User talk:Dr.K./Archive 3

HELP US MAKING THE PROJECT OF ANCIENT GREEK WIKIPEDIA
We are the promoters of the Wikipedia in Ancient Greek. we need your help, specially for write NEW ARTICLES and the TRANSLATION OF THE MEDIAWIKI INTERFACE FOR ANCIENT GREEK, for demonstrating, to the language subcommittee, the value of our project.

Thanks a lot for your help. Ἡ Οὐικιπαιδεία needs you!

DYK

 * Many thanks Royal to you and the DYK crew that made this possible. Take care. Dr.K. 02:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Aerospace
Hi - I believe that it derived from Mechanical Engineering so Historically it arose from bicycle mechanics - see Specialized subdisciplines of Mechanical Engineering. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HAL3000 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm sure that Aeronautical has a strong mechanical component in it. But I quote from the History section of Engineering: Its origins can be traced back to the aviation pioneers around the turn of the century from the 19th century to the 20th although the work of Sir George Cayley has recently been dated as being from the last decade of the 18th century. Early knowledge of aeronautical engineering was largely empirical with some concepts and skills imported from other branches of engineering. Modern Mechanical arose from the Steam engines and their application to industry that led to the Industrial Revolution. Aeronautical borrowed from Mechanical but it also borrowed from Physics, Fluid Dynamics, Textile Engineering which is related to Chemical etc. and it evolved historically as a separate branch in parallel to Mechanical. That is why it is considered as a separate Branch. See it this way: It did not wait for Mechanical to mature and then to later grow out of Mechanical. Computer Engineering, for example, grew out of Electrical and developed later. Aeronautical grew in parallel to Mechanical. Dr.K. 22:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply - to quote MIT's website: http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/about/history.html  The aeronautics study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology began six years prior to the Wright brothers' 1903 pioneering flight. In 1896, mechanical engineering student Albert J. Wells built a 30-square-inch wind tunnel as part of his thesis.

You could say that DiVinci is the father of aerospace engineering and that it stemmed from biology or that Daedalus is the father and that it stemmed from prison escape...

If you go to the link in reference 14 U of E, they only mention the others and not aerospace so that's contradictory.

At the Imperial College of London - if you look at their department it states: Aeronautics was first taught at Imperial College in 1909, with the first chair established in 1919. We are now recognised as a leading department internationally, with over 300 undergraduates on our four-year MEng degree, approximately 40 postgraduate students on our two MSc courses and over 70 research students and research associates.

It looks like they only give a Meng degree.

Also Mechanical Engineering is concerned with anything that moves. Civil with statics. Chemical(a branch of Mechanical). If you asked me there would be two - Civil(Mechanical a branch of Civil), and Electrical

So - where does this leave us? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HAL3000 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You can classify them any way you want and that's the problem. So the classification has to come not from you or me but from History and from practice. DaVinci and Daidalos etc are too early to even be considered. Mechanical, in its modern form, according to Britannica started with the steam engines etc. not with Archimedes. You either accept this chronology or we have to go back all the way to the Neanderthal man and see what kind Engineering branches they had. It is generally accepted that Engineering has the five branches mentioned if you accept the chronology from the 17th century onwards. There is neither a strict definition nor a theorem that can yield the five branches. But Academically and historically these are the recognised five main branches of Engineering. That Edinburgh does not offer one of them (Aerospace) is not proof it does not exist. Engineers know that. Now if you want to be philosophical about it and try to either expand them or shrink their number by shifting criteria or finding new commections between the branches you can of course do that too. It would be very time consuming and counterproductive for us to engage in such discussion though because it would be like playing with dough. Engineering as a subject is malleable enough to take many shapes. Everyone using their own criteria can come up with different branches. Either we stick to History, academic tradition and widely accepted practice or we might as well go to the beach and start playing with wet sand. Dr.K. (talk) 22:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Βικιπαίδεια
Hi Dr.K. I just copied the article Korkyra (which you started) to el:Κόρκυρα (with the necessary link to all previous editors and I have just moved its editing history too). I think that it would be a good idea to have in Βικιπαίδεια the articles you started here. My time is limited, this is why I chose a really small article of yours to demonstrate this in practice and not just canvass you. I understand that your time is also limited, but nevertheless, I thought, why not, one more sort-of-canvassing note. He can survive that one too :) .--FocalPoint (talk) 09:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm really honoured FocalPoint. Far from being canvassing your message is very welcome news and your strategy very logical. I am intrigued and I will try to help especially with larger articles in the future. But I'm also impressed with your technical skill. I didn't know you could transfer the history of an article interwiki. How did you manage that? I always thought it was well nigh impossible. And to go to such lengths to credit the original contributors even though you did all the translation exceeds the standards of academic integrity. Let me know if you need any help in the future. Thanks again and εις το επανιδείν. Τάσος. (Dr.K. (talk) 15:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC))

Since this action involves deleting, it is reserved to administrators (I am one in Βικιπαίδεια), however, you can ask for this in el:Βικιπαίδεια:Αιτήσεις εισαγωγής ιστορικού. We always respond, since as you point out, this gives credit to the right people. Many editors in Βικιπαίδεια are quite careful about our (wikipedians') copyrights. Χάρηκα για τη γνωριμία Τάσο, --FocalPoint (talk) 18:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I was suspecting something like that. I didn't think mere users could transfer history like that. It was very kind of you to do so. Anyway I have occasionally edited Βικιπαίδεια as Τάσος Κ so I'll use the account for any future work there. Ευχαριστώ και πάλι και η ευχαρίστηση είναι αμοιβαία. Τάσος. (Dr.K. (talk) 20:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC))

http://tools.wikimedia.de is down
The whole of http://tools.wikimedia.de appears to be down currently. This affects many things. One of them is mentioned at Village pump (technical). I don't know what caused it or when it might be fixed. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:15, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It's back. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Burt Lancaster in Lawman.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Burt Lancaster in Lawman.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I notice that you removed 2 fair use images from the article. You shouldn't have removed them and you should add them back immediately. The DYK rules don't state that you should remove the fair use images from the article. What the rule say is that the image that we use on the main page won't be a fair use image. I hope this comment helps clear up the rules. Your article looks good and it should be featured. Royal broil  22:04, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thanks. But what will be the replacement pics? Dr.K. (talk) 22:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I see. thanks for the clarification. Dr.K. (talk) 22:28, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I see that you did not cite anything in the article Lawman (film) that you nominated for DYK. It cannot be featured with citations. There at minimum has to be a citation for the fact used in the DYK hook. Please fix this as soon as possible so it has a chance of being featured in DYK. You don't necessarily need to use fancy templates. You can find out more at CITE. Here's a simple example that I did today if you find that easier: Jimmie Lewallen. Good luck. Royal broil  04:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Done as we speak. Dr.K. (talk) 07:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for all your great help. Dr.K. (talk) 07:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Lawman
Hi there Tasoskessaris. Don't get me wrong, I thought your article was very well written and quite interesting. I just couldn't find where you'd got the following summary from:

'' Its main characteristic is that the hero appears flawed and the motives and purpose of the other characters are not as defined or clear-cut as in other westerns such as the Good the Bad and the Ugly and even earlier American ones that preceded it. The suspects' crime is not as heinous as in other westerns and their credentials as villains not as certain. Even the town's strongman Vincent Bronson, played by Lee J. Cobb, is portrayed as an eager negotiator trying to avoid bloodshed at every turn. Despite all these factors the marshal and the guilty men come to a series of deadly confrontations that claim many lives. The lawman is portrayed, as the plot progresses, as having increasing doubts about his mission and being disillusioned about his job.''

I just couldn't find much in the sources to support this description. So while I think it's probably passable as an article, I'm inclined to think that articles nominated for DYK probably need to stick a little closer to their sources. If you can point me to a source that makes the above points however, I'd be happy to reconsider. Gatoclass (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but I read right through the TCM summary carefully and again, I just didn't find anything to support the summary of the film you wrote above. The hook is there, sure, but I think articles that are submitted for DYK have to conform to minimum Wiki standards, such as WP:OR. Basically the above summary seems to be your own opinion of the film, and while your opinion may well be accurate, the encyclopedia can't be based on the personal opinions of Wiki editors. Gatoclass (talk) 16:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I think it would be fine without the summary. Gatoclass (talk) 16:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


 * That looks fine now, I'll add a message to the Suggestions page to say I've changed my mind, if someone else doesn't include it in an update I will add it to the next update I do (sometime tomorrow). Cheers, Gatoclass (talk) 16:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:Andreas Papandreou.jpg
It was a photo (not a newspaper page) uploaded with a Non-free newspaper image licence - deleted per WP:CSD I#7 - Non-free images or media with a clearly invalid fair-use tag (such as a logo tag on a photograph of a mascot) may be deleted at any time. I restored it, You are welcome to fix the licence before 3 January 2008. P.S. ''This page is 150 kilobytes long. It may be helpful to move older discussion into an archive subpage.'' Best, feydey (talk) 01:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I suggest reading Non-free newspaper image licensing text very well before using it. It is not to be used on photographs, even if they are scanned from newspapers. feydey (talk) 01:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * There was nothing wrong with the fair use rationale on that image, just the license. feydey (talk) 01:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. I will have to check it up as soon as I return. Unfortunately I have to go now. Take care and thanks again. Dr.K. (talk) 01:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Does Rolex rhyme with bolox?
(Sorry Doc, couldn't resist. It's not even original: years ago, "Bolox" watches were advertised in the back of Private Eye: "Your friends will love it when you say 'Excuse me while I check my Bolox.'" Or similar.)

Could you have another look at Talk:Rolex if you have a few minutes? Thanks. Of course, feel very free to disagree with me there. -- Hoary (talk) 12:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Hoary. Thanks for the joke and the invitation. Nice way of demystifying the brand. Anyway I'll check the talk page as soon as I finish a Solid Mechanics discussion in the Straight razor talk page. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 17:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. More to the point, I'm taking myself off the net for a couple of days. (I'm sure en:WP can tick along without me.) Back by 3 January. -- Hoary (talk) 00:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You reminded me of the Timex ad. Indeed WP and even Rolex will keep on ticking. Have a nice break. Dr.K. (talk) 00:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Smena
If you wish to use it, please put the Smena 6 picture on the Lomography article, which discusses Smena cameras more broadly. The Smena 8M article is about the Smena 8M camera; if you wish to expand it to cover all Smenas so you can use the Smena 6 picture, you can, but then the article must move to Smena. eae (talk) 09:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * D-U-N done. eae (talk) 09:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't have bothered making the disambig page. The camera is by far the most famous Smena, and none of the other Smenas have articles, so the disambig page really doesn't help anyone find anything new.  I don't see any harm in it, but not much use either. eae (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The Prisoner
"The Prisoner also inspired the naming of the band thenewno2, featuring George Harrison's son, Dhani Harrison." I followed the links. Nowhere did I see authority for this proposition, therefore, as an uncited allegation, it remains deleted until it can be supported by evidence, and as an editor wishing to include it, the onus remains on you to provide authority. I've no doubt that it may be true; but policy requires that it be substantiated. Over to you. --Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 05:33, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll tag it but that will only delay its removal if it continues to remain unreferenced. --Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 17:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reference, but it only needs a link to the website here rather than a lengthy recitation amounting to original research. Do you mind if I change it or do you want to? --Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 02:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand your concerns here, but all we need to do is satisfy verifiability and reliable sources. If readers don't believe the statement, that's what the link is there to support. I'll shorten it if you don't mind. --Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 03:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Sophie Scholl's last words
Hi, I commented out the footnote to the film and added a fact tag to the article: The movie is a fictionalization and therefore not a very good reference. Do you have a better reference? (John User:Jwy talk) 00:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * An older version of the article had it as "possible last words" and referred to the movie. If we can't find a source, we can go back to that.  Thanks. . . (John User:Jwy talk) 02:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Link ?
Hello

Why is it, You say that it is OK to place a link on a wiki page but soon as you do its deleted ? Please can you tell me why mine keeps being deleting and what I need to do to keep the link I place ? I will gladly add a return link on my front page, do you have a 88x31 button banner that I can add to my front page for a return link?

This is my web site http://www.holidaycorfu.org for you to review. I made my web site as a hobby and for the love of the Island of Corfu. There is NO commercial interest to do with my site, and all site expenses come out of my pocket!! Please feel free to browse its content to verify that it is more then suitable to be displayed within Wikipedia.

