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Huh, difficult question. I don't actually have an overview of relevant usage, so I can only guess. Archaicizing names was a big thing in Greek literature until the 19th century, and Georgia and Georgians were not really in the horizon of the Greek intellectual world during Ottoman times, so in scholarly literature (and certainly in religious literature), you'd be more likely to find Ιβηρία. I have the impression that only with the spread of Western literature, and the annexation of Georgia into Russia, did the name Γεωργία begin to be used for the contemporary region. Certainly a number of 19th-century scholars (including Paparrigopoulos) used the term for the late medieval and post-medieval country. Constantine  ✍  15:21, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It seems that all the Georgian monarchs pre-or-after unification of all Georgian realm in Greek still remained as Ιβηρία. So for example Tamar of Georgia would by all Greek chronicles be as Tamar of Iberia, right? Jaqeli 15:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * In Byzantine chronicles, almost certainly; given that they were still given to calling the Turks "Persians" and the Bulgarians "Scythians" in the 15th century, I'd be very surprised to hear that they referred to Georgia by this name. Constantine  ✍  19:15, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Btw, any progress in Georgian article translations into Greek? Jaqeli 17:03, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I've begun a couple, but I've put them on hold as I am busy both in real life as well as with a few projects of my own here. I hope to resume work soon, though. Constantine  ✍  17:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Hermann Fegelein
Hi, may I ask you to check if all your review comments have been addressed? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

WP:MALPLACED
Please do not move pages to "(disambiguation)" titles without consensus, as you did here. This violates WP:MALPLACED. bd2412 T 16:37, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Al-Mu'tasim
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Al-Mu'tasim 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 Miyagawa -- Miyagawa (talk) 19:40, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

FA
I placed Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid in the "Royalty and nobility biographies" section of Featured articles. Can you take a look and confirm that's appropriate? I could see an argument for placing it in Warfare biographies, but it seems that most anyone who was nobility is placed in the former regardless of their military importance. -- Laser brain  (talk)  01:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi! No problem, seems more suitable as the founder of a dynasty and quasi-royal status that he enjoyed. Constantine  ✍  08:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Al-Mu'tasim
The article Al-Mu'tasim you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Al-Mu'tasim 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 Miyagawa -- Miyagawa (talk) 12:41, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015
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) 11:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Greek Prime Minister
Hi, firstly I reverted that "elect" PM like you, but then I made selfrevert as I found out that he is a probably really "prime-minister designated" due to office as leader of the opposition, see infobox in Greece. Now I try to understand Greek Constituion, because eg. Italian wikipedia claims that Vasiliki Thanou is a new "acting" prime minister (Chief of Supreme Court). Can you say, where is the truth? Thank you.--Kacir (talk) 15:37, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it seems that Thanou should become a new prime minister. Then (in my view) the Frenchwiki has mistake by claiming Vassilikí Thánou-Khristophílou as present prime minister. Cheers,--Kacir (talk) 08:10, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Kacir! The process is simple: the leaders of the three largest parties receive the mandate to try and form a government through a working majority in parliament. Unless a majority is formed, one is not PM. Each one has a maximum of three days, but each one may choose to cut this short. Tsipras immediately handed it back, and Meimarakis will do so today. Then it will pass to Lafazanis, who will likewise have three days to find coalition partners. Therefore Tsipras remains a lame duck PM until probably Friday, when an interim government will be formed to supervise the elections, with one of the chairs of the country's three top courts as PM. This will most likely be Thanou, the president of the Court of Cassation (who will incidentally be also the country's first female PM). Cheers, Constantine  ✍  06:40, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for very good explanation.
 * That is most certainly incorrect, as in the itwiki. Constantine  ✍  08:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Translate
Hi, I was trying to translate one of your articles about the frankish Peloponnese on el@wiki, when I found the name "Saint George in Skorta". How would it be possible for me to translate it in Greek ? Maybe as "Άγιος Γεώργιος των Σκορτών" ? Thanks in advance for your help and sorry for any english mistakes. -- Montjoie-Saint-Denis !!! talk 07:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Marianos Argyros
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Marianos Argyros 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 West Virginian -- West Virginian (talk) 11:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Marianos Argyros
The article Marianos Argyros 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:Marianos Argyros for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of West Virginian -- West Virginian (talk) 18:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Abbasid Samarra
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Al-Mu'tasim
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Marianos Argyros
The article Marianos Argyros you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Marianos Argyros 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 West Virginian -- West Virginian (talk) 12:21, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Acting vs. Interim
Hello; I am beginning to comprehend your explanation on this issue, and I have recently looked at the Acting Prime Minister article. I've always thought the words "acting" and "interim" mean the same thing, as they did in my belief. You say that "acting" means replacing/substituting the actual PM; this is not the case here, she "is" the PM, her role is interim..., though I never actually knew this. I may have made a few edits changing "acting" to "interim", and if this had been a mistake then I must change them back. Do you any other interim leaders (instead of acting) in charge at the moment, or could she be the only one? Many thanks. Neve-selbert (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Neve-selbert! Not that I know of, but that doesn't mean anything. I am just interested in and know about Thanou because I am Greek... Constantine  ✍  10:05, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Interestingly enough, this article section calls her Acting President; could this just be a matter of preference? Thanks. Neve-selbert (talk) 10:42, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * No, this is typical confusion by people who make assumptions but don't really know the specifics. We had a series of misinformed edits regarding Thanou and Tsipras over the past few weeks, as people from abroad read something in the international news and jumped to conclusions. Constantine  ✍  11:29, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Just one question: was Prime Minister Thanou typically not a prime minister at the time of her being appointed? Thanks. Neve-selbert (talk) 15:39, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Huh? Typically, anyone who is appointed to a post was not previously an incumbent to that post. I don't understand what you are asking. Thanou was sworn in as PM, and that is it. Her role is as a caretaker PM, but she is just as much a PM as Tsipras was or whoever succeeds her after 20 September. Constantine  ✍  16:19, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, I understand now, the "interim" word is pretty much used as description rather than as part of her actual, official title; thanks for clearing this all up. That question, however, was based on the first paragraph of this article: An Acting Prime Minister should not be confused with a caretaker prime minister, etc. Thanks for your input. Neve-selbert (talk) 17:05, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Philadelphion
Hello Constantine! Could you please share you knowledge to help me with a big problem? I created the Portuguese version of Philadelphion (here) and during the expansion I made I had problems about how the sources describe the Philadelphion. According to Byzantium 1200, Nevra Necipoğlu and J. A. S. Evans, Philadelphion was a square and inside it there was the Constantinopolitan Capitol build by Constantine. Ok so far, but according to other sources I found here, Philadelphion was a structure, not just a square, and that's why I'm confused about what Philadelphion is indeed. If I consider that Philadelphion was a structure, so what is the Capitol?--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 05:32, 11 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello Renato! AFAIK, the Philadelphion was indeed a public square, where the Capitolium was located (and hence not necessarily identical to the Capitolium, as implied by Byzantium1200). Which sources did you find considering it a single structure? On the article two remarks: a) I wouldn't use Byzantium1200 as a source, and b) Cameron & Herrin make clear that the association of the Tetrarchs group with the porphyry statues reported by the Parastaseis is only tentative, and by no means certain as the group conflicts with the description in the Parastaseis. Constantine  ✍  10:06, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * For example: according to Wim Blockmans (here) Philadelphion is the Tetrarchs' sculpture; Byzantium 1200 makes a terrible simplification about what the square and the Capitol are that's why I had terrible problems about it.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 03:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, it is easy for a general work covering the entirety of Medieval Europe to get such details wrong, which is why specialist works ought to be preferred. The sources (Patria & Parastaseis) say it was a public space, the experts agree with them, so that's it. Byzantium 1200, while otherwise an admirable project, by necessity has to make more assumptions than professional historians would be inclined to allow for, because it has to "reconstruct" complete buildings. It is nice as a visual suggestion of what it might have looked like, but not an authoritative resource by any means. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  08:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Vila Franca do Campo
Hello, Constantine – How are you? I was just skimming the article Vila Franca do Campo (which I got to out of curiosity after looking for the diving sites mentioned in some of the links at the bottom of the High diving article, this week's Today's article for improvement, (week 37, 2015)), and I was puzzled by something in the lead. It says it is a town on the island of Saõ Miguel, and then in the History section goes on to say that Saõ Miguel is named after the Archangel Michael, or Saint Michael, and that the town's coat-of-arms contains the motto Quis sicut deus, which it translates as "Who is like God?" I only had a year of Latin, so I'm not sure whether Quis sicut deus is really a question, or could be either a question or a statement, but there is no question mark on the coat-of-arms itself, and in the same paragraph in the History section it says the name Michael in Hebrew means "he who is like God". I'm wondering whether Quis sicut deus was written as a question in error. I think "He who is like God" makes more sense given the meaning of "Michael". Maybe it has evolved into a question over time, but in the absence of evidence for that, don't you think it should be translated as "He who is like God"? Corinne (talk) 22:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Corinne, I am fine, thanks, I hope you are likewise. Well, my formal Latin education is practically non-existent (I can usually half-understand something through Spanish and French, but that is it), but FWIW, what you say makes sense. Constantine  ✍  22:33, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