Best Regards

Alan. admin@holidaycorfu.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by Al69 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Invite to WP:ROBO

 * Thank you very much for the invitation. Accepted. --Dr.K. (talk) 00:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * To add yourself as a participant of WP:ROBO, please add yourself to the alphabetized list at WikiProject Robotics/Participants. Thanks! - Jameson L. Tai  talk ♦ contribs 16:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Please use subst when inviting users to WP:ROBO. for future reference, type in {{subst:Invite User WikiProject Robotics}}. Let me know if you have any further questions. - Jameson L. Tai  talk ♦ contribs 16:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge
I have a question as I do not fully understand your position:
 * Do you object to Kings and Presidents being merged in one List of heads of state of Greece (or merely to them being merged under the List of Kings of Greece article which never was my intention? *Or do you insist on a List of Kings and Presidents of Greece?

Str1977 (talk) 14:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you please reply, Dr K? Str1977 (talk) 20:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Str, but I already did here, (yesterday). Dr.K. (talk) 21:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Greek oldest living language?
I was looking for some examples and I inadvertently stumbled on the notion that calling Greek the oldest living language might be misleading for that even though it has been "alive" for so long modern Greek is incompatible with its Ancient iterations. Although I suppose that its a continuous relationship; maybe that isn't something to worry over. However if you choose to go by that logic you would be ignoring the similar journey underwent by Chinese. Oracle bone inscriptions acknowledged by a section of this very site (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Written_Chinese) date Chinese back to at least the 14th century, there is no dispute of that within the historical community, that I'm aware of.

Thanks,

Grenadesalad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.107.124.198 (talk) 07:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting points. Linguistically speaking, I am not sure if the statement that modern Greek is incompatible with ancient Greek is true. There are significant similarities between the two. The natural evolution of ancient into modern Greek and language continuity is however apparent even to the casual observer I think. As far as Chinese, I am even less of an expert, therefore I cannot express an opinion on its continuity much less compare it to its Greek counterpart. I am aware however that this is an ancient civilisation with a great and lengthy history. Therefore I can easily imagine it could lay a claim as one of the oldest languages. Comparative linguistics can give us the answer if Greek or Chinese holds that title. It wouldn't hurt if you brought this up on either language's article talk page. Thanks for the enquiry and take care. Dr.K. (talk) 10:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Pardon me for kibitzing, but I think this is much too simple. When we try to look at the languages written two thousand years ago (for example), we have few among which to choose: most societies were illiterate, and we can only attempt to reconstruct their languages; we can't see them (let alone hear them). Now, we could talk of proto-Greek, proto-Chinese and proto-Italian. However, we don't: we talk of classical (?) Greek, ancient Chinese, and classical (?) Latin. The difference in nomenclature (the fact that there's no 2000-year-old Italian) has something to do with how each of these languages has diversified since; it doesn't tell us that Italian is more different from Latin than modern Greek is different from classical Greek. Yet the nomenclature by itself manages to give this impression. (The impression may accord with the facts, but that would be by the way.) You might start by looking at relative intelligibility: How old can Greek be and yet be understandable for a monolingual speaker of modern Greek? But this too is full of traps. What do you mean by understandable? What kind of speaker? To what extent does the modern written language retain features of the ancient written language that would be impossibly archaic if spoken, and thus perhaps artificially keep the old written language comprehensible. Et cetera. -- Hoary (talk) 10:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, something must have happened to Latin and somehow everyone thinks it's a dead language. I did not invent this idea. Conversely everyone seems to think Greek is a living language. We can invent any number of ideas to argue against these points. But I suspect, after some research, at the end of the day we would reach the same conclusions as above. I would hate to reinvent the wheel so I won't. Dr.K. (talk) 12:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Dr Kessaris I just dropped by to thank you for your kind words, all the more welcome for coming from a fellow engineer and IEEE member. Take care sir.

Hoary, the surprising similarities between the Greek spoken today and that of two thousand years ago, the Koine (an evolution of Attic) is due to the fact that the Koine was the language of the Gospels and hence accesible to all Greeks every week at Church. This has resulted in a modern speaker being able to understand fairly well, though not reproduce, utterances in a two thousand year old language. Additionaly the diglossia, use of a formal language (Attic) for official and scholarly written works until the 18th century has also led to smaller linguistic drift than the time intervals involved would suggest. Hope that helps. Xenovatis (talk) 17:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Xenovatis for your kind words, but that was the least I could do given your remarkable effort in collecting these academic sources which shed even more light on such a difficult, tragic and sometimes ignored historical topic that nevertheless is of paramount importance to humanity. Because only by studying, analyzing and classifying inhumanities and crimes against humanity we can more properly define what is humanity. I am also pleased to see another fellow engineer and IEEE member, especially on my talk page. Thank you as well for the details you provided about the Greek language. It's a fascinating subject and I didn't know the very interesting evolutionary details that you provided.  Take care for now. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 18:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC))

WP:ROBO
OK... so I've began to assess the robotics articles. Please review the article assessment guidelines and help this WikiProject out by helping out with the following:


 * Adding Robotics-related articles to the WikiProject
 * Assessing robotics articles listed in Category:Robotics articles by quality
 * Helping out with giving comments to individual articles after assessment, pointers, comments, etc. (basically, don't just give an article class and move on, let people know what led you to give such a rating when necessary.

We need to get this article assessment drive going first before peer reviews and collaborations programs can be made.

Note: advertising for this WikiProject:


 * Static Banner



If you want to use it for our WikiProject advertisement, simple paste  to use this static banner.


 * Animated Banner

Our ad is now in the Wikipedia Ads circulation. Help promote WikiProject Robotics by displaying this image on your userpage, or to place Wikipedia Ads to your user page, you may add.


 * Display only certain ads: Here's the script to only display certain ads (so you can have people see our Robotics ad more often (or just only display this ad only). Note: WikiProject:Robotics Ad is #116.

Please let me know if you have any questions. - Jameson L. Tai  talk ♦ contribs 10:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks I will. It really looks great. Dr.K. (talk) 01:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Your message to me
Hi,

I wonder why you termed my addition of a link to the Grey Gardens Online website as "vandalism." Can you please explain?

Thank you for your time and feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GGcats (talk • contribs) 04:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Putting identical external links to a multitude of articles without edit summaries is considered spamming. Another editor also suggested you change the mode of contributing to Wikipedia on your talk page because it only involved pasting one single identical link to a variety of articles without proper explanation. Spamming is a serious breach of Wikipedia policies. Dr.K. (talk) 04:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Your reaction, however, asking in a civilised way to explain the reason of my action, clearly does not fit the profile of a vandal. I am sorry if I hurt your feelings but in the future please provide more detailed edit summaries and avoid blanketing multiple articles with the same link. --Dr.K. (talk) 05:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Greek ancestry
Hi, I saw your "undo". Do you think you could point me to the relevant discussion please, I didn't know this issue had been raised before.Dolavon (talk) 22:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, How about this for starters. I'm sure more exist in the archives. Dr.K. (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * And this, where even DNA is discussed. Dr.K. (talk) 22:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * And of course we have another winner (whiner?) here. Dr.K. (talk) 22:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. You had given me the impression though that the Columbia Encyclopedia ref had been discussed as well and for some reason it had been agreed to leave it out, which is why you undid me. According to the relevant article, the CE is "highly regarded", so I figured it would be the easiest way to represent the current ("un-Fallmerayic") academic view on the issue without getting into the complexity of genetics.Dolavon (talk) 22:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No. I did not mean the Columbia article. I meant genetics of the Greeks in general. But the edit summary field as you understand is not large enough to include such disclaimers. There are additional discussions on DNA, including research papers on Greek genetics, far more detailed than your Columbia Encyclopaedia source but I can't locate them right now. I'm sure an administrator might help retrieve them if you need to pursue this further. Dr.K. (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC).

apologies
Sorry -- I didn't mean to be an insult-thrower. For the record, I am not super-rich, and I am currently wearing a Rolex (SS DJ that my wife bought me for my birthday). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chromatic Fugue (talk • contribs) 03:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. I have a Submariner and I am also not super rich. Thanks for the gesture. No problem. It happens in the heat of the moment. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 03:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Mavronjoti
Let me just get this clarified, once and for all, categorically: User:Mavronjoti was not sockpuppeting. If you still think he was, you need to take a quiet half hour off and study WP:SOCK and the nature of dynamic IP assignment, of which you seem to have a somewhat shaky understanding. I very strongly recommend you drop this point, because it crosses the line into harassment.

I'm all for having a critical review of whatever strange claims it is this user is proposing, and if necessary giving him a clear message how seriously we take WP:V, but let's keep it clean, WP:AGF, matter-of-fact, and focussed on the content not on the contributor. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Trying to evade violating the 3RR rule by hiding behind 3 IPs if it is not sockpuppetry it is devious editing practices. Accusing me of harassment for pointing these devious practices based on nuances and semantics after you accused me of racism is in itself harassment. Dr.K. (talk) 18:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * He wasn't hiding anything. He wasn't trying to evade anything. Sockpuppetry entails intent of deception, which was clearly not the case. He had three different IPs one after the other because his ISP re-assigns them daily, as with most of us . Routine case, I deal with these every day. He violated 3RR, it was plain for all to see, exactly because he was not hiding it. He got blocked for it, rightly so. Where's the problem? Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Striking one part of the above. Apparently, it's not daily fresh IPs from a large DSL pool, more like a small pool of recurrent IPs. Looks more like a limited group of computers like in a school lab or library or internet cafe. Anyway, it still doesn't make much of a difference. IP editing is not forbidden. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Why can't this user behave like any other good faith user? A good faith user 99% of the time logs in and then presto! he goes about his legitimate business. Ok. let's say he doesn't understand the system. But then he quotes bogus people for sources and tries to undo centuries of bona fide research to prove that Kapodistrias was born in Albania. Then he reverts people using the anonymous IPs and not his user name. Now this to me looks like a pattern. A pattern of deception. To understand that Mavronjoti is hiding behind these IPs you have to do some research. It is not apparent to the casual observer who thinks there are three users disagreeing and reverting and that gives him more clout among the uninitiated to such trickery. But enough of that. I do not wish to pursue this dialogue any further especially since I think it is basically useless to discuss this with someone so partial to Mavronjoti. Yes I know you will try to refute this. That's fine. Point taken. Don't bother to reply. Sometimes in a conflict such as this the best way out is just to close shop and go home. I never expected such behaviour from an admin, especially since I knew you and I thought you were impartial but at the end of the day one realises that worse things have happened. I'm sure life will go on. Dr.K. (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello there
Hey where is Arben Llalla’s, page because I can not find it? The only things that he writes on Albanian message boards, are for Kosovo or Macedonia, din’t see any Albanians-Greek ethnic issues.The Greek historian Panagiotis Aravantinos, Greek Encyclopedia, Vol V, page 402, and Trifon Evangelidi on his book “The history of Joanis Kapodistrias”, also the Greek newspapers “NEA EFHMERIDHA” of 10 and 12 May 1887 are and should be reliable sources though.

As Taulant, never heard of Ioannis Kapodistrias to be Albanian? I am so confused. --Taulant23 (talk) 07:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Taulant. Thank you for you enquiry, but I am afraid I am not an expert on obscure sources. In 1887 newspapers could publish anything. The reporter obviously was confused because there was no Internet then and Kapodistrias was not exactly broadcasting his origins on the nearest blog. As far as Greek Encyclopedia I never heard of such. However if you go to the Kapodistrias article you will see about 8 citations from verifiable online sources with great credentials such as books and scientific papers which clearly state that not only Kapodistrias was born in Corfu, his whole family was there since 1383 or so. This is 400 years before he was born. You then ask yourself: If the (unknown) Greek encyclopedia wrote about Kapodistrias as born in Albania how come all other International scholars never read this encyclopedia to correct themselves. They must have been pretty negligent scholars. Or they may have simply dismissed the idea as completely false. You decide what is the most probable scenario. Take care and mirupafshim. Dr.K. (talk) 14:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Warning over unaccetable behaviour
You have no right whatsoever to remove the comments of other users from talk pages. This is the only warning you will receive. JdeJ (talk) 17:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, it was a mistake
I guess you wanted to restore the previous message that I erroneously edited out when making my comment. That's perfectly fine and thanks for that, but the best approach would have been to insert that comment again as well as leaving my comment in after it. I've edited the page in that way. JdeJ (talk) 17:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message. As far as best approach, given the limited time I had at that precise moment, I restored the page to its original condition just before you edited it and I figured we would split the labour, as it actually happened. Dr.K. (talk) 18:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

einstein article
Thanks for fixing the article - I couldn't figure how to get it back to your original form. PhySusie (talk) 21:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I had the same problem. But I reverted further back to a version by me. Thank you for the feedback. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 21:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Ferret
I'd like to thank you for your rational discussion on the ferret's genetic ancestry.