 * "He who is like God" would be Qui sicut Deus or Is qui sicut Deus. See Latin declension: quis is the interrogative pronoun "who?", quī the relative pronoun "who, that". Maybe the allusion to Michael was intended after all, but there was a botch-up at some point. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:11, 14 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Actually, there was no botch-up. I've remembered that Michael's name is really a question. See Quis ut Deus? for detail. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:15, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I have enough Hebrew to confirm that mi ka el = who (is) like God". This question comes up in similar words many times in Hebrew scripture, e.g. "Who is like you, O LORD", Dt 33:29, Ps 35:10, 71:19, 113:5, Jer 49:19, 50:44 "Who is like me?". The clearly implied answer is not "this man" but "no-one". It is a claim that the God of Israel is unequalled and above all. – Fayenatic  L ondon 10:18, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Fayenatic london. Now I understand why it would be a question. Corinne (talk) 17:00, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIV, September 2015
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) 05:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you for your kind words Renato, although the few tweaks and changes here and there don't really constitute any major assistance. As for continuing for many years, I'll give it my best; certainly my work is made all the more enjoyable by such excellent collaborators as you :). Cheers and thanks again, Constantine  ✍  20:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Corinth
Hello, Constantine - I was just looking at the latest edit to Corinth, and I saw at the beginning of the article a tag asking for more sources that has been there since 2010! I don't know about this particular edit. It just added one more bit of unsourced information. If you have time, do you feel like looking at this article? Corinne (talk) 00:43, 23 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Corinne! Unfortunately, most of the sources I have relating to modern Corinth are back home in Greece. The modern town of Corinth is not so notable as the ancient/medieval one... I'll do what I can, though. Constantine  ✍  18:38, 23 September 2015 (UTC)


 * O.K. Great! Corinne (talk) 18:39, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

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. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Vassilios Vasileios Vassilis Vasilis etc
I don't think there is a "correct" transliteration, especially when it comes to this particular name. I think we should stick with the official transliteration of the Hellenic Army website. Gtrbolivar (talk) 09:23, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * By the way, I have to congratulate you on your impeccable work on many Greek history articles. I've seen the rare photos you've uploaded (Stratigos Polymenakos, Katechakis, Manetas and many many others). Really amazing. Keep up the good work. Gtrbolivar (talk) 09:27, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Not quite. There exist a few accepted standards of transliteration of Greek, and in most of them it would be "Vasileios". The reason for my insisting on following them is that the Greek army does not use any general guideline but follows a rather ad hoc approach, and in many cases this approach is problematic because it is lazy. E.g. transliterating μπ as "mp", Μιχαήλ variously as "Michail", "Michael", or even "Mikhail", etc. "Vassilios" etc can always be used as a redirect. Constantine  ✍  09:31, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * PS, thanks for your kind words :) Constantine  ✍  09:32, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * It would be a really hard task for a non-Greek to read "Vasileios". It would be something like "Βασιλέέϊος". My opinion is that we should stick with the official websites for issues like this. Anyroad, it's not an issue of grave importance. Gtrbolivar (talk) 09:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! A gift from fellow Wikipedians
Hi Cplakidas,

You have been nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways). Congratulations and thank you for your hard work!

Please email us at merchandise@wikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt.

Thanks!

KRobinson (WMF) (talk) 18:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Wow, I did not even know this existed! How nice! Constantine  ✍  20:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 13
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 13, August-September 2015 by, , ,

 Read the full newsletter The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * New donations - EBSCO, IMF, more newspaper archives, and Arabic resources
 * Expansion into new languages, including Viet and Catalan
 * Spotlight: Elsevier partnership garners controversy, dialogue
 * Conferences: PKP, IFLA, upcoming events

Ganja
Hi, reason?-SaməkTalk 14:15, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Samək! The reason is that the corresponding image collage was deleted at Commons, and the template was displaying an error message. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  14:26, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Byzantine Heraldry reference
Hello.

I was going through the stale requests at the RX and came across your request from June 2012 about Byzantine Heraldry. I was only able to find one of the unfulfilled requested articles. This is an article from Archaeology by Jennifer Wood. If you would still like to receive this reference, you can email me and I'll be happy to send it over.


 * Hi MrLinkinPark333! I am interested, thanks, but I can't find your email. Can you please send me one and I will respond. Thanks again, Constantine  ✍  10:19, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Helena (Eleni)
Good day, Cplakidas! Firstly... I want to thank you for improving quite a bit Helena Doukaina Angelina. Secondly - what is the proper transliteration of her Greek name in English - Eleni, Helena, Helen or Helene? And thirdly - don't you think it's a bit strange that John I Doukas and his wife named two of their daughters Helena (Queen Helena and Helena, wife of William de la Roche)? I am little confused about that... Anyway, thanks again, indeed, and answer when you will have a time! Bye!--Miha (talk) 08:02, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi! The transliteration would be either "Eleni" (modern phonetic approximation) or "Helene" (semi-classical transcription). The latter is mostly preferred for medieval subjects as a mid-way between the Classical and the modern forms. Helena or Helen would be the anglicized forms, which is also what is commonly used for first names of Byzantine people in the article title, whereas surnames are usually transliterated according to the Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium standard, i.e. Komnenos rather than Comnenus or Komninos, or Palaiologos instead of Palaeologus, Palaeologue, etc. On the name of the two daughters, you are right that it is odd, and indeed very unusual, but it is securely enough referenced. The Komnenodoukai seem to have liked exceptions to the general naming rules, e.g. naming themselves Doukas or Komnenos-Doukas while they were Angeloi, or the fact that Michael I of Epirus gave his son Michael II the same name, something extremely unusual among Greeks to this day. Best, Constantine  ✍  18:28, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello and thank you very much! ;) I hope you are quite well! P. S. I didn't notice until now how strange was this custom among the Greeks; but there were always some exceptions. Michael VIII and his wife had a daughter, for example, who was named Theodora, just like her mother! (In other cases, I, who love genealogies, usually noticed that daughters were often named after the grandmothers.)--Miha (talk) 11:37, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Ally or enemy?
Hi Cplakidas, just interested how does the Greek/Byzantine sources present Georgians to the Byzantine Empire? Was Georgia considered as an ally or enemy? Jaqeli 16:01, 14 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Off the top of my head, they were considered pretty much as the Armenians, perhaps a bit more favourably as they were more in the Byzantine cultural orbit. Like Armenians, they were occasionally enemies, but as Christians they were seen in a positive light, all the more since the Georgian Church was in communion with Constantinople, unlike the Armenian Church. The main factor however is that except for the brief period of the end of the 10th and the 11th centuries, when there were many marriage links and Georgians entered Byz. service, the Georgians were rather peripheral to the Byzantine worldview. To borrow a modern concept, they were sort of the Byzantine "near abroad" where influence was exerted, and where some level of acknowledgement of imperial authority was expected, but where no direct control was exercised. After 1204, of course, the Georgians were only relevant to Trebizond. Constantine  ✍  16:48, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