The history behind the present trinomial is quite interesting, but I won't bore you with it now. I just wanted to say that it's refreshing to be able to discuss such a disagreement without it degenerating into handbags at dawn. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not at all. I would like to thank you for the enlightening discussion we had. It is obvious that your knowledge of this subject is superior to mine and I also thank you for your patience and excellent discussion manners. I am really curious to understand the background of the trinomial versus the binomial naming so if you ever have the time feel free to drop me a note. And the handbags at dawn, those, unfortunately, sometimes happen but never with knowledgeable, reasonable and patient editors such as yourself. Thanks again and take care. Dr.K. (talk) 23:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Evangelos Averoff
Who sounds good to me instead of what. I just kept reading that sentance and knew something wasn't right.--Cube lurker (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. However I now took the whole sentence out because it was part of an uncited section with unsupported details. Dr.K. (talk) 02:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no objection. I know nothing about the subject.  Just cruising around with the random page button.  If it doesn't belong, just glad you noticed.--Cube lurker (talk) 02:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for making me notice. It was because of your edit that I paid attention to the article. I put the original tags in November but noone came with specific page numbers and references to the points they were trying to make. Thanks again and take care. Dr.K. (talk) 02:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Giorgos
Thanks for the welcome. I am now reading the wikipedia basics and already starting to get a headache. I 'll probably end up asking you for clarifications sooner or later. Hopefully it won't take long... and btw I think I already have a question: I 'm not an English native speaker, so could I write in Greek when asking you for clarifications? Is it considered impolite or something?--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 18:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Giorgo. Thanks for your message. It's a great pleasure to be able to help you in any way I can. Asking me for clarifications in Greek, far from being impolite, is actually fun. I can always answer you in Greek and i wouldn't mind the practice. Your level of English is great anyway. Your comments on the talk page of the article on Greeks attests to that and it is obvious you have a great understanding of the subject. Take care for now και εις το επανιδείν. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 20:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC))

Is it just me or did I mess up something in this page???--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 19:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If you indent messages like we do in a letter creates the white box with the broken lines. Always write as far left as possible. That was one of the problems for me as well when I started here. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 20:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC))

Re: My talk archive deleted
It's still there, but at User talk:Tasoskessaris/archive 2; you'd originally created it as an article-space archive rather than a user one. Hope that helps! Kirill 03:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Many thanks Kirill. I replied on your talk page. Dr.K. (talk) 07:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Pontic Greek Genocide
My apologies if I intruded into a personal conversation. It appeared, to me, that Philip was being obtuse. Kansas Bear (talk) 03:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * It would appear, to me, that Philip has decided to remain vague in his assertions to the changes he believes needed to be applied to the title. He states cases(Brazil, Germany) then completely ignores my insistance on equality in contrast to the Holocaust(in which you find no statements by David Irving nor any other Holocaust deniers). His stance on NPOV appears to be one-sided, if not nationalistically(Turkey) motivated. Unless he provides any quality sources for his assertions(NPOV), he simply needs to accept the facts presented and move on. I've yet to see such concern for the Holocaust page, and subsequent dispute over its neutrality. Kansas Bear (talk) 06:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review feedback
Hi, I noticed you have a request in at peer review which has not yet received any response besides the semi-automated script. Have you tried requesting a peer review from the volunteers list? Another idea is to review someone else's request (particularly one from the list of requests without responses), then ask that they look at your request. Hope these are helpful suggestions and help to get some feedback for your request soon, APR t 20:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * First let me thank you for caring enough to drop by. It means a lot to me to see people care. It is very nice of you and it encourages me to continue with this. Also thank you for your advice. The idea to review another article and then ask for a review in return is simple and seems straightforward. The only problem is, even though I find it quintessentially Wikipedian and amusing, I can't really bring myself to actually do it for fear of being thought of as trying to coerce someone in a quid pro quo type of exchange. But you're right, I should try it. Why not. The worst thing that can happen is if I review an article and don't get a review in return. By the way you are invited to review it in any way you see fit. Take care and thanks again. Dr.K. (talk) 21:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand not wanting to coerce someone - if you don't want to do the quid pro quo, you can always just ask for a volunteer from the list to review it. If no one else reviews it in the next few days, I will be glad to Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC) (I run the AZPR script too)
 * Thank you Ruhrfisch. I really appreciate your kind offer. I'll try it. But no matter the outcome I'd be very glad if you gave your opinion anyway. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 21:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have been trying to get all the peer reviews that are about 14 days old and have no feedback something, so I will take a look at Hendrik Bode in a few days at most (even if it gets a review too). Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 22:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Thanks again. Talk to you soon. Dr.K. (talk) 22:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I will try to review Bode's article but still have more to do on the review of Crawley first, it may take a few days... JMiall  ₰  01:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Gunther von Hagens Secret Lab
Hi Taso - you're right, it really is behind a moving staircase - just assumed that was someone making a joke. Loved the clip - really interesting - so added it to the Body Worlds Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tigriscuniculus (talk • contribs) 20:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes I know it sounds weird. Imagine my surprise when I saw the staircase move for the first time just as the narrator mentioned the secret lab. I actually put the citation clip in the article more as reply to a talk page question. I'm glad you liked it and that you put it in the Body Worlds Wiki. I'll visit the site to see what you have there. Thank you for following up. By the way I am impressed that you used the correct declension of my name. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 21:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Ερώτηση για τις τεκμηριώσεις
Αν και έχει περάσει αρκετός καιρός, από την τελευταία φορά που σ' ενόχλησα, οφείλω να σε ευχαριστήσω έστω και καθυστερημένα για τα καλά σου λόγια και την εγκάρδια διάθεση. Η απορία μου αυτή τη φορά είναι η εξής: Υπάρχει κάποια προτίμηση σε πηγές που είναι διαθέσιμες στο διαδίκτυο ή μπορώ να παραθέτω τα βιβλιογραφικά στοιχεία (συγγραφέα, τίτλο, σελίδα κοκ) σύμφωνα με την έντυπη τους μορφή; Είμαι συνδρομητής σε διάφορα επιστημονικά περιοδικά μέσω του JSTOR, στα οποία όμως η πρόσβαση επιτρέπεται αποκλειστικά στους συνδρομητές. Σε αυτή την περίπτωση, τι είναι προτιμότερο; Να επισυνάπτω στην τεκμηρίωση την ηλεκτρονική διεύθυνση στην οποία δεν θα έχουν όλοι πρόσβαση ή να παραθέτω την βιβλιογραφική παραπομπή χωρίς τη σχετική σύνδεση; Παρεμπιπτόντως, οφείλω να ομολογήσω ότι εκτιμώ ιδιαίτερα όσους υπογράφουν με το όνομά τους. Αν και δεν είμαι σίγουρος αν αυτός είναι ο κατάλληλος χώρος, θα ήθελα να μάθω αν έχει συζητηθεί η σκοπιμότητα της ανωνυμίας στην Wikipedia. Μου φαίνεται περίεργο στο πλαίσιο ενός προγράμματος που επιδιώκει τη διάδοση της γνώσης. Τι είναι πιο ευγενικό από αυτό και γιατί να κρυβόμαστε;--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 16:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Δεν υπαρχει καμμία ενόχληση Γιώργο. Είναι ευχαρίστησή μου. Επίσης σ' ευχαριστώ για τα καλά σου λόγια. 'Οσο για τις πηγές είναι απολύτως εντάξει να είναι σε τύπο βιβλιογραφικής παραπομπής χωρίς τη σχετική σύνδεση. Το JSTOR το έχω χρησιμοποιήσει κι' εγώ σε αρκετά άρθρα. Δεν είμαι συνδρομητής αλλά υπάρχουν περιληπτικές λεπτομέρειες online από το JSTOR για αρκετές ερευνητικές μελέτες. Έτσι αν μπορείς να βρείς μία σύνδεση του JSTOR online που δίνει την περίληψη της παραπομπής την επισυνάπτεις γιατί αποτελεί άμεση απόδειξη της παραπομπής. Αν δεν υπάρχει τότε απλώς παραθέτεις την βιβλιογραφική περιγραφή χωρίς σύνδεση. Μπορείς να κοιτάξεις το άρθρο του Ioannis Kapodistrias όπου θα δεις παραδείγματα σύνδεσης του JSTOR online σε περιληπτική μορφή και άνευ συνδρομής. Όσο για την ανωνυμία το θέμα είναι ότι σαν συγγραφείς εδώ βασιζόμαστε στις αποδείξεις των στοιχείων που χρησιμοποιούμε, όχι στο όνομά μας. Έτσι, ευτυχώς η δυστυχώς το όνομα δεν είναι μία συνθήκη sine qua non. Γι' αυτό, μη κοιτάς εμένα η εσένα, πολλοί προτιμούν την ανωνυμία. Υπάρχουν δε και θέματα ασφαλείας και ιδιωτικής προστασίας πληροφοριών και τυχόν υποκλοπής στοιχείων προσωπικότητας του ατόμου που κάνουν πολλούς διστακτικούς να αποκαλύψουν λεπτομέρειες για το άτομό τους. Το θέμα είναι αν τα στοιχεία που προσφέρεις σε ένα άρθρο είναι εμπεριστατωμένα τότε δεν χρειάζεσαι το όνομα. Τα στοιχεία μιλούν από μόνα τους. Το περιβάλλον εδώ γι' αυτό το λόγο είναι στοιχειοκρατικό όχι προσωποκρατικό. Εν πάσει περιπτώσει οι προσφορές κάθε συγγραφέα είναι ορατές ούτως η άλλως, έτσι κάποια προβολή γίνεται σε κάποιον που έχει συνεισφέρει κάτι αξιόλογο. Αν αυτή η προβολή είναι επιθυμητή η όχι εξαρτάται από τις ατομικές συνθήκες του καθενός. Ήταν ευχαρίστηση αυτή επικοινωνία Γιώργο και εις το επανιδείν.  Dr.K. (talk) 17:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Σ' ευχαριστώ και πάλι για τις άκρως διαφωτιστικές πληροφορίες σχετικά με την βιβλιογραφική τεκμηρίωση. Διάβασα προσεκτικά τις υπόλοιπες παρατηρήσεις σου και οφείλω να ομολογήσω ότι συμμερίζομαι τις ανησυχίες περί ασφάλειας και προσωπικών δεδομένων. Παρακολουθώντας, ωστόσο, πόσο βιτριολική μπορεί να γίνει η κατάσταση στις σελίδες συζήτησης, δεν μπορώ να μην αναρωτηθώ κατά πόσον το κλίμα θα ήταν το ίδιο αν ο καθένας είχε την παρρησία να συστηθεί (θα ήταν τουλάχιστον επίδειξη κομψότητας). Εννοείται ότι αυτό που μετράει είναι η εμπεριστατωμένη τεκμηρίωση και ότι δεν τίθεται ζήτημα προσωπικής προβολής (πολύ αμφίβολης άλλωστε εν προκειμένω. Μπορεί πάλι να κάνω και λάθος... Είδα ότι έχεις κάποια ιδιαίτερη σχέση με Κέρκυρα όπου κάποτε σπούδαζα. Θα σε αποχαιρετήσω λοιπόν καταλλήλως. Λοιπόν, μα τον Άγιο, καλή συνέχεια κι η Παναγιά κοντά σου!--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 18:12, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Καθόλου Γιώργο, η ευχαρίστηση είναι όλη δική μου. Χαίρομαι που βρήκες τις πληροφορίες χρήσιμες. Όσο για την επίπτωση της ανωνυμίας πάνω στο επίπεδο της συζήτησης, σ' αυτό έχεις δίκιο. Υπάρχουν μερικοί που είναι εκ φύσεως αγενείς και η ανωνυμία τους κάνει ακόμη χειρότερους. Αλλά υπάρχουν περισσότεροι ακόμη που αν και ανώνυμοι είναι πολύ πολιτισμένοι. Έτσι η επιρροή της ανωνυμίας δεν είναι διαβρωτική για τους πιό πολλούς κατά τη γνώμη μου. Όσο για την Κέρκυρα, ναι σωστά παρατήρησες, της έχω κάποια ξεχωριστή αδυναμία. Είμαι εντυπωσιαμένος με το πόσο καλά απέδωσες την χαρακτηριστική αυτή Κερκυρέικη (Κερκυραική, για την υπόλοιπη Ελλάδα) φράση. Δείχνει ότι κι' εσύ είσαι ένας Κερκυραίος στην καρδιά και σ' ευχαριστώ πολύ γι' αυτή την όμορφη Κερκυρέικη στιγμή που ούτε κι' εγώ θα μπορούσα να αποδώσω καλύτερα. Λοιπόν στο καλό κι' ο Άγιος ο Σπυρίδωνας να σε φυλάει και να σου δίνει ότι επιθυμείς. Κι' αν κάποτε βρεθούμε στη Σπιανάδα πίνουμε και καμμιά τσιτσιμπύρα του Χειμαριού. Με φιλικούς χαιρετισμούς. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 20:12, 20 March 2008 (UTC))
 * Ω που να σε χαρώ έυλογημένε, εσύ με τσι τσιτσιμπίρες σου κι εγώ με τα κουμ κουάτ μου. Μόνο μη γίνω φέσι ωρέ παιδί κι ύστερις μαθουν τσι πομπές μου στο πλατύ καντούνι! Θα γίνω βουρδούλιο μα τον Άγιο! LOL--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 21:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Βλέπω ξέρεις τη διάλεκτο καλύτερα κι' από μένα. Πρώτη φορά που είδα Κερκυρέικα, έστω και γραπτά, ύστερα από πολύ καιρό και νόμισα για λίγο που αλήθεια ήμουν πάλι στο Καμπιέλο, στα μουράγια η όπως το ανάφερες στο πλατύ καντούνι ακούγοντας τους ντόπιους να μιλάνε. Ήταν μία ωραία στιγμή. Σ' ευχαριστώ γι' αυτό. Και το κουμ κουάτ το υπέροχο αυτό λικέρ. Τι να σου πω Γιώργο. Δεν παύεις να με εκπλήττεις. Βάλε λοιπόν και το κουμ κουάτ στο μενού τυχόν συνάντησης και αφού είσαι και μυημένος σε Κερκυρέικα στέκια πάμε και στου Αντρανίκ για κανένα παγωτό μετά. Για την ώρα όμως η πραγματικότητα είναι δυστυχώς πολύ πιο πεζή. Ας είναι. Γειά χαρά για την ώρα και τα ξαναλέμε. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 00:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC))

Portals
Howdy. Just fyi, I've removed the Portal:Byzantine Empire link until it has been completed. The list (Portal:Contents/Portals) only shows finished portals. However, if you haven't already, you should add it to the directory (Portal/Directory) which is meant to list all portals. Thanks :) -- Quiddity (talk) 02:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. Thanks. Dr.K. (talk) 02:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Lead
Hey, I have added in my own suggestion for the Byzantine Empire's lead, please take a look at the talk page. I know you haven't participated much in discussion for this, but I think it would be a good idea to alert all notable editors Tourskin (talk) 21:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Tourskin. I was following the debate but got sidetracked due to editing the Byzantine portal. But I'll get back to the discussion. I'll leave my comments there. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 21:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * My pleasure.Tourskin (talk) 22:26, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I new formula has been proposed, by Mcorazao. Its a less detailed version, but it follows a similar structure. If you have the time, lend your opinion. Respectfully, Tourskin (talk) 21:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Much obliged Tourskin. I completely agree with your view and trust your expertise and judgement in this. I'll drop a note nonetheless. Thanks again. Dr.K. (talk) 22:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Lol, I'm just a undergraduate for Philosophy and Human Biology, but you have a Phd!! It is your expertise and judgement that is called into play! Thank you for your pleasing compliments nonetheless!! Tourskin (talk) 22:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * In this debate degrees are not as important as the knowledge of the subject and the clarity of the arguments. It is obvious that your knowledge of Byzantine History is excellent and I find the way you frame your arguments fair and concise. Therefore my original observation still stands. If it is complimentary, then fine, but it is well deserved. In turn, thank you very much for your kind comments and for your gracious invitation to the debate. Till we meet again. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 23:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC))

Τα φώτα σου
Φίλε Τάσο, αν μπορείς ρίξε σε παρακαλώ μια ματιά στη συζήτηση για τις εικόνες των Ελλήνων στο άρθρο Greeks. Νομίζω ότι η εικόνα της Υπατίας δεν πρέπει να συμπεριληφθεί. --Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 18:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Βρέθηκε άκρη, τελικά μάλλον εγώ στραβώθηκα...--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 19:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Καλώς Γιώργο. Κανένα πρόβλημα. Θα τα ξαναπούμε. Στο καλό. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 22:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)).

Uncyclopedia
What/where is that?
 * You can find the info here: Uncyclopedia. Bye for now. Dr.K. (talk) 00:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Methods engineering
I am working on making the Methods engineering article tring to make it useful. This is my first article so I'm not sure if the changes I have made have helped the article. I was wondering if you might take some time to look at the article and give me some feedback as to how to make the article better. Engineer 2009 (talk) 13:54, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Thanks for the invitation. I'll have a look and let you know. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 15:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Rolex
Hello,

I noticed that in the previous Rolex version there was a conflict between the text's 1908 and the infobox' 1905. I then only checked the article's history in general and some interlanguage links, so therefore I assumed 1905 was correct. Thank you for your two contributions. I've now checked google as you proposed, it's indeed as you wrote in your "everybody-should-be-happy"-version, "Wilsdorf and Davis" was founded in 1905 and the trademark Rolex 1908 registered.

What do you think, is the text in the infobox "Founded 1905 by Hans Wilsdorf and Alfred Davis" OK, or should it be changed to 1908? I simply leave this difficult decision up to you...

Best regards --Cyfal (talk) 18:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Cyfal for your nice message. You raise an interesting question and thanks for asking. The company was founded in 1905 but as "Wilsdorf-Davis", not "Rolex". Wilsdorf did not even patent the name Rolex until 3 years later. To make matters worse the actual company "Rolex SA" was founded in Geneva in 1919. So we have now 3 dates: 1905 (original company), 1908 (Rolex name patented), 1919 (Rolex as a Swiss company).  Rolex, on their website seems to be very vague about their chronologies as far as I can tell. They don't even seem to mention 1905 or 1908. If you noticed I did not go out of my way to phrase my edits so that a unique founding date would be specified . I only described the events and their chronology. The reason was I couldn't make up my mind as to the exact founding date of Rolex as a brand. I think that as long as we explain these facts in the main article  we can put 1905 in the infobox. I also checked the article on General Motors. When GM was founded it was not called GM but the date quoted as the GM founding date is for its parent company (a holding company for Buick). So we can go with 1905. However we could also consult a few people on the article talk page. We can then decide after a consultation, but for the moment 1905 seems to be a good choice. Let me know.  Take care for now. Dr.K. (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I think we should leave it as it is, because there is no real strong argument to decide between 1905, 1908 and 1919, and for my personal feeling 1905 is the best choice. I also checked the interlanguage wikis (as far as I could read them), they also use 1905. (Nevertheless the english article is now the best one concerning this issue, thanks to your modification...) --Cyfal (talk) 19:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree completely, let's leave it at 1905. Thank you for your kind remarks. It's been a pleasure. All the best. Dr.K. (talk) 20:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Transmission of Greek philosophical ideas in the Middle Ages
Transmission of Greek philosophical ideas in the Middle Ages was written by someone with a head full of prejudice and misconceptions claiming we had lost our philosphy and it only survived thanks to the Arabs!! He has been adding material from this pile of tripe to Greek philosophy as well, which apparently seems to have stopped in the Hellenistic era! Since you are interested in things Medieval I thought I would ask you for any sources you may have come across, esp papers etc. I am aware of a couple of books on Google book with limited preview and Halsal's site but was wondering if you had anything else I could use. Thanks Dr.K!Xenovatis (talk) 14:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Xenovatis. It's always nice to hear from a friend and scholar like you. Unfortunately on this particular subject I am not an expert at all. It is an obscure topic and I'm sure that all kinds of fringe theories can fester in such an environment perpetrated in the interest of all kinds af agendas. This however should be relatively easy to set straight because the field of Greek philosophy and its transmission through the Romans, Byzantium etc. should more or less be clear and rather well documented. I haven't researched the topic but I could check on the Internet for sources. Aside from that I don't have any other resources at hand except if I go to a library. As far as the "Transmission of Greek philosophical ideas in the Middle Ages" article we need to de-POV it when we find the sources to counter these arguments and clean up the Greek Philosophy article in the process as well. Thanks for the information and let me know about any new developments. I will let you know when I find anything. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 16:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response Tasso. Unfortunately the particular era of Medieval Greek philosophy is underexamined and ignored by Western scholarship. Part of it is a desire to claim for the West the Classical heritage and part a remnant of the older tradition of Frankish hatred of Romans (which are dubbed "Byzantines"). The perception in their minds is exactly what is reported in the article, that we forgot all about our literature and culture which was preserved by the Arabs and transmitted via them to the West, who are of course the True Heirs (c)(TM) of Greek tradition. I tried to explain it briefly to a Westerner in the Greeks talk page, read it and tell me what you think. BTW you will be pleased to note that article made GA. Contacted Yiannismaru to ask for tips on improving it to FA standard. I would be gratefull for your input that matter and any ideas for improvement. I attach some sources you might find interesting wrt to matters Medieval,
 * http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MA/BYZ.HTM
 * http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/
 * This is by Anthony Kaldelis of Ohio State. An Orthodox history of the Parthenon. You might find it interesting.Xenovatis (talk) 17:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations for the article on Greeks. All your hard work paid off. The rest of the team did a good job as well. Thanks for the FA review invitation. I'll check it out and let you know. I knew about the attempts by some to claim the Roman heritage but I didn't know that the same people wanted to bypass the Greeks and claim the Greek heritage as well. That really sounds silly but I have to look into it since it appears that it is a school of (extreme) thought. I'll also check the links you gave me. Take care for now and I'll talk to you soon. Tasos. (Dr.K. (talk) 18:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC))

DYK

 * Many thanks to you and the DYK crew that worked so hard to make this posible. Dr.K. (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

DYK

 * Many thanks to you and the DYK crew. Dr.K. (talk) 20:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Cannibal Holocaust
Hi Tasoskessaris. Thanks for bringing the edit to my attention. I had seen it, but thought I'd attempt to get the anon to engage in a civilised debate on the talk page before mentioning it. Having re-read it though, I'm not sure that was the best approach: what they said to you was extremely rude and uncalled for. Hopefully they can be persuaded to calm down, but if not then I won't be hugely surprised... Olaf Davis | Talk 18:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Olaf. Good point. Somehow I wouldn't be surprised either. Dr.K. (talk) 19:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

DYK for L'Insoumis

 * Thanks again. It's been fun. Dr.K. (talk) 20:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

5/7 DYK

 * Thank you for letting me know. Thank the DYK crew as well on my behalf. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 20:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Elgin Marbles
Finally managed to add some perspective to the Legality section, any comments would be welcome--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 14:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Giorgo. Thanks for the invitation, I'll check it out. Take care. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 17:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC))

Philippe Couplet

 * Thanks again BorgQueen for your hard work. Dr.K. (talk) 02:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