A quite late Thankyou
Hello Constantine, just now I came back to my request of 8 May 2015 concerning the Serbian sebastocrator Kersak (Isaak Doukas). Many thanks for your translation/interpretation! Jürgen 217.83.5.138 (talk) 18:38, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Theodosios Kyprios
Hello Constantine, do you know any primary sources or literature about "Theodosios Kyprios, usurper in Constantinople 1402" or the historical context of this usurpation, respectively? According to the only secondary text I found online about him, he was "one of the leading men in court in 1414". Thanks Jürgen217.83.5.138 (talk) 18:59, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Jürgen, long time no see! I hope you are fine! On Kyprios, the only info I could find is the same as you: that in 1414 he was at the court in Constantinople, and that his daughter married the son of Michael . I have no idea where this 1402 usurper came from. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  20:19, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015
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) 21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Need your assistance
I noticed you have used this book as a reference:Prof.Yaşar Yücel-Prof Ali Sevim:Türkiye tarihi II, AKDTYKTTK Yayınları, 1991 Would you happen to have access to pages 38-40 of this book? Could you verify that it mentions the Siege of Nagykanizsa and supports this edit? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:17, 16 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Kansas Bear! If I recall correctly, this was simply me copying stuff over from Ottoman-Iran wars. You should ask User:Nedim Ardoğa, it is he who has used these publications as sources. Constantine  ✍  10:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:49, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Baldus de Ubaldis
I was just reading the article on Baldus de Ubaldis, and I was puzzled by two things. I wondered if you could shed some light on them. The first is the name "Ubaldis". How did the name get the "s" on the end when in Italian is is "degli Ubaldi" (of the Ubaldis). Why wouldn't it stay "de Ubaldi"? The second is how he and each of his two brothers – all three of them – died in the same year – 1400. That's an incredible coincidence. Corinne (talk) 02:09, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Trajan
In response to a request made at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, I have just begun copy-editing Trajan. I have a few questions, and I don't know anyone other than you to ask it of. The first paragraph of Trajan, is:


 * Marcus Ulpius Traianus was born on 18 September 53 AD in the Roman province of Hispania Baetica (in what is now Andalusia in modern Spain), a province that was thoroughly Romanized and called southern Hispania, in the city of Italica (now in municipal area of Santiponce, in the outskirts of Seville), where Hispano-Roman families were paramount. Of partial Italian stock and ethnically Hispanic, Trajan is frequently but misleadingly designated the first provincial emperor.

1) The phrase "a province that was thoroughly Romanized and called southern Hispania" does not sound right. I undertand "was thoroughly Romanized" (I read the entire article on Hispania Baetica), but "called southern Hispania" seems kind of tacked on and results in an awkward middle of this long sentence. It's not clear to me who called Hispania Baetica "southern Spain". Was it the Romans? The residents of the Roman provinces of the peninsula? Or is it modern scholars or others? Also, the sentence just said it was "the Roman province of Hispania Baetica". If it was an alternate name for that province, perhaps it should be written that way (also called "southern Spain"). Any thoughts?

2) I think "Of partial Italian stock and ethnically Hispanic" is a little odd. Perhaps "Of partial Italian stock but ethnically Hispanic"? Any thoughts?

3) Regarding the last clause, I read the note that accompanies this, and I still don't understand why it is misleading (and presumably wrong) to designate Trajan the first provincial emperor. He was from a Roman province. Was there another emperor who was really the first provincial emperor?

If you are unable to answer, or don't feel like responding, let me know and I'll copy these questions to the article's talk page. Corinne (talk) 02:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Corinne! On the first issue, I'd leave this "and called southern Hispania" entirely out as it is rather incorrect. The province was called Hispania Baetica, and was in the south of Hispania, but this phrasing gives the wrong impression, as you noted. On the Romanized bit, I would move it to the end, and join it to the discussion on Trajan's origin. What "ethnically Hispanic" is supposed to mean I have no idea. Based on the sole reference provided it is actually wrong, as Trajan's family were Italic colonists, so here too I'd change this. On the third question, the author probably means that though born in the provinces, Trajan was of Italic stock himself. I think that the first emperor of not fully Italic stock was Septimius Severus, and the first with no Italic background at all was Macrinus. In short, I'd rephrase this to something like this: "Marcus Ulpius Traianus was born on 18 September 53 AD in the Roman province of Hispania Baetica (in what is now Andalusia in modern Spain), in the city of Italica (now in municipal area of Santiponce, in the outskirts of Seville). The province as heavily Romanized, and Hispano-Roman families were paramount at Italica. Although frequently designated the first "provincial" emperor, Trajan, although born outside Italy, was actually of fully Italic stock himself." Cheers, Constantine  ✍  04:47, 22 October 2015 (UTC)


 * You will recall that, following your suggestion just above, I worded the sentence pretty much as you suggested. An editor has now re-worded the sentence to reflect a source that says Trajan was partially of Italic stock. However, the way it is now worded (removing the "although" subordinate clause), also removes the contrast between a frequent assumption that Trajan was the first provincial emperor and the fact that he was at least partially not of provincial stock. At least that's what the original sentence was trying to convey. I don't know if that contrast is important, or correct, or of general interest, but it's not there anymore. Do you think that contrast, that point, should be there? If so, the "although" construction can be put back while retaining the information that he was partially of Italic stock and partially not. Corinne (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Corinne! Well, although I am not an expert in Roman history, I do remember that the point of Trajan being the first "provincial" emperor is one that is frequently mentioned when referring to him. Therefore, based on my (admittedly subjective and non-exhaustive) experience of the sources, I think it is important to clarify the subject as far as possible. I cannot comment on the purity of Trajan's Italic descent; what seems clear to me is that the referenced source insists that Trajan's family was a) mostly if not exclusively of Italic descent and b) that the milieu it moved in and Trajan grew up in was solidly Italic. Hence I disagree with the edit linked above, which implies rather the opposite. If the controversy continues, I would suggest to cut out the middleman and use the direct quote, which is either way in the reference given. Constantine  ✍  16:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Are you suggesting that we revert the edit? Shall we point to this discussion? Shall I leave the edit up to you? You're more of an expert on the content than I am. Corinne (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Are you watching Trajan? The editor seems determined to prove that Trajan was "ethnically" a Spaniard. Corinne (talk) 16:35, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments on the article's talk page. (I assume when you wrote "you" near the beginning of your last comment, you meant the other editor, not me.) Corinne (talk) 00:28, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Article upgrade assistance request (Pre-translation stage)
Seasons Greetings,

This is in reference to a relatively new umbrella article on en-wikipedia named Ceremonial pole. Ceremonial pole is a human tradition since ancient times; either existed in past at some point of time, or still exists in some cultures across global continents from north to south & from east to west. Ceremonial poles are used to symbolize a variety of concepts in several different world cultures.

Through article Ceremonial pole we intend to take encyclopedic note of cultural aspects and festive celebrations around Ceremonial pole as an umbrella article and want to have historical, mythological, anthropological aspects, reverence or worships wherever concerned as a small part.

While Ceremonial poles have a long past and strong presence but usually less discussed subject. Even before we seek translation of this article in global languages, we need to have more encyclopedic information/input about Ceremonial poles from all global cultures and languages. And we seek your assistance in the same.

Since other contributors to the article are insisting for reliable sources and Standard native english; If your contributions get deleted (for some reason like linguistics or may be your information is reliable but unfortunately dosent match expectations of other editors) , please do list the same on Talk:Ceremonial pole page so that other wikipedians may help improve by interlanguage collaborations, and/or some other language wikipedias may be interested in giving more importance to reliablity of information over other factors on their respective wikipedia.

This particular request is being made to you since your user name is listed in Translators available list.

Thanking you with warm regards Mahitgar (talk) 05:44, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Khumarawayh ibn Ahmad ibn Tulun
Materialscientist (talk) 13:13, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Legio I Minervia
Constantine, I hope you won't mind another question. In the first paragraph in the article Legio I Minervia, it says "in the Rhine border". Can that be correct? I would think one of these would be better, unless this is specialized military terminology:


 * at the Rhine border


 * near the Rhine border


 * in the Rhine border region

What do you think? Corinne (talk) 23:44, 24 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Corinne! I think the Rhine limes is meant here, which is a broader region than the borderline pure and simple, i.e. either your first or your third options would be fine. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  09:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I used the third version. Corinne (talk) 15:51, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, would it be possible for you to take a look on this article and do whatever modifications are needed in order to make it look even better ? Thanks in advance. -- Montjoie-Saint-Denis !!! talk 13:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Basil I
Hi Constantine,

Just a heads-up that the article on Basil I seems to be attracting nationalistic axe-grinders again. Urselius (talk) 11:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Basil I
Would you be interested in giving your opinion concerning sources on the Basil I talk page? --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Malta
Hallo Constantine, I hope that everything is going well for you in Austria! :-) I have a question for you: there was a recent addition on Malta history section, which say that in 395 AD the island joined the Eastern Roman Empire. I looked at bit at it, and found out that some sources confirm it, while others say that it remained with the western part (this looks more logical to me, since both Sicily and Tripolitania were also part of it). On the Notitia Dignitatum I found nothing about the island, except a line about a certain Legio Melitense in the eastern part (but here I think that the reference is to Malatya). Do you know any source that can cut the head to the bull? :-) Thanks and cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 10:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Alex! Everything is fine, except I am very busy with work! I hope everything is fine on your side too :)! On your question, you are quite right. Malta was an annex of Sicily, so it shared Sicily's fate while part of the WRE. Here's what the ODB has to say (article "Malta", by Thomas S. Brown, p. 1277): "Probably ruled by the Vandals from ca.455 until it was taken over by the Ostrogoths at an uncertain date. It was conquered by the Byz. ca.535." Constantine  ✍  14:51, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, all ok here in Helvetia, except the result of the elections. :-) Strange that the Enciclopedia Italiana says that belonged to the east, but maybe it was a "refuso"... ODB rocks! :-) Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 17:50, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Accents
Hello Constantine! Would you know any way I could discover where I need to put the Greek accents in words? Always you have to correct it and I don't understand yet any specific rule about, even if I have to use "ε" or "η" and "ο" or "ω", that's why I always use Google Translator to turn back transliterated words to Greek alphabet and, as you can imagine, Google never put the accents in the right place.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 18:36, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Renato! If you mean where the word is accented, actually it is very simple: these diacritics are accent/stress marks: ὰ ά ῶ. There should only be one in each word, and this is the syllable stressed. ἀ and ἁ are modifiers (rough breathing etc) mostly irrelevant in modern pronunciation. In transliteration for medieval/ancient words, ἁ would be "ha", ἑ "he", etc. Hence Ἕλλην for example is Héllen. In modern pronunciation this is actually Ellin, however. I hope this helps :). Cheers, Constantine  ✍  18:47, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Where you don;t have any diacritics to go by, e.g. when working from a transliterated word, the usual positions for the stress in Greek from antiquity to today are in the penultimate and antepenultimate syllable, but there are quite a few exceptions in the more archaic words. Whenever you have trouble, just ask :). Constantine  ✍  18:54, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 01:32, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Many thanks Peacemaker67, for your help in achieving this. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  16:23, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

An Umayyad pretender
Hello old friend. I just started Abu Muhammad al-Sufyani (mostly to get rid of a redlink in the Palmyra article) and was wondering if you had anymore info about the man. He is basically known for being a pretender to the Umayyad Caliphate at the time the latter was being overtaken by the Abbasids. Also, I recently read the article on Ahmad ibn Tulun, fantastic work as always. --Al Ameer (talk) 22:37, 9 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Al Ameer! Thanks for your kind words. I'll have a look at what I can find. Best, Constantine  ✍  14:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey!
Hello Cplakidas,

Regarding this edit, I wondered, should we even use the picture at all then? Is it even depicting the siege of 626 at all as the uploader has written in its caption? :-) I know you're much better versed in Byzantine matters than me, so I thought I'd hop by for a sec. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 10:48, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi LouisAragon! IIRC, the siege depicted is indeed supposed to be the 626 siege, which was of major religious significance for the Byzantines (remember that the Akathist, even today perhaps the most well-known Greek hymn, refers to this siege), but it depicts events in contemporary fashion, drawing naturally on the far more recent 1453 siege (cf.  and ). It is an anachronistic depiction, yes, but it was probably deliberate as an anti-Ottoman statement. Either way, as an artistic depiction historical accuracy was not important during the period, any more than for Western artists whoe dressed Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar up in knights' armour. Constantine   ✍  14:43, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


 * , Well explained, thank you. Yeah, looking at the cannons (wat, 7th century AD, heh) one would indeed raise some question marks. It's good to know that it's indeed the siege itself, I was mostly confused about that. Anachronistic scenery was indeed quite common throughout the entire medieval ages, of which indeed "Alexander of the Medieval Ages" is a good example. I remember when I was in high school (studied gymnasium) the images used at the texts we translated of the Aeneis were very often displayed in such manner too. Kinda lame but yeah can't blame our ancestors for that, haha. Btw, does it show the Persians to be attacking as well or only the Avars/Slavs? That would be good to know as well. Bests and take care - LouisAragon (talk) 05:10, 11 November 2015 (UTC)


 * , I think (and this is only my personal opinion, I haven't seen the images in person or read the relevant scholarship so I might well be wrong) that only the Persians are supposed to be depicted. For one, the Persians were considered the main enemy in 626 and in Byzantine memory of the events, and for the other, in lat Byzantine usage, the Turks were often anachronistically called "Persians", which I suspect carried over to ecclesiastical usage as well. Constantine  ✍  17:14, 11 November 2015 (UTC)


 * (, strange I didn't get a notification even though you pinged me, excuse me for the belated response) Yeah, I heard about that anachronistic usage as well before, regarding the Turks. Kinda reminds me in some way, in a differerent context and relation, of how Russians labeled many of the Caucasian people's well into the 20th century. Though in my opinion that made more sense than the Byzantine comparison, as they used to be part of the same nation until recently (1813/1828). Of course were talking about two completely different time periods, but yeah. Btw, I was just having a look, do you think this article could pass the GA test for the Greece and MH WikiProjects as of right now? Or does it need more tweaking? Asking you this again, as you have more knowledge about that I believe. ;-)
 * Bests and take care - LouisAragon (talk) 16:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)


 * , well, the article is a very good effort but not quite at GA/A-class-level IMO. Chiefly I think that the first years of the conflict are not covered in sufficient depth, both as far as the operations in the east are concerned, as well as due to the complete lack of any reference to the increasingly insecure basis of Phocas' regime in Constantinople. Background ought also to be expanded, a bit more about the long prehistory of the Byzantine-Persian Wars ought to be included. There is also a lack of information about events in Persia proper, or at least an analysis of Khosrau's motives or viewpoint. Admittedly I am not sure such has been attempted and information is probably sparse, but I would be happier to see that someone went to the trouble to include contemporary Iranologist opinion in the article, e.g. Pourshariati, rather than relying solely on Byzantinists' accounts. I would also get rid of the first two maps as they are rather unreferenced and offer nothing that the third map doesn't. For further improvement, I would suggest a purge in the literature, Farrokh and Oman should be replaced, the one is too unreliable and the other too outdated. Constantine  ✍  16:55, 13 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I agree with that exactly. Well-summarized points. We'll work on it somewhere in the future I'm sure. Regarding those last mentioned points, heh, funny thing is Farrokh is not even a historian, yet his works are very often just dropped here randomly as references on Wiki. Some things will never change I guess. ;-) Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 05:02, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Ulichs
Hello, Cplakidas -- I was just skimming the article on the Ulichs, and in the lead I noticed this sentence:


 * The tribal name comes from their location in Bessarabia called Ugol (corner) in Slavic and Ογλος in Greek (Greek ογλος, "an angle or corner").

I see that the same Greek word is written twice. Since this is not helpful to any reader who does not know Greek, wouldn't it be better to write the first one so English-speaking readers could get an idea of how the word is pronounced? Corinne (talk) 23:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

John Asanes (despot 1355)
Hi Constantine,

PLP No. 91373 states John Asanes (brother-in-law of John VI.) was made governor of Peritheorion in 1355 by emperor John V. In the same year, he was promoted from sebastokrator to despot - implying that this promotion had also been made by John V.