5/9 DYK

 * Thank you very much. Dr.K. (talk) 02:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Τα φώτα σου πάλι
Dear Tasos, I want to upload a photo in the Elgin Marbles article depicting the crude tools used for the infamous British Museum "cleaning" in 1936. I already asked Future Perfect and he gave me some basic advice on how to do it but I am still at a loss. Could you help me out?--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 21:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC) BTW, I think my edits need a lot of "editing" themselves, if you could find the time να τα συγυρίσεις λίγο, I would be deeply grateful... you see I am trying to work at the same time and I 've been editing somewhat erratically.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 21:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Giorgo. Can you send me the link to the photo? I want to see its copyright status first. Or if the photo is yours let me know. As far as copyediting your contributions, that's going to be a difficult task because your ideas, eloquence, vocabulary and precision of language are of very high calibre indeed. But I will humbly try. Με πάντα μεγάλη ευχαρίστηση και φιλικούς χαιρετισμούς. Τάσος. (Dr.K. (talk) 21:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC))
 * Well, I tried once more and I seem to be getting somewhere. I asked FP to have a look on what I did with the photo but a second opinion is always welcome []. ... I am sorry to admit that my competence in English simply collapsew when I am under working pressure--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 21:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi again. I saw the pic. The robot has tagged it for deletion. Did you find the picture on the web or is it from a scan from a book? If you got it on the web can you give me the link? Dr.K. (talk) 21:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I extracted it from a pdf version of the article,the caption reads: Figure 3 The copper scrapers used for cleaning the Elgin Marbles in 1937-38. ?British Museum. Is there any chance I could use it under fair use?--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 22:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Where is the link to the pdf? Dr.K. (talk) 22:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * JSTOR, unfortunately... I think though that FP, just fixed it for me. Where can I find detailed information on what I can or cannot use in wikipedia? And could you by any chance help me insert the picture in the article? I am afraid I am going to create yet another mess...--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 22:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I'll work on the picture as well. Dr.K. (talk) 22:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I really, trully appreciate it. The thing is that for the time being I' ve been inserting a lot of unseemly quotes and clarifications because I don't want to remove any of the tendentious remarks that are vaguely sourced (and I am afraid also misquoted, I already found two instances of misquotation or rather falsification) but I would appreciate some reactions. I've been working my butt out in real life but if I don't start with this article now I may as well leave it as it is. Hopefully my edits will attract some discussion to make this article better. In its present state, it reflects largely all sorts of Neo-colonial attitudes that I find really conceited and tendentious. I was obliged to add all these distasteful pieces of information that do not do justice to the British in general, but show how nasty cultural nationalism can become. Sorry for the long intervals between my responses but I am working at the same time--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 22:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Not at all. Don't mention it. It was my pleasure. I found a link from Google to use as the source of the image and expanded the Fair Use rationale. That should do it. As far as the article I have to see the POV you are talking about. You already started cleaning it up and that's always encouraging. I'll have a look as well. Have a great weekend Giorgo and don't work too hard! Talk to you soon. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 22:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC))
 * Thanks, again for the continuing interest--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 16:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Dear Tasos, (in the hope that I am not taking advantage of your kindness)I have yet another question. I found out that more than once sources have been misquoted, tendentiously manipulated or even simply falsified. If you take a closer look at the footnotes you will notice that page numbers are regularly missing from every book or article used to substantiate the British Museum claims or to present the Greek position under a bad light. The misquotation frequency has made me rather suspicious and I want to verify myself all relevant quotations from books, articles and papers cited. Without page numbers this is going to be a very cumbersome task even if I manage to trace each and every source. How can I ask for verification from the contributors and what do I do when no verification is provided? I asked for all relevant King passages in the talk page but nobody added the relevant page numbers--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 16:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's always my pleasure Giorgo. Anyway, if you know who the contributor is and they are also active editors you can ask them if they know the page numbers directly, but this, in my opinion, is a cumbersome and difficult task. A better method would be to announce your intentions on the talk page of the article that if page numbers are not cited the citations will be removed because they fail the verifiability test according to WP:RS and WP:VERIFIABILITY. Then add to the disputed facts in the article and if noone comes to add the page number in a reasonable amount of time and you don't get a reply on the talk page then the citation can be removed. You can also strengthen your case by finding an example that demonstrates misleading use of a citation source. If something also looks suspect you can remove it anyway. Let me know how this turns out and I will keep an eye on it myself. Τάσος. (Dr.K. (talk) 18:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC))
 * Thanks, I' ll do just that as soon as I am over with my edits. Είσαι πολύ τσίφτης!--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 20:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ευχαριστώ και επίσης επειδή είχα να δω αυτή τη λέξη χρόνια. Γειά χαρά Γιώργο και τα ξαναλέμε. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 00:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC))

Hmm... it's me again
I have been working on the Elgin Marbles article for several days now and I am proposing that it be renamed. Unfortunately I have not managed to attract any responses yet and I would be interested to hear what you have to say about my proposal. I am planning to notify other contributors as well in the hope to start a discussion--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 12:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll be there. Thanks for letting me know Giorgo. Dr.K. (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Portal
Greeting! I see you have have made a very beautiful portal for the Byzantine Empire. Don't you think it is more appropriate to add Portal:Bulgarian Empire to related portals instead of Egyptology? The two empires have much more things in common and were closely related during their existence in the Middle Ages. --Gligan (talk) 22:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi there. Thanks for your nice comments. I agree. I already changed it. Take care and if you have any more suggestions please let me know. Dr.K. (talk) 23:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

DYK

 * Many thanks (as always) Gatoclass to you and the crew. Dr.K. (talk) 14:32, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

On the Byzantine Senate
Please take a look at the Byzantine Empire talk page. Tnx. Ashmedai 119 (talk) 16:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the invitation. I replied there. Dr.K. (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

DYK 6/26

 * Thank you very much Daniel. It is great. I really appreciate it. Thank the crew as always on my behalf. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 17:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

La Boutique fantasque - good job!
Hello! I just saw that you put La Boutique fantasque up for Did You Know? consideration. My article is the one below yours. I mention this because earlier in the day I marked your article "patrolled" when I was doing New Page Patrol - and I added the WikiProject Ballet template to the Talk Page. It is a wonderful article and I am glad to see it online. Good job! Ecoleetage (talk) 02:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merci beaucoup Ecoleetage. It's very nice of you to express such nice comments about this article. It really means a lot to me. I just found a reference about this ballet recently and it seemed a charming little story so I thought it would be fun to write about it. You just enhanced my experience even more. By the way your article about David Zolotarev is very interesting and well written. I wish you the best with DYK. Take care and au revoir. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 03:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC))
 * Yasou! Here is hoping for a pair of DYKs! Keep up the great work! Ecoleetage (talk) 03:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Efharisto! Yes it would indeed be very nice to see both articles on DYK! All the best. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 03:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC))

La Boutique fantasque

 * Many thanks BorgQueen to you and the crew. I really appreciate it. Dr.K. (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Municipal Theatre of Corfu

 * Thanks again BorgQueen for all your tireless efforts and your corrections to my entry. Say hi to the crew as well. With all this hard work you put forward I am so impressed I could very well become assimilated very soon. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 12:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

 * Just stopped by to say hello. It's been ages since the last time we interacted and seeing that you were active I decided to send you my greetings. Άντε σου εύχομαι, κιόλας, να βρεθείς σύντομα για διακοπές στα πάτρια, ή ακόμα καλύτερα στην Κέρκυρα που της έχεις τέτοια αδυναμία--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 19:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Γιώργο, τι ωραία έκπληξη η επίσκεψή σου αυτή στην σελίδα του διαλόγου μου. Είναι πάντα μεγάλη η ευχαριστησή μου να επικοινωνώ μαζί σου. Βλέπω δεν σ' αφήνει κανείς ήσυχο. Όλοι θέλουν τις εμπεριστατωμένες και φιλοσοφημένες απόψεις σου για ένα άπειρο αριθμό θεμάτων. Είναι μία σαφής ένδειξη του υψηλού επιπέδου σου σαν άτομο και σαν διανοούμενος. Όπως πάντα χαρακτήρησες τις περιστάσεις που με αφορούν με μεγάλη ακρίβεια. Είναι πλέον φανερή για όλους, όπως έχω καταλάβει, η αδυναμία μου για την Κέρκυρα. Και έχεις δίκιο οι διακοπές είναι πλεόν κοντά και μάλλον εκεί θα την βγάλω για λίγο καιρό. Αλλά αρκετά για μένα. Εσύ τι κάνεις; Σκέφτεσαι για τίποτα διακοπές η τις έχεις ήδη πάρει; Σου εύχομαι ό τι καλύτερο και σ' ευχαριστώ για την σκέψη σου αυτή να με επισκεφθείς. Θα τα ξαναπούμε (και πριν των διακοπών). Τάσος. (Dr.K. (talk) 20:17, 24 July 2008 (UTC))


 * Ευχαριστώ για τα καλά σου λόγια, αλλά φοβάμαι ότι μιλάς για άλλον άνθρωπο. Σε σχέση με τη μάθηση μοιάζω πολύ με τις κότες, που τρώνε γενικότερα ότι σκατό (συγγνώμη για την έκφραση) βρεθεί μπροστά τους. Βλέπεις, λόγω επαγγέλματος, έχω μετατρέψει το κεφάλι μου σε χωματερή παραθεμάτων και βιβλιογραφίας... δυστυχώς οι πραγματικές μου γνώσεις είναι συχνά σκόρπιες και γεμάτες τραγικά κενά και μόνη αρετή που μου αναγνωρίζω είναι ότι δεν δέχομαι τίποτε ως δεδομένο και μου αρέσει το ψάξιμο. Κατά τα άλλα δεν διαφέρω σε τίποτε από το μέσο όρο. Όσο για τις διακοπές, δεν ξέρω ακόμα. Δυστυχώς έχει πέσει πολύ δουλειά και είμαι μονίμως σε πίεση. Αν πάντως πάνε όλα καλά, θα την κάνω για ανασκαφές (πηγαίνω σχεδόν κάθε χρόνο) σε έναν πρωτογεωμετρικό οικισμό προς Ωρωπό μεριά. Αν τύχει και βρεθείς Αθήνα, εν τω μεταξύ, εννοείται πως κερνάω μπίρες!--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 20:31, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Δεν είπε ποτέ κανείς ότι η άκρα μετριοφροσύνη δεν ήταν μία (από τις πολλές) αρετές σου. Θα ήθελα πολύ να παραβρισκόμουν στις ανασκαφές ιδιαίτερα σε τέτοιου είδους οικισμού πρωτο-Ελλήνων (το είπα καλά;). Η μπύρα στην Αθήνα είναι μία προσφορά πολύ ενδιαφέρουσα αλλά και ανταποδίδεται από μέρους μου με ποτό στον κήπο το λαού η στη καφετέρια Μπέλλα Βίστα κοντά στο Αγγελόκαστρο, όπου και θα μπορούσες μετά τη μπύρα να έκανες και μία επίσκεψη η τυχόν ανασκαφές! Dr.K. (talk) 20:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Αχ, ρε Τάσο καλά θα 'τανε... Όσο για τον οικισμό γράψε λάθος, δεν είναι πρωτογεωμετρικός, αλλά υστερογεωμετρικός (χονδρικά 8ος-7ος αιώνας π.Χ.). Το πολύ ενδιαφέρον είναι ότι πρόκειται μάλλον για την αρχαία Γραία, απ' όπου ίσως ξεκίνησαν οι πρώτοι άποικοι που εγκαταστάθηκαν στην Κάτω Ιταλία και τη Σικελία. Αυτοί λοιπόν οι Γραίοι, ίσως να ήταν οι πρώτοι Έλληνες που γνώρισαν οι πληθυσμοί της Ιταλίας και τους αποκάλεσαν στις γλώσσες τους Graei > Graeci. Αυτό βέβαια παραμένει για την ώρα απλώς μια γοητευτική υπόθεση...--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 21:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ναι θα ήταν ωραία. Τώρα μάλιστα θυμήθηκα ότι απέναντι από το Αγγελόκαστρο υπάρχει ένα restaurant χτισμένο σε εξέδρα πάνω από το γκρεμό με πολύ ωραία θέα της θάλασσας και του βουνού. Ας είναι. Όσο για τον Ωρωπό εάν η θεωρία σου για τον συνοικισμό επαληθευθεί θα είναι μία πραγματικά μεγάλη ανακάλυψη. Καλή τύχη. Ελπίζω να μου στείλεις το paper όταν δημοσιευθεί. Dr.K. (talk) 21:15, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Μάλλον δεν εξήγησα καλά, φίλε Τάσο. Η θεωρία δεν είναι δική μου και ούτε είμαι ο ανασκαφέας, εγώ απλώς θα συμμετέχω. Να σαι καλά πάντως --Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 22:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Δεν χρειάζεται η διευκρίνηση Γιώργο. Τέτοιου είδους γεγονότα οργανώνονται με συμμετοχή πολλών αρχαιολόγων σε διάφορους ρόλους. Το να είσαι μέλος της ομάδας αυτής είναι αρκετό. Η προσφορά σου σε μία τέτοια προσπάθεια είμαι σίγουρος ότι θα είναι σημαντική. Να είσαι και συ καλά και τα ξαναλέμε. Dr.K. (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Substing user warning templates
Don't forget to subst user warning templates, i.e. use {{subst:uw-3rr}} rather than uw-3rr. This helps improve Wikipedia server performance. Stifle (talk) 10:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