But: In 1355, Matthew Kantakouzenos was still in war with John V., and John Asanes had always been a supporter of him and his father. So it would be plausible for me that in 1355 John Asanes had been promoted by Matthew and not by his rival. Is there explicite evidence in the sources (Kantakouzenos, Gregoras) that John Asanes had changed sides after the abdication of John VI. in December 1354 from Matthew to John V.? Thanks for help! Jürgen--217.83.3.163 (talk) 09:58, 14 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Jürgen. Well, Kantakouzenos in his history is quite explicit that it was John V who appointed Asanes as governor of Peritheorion: Παλαιολόγος δε ο βασιλεύς, έπει την διατριβήν έώρα πρός ουδέν λυσιτελούσαν, Ασάνην δεσπότην τόν Ιωάννην Περιθεωρίου καταστήσας άρχοντα. Given the interrelations of the leading Byzantine families at the time, it shouldn't be a surprise that Asanes turned to John V after John VI Kantakouzenos' abdication. Constantine  ✍  15:09, 14 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Constantine, thanks! Does Kantakouzenos also give information about which emperor raised John's brother Manuel Raoul Asanes to the rank of despot in 1354/55: John VI, Matthew - or John V? --217.83.6.32 (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, there is a passage which calls Manuel a despotes already in 1351 during the siege of Galata along with Phakrases (ή πεζή και ιππική δύναμις εξήγετο, ών εστρατήγει δεσπότης Μανουήλ, Ασάνης, ό βασιλίδος της Ειρήνης άδελφος υποστράτηγον έχων τον πρωτοστράτορα Φακρασήν, και περιεστρατοπέδευε Γαλατάν), which would mean that he was appointed by John VI. Constantine  ✍  17:22, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ahmad ibn Tulun
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ahmad ibn Tulun 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 13:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you see this message? FunkMonk (talk) 20:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi FunkMonk, I saw it, I was just waiting for you to go through the entire article. I'll probably get around to answering your points tomorrow. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  21:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)


 * You have done a lot of great work, I'm a huge fan of your work. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 23:32, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Cool, just checking. I don't have further points so far. FunkMonk (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVI, November 2015
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) 03:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Wasim
Hello Constantine! you could please tell me, who is Wasim that you mentioned in the article Badr al-Mu'tadidi?--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 04:20, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Renato! It's an error for Badr, I don't know how it came about. Thanks for catching it! Constantine  ✍  10:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Ethnic group
Hello, Constantine -- I was just looking at the article Ethnic group, and I noticed in a list of four Greek phrases in Ethnic group, three of the four are translated into English, but one is not. I'm wondering if you could provide a translation. Corinne (talk) 00:25, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Also, while you are there, could you look at two other things?

1) There is an error in the notes, but I don't know how to fix it.

2) You'll see in the revision history that I changed a pull quote to a blockquote. However, now that blockquote starts with a lower-case "c". I tried to access the quote in the source, but couldn't. If that is the beginning of a new sentence in the original, the "c" can be changed to capital. If it isn't the beginning of a new sentence in the original, the "c" should, I believe, be changed to [C] to indicate that it was added here but was lower-case in the original. Are you able to find the quote in the source? Corinne (talk) 00:42, 1 December 2015 (UTC) Unless, of course, you think it should stay lower-case. Corinne (talk) 00:43, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Corinne! The untranslated Greek phrase is already translated, it means "common sanctuaries and sacrifices". I guess the others are translated because they are not so verbatim. On the error, you mean the "cohen" reference? The problem here was that the reference was defined differently on two different places, one with page 383 alone and one with pages 383-384. I've fixed that. I've also fixed the blockquote, you were right, it is a fragment from a sentence and begins with a lower-case letter in the source. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  09:58, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Corinne (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

What reference style do you use?
I'm interested in adopting your method of referencing in articles and abandoning the MLA format I use. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 17:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Alexis Ivanov! I mostly use the Harvard style in the shortened footnote format, depending on the case at hand. Mostly the template suffices, when I want to make a side comment and reference that, I use . Sometimes I include some online resource or a source that is used only once, then I might include the full citation straight in the reference. Mostly I single source-referencing, but sometimes, especially if I use more than three sources for a section or statement, I bunch them together in a single reference. As I said, it depends on what makes most sense in each case. You can see some examples at al-Mu'tasim and Siege of Constantinople (717–718). Generally I find that you should use what works best for you; the only rule is to be consistent within each article. Constantine   ✍  23:23, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks I'm learning your way, it's much better. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 20:29, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Roman town category?
Hey Cplakidas, hope you're doing well :-) Regarding Bishapur; should it receive one of those Roman categories, like "Roman towns in ...."/"Roman towns and cities"? The architecture of the place, art, and foundation was largely made by Romans, but I thought I'd see for your opinion first, so that we dont create/add an obsolete category. The same goes for Rumeshkhan County (I have some source ready to expand that). Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 15:56, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi LouisAragon! I am fine, although work doesn't leave much time :) I hope you are doing well too. The question is a good one, as it is somewhat unclear whether the categorization refers to an ethnic or cultural/archaeological label. I would definitely lean towards adding the category, however. Perhaps simply use the Category:Roman sites in Asia, which is generic enough to cover anything Roman-related. Constantine  ✍  18:39, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * , that's good to hear. :-) Yeah, I'm doing well too, thanks for asking. ;-) Indeed, work and life in general leaves us without the amount of spare time we'd want to have, definetely sometimes at least, haha. I agree with your response; I'll make sure either one of the categories is added. Bests and take care - LouisAragon (talk) 04:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Btw,, while we're at it, some time ago I added this line ( (...) although the Arsacid dynasty lived on through the Arsacid Dynasty of Armenia, the Arsacid dynasty of Iberia, and the Arsacid Dynasty of Caucasian Albania; all eponymous branches of the Parthian Arsacids.") to the lede of the Parthian Empire, which is a must have for the lede (you can see it there). I think however, perhaps, it should be moved a bit upwards, no? I'm asking you this as you're the main Classicist/Greco-Roman man of us here. If you know a better spot higher up in the lede, could you move it perhaps? Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 08:22, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I am not really a Classicist, that honour goes to others. As for the sentence in question, I think it is well situated where it is currently, unless you expand the lede to include more information on the client kingdoms' relationships with Parthia, where you can then point out that branches of the Arsacids were installed in the Caucasian states. Otherwise it is fine, IMO. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  10:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Konstantinos,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Roman East 50-en.svg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on December 23, 2015. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2015-12-23. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:32, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

I need your assistance
Hi Contantine, I would like to ask you a favor. I am trying to list the Ottoman ports. But finding the modern equivalents of some romanized Ottoman names is very difficult. So far I had difficulty in the following names: İstandiya (maybe a port around Crete), Siray and İstanpali (around Rhodes). I also couldn't determine whether Vati is in Kalymnos or in Samos. Can you please give your opinion on these. Thanks. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:44, 5 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Nedim, sure thing, but I don't have any of my Greek sources on the Ottoman period here in Vienna. At best therefore I can guess: Vati is most likely Vathy in Samos, Istanpali could be Astypalaia, Siray Syros and Istandiya likely Tenos. Where are these names from originally? Constantine   ✍  13:59, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the light-speed reply. These names are from Ottoman salname (annual). But unfortunately Arabic alphabet lacks certain vowels Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 14:23, 5 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, I happened to see this query. I would guess that İstandiya is Dia (island), also known as Standia, the principal port of Crete for centuries ; the epenthetic "İ" in Turkish is regular. Is it possible that İstanpali is Stimboli, Crete (= Lappa, Argyroupolis)? --Macrakis (talk) 23:45, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Muhammad ibn Abdallah ibn Tahir
Hey Constantine,

Hope things are going well. I'm currently doing some work on a number of Tahirid-related articles and I had some questions on Muhammad ibn Abdallah ibn Tahir; since you created the article, I thought I might pose them to you before making any changes:

1) According to Ibn Isfandiyar (link), Muhammad was the governor of Tabaristan from ca. 845 to 851 on behalf of Tahir ibn 'Abdallah. Ibn Isfandiyar is a relatively late source, however, and I've been unable to find any secondary or earlier primary sources that confirm this information. Have you happened to come across a reliable source that mentions this?

2) Is there any reason to use Iraq Ajami instead of Jibal?

3) "Iraq Ajami, along with the provinces on the southern shore of the Caspian Sea, also came under Muhammad ibn Abdallah's jurisdiction. In the latter, Gurgan and Tabaristan, he had appointed his brother Sulayman..." This is indeed what the cited source (Bosworth) says, but I think it's possible that the source itself may be incorrect here. Both al-Tabari (here) and Ibn Isfandiyar state that Sulayman was actually acting on behalf of Muhammad ibn Tahir, the governor of Khurasan, and both the Encyclopedia of Islam and Encyclopedia Iranica articles on the Tahirids agree. Al-Tabari does say that the revolt of 864 was at least partially caused by the abuses of Muhammad ibn 'Abdallah's agents who were managing his estates in western Tabaristan, but I don't think that he was Sulayman's superior.