User block notice
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. Stifle (talk) 10:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * In reviewing 3RR, Content changes, adding or removing tags, edits which are against consensus, and similar items are not exempt. It is clear that there is consensus against this "jasper" being included as a Greek name, but as it says, that doesn't make your reverts 3RR-exempt. A much better idea would have been to let someone else perform the 4th revert, and then had the IP added it again, s/he would then be in violation of 3RR, whereas you would be safe. That being said, due to the fact that you were using edit summaries to explain your reverts, that consensus was clearly on your side, that the IP had been reverted twice the day before as well, and he was not at the time using edit summaries, I'll contact the blocking admin to see if they're willing to lift or reduce the block length. – xeno  ( talk ) 14:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you Xeno for putting on record an accurate picture of my actions. I feel completely demoralised because of the heavy-handed approach by the blocking admin. You can undestand after fighting vandalism for such a long time I don't get even a warning for my apparent transgression which happened because of inexperience dealing wtith WP:3RR technicalities and idealism to keep Wikipedia clean from certifiable rubbish and not because of any POV agenda or similar issues. What the IP was doing can be considered vandalism. That makes the decision to block me even more callous. I appreciate your stance, your accurate analysis and your grace to act on my behalf and for releasing me from this block. save for the fact that you called the block justified. The mere fact that I was treated like a random IP and was slapped by the exact same block duration speaks volumes about the regard the blocking admin has for my record here and for the record of all registered editors in Wikipedia. Dr.K. (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe the standard practice for responding to 3RR reports is to block any users who have violated 3RR for the same length of time, thus the blocking admin remains impartial. While someone knowledgeable with the subject would call it vandalism, it is not "simply" enough to qualify as vandalism under the 3RR exemption. Nevertheless, your contributions are welcome and I hope that this will not discourage you from continuing to do so, with a greater understanding of how to respond to content disputes of this nature. – xeno  ( talk ) 16:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you Xeno for your comments. I sent you an email but if you can read this can you please lift the autoblock? Thanks. Dr.K. (talk) 16:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The autoblock should be cleared now. Sorry for the inconvenience. – xeno  ( talk ) 16:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Xeno. Dr.K. (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * My apologies Xeno. I struck my comments above because you did not call my block justified. I was reading the wrong edit when I wrote that. Sorry and thanks again. Dr.K. (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Xeno hi again. Can you please help with the other autoblock? Thanks again. Dr.K. (talk) 20:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry, I didn't know there were 2. Good now? – xeno  ( talk ) 20:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much again for your continuing help. Sorry for the disturbance I put you through. Please also see my correction to my original reply to you above. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 20:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't sweat it. I can understand the frustration. – xeno  ( talk ) 20:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It's very nice of you. All the best. Dr.K. (talk) 20:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It's very nice of you. All the best. Dr.K. (talk) 20:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

?????
I don't know whether this is the appropriate place to post my message, but I have to say that Tassos was clearly acting in good faith. The name Ιάσπερος is unattested to my knowledge. I looked it up in all major reference works available to me and came up with nothing whatsoever (Liddel Scott Dictionary, TLG Musaios, Project Muse, JSTOR, Oxford Reference, and three different Greek Dictionaries!). The anonymous editor reverted repeatedly without even providing edit summaries     and refused to engage in any constructive exchange of arguments in the talk page. On top of all that he obviously returned, with a different IP this time, to repeat the same unsubstantiated edit. I find that blocking Dr.K. sets a very dubious precedent and encourages unconstructive behaviour--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 12:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much Giorgo for your support. This confirms my experience and research as well. I googled Ιάσπερος and it turned up 0 (zero) hits. That must mean something. Another editor in that article also mentioned the same thing and he also got reverted by the IP. I have been fighting vandalism and misinformation as well as writing articles in Wikipedia for a long time. That I got slapped with the same block with a limited number of edits IP with warnings on its talk page about wrong information and no intention to engage in meaningful dialog speaks volumes about the relative importance of the record of an established editor versus that of the IP in question. I am disappointed to say the least because this heavy-handed approcah discourages the fighting of vandalism and misinformation but I thank you again for your support Γιώργο. Take care. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 12:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC))
 * By the way the section heading of your message appears in question marks (?????) on my computer. What was the subject of your message? Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 12:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The question marks simply illustrate my utter amazement and disgust! "Something's (unbelievably) rotten in Denmark"—--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 12:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh I see. I thought it was some Greek font that didn't render well. Yes indeed. Shakespeare provides a very apt analogy. Thanks again Giorgo. Talk to you soon. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 13:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC))
 * I just saw your comment about the anon user coming back under a new IP address to repeat the same misinformation. So in addition to the fact that my record is not considered in the blocking decision now I cannot edit because I am a named editor while the anonymous IP evades the block and repeats the same vandalism. Talking about the privileges of registering an account. Dr.K. (talk) 13:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I get the feeling that someone was simply trying to prove a point . If that is the case then it's simply sad--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 14:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It's sad and thanks for the information. I think it is a matter of principle and the mere fact that I got blocked for the same length of time as the offending IP without any consideration given to my record to this point is frankly a disgrace and it does not promote accuracy and vandalism fighting. In fact I even reported the IP. What does that do for reporting vandalism and other such transgressions. Such disregard for the record of established editors is demoralizing and counterproductive.Dr.K. (talk) 15:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If this was not an effort by the anonymous guy to revert "legitimate edits with the intent of hindering the improvement of pages" as it is clearly stated in WP:VAN than I don't know what to call it--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 15:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. But I get blocked while IPs are roaming around. It's not a pretty sight. But I have to leave for a while so we'll talk later. Take care for now. Dr.K. (talk) 15:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Jasper
Just for the record, since this whole Jasper folly got you blocked I hope it would be some consolation to learn a bit more about what's in a name. Jasper was the name of one of the 3 magi and it is actually Persian as you probably know already. It is not attested in the Holy Scriptures, and, strangely, it is not even mentioned in the so called apocrypha. The name, along with the names of the other two legendary magi, appeared for the first time in medieval latin texts (although I didn't manage to find the exact source) The Greek equivalents are Γάσπαρ and Κάσπαρ. The oldest written attestation of the Greek name comes from Excerpta Lugdunensia, ed. E. Oder and K. Hoppe, Corpus hippiatricorum Graecorum, vol. 2. Leipzig: Teubner, 1927 (repr. Stuttgart: 1971): 272-313.(Cod: 11,612: Med.) and dates from the 9th century AD (rather late actually). The Hippiatrica is a collection of medieval veterinary healing methods and spells (mainly for horses LOL). Interestingly enough the spell containing the name of Κάσπαρ is actually a greek transliteration of a latin text. The poor 9th century byzantines couldn't understand a word of latin. The language must have sounded quite mysterious and exotic to their ears. Here's the full text of the spell (the spell itself is almost nonsensical but has many distinctly latin words and phrases. Of course, you will readily recognise the greek instructions at the bottom of the magic text):
 * Περί αδελφικού, κόντρα μόρβουμ

Καδούκαμ αβελφάμοθλ, φάμουλ, δεήνόμεν. Κάσπαρ, Μελχιώρ, Βαλτοσαράγ, ο θεός ισχυρός άγιος αθάνατος ωσσάνα, σουσάννα Αγαθή, Λατζία Κοσμέν εθ Δαμιανός, Λίνα Κλέτοθς εθ Τζιπριάνους ντόμινε ντζιέσζουμ κρίστε φίλιους δέκει άλτισιμ τουμ λίμπερα δε ιστομορβομ περ μέρτι μπεάτα εθ πάυουλι εθ σάντου Δονάτι άλφα εδώμ αμέν, ή Οφείλεις δε ποιείν εις αυτήν την διάταξιν λειτουργία απάνου εις τον πάσχοντα και να τον ρίπτει εις τα άγια και εις την εξυστερινήν λειτουργίαν να το γράψει εις χαρτίν βέβρανον και να το δένι εις τον αυχένα του πάσχοντος ίππου

I' ll try to find if there are any spells for misguided administrators as well (LOL)--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 21:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That was awesome. I had never seen Latin rendered in Greek. It's amazing how you could find this passage but I'm already past being amazed anymore because that's the norm with your contributions anyway. To read the passage was a treat. "Hippiatrica" is basically from Ιππιατρικά, now it reminds me of a the word Ιππίατρος. I had forgotten it even existed. Well you learn new words everyday or remember old ones you had forgotten. Thanks for reminding me of these words and for the spells. It was great but don't try too hard to find admin related spells however. I doubt they'll fall under them since they generally don't understand Greek or, even worse, Latin rendered in Greek. And don't forget this is Δανιμαρκία. It's a slightly off kind of kingdom. Take care for now and thanks again. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 21:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC))


 * Well here's what I can make out in Latin if they would be interested to fall under a byzantine spell "Contra Morbum (that's the latin word for disease cf. morbid):....Cosmam et Damianus, Lina Cletus et Cyprianus, domine Jesu Christe filius Dei altissimi, tum libera de isto morbo per martyri (?) Beata et Pauli et Sancti Donati" hehe I find it absolutely hilarious as well... Take care, stay out of trouble and mind the... horses.
 * Fantasτic sounding stuff. I really like it. I'll try to follow your advice. And keep well. Καληνύχτα λοιπόν. Τάσος. Dr.K. (talk) 21:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Aegean Macedonians
Hi. Thanks for the banner on the talkpage - hopefully others will take heed. By the way, could you "nest" the Wikiproject banners and add a "This is not a forum" banner, if you know how? I can't find out how to do it myself. Cheers,  Balkan Fever  02:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi BalkanFever. Yes I agree that discussion was getting really heated. I did my small part to try to cool it down a bit. Thanks for your feedback. I nested the project banners but I can't find the forum message yet. I'll try to find it. Take care for now. Dr.K. (talk) 04:23, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Δυστυχώς, είδα με τριήμερη καθυστέρηση το γράμμα. Χαίρομαι που με τη βοήθεια του Γιώργου το άρθρο μπήκε στο σωστό δρόμο! Κατά τα άλλα, ακόμη και με anonymous IPs όσο ηλίθια και αν είναι καλό θα ήταν να αποφεύγουμε πάνω από 3 revers, εκτός αν πρόκειται για vandalism. Λυπάμαι που δεν μπόρεσα να επέμβω εγκαίρως!--Yannismarou (talk) 16:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Alex Jones page
Thanks for your input there, we were going around in circles for a long time and you seem to have broken the deadlock. Excellent edit I hope that section becomes more stable now :D. Regards. - 88.212.144.188 (talk) 16:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I hope so too and thank you very much for your nice comments. It was a pleasure helping out. I saw the ongoing feud and decided to offer my opinion. I'm glad it worked out. Thank you for your nice edits as well. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 17:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
For the pronounciation of Antikythera mechanism! DMacks (talk) 22:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It was my pleasure. Thank you for your great suggestion. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 22:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Indo-Greeks_100bc.jpg
Hi Dr.K. Thank you for your questions about the map. I moved the conversation and answered your questions on the East-Hem_100bc.jpg talk page. And please, ask any questions and send any comments or ideas you have to me, and I'll do the best I can to integrate them into the maps! Respectfully, Thomas Lessman (talk) 16:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much as always Thomas. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 16:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Pancanada
Hi Dr.K. Thank you for your questions about Pancanada in the. Unfortunately I do not have an answer for you. I have had very little luck looking for more information; it seems Pancanada is very poorly documented - there's not even a Wikipedia article about it. The only sources I have that show Pancanada are Joseph Schwartzberg's Historical Atlas of South Asia, and John Nelson's WorldHistoryMaps.com atlas (says Pancanada lasted from 130-100 BC, then was conquered by Taxila, possibly N. Sakas).

Thus, I am not sure whether Pancanada is ruled by an Indo-Greek, Indo-Scythian, or native dynasty. I'll keep looking for more info, but I would appreciate any info you may have. Respectfully, Thomas Lessman (talk) 11:31, 3 August 2008 (UT
 * Thank you very much Thomas. Unfortunately I don't have any information about the area and in these obscure topics this is not something easily available. As far as the Indo-Greek map can the numbers indicating countries that are not visible in the cropped version be removed and a legend for the various colours be created? Finally as, I also mentioned in the Indo-Greek talk page please feel free to indicate the maps you want to be included in an animated gif and I'll try to do it. Take care for now. Dr.K. (talk) 13:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

 * Thank you very much Gatoclass for all your hard work and that of the crew. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 08:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Αγαπητέ Τάσο

Δεν καταλαβαίνω το λόγο για τον οποίο διαγράφεις τον σύνδεσμο της επίσημης σελίδας της Νομαρχιακής Αυτοδιοίκησης της Κέρκυρας από τη σελίδα που αναφέρεται στην Κέρκυρα. Θα σε παρακαλούσα να μου αναφέρεις έαν υπάρχει κάποιος σπουδαίος λόγος προκειμένου να ενημερώσω με τη σειρά μου όποιον και όποιους χρειάζεται ώστε αυτός ο λόγος να αντιμετωπιστεί. Οθων Μιχαλάς —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corfiot (talk • contribs) 15:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Συνέχεια
Σε συνέχεια του προηγούμενου (αναφορικά με το http://www.corfuvisit.net) θα σε παρακαλούσα να με ενημερώσεις και στην διεύθυνση μου michalas@corfumail.net. Οθων Μιχαλάς —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corfiot (talk • contribs) 15:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Γειά σας. Τρείς είναι οι λόγοι. Πρώτος ότι η σελίδα δεν αναγράφει ότι είναι επίσημη. Δεύτερος ότι οι πληροφορίες της σελίδας είναι τουριστικής και διαφημιστικής υφής και όχι εγκυκλοπαιδικής. Τρίτος λόγος είναι ότι οι συνδέσεις στη σελίδα δεν λειτουργούν. Μόνο ένας από αυτούς τους λόγους είναι ικανός να καταστήσει τη σελίδα ακατάλληλη για την Βικιπαίδεια. Τώρα έχουμε τρείς. Τάσος. (Dr.K. (talk) 15:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC))

Ελπίζω τα παραπάνω να ωφείλονται μόνο σε λόγους πίεσης λόγω και της αξιόλογης προσφοράς σας στην όλη προσπάθεια. Απαντώ:

1. Αν δείτε στο footer της σελίδας υπάρχει σε όλες το: Copyright 2002-2008 © Prefecture of Corfu All rights reserved. 2. Θεωρώ ότι ο χαρακτηρισμός μιας πληροφορίας με τον όρο "τουριστική" είναι παράδοξος. Αν τουρισμός είναι η "επόπτευση", "περιήγση" του χώρου τότε η πληροφορία που αναφέρεται σε αυτή την επόπτευση ή περιήγηση είναι ουσιώδεις. Εξ άλλου οι πρώτες εγκυκολπαίδειες περιείχαν ακριβώς τις περιηγητικές εντυπώσεις διάσημων περιηγητών. 3. Εάν κάποια σύνδεση σε κάποια σελίδα δεν λειτουργεί παρακαλώ πολύ να μου την αναφέρεται διότι αυτό αποτελεί πρόβλημα για μια σελίδα με επισκεψιμότητα κατά μέσο όρο 1000 επισκεπτών ημερησίων.

Οθων Μιχαλάς http://michalas.corfumail.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corfiot (talk • contribs) 15:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

http://www.corfuvisit.net
Αγαπητέ Τάσο Κέσσαρη

Ελπίζω τα παραπάνω να ωφείλονται μόνο σε λόγους πίεσης λόγω και της αξιόλογης προσφοράς σας στην όλη προσπάθεια. Απαντώ:

1. Αν δείτε στο footer της σελίδας υπάρχει σε όλες το: Copyright 2002-2008 © Prefecture of Corfu All rights reserved. 2. Θεωρώ ότι ο χαρακτηρισμός μιας πληροφορίας με τον όρο "τουριστική" είναι παράδοξος. Αν τουρισμός είναι η "επόπτευση", "περιήγση" του χώρου τότε η πληροφορία που αναφέρεται σε αυτή την επόπτευση ή περιήγηση είναι ουσιώδης. Εξ άλλου οι πρώτες εγκυκολπαίδειες περιείχαν ακριβώς τις περιηγητικές εντυπώσεις διάσημων περιηγητών.

3. Εάν κάποια σύνδεση σε κάποια σελίδα δεν λειτουργεί παρακαλώ πολύ να μου την αναφέρεται διότι αυτό αποτελεί πρόβλημα για μια σελίδα με επισκεψιμότητα κατά μέσο όρο 1000 επισκεπτών ημερησίων.

Οθων Μιχαλάς

http://michalas.corfumail.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corfiot (talk • contribs) 16:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Δεν υπάρχει καμμία πίεσις. Δεν χρειάζεται να εκτελείτε χρέη διάγνωσης της καταστάσεώς μου διότι κατά τέτοιον τρόπο προσχωρείτε σε μη επιτρεπτά όρια. Πριν από λίγες μέρες οι συνδέσεις δεν λειτουργούσαν γι' αυτό ανεφέρθην σε τέτοιο θέμα. Περιήγηση κτλπ. είναι θέμα τουριστικό και άλλωστε υπάρχουν συνδέσεις σε ξενοδοχεία και άλλες τέτοιες τουριστικές δραστηριότητες και αυτό θεωρείται σπαμ (WP:SPAM). Θα το βάλω για σχόλια στη σελίδα συζήτησης του άρθρου και αν άλλοι συμφωνήσουν έχει καλώς. Dr.K. (talk) 16:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Παρατηρώ ότι παρ’όλες τις εξηγήσεις που προσπάθησα να σας δώσω, προχωρήσατε σε διαγραφή του συνδέσμου τοποθετώντας την ακόλουθη λεζάντα.

(cur) (last) 15:35, 8 August 2008 Tasoskessaris (Talk | contribs) m (85,069 bytes) (Undid revision 230626340 by Corfiot (talk)Please do not add spam to the article. The website is purely commercial) (undo)

Μετά από αυτό είμαι υποχρεωμένος να ενημερώσω τους καθ' ύλην αρμοδίους τόσο για το σύνολο των στοιχείων που περιέχονται στις υπό την επιτροπεία σας σελίδες, όσο και για τις πράξεις σας, διότι φαίνεται ότι τα πράγματα είναι πολύ πιο σπουδαία από όσα μπορεί να διαχειριστεί ένας φτωχός, απλός webmaster.

Εντυπωσιάζομαι βεβαίως από το γεγονός ότι προσέξατε πως το προηγούμενο Σαββατο Κύριακο κάποιος hacker κατόρθωσε να σπάσει την ασφάλεια του συστήματος μας και να σταματήσει τον σταθμό για 8 περίπου ώρες.

Δεν μπορώ βεβαίως να μείνω αδιάφορος με τα λεγόμενα σας περί spam διότι αφενός μεν οι σελίδες που υπερασπίζεστε ή/και εποπτεύετε γέμουν από εμπορικούς συνδέσμους (πιθανολογώ ότι σας διέλαθε), αφετέρου στο ίδιο ακριβώς σημείο αναφέρεται  η πολύ καλή σελίδα του Δήμου Κερκυραίων.

Επαναλαμβάνω ότι αν η διαφορά στην αντιμετώπιση Δήμου και Νομαρχίας προέρχεται από σφάλματα, λάθη ή παραλείψεις της Νομαρχιακής Αυτοδιοίκησης είμαι πρόθυμος να μεταφέρω τις απόψεις σας προκειμένου να διορθωθεί ότι διορθώνεται

Με ιδιαίτερα φιλικά αισθήματα

Οθων Μιχαλάς

http://www.corfuvisit.net/

P.S. Το επώνυμο παραπέμπει σε Κερκυραϊκή καταγωγή. Μήπως είστε Κερκυραίος;


 * You have resorted to legal threats. Please see No legal threats. I will report this incident to the proper Wikipedia authorities. Dr.K. (talk) 16:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Byzantium
No problemo!Tourskin (talk) 05:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Please explain why my edit to Engineering was unhelpful and unconstructive. I was making a seeious edit. I do apologise if I broke any wikipedia rules. Regards. 86.143.174.153 (talk) 17:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi sorry, I replied on your talk page. Thanks. Dr.K. (talk) 17:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation. Perhaps both links can be included in the article since they are both correct. 86.143.174.153 (talk) 17:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, you make a good point. I agree with you, please go ahead and change it accordingly if you wish. As far as wrongly reverting your edit, when I saw your two edits I thought you were changing the order of "Technology|technical" within the wikilink just for testing reasons. But then I saw the previous edit and I realised that this was not the case. Sorry again and take care. Dr.K. (talk) 18:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Trial and incarceration of the junta at Korydallos
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Trial and incarceration of the junta at Korydallos, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Mayalld (talk) 14:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Trial and incarceration of the junta at Korydallos
I have nominated Trial and incarceration of the junta at Korydallos, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Trial and incarceration of the junta at Korydallos. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Mayalld (talk) 15:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Junta trials
You should nominate the article now under the date of creation, 15 August. If you wait until the AFD is closed it may no longer be eligible, because articles have to be nominated within five days of creation. Provided the article is approved, consideration will be given to the fact that it is undergoing an AFD and it won't subsequently be deleted for being a few days late, but you have to nominate before the five day period has expired. Gatoclass (talk) 05:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Vlora page
Thank you for being contributive in Vlora page, but I think no reference says that in antiquity it was Avlon, just Aulon. Secondly, Αυλών is the ancient greek form, or the modern greek?. And thirdly, I think we should stress in the lead archaich:ancient greek. What do you think?balkanian (talk) 20:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi balkanian. Thank you for your nice message. "Αυλών" is ancient Greek and "Αυλώνα" modern Greek but "Αυλών" is also used in "Katharevoussa" Greek, which is not used that much anymore. The way you suggest it is even better. I completely agree. Please go ahead and change it. It's been a real pleasure talking to you. If you need anything else let me know and I hope I will see you around. Take care for now. Tasos. (Dr.K. (talk) 22:03, 17 August 2008 (UTC))

Greek junta trials

 * Thank you very much Dan. I really appreciate it. Say hi to the DYK crew. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 19:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you again for your support
It is always a pleasure to work with a person of such character as yours. Hail to you, son of Constantine!!Tourskin (talk) 00:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The feeling is mutual Tourskin. It is really my pleasure working with you on this topic and I agree with you in many respects. Take care and thank you for your noble salute. It is an honour. Dr.K. (talk) 01:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Junta trials
Hello Tassos! First off, congratulations on writing this important article! I've began making some copyedits, trying to improve the flow of the language a bit and add some info for readers who are not familiar with the context. I also saw that you have included sources in Greek, and have had them autotranslated. Wouldn't it be better if we translated them directly to English ourselves? I can easily do that, unless there is a reason why not. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  09:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you Kostas, I really appreciate your nice comments. The idea about writing the article came to me recently, after I watched the documentary "Junta trials (Korydallos)". I just couldn't believe it. It brought the events so close that I had to write about them. The rest is history to use the cliché. As far as your edits to the article, no problem. I saw them and corrected just a minor thing. You did an excellent job. Now the problem with the translations is that if we provide them ourselves anyone can write anything they want. There is no objectivity, no verifiability and no accessibility to the translation. Google translation, although at times horrible, is accessible and verifiable and gives the gist of the meaning in most cases. Therefore I strongly prefer it. It is also accepted by the relevant regulations covering WP:CITE. I hope this answers your question. Take care for now. Τάσος. (Dr.K. (talk) 15:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC))


 * I suspected as much. OK then. :) Cheers, Constantine  ✍  15:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Take care Kostas and thanks again :) Τάσος. Dr.K. (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Vlora page
Hi, our consencus is being breaked by User:Tsourkpk. Can you help me explaining him, why the lead should be as we agreed?Thanks balkanian (talk) 18:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC) You are propably right, but the source we have, says that the name aulon may derive from a not greek language, so Vlora (archaic: Aulon, Ancient greek: ..)would be more NPOV.balkanian (talk) 18:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC) Nice to work with you.balkanian (talk) 18:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It was my pleasure. Take care balkanian. Dr.K. (talk) 18:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry for being a bit agressive. [I have a bad hairy day :D ] I hope you won't hold it against me. Bye! Surtsicna (talk) 18:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It is very gracious of you. I appreciate the gesture. There is no problem at all. It happens all the time, in the heat of the moment, especially in edit summary comments. Thank you again and it's been a pleasure meeting you. All the best. Dr.K. (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL
...well, well, well, look who's back again.


 * Thanks Giorgo. Unbelievable. I'll do two reverts, then if you don't mind do two more, and then he will be blocked. Let's see. Dr.K. (talk) 22:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

His fixation is actually funny though... Γασπερός as in Γαμηστερός maybe?--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 22:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a certifiable case. Dr.K. (talk) 22:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I' ll be hitting the sack in a while, but I will be around.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 23:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Great. We'll talk soon. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 23:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The WikiProject Greece August 2008 newsletter
The August 2008 issue of the WikiProject Greece newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.--Yannismarou (talk) 11:05, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Did You Know question
Hi. I've reviewed your DYK submission for the article massacre of the Acqui Brigade, and made a comment on it at the submissions page. Please feel free to reply or comment there. Cheers, Art LaPella (talk) 22:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Art. Great suggestion. Kostas changed it as you suggested. He beat me to the punch. Thanks again. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 23:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I must say, it's always a pleasure to discover another new article by you, Tasos. It's like "oh, great, I really wanted to write something on this, but never really had the time, etc." It's much easier to go copyediting than writing it from scratch! :) Once again, good work! PS. if ever in some article you need help with translation from German/Spanish/French sources, I'll be happy to help. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  01:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you Kosta. It's been a real pleasure working with you and your contributions to this article were great as always. I know now that I can count on your insightful edits and this makes editing much more enjoyable, not to mention not so lonely anymore. Take care. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 01:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC))

DYK

 * Thanks Maxim. Please say hi to the DYK crew from me. 19:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Alexios/Alexius
I see Yannismarou has already moved it back. Problem solved, until the next time! Adam Bishop (talk) 01:28, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Phan Thanh Gian

 * Thanks as always BorgQueen. Say hi to the crew. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 01:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Ancient Greek
There is a debate on whether ancient Macedonia should be portrayed as a conclusively non Greek speaking region or not in the accompanying image Future Perfect is making. Check it out!