Thanks, Ro4444 (talk) 21:09, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello Ro4444, things are fine, thanks a lot :) I hope you are fine as well. As to your points, 1) I didn't know, and it certainly is not in the sources I used. On 2) if I had a reason, I have long forgotten it so probably it wasn't anything important. On 3) I think you are right, Tabaristan after all was usually under the control of the governor of Khurasan. Again, feel free to correct this. As the History of Iran is a standard go-to source, I'd prefer not to excise this entirely, but to mention that Bosworth writes this, but in reality etc. PS, as you have a greater facility with and access to primary sources than I, I am currently working on Ahmad ibn Tulun and would like to add a more or less comprehensive section on his family. It is always irksome how one of his sons never mentioned before pops up here and there in the secondary accounts of the Tulunid regime, and if you have access to any relevant sources, I'd like to summarize his wives and offspring somewhere in the article. As always, thanks for your diligent work! Constantine   ✍  22:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Good to hear! Thanks for the answers, I'm not entirely sure how best to make the last change, but I'll see what I can do to make the article more accurate.
 * As for your request, unfortunately I'm guessing the secondary sources are just presenting the information in the manner that the primary sources gave them. I have nowhere near a comprehensive knowledge on everything that the primary sources say, but the histories of al-Kindi, al-Yaq'ubi, al-Tabari, and al-Mas'udi don't have anything resembling biographical information for his family members; I've never run across a copy of Ibn al-Daya's biography, and I haven't taken more than a cursory look at Maqrizi. Al-Balawi probably has the most information out of the sources I'm familiar with, including accounts of Ibn Tulun's origins and father (which is pretty much entirely covered in Gordon's Slaves on Horses). He also mentions (p. 349) that Ahmad had 33 children, 17 boys and 16 girls, whose names were:


 * Males: Abū al-Faḍl al-ʿAbbās (the eldest), Abū al-Jaysh Khumārawayh, Abū al-Ashāʾir Muḍar, Abū al-Mukarram Rabīʿah, Abū al-Maqānib (?) Shaybān, Abū Nāhiḍ (?) 'Iyāḍ, Abū Maʿd ʿAdnān, Abū Karādīs Kazraj, Abū Ḥabshūn ʿAdī, Abū Shujāʿ Kindah, Abū Manṣūr Aghlab, Abū Lahjah (?) Maysarah, Abū al-Baqāʾ Hudā, Abū al-Mufawwaḍ Ghassān, Abū al-Faraj Mubārak, Abū ʿAbdallāh Muhammad, and Abū al-Fataj Muẓaffar.


 * Females: Fāṭimah, Lays (?), (?), Ṣafiyyah, Khadījah, Maymūnah, Maryam, ʿĀʾishah, Umm Hudā, Muʾminah (?), ʿAzīzah, Zaynab, Samānah, Sārah, and Ghurayrah (note only 15 names are listed).


 * And Ibn Taghribirdi (v. 3: p. 4) has this passage about his wife:


 * "When Aḥmad grew up, he married Khātūn, the daughter of his uncle. She gave birth to al-ʿAbbās in the year 242 (856-857 AD)."


 * Aside from that, there are some sporadic references to Ahmad's lesser sons during his lifetime; al-Kindi, p. 221, for example, mentions that Rabi'ah ibn Ahmad was in charge of affairs in al-Fustat when his brother al-'Abbas fled to Alexandria and then Barqah in 879.


 * Thanks for the compliment, you too! Hopefully the effort to get GA status for Ahmad ibn Tulun is completed soon, it looks like you've put a LOT of work into the article already. Ro4444 (talk) 19:23, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for the info. Which books/editions are these data from? Also, does anyone report why his advance in Syria was called off in 871? I suspect the reason is unease at his growing power, but cannot find a statement to that effect or to any other reason. Otherwise I think the article is quite complete, what do you think? I'd like to bring this, like his later imitator al-Ikhshid, up for FA soon enough. Constantine  ✍  21:47, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Whoops, forgot about that. Here you go:
 * As for Ahmad's abandonment of the campaign against 'Isa ibn al-Shaykh in 870, this is covered by al-Ya'qubi, p. 618, al-Kindi, pp. 214-15, and al-Balawi, pp. 51-52. No reason is given for the reversal of the directive, other than that the central government had decided to appoint Amajur to fight the rebel instead, nor do they tell us who was behind the decision. Ahmad simply receives a notice from Iraq to go home and returns to al-Fustat, while Amajur marches to fight 'Isa. If the central government was motivated by fear of Ahmad to rescind the order, we're not told as much (again, maybe Maqrizi, Ibn al-Daya or some other source has more detail on this, but I'm not aware of it if that's the case). Ro4444 (talk) 07:01, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * As for Ahmad's abandonment of the campaign against 'Isa ibn al-Shaykh in 870, this is covered by al-Ya'qubi, p. 618, al-Kindi, pp. 214-15, and al-Balawi, pp. 51-52. No reason is given for the reversal of the directive, other than that the central government had decided to appoint Amajur to fight the rebel instead, nor do they tell us who was behind the decision. Ahmad simply receives a notice from Iraq to go home and returns to al-Fustat, while Amajur marches to fight 'Isa. If the central government was motivated by fear of Ahmad to rescind the order, we're not told as much (again, maybe Maqrizi, Ibn al-Daya or some other source has more detail on this, but I'm not aware of it if that's the case). Ro4444 (talk) 07:01, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * As for Ahmad's abandonment of the campaign against 'Isa ibn al-Shaykh in 870, this is covered by al-Ya'qubi, p. 618, al-Kindi, pp. 214-15, and al-Balawi, pp. 51-52. No reason is given for the reversal of the directive, other than that the central government had decided to appoint Amajur to fight the rebel instead, nor do they tell us who was behind the decision. Ahmad simply receives a notice from Iraq to go home and returns to al-Fustat, while Amajur marches to fight 'Isa. If the central government was motivated by fear of Ahmad to rescind the order, we're not told as much (again, maybe Maqrizi, Ibn al-Daya or some other source has more detail on this, but I'm not aware of it if that's the case). Ro4444 (talk) 07:01, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * As for Ahmad's abandonment of the campaign against 'Isa ibn al-Shaykh in 870, this is covered by al-Ya'qubi, p. 618, al-Kindi, pp. 214-15, and al-Balawi, pp. 51-52. No reason is given for the reversal of the directive, other than that the central government had decided to appoint Amajur to fight the rebel instead, nor do they tell us who was behind the decision. Ahmad simply receives a notice from Iraq to go home and returns to al-Fustat, while Amajur marches to fight 'Isa. If the central government was motivated by fear of Ahmad to rescind the order, we're not told as much (again, maybe Maqrizi, Ibn al-Daya or some other source has more detail on this, but I'm not aware of it if that's the case). Ro4444 (talk) 07:01, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * As for Ahmad's abandonment of the campaign against 'Isa ibn al-Shaykh in 870, this is covered by al-Ya'qubi, p. 618, al-Kindi, pp. 214-15, and al-Balawi, pp. 51-52. No reason is given for the reversal of the directive, other than that the central government had decided to appoint Amajur to fight the rebel instead, nor do they tell us who was behind the decision. Ahmad simply receives a notice from Iraq to go home and returns to al-Fustat, while Amajur marches to fight 'Isa. If the central government was motivated by fear of Ahmad to rescind the order, we're not told as much (again, maybe Maqrizi, Ibn al-Daya or some other source has more detail on this, but I'm not aware of it if that's the case). Ro4444 (talk) 07:01, 10 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot! As to his daughters, there is a (?) without an accompanying name there, i.e. there are only 14 names. Is this so in the text as well (I assume this is from the Sirat of Balawi)? Constantine  ✍  14:50, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the edition of al-Balawi I have has a corrupt version of the name (here), where the editor wasn't sure what the form was. Both the first and last letters could conceivably be b, n, t, th, or y.
 * I missed your earlier question regarding the article in general. My opinion is that it's very good, it deals comprehensively on the subject and the sources are balanced well. Looking with a more narrow view, added a more contemporary map and I did have a few comments on the text:
 * 1. The name of Ahmad's first wife seems to be given pretty variously in the sources: Ibn Taghribirdi provides Khatun, Maqrizi provides Majur, and I believe other versions exist as well. That's why Gordon, Slaves (p. 117) uses the name Khatun, while Swelim uses Majur. I'm not sure if modern scholarship has rendered any opinion on the name most likely to be correct.
 * 2. "Ibn Tulun created a fleet and fortified his borders and ports, including Alexandria, Akka—the latter undertaken by Abu Bakr al-Banna, the grandfather of al-Muqaddasi, who provides a detailed description—and a new fortress on Rawda Island to protect Fustat." This statement, coming from Bianquis, seems to be a little loose with timing, as Akka would not likely be under Ahmad's control prior to his conquest of Palestine. The account of the fortification of Akka, given by al-Muqaddasi (translated here, and which also states that Ahmad already had a governor in Jerusalem at the time), provides no date for the event.
 * 3. "Ibn Tulun kept himself out of the Zanj conflict, and even refused to recognize his new suzerain, who in turn did not confirm him in his position." This is kind of unclear in terms of who was on the other side of this disagreement.
 * Other than that, like I said I think it's well done, I can't see much else that could use improvements.Ro4444 (talk) 23:54, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Again thanks, I've incorporated your comments and info in the article. Constantine  ✍  11:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Akapniou Monastery
Hello Constantine! I'm creating the Portuguese version of the article about this monastery using Kazhdan, and according to him V. Grumal suggested that the building was established by Saint Photios of Thessaly in the early 11th century. Do you have any information about this Byzantine saint in your prosopographical sources?--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 01:39, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * And also Demetrios Beaskos.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 02:08, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Renato! Photios of Thessaly was the spiritual father of Basil II, and accompanied him in his wars against the Bulgarians. He is not well known, and IIRC, his hagiography remains unpublished. On Beaskos, acc. to PLP 2541, he was a functionary of the Metropolis of Thessalonica in the 1290s: "Megas Oikonomos von Thes/nike, 1295 - 1299; Referendar von Thes/nike, vor 1295; Diakon, 1295; Hierodiakonos, 1299; Komponist, vor 1295; Schriftsteller, 1299". He also corresponded with patriarch Gregory II Kyprios and John Pediasimos. I'll try to find more on Photios, he seems an interesting figure. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  23:15, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Abdallah ibn al-Mudabbir
Hello friend. I think there is a problem with the introdution of this article. Who fought with Ahmad ibn Tulun was his brother, not him as is described. Cheers.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 04:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Indeed. I forgot to remove it during the copy-paste from his brother's article. Thanks for the correction! Constantine  ✍  08:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 14
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 14, October-November 2015 by, , ,

 Read the full newsletter The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * New donations - Gale, Brill, plus Finnish and Farsi resources
 * Open Access Week recap, and DOIs, Wikipedia, and scholarly citations
 * Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref - a citation drive for librarians

John Kourkouas
Hi friend. who is the "Suml" mentioned in John Kourkouas' article? I see the name just there and comparing it with our list of Abbasid governors of Tarsus, who was in office at that moment was Thamal al-Dulafi, not "Suml". But there is another problem. In Thamal al-Dulafi's article, there is no information about any engagement between him and Kourkouas despite the latter was militarily active at that moment.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 05:58, 12 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello! Suml is apparently the same as Thamal, it is probably a different reading of his name by Runciman (perhaps from a non-Arabic source). You can see that in p. 138 Runciman references his destruction of the Kurd Ibn al-Dahhak. As to the latter problem, I don't see the contradiction: Kourkouas and Thamal simply never met in battle, Thamal operated against local Byzantine commanders and not in the areas where Kourkouas was active (i.e. the Upper Euphrates/Mesopotamia area). Constantine  ✍  16:21, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks a lot Renato for your kind words and wishes. I certainly plan to keep writing for decades, Inshallah :). Constantine  ✍  13:12, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Abu Firas al-Hamdani
Hi again. Could you please help me to put the things clear in my mind? According to Abu Firas al-Hamdani, in 952 he fought with the Byzantines lead by Bardas Phokas the Younger and his son Constantine Phokas near Mar'ash when they tried to obstruct Sayf al-Dawla's refortification of Ra'ban and Mar'ash. But according to the article of the battle it happened one year after and there is no mention to Abu Firas' participation. And according to Sayf al-Dawla's article, indeed the battle happened in 953, not 952, and again there is no mention to Abu Firas' participation.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 23:02, 13 December 2015 (UTC)


 * These are two different campaigns. The text in Sayf al-Dawla reads: "In the next year, he concentrated his attention on rebuilding the fortresses of Cilicia and northern Syria, including Marash and Hadath. Bardas Phokas launched an expedition to obstruct these works, but was defeated. Bardas launched another campaign in 953, but despite having a considerably larger force at his disposal, he was heavily defeated near Marash in a battle celebrated by Sayf al-Dawla's panegyrists". The first two sentences refer to the 952 campaign, which is the one Abu Firas fought in, and the rest concerns the "Battle of Marash" campaign of 953. Constantine  ✍  14:06, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot.--Renato de carvalho ferreira (talk) 15:16, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * A pleasure, as always :) Constantine  ✍  16:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Theodore Komnenos Doukas
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Theodore Komnenos Doukas 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) 21:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sakellariou and George II.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Sakellariou and George II.jpg. 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) 18:57, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Translation of quote
Hello,

Would be grateful if you could translate the following quote to English (context):

"Ποτέ δεν έκρυψα ότι είμαι αλβανικής καταγωγής. Αυτό θα ήταν ασέβεια προς την πατρίδα των γονιών μου και πολλών συγγενών μου. Είμαι και Έλληνας πολίτης. Στην Ελλάδα μεγάλωσα, εκπαιδεύτηκα, έμαθα ποδόσφαιρο. Στη χώρα που υποδέχτηκε την οικογένειά μου και την οποία τιμώ όπως μπορώ." 37.46.188.80 (talk) 15:14, 21 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello! Here it is: "I never hid that I am of Albanian descent. That would have been disrespectful towards the homeland of my parents and many of my relatives. But I am also a Greek citizen. I grew up in Greece, went to school, learned to play football. In the country that welcomed my family and which I honour however I can." Cheers, Constantine  ✍  15:18, 21 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you, champ!37.46.188.80 (talk) 17:09, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Eustathios Daphnomeles
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eustathios Daphnomeles 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) 02:02, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015
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) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Possible category merger
Hello, Cplakidas. Recently, I created a Category:Metropolitans of Adrianople with a link to the Greek and Bulgarian wikipedias. I think it is similar to the Category:Bishops of Adrianople that you created. The other 2 wikipedias don't acknowledge the existence of your category page. I propose that the two category pages to be merged if you think it is necessary. Zee money (talk) 06:15, 26 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello Zee money! I generally prefer to use simply "Bishops of X", because the sees were not always metropolitanates; many have a chequered history, being elevated to archbishoprics or metropolitanates, demoted, and re-elevated, etc. "Bishops" covers them all irrespective of the exact title, and for the purpose of categorization, the identity of the see is IMO more important than its exact hierarchical position. So yes, I am in favour of a merger, but for simplicity's sake rather than because it is necessary as such. Have nice holidays and a happy New Year! Constantine  ✍  11:17, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Fifty-Year Peace Treaty
Hey! How are you doing? Hope you had a Merry Christmas :-) I was wondering (just regarding something little); am I missing something or is there a clear reason as for why Fifty-Year Peace Treaty isn't added to the info box of the Lazic War? Didn't the treaty finalize the war after all? - LouisAragon (talk) 23:02, 28 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi! Thanks, it was nice :). As to your question, no, there is no reason, it was just an oversight, which I fixed. Cheers, and a happy New Year! Constantine  ✍  08:08, 29 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Heh, good to hear you had a nice time. Thanks, and the same wishes 110% back to you! :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 20:01, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Cplakidas!


Happy New Year! Cplakidas, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Krakkos (talk) 04:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

About a persistent sneaky vandal
Hello, have a great new year and greetings from elwiki. I'm writing here (in english, since this may be of interest to other editors of enwiki) asking you to keep an eye on a peculiar and persistent vandal that frequently appears here as well as on elwiki - maybe much more over there. Sometimes I hesitated, whether I'm right reversing the guy or not, however the pattern was too strong to ignore.

There is one of his latest edits and here is its elwiki counterpart: 10 minutes apart, same IP, same target, same kind of edit. There are dozens more in elwiki all having the same pattern, changing details of military career with a peculiar bent on artillery. (Of course they are all are reversed). That's very insidious as such small details look 100% legit, especially for the most obscure people, and may be unnoticed for a very long time; yet it's pure vandalism. --cubic[*]star 20:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello and a happy New Year to you too! I've been aware of the guy too, he's been doing the same thing around here for the past week or so. As vandalism goes, it is insidious but also pointless; the articles are obscure, and for the life of me I cannot understand why anyone would be interested in changing the arm of service of some Greek officer, or why anyone would waste his or our time with it... To put it bluntly, it is another confirmation that η μαλακία είναι αθεράπευτη, and that some people have too much time on their hands... Anyhow, keep up the good work. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  20:07, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Ahmad ibn Tulun
Hi, just to let you know that your hook was 218 characters long (DYK maximum is 200, and shorter is better). It is now in Prep 5, and I shortened it there. Yoninah (talk) 17:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ahmad ibn Tulun
The article Ahmad ibn Tulun you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ahmad ibn Tulun 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Theodore Komnenos Doukas
The article Theodore Komnenos Doukas you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Theodore Komnenos Doukas 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) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Ahmad ibn Tulun
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thank you Oncenawhile, much appreciated! I look forward to bringing this to FA soon! Best regards, Constantine  ✍  11:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Byzantine heraldry articles
To close resource request Byzantine heraldry articles I send the three articles to you. --Dr Lol (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Ousterhout, Robert. "Symbole der Macht. Mittelalterliche Heraldik zwischen Ost und West" Lateinisch-griechisch-arabische Begegnungen (2009) pp. 91-109
 * D. Cernovodeanu. "Contributions à l'Étude de l'Héraldique Byzantine et post-Byzantine", Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinik 32.2 (1982) 409-22.
 * W.H. Rüdt von Collenberg. "Byzantinische Präheraldik des 10. & 11. Jhs", Recueil du 12e Congrès International des Sciences Héraldique et Généalogique (Stuttgart 1978), 169-81


 * Thanks a lot Dr Lol! Very much appreciated! Best regards and a happy New Year! Constantine  ✍  16:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Nikkimaria (talk) 23:01, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Hama
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Hama 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 Catlemur -- Catlemur (talk) 22:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Constantine Diogenes
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Constantine Diogenes 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 Ian Rose -- Ian Rose (talk) 06:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Theodore Komnenos Doukas
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I've sent you an email on wikipedia
or

Menas of Constantinople
Fair enough he came from Alexandria, thanks for adding this, but as he lived in Constantinople he can also be categorized as people from Constantinople. See Categorization_of_people. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Constantine Diogenes
The article Constantine Diogenes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Constantine Diogenes 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 Ian Rose -- Ian Rose (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Battle of Bizani
Hello Constantine, hope you have a nice time. I remember you are one of the experts on the subject, thus your advice will be invaluable in the case here [] about the Albanian involvement in the specific operations.Alexikoua (talk) 08:32, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Gospel of Matthew
Hello, Constantine -- I'm reading the article Gospel of Matthew, and at the end of the section Gospel of Matthew I saw some repetition. Can you take a look at it and see if it needs fixing? Corinne (talk) 16:49, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Here is the passage. I've put into bold what looks like a repetition:


 * The author also had at his disposal the Greek scriptures, mostly not from any known version of the Septuagint, both as book-scrolls (Greek translations of Isaiah, the Psalms etc.) and in the form of "testimony collections" (collections of excerpts), and, if Papias is correct, probably oral stories of his community. These sources were predominantly in Greek, mostly not from any known version of the Septuagint; although a few scholars hold that some of these source documents may have been Greek translations of older Hebrew or Aramaic sources.

– Corinne (talk) 16:51, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I noticed a mistake
Battle of Fakhkh, is spelled wrong. It is just one Kh instead of two. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 07:44, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Alexis Ivanov! Are you sure? Because the translation of Tabari uses "Fakhkh". That's where I got it from. Constantine  ✍  07:54, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

I just used a modern source (The New Cambridge History of Islam,volume 1 page 407) and to me surprise there is a usage of the word Fakhkh, yet the Arabic and Persian pronunciation and spelling contains only one "Kh". I will let the article stay as it is in the meantime, I will look into it more Alexis Ivanov (talk) 08:04, 21 January 2016 (UTC)


 * There is no mistake, I checked on the primary source itself, I was thinking about this all night in my bed, and I knew my mistake when I was in bed before going in for the next day, there happens to be a diacritic known as Shadda on top of the Kh, indicating Kh-Kh, the same way the B in Abbasid has Shadda, that is why is written as Abbasid in the translation, but in the Arabic it is written Abasid, with the shadda on top of the B. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 01:19, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I hope you can look at the battle of Fakhkh infobox that I did, and look at the info. Interesting enough there is a Wikishia, since this event is far more important to the Shia's history, which includes picture of Fakhkh, that I'm not sure if we can borrow it Alexis Ivanov (talk) 06:29, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Looks good, but usually the Arabic names are transliterated without the various diacritics for simplicity's sake. Would you like to undertake expanding the article? There's lots of material in Tabari, and I certainly won't get around to doing it any time soon. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  12:33, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't have the English translation, only the Arabic version in my possession. I will try and expand the article in the near future. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 19:16, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

January 2016
Hello, I'm Lukaslt13. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Talk:Utigurs has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.Lukaslt13 <em style="font-family:Verdana;color:red"> --Talk  18:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13


 * Hi Lukaslt13. Before reverting, you might want to check out what it is you are reverting; in this case, there is an IP dumping his fringe POV-version of the main article, which has been a battleground for several months, to the talk page since he cannot do so in the article itself. Constantine   ✍  18:28, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * And as an aside, in case you are not aware of it, notifying users of good standing and over 10 years of experience in WP by automated messages like the above is generally considered bad manners (i.e. a bit heavy-handed/patronizing). I am sure you did not mean anything by it, I am just letting you know that this is an unwritten code of conduct. Constantine  ✍  18:30, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Go then to SMS, or PM, or IRC, but stop cussing, and that in such situations!! Because I guarantee what other people are feeling by reading all this nonsense. Let's be clever. Peace :D.--<em style="font-family:Verdana;color:Green">Lukaslt13 <em style="font-family:Verdana;color:red"> --Talk  18:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13
 * I am not sure I follow what you mean. Anyhow, I did not mean the second part as a criticism; it's something you can take or leave, but you should be aware of. As for the first part, when you see someone removing massive blocks of text it generally is a sign that something is going on. What exactly is going on, especially when it is done by a registered account and not an IP or a throw-away 5-day old WP:SPA account, is something that requires a bit more research before pressing the revert button. Constantine  ✍  18:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016
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) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Leo III- Final Years
Hello Cplakidas,

Thank you for your history contributions, first off all! I had been reading up on my Byzantine history, and came across a passage that didn't quite sit well with me. The topic was Byzantine Empire under the Isaurian Dynasty under the heading Final Years (of Leo III). Describing his Ecloga, it is said "Christian influence is evident in the marked decrease of crimes subject to capital punishment, but the collection conversely expanded the use of mutilation, perceived as more humane, as punishment."

This statement implies that the moral superiority of a Christian belief led Emperor Leo to do away with a number of capital punishments. I have not read Ecloga, so I am not sure which capital punishments were discarded. However, it did make me curious. I wonder if any of them were the ones instituted by Emperor Theodosius about 250 years earlier. His institution of a wide range of capital punishments were also Christian influenced.

I can see how the quoted sentence may have been used to describe Emperor Leo's motives, and may have been innocent enough. However, it can also be seen as biased and from a certain POV. As comparing the institution of laws, we can compare Leo on the one hand, as being influenced to do away with capital punishments due to his Christian faith, or on the other hand Theodosius, whose pious Christian belief led him to institute many offenses punishable by death in order to force Christianity onto his subjects. Either way, the implication the sentence has on the basis of a religious belief as a source of morality is a POV and biased, even if it does come from a source.

Archimedeslibrary (talk) 19:50, 27 January 2016 (UTC) Archimedeslibrary


 * Hello Archimedeslibrary! First, thanks for your kind words. On your observation, I tend to agree with the gist of it, but per policy we must follow what the sources say. I don;t have enough knowledge of the background of the Ecloga myself, so it may well be that Leo actually justifies his changes on Christian terms, or that some contemporary source makes this connection, in which case it is not modern opinion, but the actual driving force. As to the comparison with the Theodosian Code, again, we are free to make speculations, but not include them in the article per WP:OR. If you find a reliable source making this comparison or anything relevant though, please feel welcome to add it to the relevant articles. Best, Constantine  ✍  21:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)