GK1973 (talk) 22:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks I will. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 22:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Expedition Global Eagle

 * Thanks again to you BorgQueen and the crew for another job well done. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 19:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Μαντάμ Σουσού
Μ' αυτά και με τ' άλλα ξέχασα να σου γράψω ότι εκτίμησα απολύτως τη στάση σου, και χάρηκα που βρέθηκε κάποιος ψύχραιμος και συγκροτημένος να πάρει μέρος στη συζήτηση. Δυστυχώς, έχουμε αρχίσει να θυμίζουμε ξεπεσμένους συγγενείς, που νομίζοντας ότι δεν έχουνε τίποτε άλλο να τους προσδιορίζει, περνάνε της ζωή τους αναμασώντας ότι ο παππούς τους ήταν ο σπουδαίος αριστοκράτης και ότι στις φλέβες τους τρέχει γαλάζιο αίμα... Το σύνδρομο της Μαντάμ Σουσού... Ξενέρωσα τελείως και καθώς διαβάζω και ατάκες του τύπού: ''It is evident that in this period a great deal of ethnic mixture between Slavs and Greeks occurred; probably few full blooded Greeks - if such existed prior to the Slavic invasions - were left. Thus there is no reason to beleive that Greeks now are any purer-blooded than any of the other Balkan'' μου έρχεται ναυτία. Ε ρε γλέντια!Πάμε ρε να κάνουμε μια αιματολογική να δούμε πού στεκόμαστε. Να βγάλουμε και το ελληνόμετρο να μετρηθούμε μπας και... --Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 06:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Giorgo. You're right. You put it so aptly. This Hellenonometer line should have been mine. The question I would have asked in the recent conversation (had I used it) would have been: "If you had it, (never mind how it was invented) would you use it?" I would really like to know the answer, even though I suspect if it were easy, many would do it. But here we are trying to argue against genetics information being put into the article and then your quote comes up about "full blooded Greeks" coming from, you guessed it, a geneticist. Can you then blame the Greeks for trying to rebutt politically loaded drivel like this? Especially if they have data to prove it? It's a tough call. Very tough call. In a toxic neighbourhood such as the Balkans and facing the drivel from toxic scholars against Greece, maybe playing this genetics game is not so silly. It may even be a line of defence. Maybe Deucalionite was right after all. The question is: do we let the environment brutalise our thinking as well? On the other hand, genetics is a subject that can easily be manipulated to fit any agenda, therefore its value is rather limited. Thanks for dropping by Giorgo and take care. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 16:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC))


 * Μην κάθεσαι αδελφέ να πιστεύεις τις αερολογίες του John Fine. Άντε. Deucalionite (talk) 13:07, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Είμαι fine και χωρίς τον Fine σ' ευχαριστώ. Πολύ αίμα δάκρυα κι ιδρώτας όμως και μου γυρνάνε τ' αντερα. Το πήρα όμως απόφαση, όπως είπα και νωρίτερα από σήμερα κι ομπρός θα βγαίνω έξω με το ελληνόμετρό μου... Αγαπάς την Ελλάδα; Απόδειξη. Βγάλτην έξω τώρα να σου τη μετρήσουμε με το ελληνόμετρο (δε βγαίνει κάτω από ένα μέτρο, γιατί είναι και μερακλού η φυλή)... την ελληνικότητα. Να δούμε την έχεις μεγάλη γιατί της κοντής ελληνικότητας της φταίν οι τρίχες...
 * Hi Deucalionite. Maybe you had a point during the recent conversation, since people like that still exist. But maybe not. Because this just proves my point that genetics are very pliable and can be manipulated to suit any agenda. What a field of research. More like a quagmire rather than science. By the way who is this guy Fine? Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 16:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC))


 * I guess one reason I insist on keeping the "Genetic origins" section of the Greeks article is to stop users from catapulting all of this Fallmerayer-induced bullshit about Greek identity. It's sad that there are still scholars who continue to propagate aspects of Fallmerayer's political treatise despite the fact that it was rejected years ago.


 * Just so you know, John V.A. Fine is a "Balkanologist" and history professor whose works make me want to regurgitate in a urinal. Fine embraces "Slavic domination" of Greece without at least consulting the archaeological services of Greece to confirm any of his statements. I myself checked the archaeological reports going back several decades. Nowhere did I find evidence of "widespread Slavic settlements" substantiating the notion of a Slavic "tidal wave" engulfing nearly the entire Greek mainland. Hell, even the Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium states that evidence of Slavic culture in Greece is rare. How can Slavic culture be rare if we are supposed to believe that the Slavs "dominated" Greece for a period of time (i.e. 200 years based on some extreme "estimates")? Obviously, some scholars still resort to believing in Byzantine literary exaggerations and aspects that seemingly reflect the ideological tenets of Pan-Slavism. Pathetic. Deucalionite (talk) 17:31, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info on Fine. As for the rest, as I mentioned before, the Balkans are a bad neighbourhood. It's getting slowly better but old habits die hard. There are people out there still looking for Greek real estate on false pretenses. The dustbin of history is waiting for them. Dr.K. (talk) 19:34, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. The Balkans will always be a bad neighborhood. The only realistic way for the Balkans to achieve any semblance of regional stability requires each major ethnic group to stay within the boundaries of their own homogeneous nation-state without making expansionist territorial claims. Some countries in the Balkans implement sneaky tactics where they use immigrants (illegal or otherwise) in order to destabilize other Balkan nations and fulfill expansionist territorial claims. It's sickening. Old habits never die in the Balkans, they simply hibernate. Deucalionite (talk) 21:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Genetics at the service of territorial claims and as a defence against the same. What a world. Dr.K. (talk) 02:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

message
 fr33k man  t -  c 15:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I replied on your talk page. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 15:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Latest Corfu autonomy
Have you seen this ? Perhaps we should mention this new political development/trend in the article Corfu Apostolos Margaritis (talk) 16:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I see in the meanwhile the Greek press (see among others Kathimerini) mentions the story too!. Poor Karamanlis, this is exactly what he needs right now! But you are right, the story does not deserve a special paragraph. Maybe we should approach Ms. Smith's story with a..pinch of salt and caution. I am in a hurry so just pasted the text it but I guess it should be rewritten/edited. Naste kala! Apostolos Margaritis (talk) 17:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Funnily enough, now the BBC is coming up with this. Something must be going on! Apostolos Margaritis (talk) 14:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Apostole. The BBC used to be a serious news source. Maybe they just went on an editorial vacation or they are just trying their luck at comedy. It used to be that news was made after facts had been established on the ground about the acceptance or not of a political movement by the masses. This way the real newsmakers were separated from the wannabes. It seems that, in their haste, the BBC is generating news before they happened. Nowhere in these pieces is established that the views of the interviewee are shared by anyone other than himself. At this rate we still have a long way to go. We have all kinds of pretenders to various thrones in Europe, for example, who would love to be interviewed by the BBC and who would make very plausible cases as future rulers of many European countries. But they simply don't have the sexy backdrop of Corfu and the irresistible allure of embarrassing the Greek Government. It's a tragic way to end BBC's credibility this way. Dr.K. (talk) 01:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Say it isn't so Tasos? I read that article from the Guardian yesterday and I was left speechless. I just hope I can visit Corfu before they become independent! El Greco(talk) 19:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Μην ανησυχείς, μέχρι τότε όλοι οι Έλληνες θα έχουμε επιστρέψει στο Σείριο. Τι άλλο θα ακούσουμε θεέ μου εδώ μέσα...--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 19:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


 * First of all hi guys, El Greco, Giorgo. It's always a great pleasure to see you here. Thanks for the visit. Now back to the subject at hand. What can I possibly say? It is true that Corfiotes can sometimes feel a bit insular, it's an island after all. I think this guy, who got the autonomy idea, may have to take a few trips (and maybe a few beers) just to take it easy and maybe spend his energy somewhere more productive. Other than that I am still recovering from the shock myself. For a moment, as I was editing this info into the article, I had a bad déjà vu as if I were a vandal. But it was true, even though slightly premature and hyped up by our British friends who of course they wouldn't miss such a chance to embarrass the Greek government in their inimitably British way. But they weren't so phlegmatic this time because their report was over the top. I mean the countryside littered with cars? The old city run down? It was described like some kind of ghetto. I also liked the reference to the dismantling of the Ionian Academy. That's news from the 1800s. They also forgot to mention that the building is completely refurbished and the Ionian University replaced the Academy. Where did the reporters get these gems from? If they bothered to read the Corfu article on Wikipedia they would have discovered all this information. I even put up a picture of the reconstructed Ionian Academy building recently. I guess Corfu can have this effect on them, especially given their past history and continuing close connections with and love for the island. Anyway, who knows what the local autonomists are thinking. Maybe they want to recreate the Ionian State, minus the rest of the Ionian islands (kind of a non-sequitur in itself). But I have to thank Giorgos again. His remark elegantly reminded me that this has galaxies to go before (and with a big if) it has the slightest impact on anyone's life. Don Quixote may have been a Spaniard but his descendants are all over the place. They just landed in Corfu of all places. So no need to worry about passports for quite sometime yet. Like Don Quixote, when these people hit the windmills of history, they'll wake up. Take care El Greco and Giorgos. It was really nice, and therapeutic, talking to you about this. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 22:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC))


 * Ω ρε παιδί, νομίζω που μας κογιονάρουνε, η Παναγιά κοντά σου, μα έλα μου που θα τσι μάθουν τσι πομπές τους στο Πλατύ Καντούνι. Βουρδούλιο... μα τον Άι Πίπι μου!--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 10:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Ρε Γιώργο τι μου θύμησες τώρα. Με τα άπταιστα Κερκυρέικά σου με ξανάφερες τόσο κοντά και ζωντανά στη κατάσταση αυτή που μόνο η λέξη βουρδούλιο μπορεί να περιγράψει. Όσο για το κογιονάρισμα είναι διπλής κατεύθυνσης δυστυχώς. Τηλεκατευθυνόμενο από Αγγλία και ίσως γενικά Δύση και βέβαια, και δικαιολογημένα, από τα πάτρια, συμπεριλαμβανόμενης και της Κέρκυρας. Όσο για τσι πομπές τους στο Πλατύ Καντούνι, ο Άι Σπυρίδωνας θα τσου πετάξει από τη φινέστρα της Ιστορίας. (Τόπα καλά;) Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 12:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC))

DYK for René Dagron

 * Thanks for your great efforts Borg Queen. All the best to you and the rest of the crew. Dr.K. (talk) 14:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Tasoskessaris's broken undo rules
This user has broken an undo rule against me recently.

He has used an undo only when a part of it needs to be undone.

Read the undo guidelines, people!

He even marked it as a vandilisem undo!

All it was was that my broken internet cord caused a single line of the ferret article to get messed up when i made an edit.

I was not trying to vandalize the page whatsoever.

Split9102 (talk) 19:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * He already apologized to you at the article talk page: Talk:Ferret – xeno  ( talk ) 19:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Xeno. But I want to correct you for the record. I did not apologise because there was nothing to apologise for. Split9102's edit fit all the criteria of test edit or vandalism. So I just told him that I accept in good faith his rambling explanation about broken Internet etc. Obviously he does not understand a few things but that's ok. Harassing me on my talk page after I gave him a good reply on the article's talk page is not a good sign. But let's assume good faith one more time and see where this goes. Dr.K. (talk) 20:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well you did say "Sorry" =) I agree with you, and would urge Split9102 to try and sort out his connection issue: the fact that he seems to insert a lot of netpacket chatter (which will be interpreted as nonsense vandalism) when he edits will likely have future edits marked as vandalism as well. – xeno  ( talk ) 20:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, technically I did use this word. But not as a synonym for apology but rather as a sincere expression of concern about hurting his feelings, even though his explanation was rather imprecise and rambling. I did not mean to apologise for reverting patent nonsense. Anyway I'm sure you have better things to do, as have I, rather than wasting our time over such rather silly things. Thank you for the courtesy of replying in my absence to this user and as always I'm glad to see you here. Take care. Dr.K. (talk) 20:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. Just doing my thing. cheers – xeno  ( talk ) 20:29, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice sense of humour. Thanks for making me smile :-) Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 20:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC))

Ur welcome
My gratitude and respect to you, and my pleasure Gabr-  el  05:27, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It's always a pleasure Gabr-el. I thank you in turn for your lucid and well considered arguments which are such a pleasure to contemplate. Till next time. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 05:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC))