User talk:LukasPietsch/Archive 2

Greek loanwords in English
Hi Lukas,

I have made an estimation on Talk:English words of Greek origin and I would like your opinion on this.--Odysses 14:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Lukas, I am thinking of giving up on English words of Greek origin. Clearly the agenda of most of the editors there is showing how wonderful Greek is, not understanding etymology better. And I'm afraid that neither you (a full-fledged linguist) nor I (an educated amateur) is going to be able to give them an education in linguistics on line. I am tired of dealing with the chauvinists. But if I can support you, let me know. --Macrakis 18:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your opinion Lukas. The problem now is the number of words in English language. (Too bad I don't speak any French).--Odysses 18:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * What do you think about the book, Lukas? NikoSilver 23:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Keep up the good work!




And I, NikoSilver could not agree more, and would like to give you more medals, trophies, prizes, credits, bravos, yoohoos, cheers, distinctions, and decorations, but I don't know how to do that yet, since I am new in Wikipedia! I am also very jealous and full of envy for Odysses who gave you an award faster than I could!

Euharisto Louka!

Paraklisis
Geia sou Louka,

Eimai o: Asteraki (wiki name). Apo pou an epitrepete apo Germania? -Kai apo pou apo Ellada? (ida entelos tixea ti selida sou...)

Tha xaro poli an epikinonisis mazi mou sto kontino mellon (paraklisis)! -Alithia? Grafis kai sti Germaniki wiki? ( Ego nai! -Efxome kai esi! )

Xarika poli, ( esto kai entelos tixea... pou epikinonisa mazi sou!) --Asteraki 23:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

md
Apparently 'idiom' is english terminology. Miskin 15:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no, not as a technical term in linguistics, and certainly not in a sense contrasting with "dialect" in the way you are using it ("dialect"=major division; "idiom"=minor division). That distinction is made only in Greek. Lukas (T. 16:00, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Ronald McDonald (whaling ship worker)
Hi, question for you. I put the Prod tag on the article "Ronald McDonald (whaling ship worker)", and you changed it into a redirect to the appropriate page. I'm wondering what the point is of having such an utterly obscure article name be a redirect. I find it impossible to believe that anyone will ever type in "Ronald McDonald (whaling ship worker)" and so end up being redirected to the correct page. Or is there another reason for such a redirect that I'm missing? --Xyzzyplugh 14:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hm, well, you might be right about the long title with the brackets. The name as such, though, "Ronald McDonald", could very well be a plausible search term. Maybe it should be added to the dab page Ronald MacDonald. Anyway, it's probably not worth racking our brains about this - "redirects are cheap", as the saying goes, so there's really no harm done if it stays now the way it is. If you feel it's important, I wouldn't mind if you just re-added the "prod" (I think the policy is that an article shouldn't be prodded twice, but in this case, I as the de-prodder wouldn't object.) Lukas (T. 15:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

fighting as Greeks
Can you explain to me what "fighting as Greeks" means? Albanau 11:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * "...in the role of Greeks", "...being regarded as Greeks" (rather than simply "...on the side of the Greeks"). Did you think I meant "... like Greeks"? - If you can find a better formulation, fine. Lukas (T. 11:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi
Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Macedonia if you can. --Latinus 12:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Myson
Sorry to mislead you; OCD doesn't have an article on Myson, the quote in Articles for deletion/Myson of Chen is from their article on the Seven Sages. Septentrionalis 18:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Naming issues
This is a complex area and I don't really consider myself involved. Check the revision history of the portal and as you can see, there is (or was) and wheel war over the location. Before the portal was made, I got wind that they were planning it and had this conversation with Bomac. He seemed to indicate that they would not be pursuing it at the location Portal:Macedonia - in the end though, that is where they made it! As you can tell from its talk page, the Greek and Bulgarian users are not happy about it; User:Makedonas went off his head about it! After this post in which I am accused of "conspiring" to move it (my Bulgarian my not be that good, but I can pick that out), I thought, no conspiracy, the move will be performed in the open and initiated the poll. Let’s see where it leads us; wherever it leads us, it will stop the wheel war.

With regards to using foreign names, I don't object and am in fact in favour of including names of historical relevance. This can be illustrated by my reaction to Ormands's edits. I have never advocated removing Turkish names from articles on Greek places. --Latinus 15:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * BTW do you think you could give your views on the edit war at Ottoman Empire. --Latinus 15:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Nope, the sources are on the talk page - the map I'm reverting to is correct. That's the problem :-( --Latinus 16:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikinfo
Wikinfo is a fork of Wikipedia set up for all those users who in good faith believe that an encyclopedia article should be a honest simple advocacy of whatever Forgotten and Suppressed Truth they're pushing. .

WHEELER, who copied his Wikinfo article on Myson to start this article, was one of the worst of these, until he stomped off to Wikinfo (and good luck to it). His particular Truth was largely derived from Karl Otfried Müller's 1000-page fantasia on the Dorians from 1824 (they're blond athletic barbarians who started all the good things in Greek culture, as opposed to all this horrid civilization). It seems plain that he did so to advertise Mueller and Wikinfo.

I'm an inclusionist myself (despite having two articles on AfD at the moment), and I would have simply rewritten the article from modern sources, except for a problem: WHEELER included a GFDL tag crediting Wikinfo, and it's not clear that GFDL permits this ever to be removed even if the article is completely rewritten. I think, however, that WP and Wikinfo are doing different things, and should be separated as far as possible. Septentrionalis 17:46, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Greek grammar
Do you think you could comment - after all, you are the expert ;-) --Latinus 13:49, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes they have, I can see them now - try clearing your cache. --Latinus 15:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks great - I have a few things to add (hope you don't mind), I can't do it now though - in a few hours maybe... --Latinus 19:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hallo Lukas

I ve visited your article about the consonants in the greek language and i observed that some of them /b,d,g,ts,dz/ are not contained in the phoneme board. I try lastly to edit the german article about the "greek language" and at time i feel a little bit confused. I studied the linguistics too but as far as i remember, those phonemes above are inextricable parts of the greek phonemic board. Primus

Arvanit
Lukas,

Do not re-direct Arvanit to Arvanites!

I will report you if you continue to do this.

Arianit

Arianitr
I think we should assume good faith, considering that at first sight, it looked like he was being bullied. What I am concerned about are the POV duplicate articles at Image:Al55.GIF and Image:Gostviari.jpg. Someone ought to have a word with him and explain that that's not how things work here... --Latinus 16:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, he's been blocked again... --Latinus 17:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * We'll see what happens - notorious trolls who spread nationalist mythology after multiple warnings, sooner or later, get banned (if you want names, let me know and then check your e-mail). --Latinus 18:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Ancient Macedonian language
Gia sou Lukas! Eida oti milas kai ellinika kai to protimisa na sou grapso sta ellinika apo ta aglika kaita germanika, giati den tha katalavoun poloi ti sizitame!

Tha ithela na sou po pos o Dbachmann kai o Alexander 007 den einai realistes! Se parakalo poli therma na dis tin selida:


 * I parapano selida apodiknii oti i Ancient Macedonian language einai dialektos tis Proto-Greek language.

Notes
 * Graeco-Armenian einai mia glossa tin opia kai dimiourgise o Dbachmann molis simera, me skopo na ipostiriksi tin apopsi oti dithen i Ancient Macedonian language den einai Proto-Greek language

Séfxaristo. --84.164.241.167 19:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Apantisi.... --84.164.241.167 19:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Lukas ich warte auf deine antwort! --84.164.241.167 22:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, I'm not always in front of my computer! :-) - Anyway, first I have to say I find your avoidance of English rather poor style; I'm not going to join in conspiracies and secrecies here. Second, I very much agree with dab. He knows a good lot about these topics, in some areas more than me, and his judgment is generally sound. I have no opinion about the specific hypothesis of "Graeco-Armenian", but apart from that, the general fact remains that the status of Macedonian is disputed; the Greek-dialect hypothesis is just one option among several, at best; the "Proto-Greek" or "Hellenic" hypothesis isn't too well established either (with nobody knowing for certain what exactly anybody else might mean by "Proto-Greek"), and as I said, the mere fact that one group of linguists over at LinguistList have gone for "Hellenic" as the most handy of hypotheses to build a big tree doesn't say anything. We don't even know who these guys are and what sources and what arguments they have been basing their own judgment on - you must be aware that theirs is not primary research literature but must be some sort of compilation, tertiary literature. In any case, there's absolutely no excuse for forcing one of the disputed hypotheses into the disambiguation notice at the top of the article, when that notice can just as well be formulated in a perfectly neutral way. Its only function is to distinguish from Modern Macedonian, after all. You've probably seen I've reverted to the intermediate version and I'd very much suggest you leave it at that. Lukas (T. 22:17, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Λούφα
Hi Lukas,

I see that you have written about Imia/Kardak. Perhaps you'd like to check the light side of Imia] (Choose version, Downloads, music video) --Odysses 16:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Α, ωραία. Κάτι έλεγε κι η κουνιάδα μου για αυτό το έργω. Παίζει τώρα στην Ελλάδα; Πρέπει κάποτε να βρούμε το ντιβιντί, φαίνεται. :-) Lukas (T. 16:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Το έργο βγήκε το Δεκέμβριο, Δεν το είδα, αλλά φαίνεται καλό :-) Το ντιβιντί πρέπει να βγεί στους επόμενους μήνες. Μερικές ακόμα πληροφορίες εδώ--Odysses 17:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

RFC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Dbachmann

Scan include image
Yes, I have the map and can scan relevant island, but cannot work out how to include is as image. Imia is indicated as Limnia N. (N is for nisos=island and attributed to all Greek sovereign islands); all Turkish islands are indicated with an A. Politis 09:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Aucaman RFC
Before defending Aucaman by making accusations of "nationalist mud-slinging" and saying "I cannot see anything that I would classify as personal attack", why don't you look at this. Do you condone such behavior? --ManiF 19:19, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I have little to add to what I wrote, and I stand by my judgment until better evidence is offered. If you have any legitimate complaint against Aucaman, you guys have been doing a terribly poor job presenting it. That one incivil remark of his in Persian was treated on the discussion page, and I've commented on it accordingly. Apart from that, wherever I look in the article discussions and related WP:AN pages (and mind you, I'm not going to read through all that mess), I see Aucaman as consistently the better argued, more concise, more civil, more focussed, more reasonable, less ideological voice. From you guys, I see ramblings, wordiness, evasion, repetition, whining, poor documentation, lack of understanding of process, and incapability of even filling in an 3RR report or an RfC properly. You really have only yourselves to blame if people don't believe you have a case. Lukas (T. 20:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


 * All I see from you are accusations based on assumptions and borderline personal attacks calling us names such as "whiners". "ramblers", "nationalists". People do believe we have a case, because we have direct evidence supporting our case, not circumstantial mumbo-jumbo. --ManiF 21:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The Iranian watchdog is an organised way of handling with vandals. How is it a 'nationalist battleground'? your criticisms are ridiculous. If articles related to a certain country are being attacked, and then the individuals are also being called names, as bad as 'terrorist' by a few 'contributers' just because of their nationality, what else were we supposed to do? We had to get organised to deal with it.

Now if you didn't have time to get the full account and just tried to give us even more work, then again, this is exactly the weakness of Wikipedia's power structure. No one bothers to be fair, so they do 'something' and think they have done something good.

Instead of supporting us to end this battleground and make a way for the Iranian contributers to actually have time to CONTRIBUTE instead of just revert and defend articles, you have created even more hassle. Well done. It's these behaviours and weak judgements people make on here everyday that makes Wikipedia weaker and weaker. I hope you are happy. --Kash 00:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Read your notes again.. It's amusing to say the least. Instead of providing a way to resolve the issue, you have done what exactly? I would love to know why you thought your comments were helpful in anyway, to end this 'battleground' as you call it. You just provided links to our actions to stop attacks against Iraianian 'POV issues' as you call it. What else are we supposed to do? Atleast try to be helpful when you come across such issues. --Kash 01:01, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

The RfC
Well a number of Iran-related articles have a nationalist-racialist POV to them. My attempts to improve these articles have been branded as "Zionist" and "anti-Iranian" even though I'm Iranian myself. Instead of addressing my (very specific and otherwise trivial) concerns they give explanations like "You don't have a majority consensus" or simply ignore what I say and start making personal attacks. They have made this way too personal and want me to stop contributing to Wikipedia, removing any dispute tags I place and reverting most of my edits (even the obvious ones like this one). I've been subject to a lot of personal attacks, many of them coming from anon users (or those who pretend to be anon users) with no previous record on WP (see the one brought up by User:ManiF above and read my explanation of it). I'm not sure how many other users have gone through what I'm going through, but it looks like they've successfully terminated some of the other users opposing them in the past (User:Ahwaz, User:Diyako, and User:Mesopotamia come to mind). AucamanTalk 06:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

English words of Greek origin
I am not sure if we should keep the picture+comment I uploaded in the above article. Please revert it if you think it's lame. Niko Silver  (T) @ (C) 11:42, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * :-) Nice one. I just saw the same add here on my favourite linguist weblog today, and was already thinking of sending you a note: (but the accompanying text is unfortunately about something different). - Well, I'm afraid you're probably going to get into trouble with copyright, so be prepared if somebody deletes the picture. Apart from that, it's nice. Does the figure quoted there actually correspond to anything of what we found? Lukas (T. 11:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Ha ha, I reverted it myself. Anyway, my altering the article, flashed red in Macrakis' watchlist, who in turn altered very accurately and precisely the wording of the intro paragraph. So, ουδέν κακόν αμιγές καλού applies here too! Thank again for your support back then... :-) Niko Silver  (T) @ (C) 20:40, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * PS Need any help in Adana? Niko Silver  (T) @ (C) 20:40, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it seems we've worked it out, as far as the ancient names go at least. The matter is more complicated than we thought at first, so apparently it'll be best to move the names further down after all, which seems to remove the initial controversy. (I don't really want to get involved in the other part of the dispute, about the Armenian massacres.) Well, those watchlists and contribution histories sometimes lead one on peculiar paths, don't they? :-) Lukas (T. 20:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Adana
Sorry about Talk:Adana -- I have no idea how that happened. Perhaps a bug in the Wiki software? I certainly didn't excise your section explicitly. --Macrakis 21:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem, no offense taken, I was sure it was some mistake. Possibly an edit conflict, you having the edit window open for a longish time while I was making those edits? Anyway, doesn't really matter. Lukas (T. 21:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Nestor's Cup
Hab ich mir auch ueberlegt; schlimmstenfalls kann man das Bild ja noch auf die obere Haelfte 'zuschneiden'. Vielleicht aber auch besser als "fair use" auf en: hochladen, fuer den Fall dass ein Purist die Datei von commons: loescht. dab (&#5839;) 11:40, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Οι υιοί
How was this pronounced in Hellenistic Greek? [y yy]? Sounds strange. Maybe you could comment at Talk:Koine Greek, thank you Andreas 15:40, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Greeks
Please take a look at Talk:Greeks. I'm afraid the essentialist concept of ethnic identity is very stubborn.... Your thoughts and contributions would be welcome. --Macrakis 17:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I just saw that. To be honest, I'm terribly busy with nasty POV disputes elsewhere at the moment and a bit reluctant to enter a new one. While I certainly would have preferred your formulation, I'd say that the formulation "are inheritors" etc. is probably not quite wrong enough to warrant a big dispute. After all, there is a lot of objectively tangible cultural continuity and inheritance of ideas in this case. What gets on my nerve more is Politis' typical way of convoluting things even more. "Shaped world trends and adapted to them", heavens, what a stupid blather. But let them have their way for now. Let's work on a better formulation when things have quieted down a bit.


 * If POV-declaring userboxes weren't so strongly under fire these days, I'd be all in favour of creating one now: "This user thinks that ethnic essentialism is generally not a very good idea." What kind of symbol and colour would that go with best, what d'you think? :-) Lukas (T. 18:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Advice
I would like your advice. On the Talk page for Arabs of Khuzestan, user Dariush4444 has called me a liar and propagandist.[] He has called the Arab population "refugees", which is not true, and he claims that I know nothing about the Middle East. He also denies that the Arab population has any ethnicity or culture distinct from the Persian culture. I want to know whether any of these comments breach Wikipedia rules and what I do about it if they do. However, as I have been reprimanded once by Wikipedia administrators, I do not think they will take anything I say seriously any more. I would like your advice.--Ahwaz 18:41, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, sorry, I'm just on the run, I'll be back with you later. Take care, Lukas (T. 18:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, "lies and propaganda", in the context he was using it, is a "personal attack" in my book. Not yet an extremely violent one that should trigger an immediate block IMHO, but I've warned him for it. If he continues despite the warning, a proper next step is to report him at WP:PAIN, the admins noticeboard for persistent personal attack problems, or personally to an admin of your confidence. Don't worry too much about admins now being biassed against you in all eternity - if you demonstrate your own behaviour in this context was okay, nobody can blame you for anything. - The other statements you quote probably don't qualify, they are just a nationalist POV he's expressing, that's a nuisance but nothing you can do much about. Keep cool! --Lukas (T. 23:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks warning
Lukas this is in regards to your warning to user Dariush4444: that certainly was not a personal attack per se, although the comment by Dariush4444 was incivil and certainly uncalled for. However, as importantly Lukas, you yourself said many editors are "whining", "nationalists" and "rambling".... is in fact a form of personal attacking, and altough I can appreciate your warning on Dariush4444`s talk page, but you too need to adhere to these rules as well please, since there are no double standards in Wikipedia; just be aware of that please. Thank youZmmz 00:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Note: Lukas on the assumption of good faith, and after being pointed out to me by other users that it may be inappropriate to use the word biased--I have now erased it, and in the intrest of sounding fair; I do actually apologize. But, again, please do not spam my talk page too much, and certainly refrain from scolding me. Thanks and good luck to you.Zmmz 01:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

RfC
Hi, Lukas. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Aucaman has, as of late, become a problematic editor who is unwilling to compromise and who has also engaged me in ludicrous revert wars for no reason. He wants the complete removal of the term "Aryan" from all Iran and Iran-related articles and accuses anyone of using the term, even in the Iranian context, of being an anti-Semite. I don't agree with all the other editors involved with the RfC, but certainly everyone agrees that Aucaman needs to calm down and be willing to compromise and recognize that his recent behavior is totally unacceptable. I also did not appreciate his appreciate his insinuations against me. And I must certainly and quite emphatically disagree with you that the RfC is simply "nationalist mud-slinging." I have no idea about the politics of most of the other editors, but Khoikhoi and Paul Barlow are two editors who definitely, absolutely cannot be accused by anyone of "nationalism." At any rate, I haven't been online very much lately so I haven't been keeping track of things but as far as I'm concerned this matter is a non-issue and Aucaman has no grounds in constantly removing the term "Aryan" from Iran-related articles. This is my only interest in the matter. SouthernComfort 15:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, quite frankly, I don't think this RfC will accomplish anything since as you have noticed, it has grown unwieldy. Personally, I'm hoping that this problem will just go away since I am very quickly growing tired of this nonsense on WP, since as you have noticed, editors often become divided into two extremes where there is little communication and a breakdown in civility and assumption of good faith. This is typical throughout WP, no matter the subject matter. If things on WP continue this way, I cannot imagine any sane, reasonable person with a life wanting to get involved in this project. At any rate, what are your thoughts on this matter? That is, do you have any ideas for a solution? SouthernComfort 15:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, the situation with the noticeboard is due entirely to the constant POV "attacks" and sneaky vandalism against certain Iranian articles on the part of editors harboring anti-Iranian or anti-Persian sentiments. Such extremes will always ultimately attract other extremes. It's a reaction to prejudice, perceived or otherwise. Up to now Zmmz, ManiF, and Kash, though I have not had much in the way of interaction with them, seem to be willing to compromise. And so far they have been very communicative with neutral editors such as Khoikhoi. So, we'll just have to see how things work out. SouthernComfort 16:08, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Reasonable?
I have a different POV on Southern Comfort's "reasonableness". His edits seem ultra-nationalist to me, and his attitude is often less than affable. For example:


 * You are simply the most ignorant user I have ever come across on Wikipedia. It's absurd. I'm tired of responding to your racist ignorance, but I won't let you continue vandalising these pages. Go read the history books for yourself and stop relying on the racist propaganda of pan-Arabist websites. You make a lot of noise Zora, but in the end you cannot back up your claims or prove your revisionist history. SouthernComfort 11:19, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

I could add numerous additional cites but ... I won't. I can't find the one where he called me a Bengali and told me to stay away from Iranian articles. I enjoyed that one -- it's on my user page, in my list of "names people have called me" :) Zora 23:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Zora, just be forewarned please, if you are going to make allegations like that, you need to provide proof. Otherwise, it may be used against you. It doesn`t do any good that you constantly label others as "nationalist" or "chauvinist" either. ThanksZmmz 00:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I see that Zora is again stalking me. She is, in fact, an anti-Persian, anti-Iranian racist and she has consistently harassed both myself as well as Zereshk for the past year. BTW, I never called her a "Bengali" or any such names ( I challenge her to find the diff ) - unlike her, I do not make personal attacks such as lambasting others as "nationalist" or "chauvinist" again and again ad nauseum for over a year. See her comment here (last sentence) . Her hatred of Iranians is unbelievable, and in my entire life, I have never come across someone as prejudiced. And on WP. Go figure. SouthernComfort 23:48, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * BTW, as to the first comment she provided, she was quite prone to massive deletions of information from articles and injection of her own personal opinions and blatant errors - as you yourself could see on History of Khuzestan, which I thoroughly cleaned up. My opinion is that her conduct, particularly her constant stalking behavior, is intended to drive me away from WP and/or to get a rise out of me. It won't work. SouthernComfort 23:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry to have confused you with Zereshk re that incident, SC. I apologize for the error. The rest of it ... well, QED. But I'll stop here, since I think I'm getting too caught up in this. Zora 07:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry Lukas. I strongly disagree with you as well. Of all the anti-Iranian editors, Zora has theee longest history and record. You will not find EVEN ONE full time Iranian WP editor that has not clashed with her on an Iranian article. And there are at least 20 active Iranian editors currently on WP. If there were to be a vote against Zora's edits regarding the Iranian articles, I am willing to bet there would be a unanimous vote by them against Zora. Not only that, I guarantee a similar outcome by the Shia editors. I challenge anyone to find even one Shia editor that will defend Zora.


 * The only reason I respect Zora is that she stops short of direct personal attacks (excluding the "nationalist" labelings). At least not in the same way that users such as User:Ahwaz and User:Mansour have attacked me. And that is probably the only reason we have kept our peace with her (or try to). And besides, we have had many non-Iranian editors helping us out as well.


 * I'm sorry Lukas. Our experience with Zora it seems, is entirely different from yours.--Zereshk 10:39, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I second the comment above --Kash 10:55, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

What do you think?
"Now, go and get lost. Death praiser. You illiterate mental. Your Cyrus the Great was nothing but an illiterate and murderer. But still he is long gone and forgoten. What is your excuse for being one.....? Your dad is a mercenary".

This is the translation of a comment User:Aucaman left here

For your information, Cyrus was the founder of then Persia, now Iran.

Do you think he is fit to 'contribute' to Iranian articles when he has a strong anti POV against Persians/Iranians?

Me and others have asked him to comment on this however he repeatedly archieved his talk page! --Kash 10:55, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yawn. This incident has been discussed to death, I've commented on it earlier myself, he's himself done all the explaining it needed. It wasn't okay, but he was severely provoked and he then retracted it. Now stop it. You guys have been carrying this quote around in front of you long enough. Stop spamming people's talk pages with this. Lukas (T. 11:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Eh? This single quote shows how racist he is toward Iranians yet you "yawn"???? If you were neutral in this dispute you would not simply OK his behaviour just because he was 'provoked', racism can not be justified. You from all should know this --MysticRum 17:12, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Please re-read every single word of what I said above, try to take it in, and then go away. Lukas (T. 17:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Lucas I realise how one-sided you are on this matter (forget it - I don't want you to comment) but please Please do not bite the newcomers, MysticRum has only just joined us recently. --Kash 00:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * My extra patience for newcomers is reserved for technical mistakes and weaknesses about how to write good articles. It does not apply to nationalist bickering. Lukas (T. 10:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Communalism on Wikipedia
Sir, it has come to my attention that a group of people are mobilising on communalist lines against those they regard as "anti-Iranian" and "anti-Persian". See this Wikipedia notice board: I have no problem with people coming together to exchange opinions and on a range of articles and, in a subject as vast as Iran, it could make sense. But this is not what this notice board is about. It explicitly says the notice board is for "Iranians", not a broader range of people with an interest in Iran. See which says "This is solely for awareness of other Iranian Wikipedians to join discussions on controversial topics."

Then there is a section entitled "Users to keep a watch on", which lists those "users who are widely known to systematically, methodically, and deliberately be involved with dismantling, attacking, debasing, and injecting misinformation into Iranian related articles." It accuses them variously of being anti-Iranian and even "terrorising". It lists their ethnicity, as if no Turkic, Azeri or Kurdish editor can be classified as Iranian. On this page, I have been accused of "spreading anti-Persian propaganda" simply for debating the issue of the Arab population of Khuzestan. Nothing I said in the talk page or on the main article page was "anti-Persian" at all.

I and other editors have been the target of racist abuse and we have been warned for reacting to it - I was punished by being blocked for 24 hours, even though I deleted the comments I made soon after making them. Yet, it seems that Wikipedia takes no action over this and even allows people to mobilise on communalist lines and target individuals! It goes beyond the necessary requirement to organise people to contribute to Iran-related articles and into a vindictive campaign to force people out of Wikipedia. Is this the "civility" you and others were telling me to abide by?--Ahwaz 11:36, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * It looks like User:ManiF has done the right thing and deleted the section "Users to keep a watch on". However, I am still concerned that such personalised attacks will just switch to the talk page. The "controversial topics" section is also still personalised with "attacked by ...". I know that I have not been warned or blocked for vandalising any article, although I was warned over reverting the Arabs of Khuzestan article that was being vandalised by an anon who refused to engage in discussion. It seems that disagreement with their strand of thinking is regarded as some kind of attack and heightens the air of hostility.--Ahwaz 12:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Intervention at Talk:Greeks
Sorry for backing you up, I know you're a big boy and you can handle your own businesses. I just did so, in order to bring things a little closer with you and User:Politis, because I think that he is a user with great potential, but too little experience. :-) Niko Silver  (T) @ (C) 11:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, thank you for your solidarity. It's true I've become rather impatient with Politis after a few rather outrageous edits he made recently, and after his attacks on Macrakis, whom I value as a friend and great contributor. Maybe I was a bit harsh. Wikistress showing through, perhaps. :-) Lukas (T. 12:16, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * It was an automatic reflex. Feel free to revert. -- Rory 0 96 16:13, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You've got mail. :-) <font color="#606060">Niko <font color="#909090">Silver  <font size="-2">(T) @ (C) 16:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attacks Warning II
Please be forewarned that there are absolutely no double-standards in Wikipedia. Even after I personally assumed good faith in you and apologised for implying your behaviour may be biased, you contact me by saying I may in fact have no decency . Be forewarned, from now on you are to refrain from personally attacking newcomers, or any other editor. Using language like, nationalist factionalizing mudslinging, then go away, a disgrace to Wikipedia, and nationalist bickering is considered incivil, and in fact, as personal attacks. Regardless of how you may perceive other’s actions, what is important is [your] reaction. You have been warned before, but still insist on labeling others. Also, continuing to spam the pages of the editors who you disagree with is considered as harassment; simply state your grievances in the appropriate pages such as the Rfc in which you act as an advocate for. Zmmz 01:38, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:RFAR
Yeah it would be nice if you could help me. I've already sent you an e-mail. AucamanTalk 08:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You should receive an e-mail from me in an hour. AucamanTalk 09:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You've got mail. I'm about to go sleep now, but I should be around for another 30 mins in case you have any questions. AucamanTalk 11:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Macedonians (ethnic group)
I know you don't like to take sides or even comment on any talk that may be of nationalistic hue. However, in the above talk, there is a logical paradox that needs the attention and views of non-biased and neutral users such as yourself. Your opinion would be very helpful.

PS. Hope you well received my last e-mail on previous discussions (17/3/2006). <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff"> <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">N <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">k <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">o <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">S <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">l <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">v <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">e <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">r <font style="background: #ababab;"> <font size="-2">(T)@(C) 10:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you for the notification. Right now, I have to admit I'm a bit under wikistress for various reasons and a bit reluctant to enter into yet another dispute. Hope you'll understand. I need a bit of a break. But I have the feeling the discussion over there is currently running more constructively than it used to, isn't it? Maybe I can give it a look later, but I can't promise right now. See you, -- Lukas (T. 11:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I fully understand. After all, such talks can be stigmatising, yet challenging... <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff"> <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">N <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">k <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">o <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">S <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">l <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">v <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">e <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">r <font style="background: #ababab;"> <font size="-2">(T)@(C) 11:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

What?
what was that message about?did i insult anyone in english or greek?--Hectorian 19:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, you didn't, of course. Miskin did, in the sentence just above mine. Sorry, thought that was obvious. --Lukas (T. 19:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * i had guessed u meant that,but i wanted to make sure u were not accusing me.btw,i do not think it's a big insult.we use this word quite often here...Regards!--Hectorian 19:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, sorry again for the misunderstanding. BTW, independently of this particular minor incivility, I think there is actually a deeper problem here. I see a tendency among many non-English-speaking users, not just Greeks, to use their languages for these kinds of "conspirational" purposes - talking about other people behind their backs, arranging concerted action on some edit-warring issue, that sort of thing. Which is generally not a nice thing, in my view. Maybe we can work on that at some other time, when the air is free from angry mastodons. --Lukas (T. 20:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Couldn't help noticing your talk. English is fine. Your native tongue is more easy-coming. I believe this is the reason why people don't use the perfectly acceptable by wikipedia means of conspiracy: the e-mail. I too get frustrated when I read... Sanskrit, but people tend to use their native language to get their point across on a more intimate level. Also, I confirm Hector's assertion that the word is common (like "silly" in English which both of us have used quite a lot, Luke). <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff"> <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">N <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">k <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">o <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">S <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">l <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">v <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">e <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">r <font style="background: #ababab;"> <font size="-2">(T)@(C) 20:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You may be right in parts, thanks for the note. Still... "o ilithios"? Isn't that really more like "that idiot"? If you tell me no now, I'll remove the notice from Miskin's page before he sees it. Lukas (T. 20:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The word may mean 'idiot' or 'silly'.judging from the discussion it was used for,i think that the word was more used like naive-not knowing-silly...or maybe 'idiot'.but i really find it a bit exagerrating to be considered a personal attack...afterall there have been used much more insulting words and expressions in wikipedia(in english or not).we should also keep in mind that sometimes we loose our temper...we're humans:)--Hectorian 21:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry too for the misunderstanding.i have to admit that i also get a bit suspicious and curious when i see my username between words that i cannot understand...but what can i say...if people want to use their mother languages,i cannot stop them.--Hectorian 21:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually it's more like "the fool", or "silly". It sounds like a curse that a 5 year old would use. I assure you, I can't think of a milder insult. Furthermore, he doesn't say who it refers to. I'll have to see his contributions, to know who he refers to at the time, but I guess it's not worth the time and it can't be substantiated as an actual insult. Miskin is generally not so provocative in his talks. I guess that it is gray word (but very close to white) that addresses someone indirectly. I wouldn't have even bothered, but then again this is your choice. <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff"> <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">N <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">k <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">o <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">S <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">l <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">v <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">e <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">r <font style="background: #ababab;"> <font size="-2">(T)@(C) 21:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * My response on the other issue will be posted in my talk. <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff"> <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">N <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">k <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">o <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">S <font style="background: #9f9f9f;" color="#ffffff">i <font style="background: #ababab;" color="#ffffff">l <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">v <font style="background: #c4c4c4;" color="#ffffff">e <font style="background: #b8b8b8;" color="#ffffff">r <font style="background: #ababab;"> <font size="-2">(T)@(C) 21:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Not sure
Why did you get involved in to this? Aucaman did not even ask you to, it looks like you couldn't wait to get your hands dirty! 

No worries, I will get involved when I have time (is there a deadline?), your comments such as should surely discredit you already? You have been involved in even more 'vs Iranian' activity as mentioned in your first archive too, right? May I ask whether you have a tendency to back people against Iranians? --Kash 11:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * First, I can assure you that your repeated attitute where you keep calling all Iranians 'nationalist' and defending someone who is clearly being problematic already sums up the reason behind why you got your self involved here.

But anyway I'll see you in court! ;) --Kash 11:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Lucas, as you know perfectly well (I hope), you can always tell me if you find something I said offensive, it was not my intention to 'attack' you.

Thanks --Kash 11:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Greeks
I haven't looked at it for a day. I agree that the &lt;ref&gt; functionality is very nice, and have installed it on another article (Democratic peace theory) on which Wikifate has inflicted a PoV pusher. I installed's Byz's text as a demonstration that I am prepared to consider variants - the nationalists are not. Septentrionalis 22:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

E-mails
Have you been getting my recent e-mails? I've got a couple of return notices. I responded to your question about the Persian people article. Did you get that? AucamanTalk 02:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You should be getting two e-mails from me. AucamanTalk 08:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I just sent two new e-mails to the old e-mail address. Let me know if you're getting them. AucamanTalk 11:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Check your e-mail. AucamanTalk 11:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I sent you another e-mail but you don't have to reply anytime soon. AucamanTalk 12:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Your RfC
Hi CoolCat, I just saw that RfC page you put up for Aucaman et al. This doesn't really look like a formally valid user-conduct RfC. Could you please check the formal rules again and reformat accordingly, so that it will actually be useful in attracting people to comment? I'd suggest you shouldn't advertise it in the meantime. Thanks! Lukas (T. 14:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm... so rfc structure has changed over all this time. I'll take a look and fix it.
 * I make it a personal policy not to advertise to parties. The only people I notified are the ones already involved with the case.
 * -- Cool CatTalk 14:21, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I see you notified Zmmz and somebody else, but not even the parties actually criticized, i.e. Aucaman et al.? That, IIRC, is one of the most basic requirements and has to be documented in the RfC before it can be counted valid. - By the way, you may wonder why I've become active so quickly in this, but I've been acting as a kind of semi-advocate in Aucaman's other affairs lately. Lukas (T. 14:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * P.S.: Please see Requests for comment/Example user. It's been more or less like that since mid-2004, apparently. Lukas (T. 14:33, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm.. I see. I'll advertise to them as well. -- Cool CatTalk 14:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Anything else I should do? Feel free to assist. :) -- Cool CatTalk 14:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, sorry, no offense, but ... rather than assisting, I'm probably going to shoot it down. Honestly, I don't think the RfC in this form is going to go anywhere. Give me half an hour, I'll add a note explaining why I think it won't work, and suggest you drop it for the moment and try in a different form. Lukas (T. 15:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting personal attacks and pov pushing are acceptable? I depleted every method avalible to me. I ask for asitance on the noticeboard I asked people on IRC. I let them be for months in hopes someone would interfere. I was going to directly jump to arbitration but Francis requested I go for RfC first.
 * Shooting an rfc I filed for obviously problematic behaviour is puzzling behaviour after making me work so much. I am currently confused as well as frustrated by your statement.
 * -- Cool CatTalk 15:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, wait till you see my reasons. This is not about their behaviour not being problematic, but there are formal problems which I think can't be healed within the present process. Lukas (T. 15:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, here I am again. Well, sorry, as you've seen, I did it. As for how to proceed further, I'd say you leave Aucaman alone; he's now at Arbcom anyway and your case seems at least to heavily overlap with that one. You could of course still submit evidence there. Muhamed, if he's really as extreme as you paint him, should simply be blockable by admin decision alone (repeated, persistent personal attacks are blockable, I think.) As for Diyako and Heja, I can imagine that an RfC might be a good idea; I don't know them well, but what I saw of Diyako during the Newroz/Norouz comedy was highly problematic. Lukas (T. 16:28, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh I am not annoyed. I just hate to see Anti Air flying around ;). I can take your advice and leave Aucaman out. (simple enough). However I have repetively plead for assitance for Muhamed and no one interfered (even filed an ANB). So unless there is a fast way to get rid of him an RfC is the only option. -- Cool CatTalk 16:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, I have no problem with that. I'd just recommend that a single RfC should be about a single, well-defined set of incidents. Maybe you could split it up. Lukas (T. 16:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure but as you may recall gathering evidence is a painful process. I didnt cite too many as practialy almost any diff they have can be used as evidence. Hence I invite you againto assist. I do not mind if you break the RfC into 3. I just dont want to veture into this all alone. -- Cool CatTalk 16:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Just a note: I wonder why you are still so upset about that restaurant incident? That was entirely reasonable; the article wasn't really about the restaurant as such, but about a political event that took place there, and which happened to involve some prominent Kurdish politicians. (see Mykonos restaurant assassinations). It was moved, but still has got that category. Lukas (T. 16:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I wasnt upset. The article was originaly talking about a non notable restourant. All that was relavant was "supposively" two kurds were murdered there. So it was an easy delete as it was pointless. During the Afd Article was renamed and expanded to explain historic event rather than the restourant. The expansion was indirectly my doing.
 * I was upset that article to be tagged with the Kurdistan category. As you might know Kurdistan is a contraversial region of a proposed kurdish country with borders determined by whoever is drawing. Berlin is not even in the middle east hence no where near Kurdistan unless borders reach to berlin germany.
 * -- Cool CatTalk 16:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but at the time Muhamed cat'ed it, it was clear enough what the article was intended to be about. It was a poorly written article, to be sure, but that wasn't his fault, its relevance to the "Kurdistan" category was obvious to anybody familiar with the subject. So, I really don't see how you would class his edit as disruptive or anything. At the most, you might argue that "Kurdish history" or somesuch would have been a better choice than "Kurdistan", but that's still just a minor, perfectly AGF-able mistake of judgment, not disruption. Lukas (T. 17:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Think it this way, this is like tagging Kennedy Assasination with Category:Asia. Kurdistan supposed to be a proposed country or region and is contraversial. The user tags random provinces in turkey, iran, Syria, Turkey with kurdistan category as well as a restourant in Berlin germany. If I tag Paris as a part of greater germany I would be blocked for breaching WP:POINT, I dont see why this user is allowed to do what he is doing. because of him and people like him the categories related to kurds are imposible to navigate as you are likely to find categories and subcategories with a handful articles.
 * Check his past contribution: . And/or just review the edit summaries:.
 * -- Cool CatTalk 17:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * "Random provinces"? - Could there be a tiny little chance that they were not random but had one little unimportant thing in common - that of being considered part of Kurdistan by some? ;-) I mean, you might not like to consider them part of Kurdistan, but some people clearly do. I'm ready to agree that some of his activity is problematic, but the wish of having a category "Kurdistan" covering these things is certainly not prima facia illegitimate, and I don't think you'll gain much support RfC'ing with that argument. Lukas (T. 17:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Look. This person only tags random articles (doesnt have to be provinces and on occasions the word kurd is not even mentioned in the article) with category Kurdistan with an edit summary talking about removing bosmongol propoganda by adding the category. That is all he does aside from trolling my rfa and voting on afds etc. There is nothing else I can cite because thats everything he has done.
 * We do not tag France under category Germany just because some neo-nazis consider it as a part of greater germany. Nor do we tag Canada as a US state even though many people consider that (no offense to anyone, just an analogy). So why is it that Kurdistan is treated any diferently? You do see my point I suppose.
 * -- Cool CatTalk 17:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

(This comment was originally written on CoolCat's talkpage; CoolCat deleted it however immediately.) I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Category:Kurdistan has recently been nominated for deletion, and it was decided to keep the category. When the results seemed clear CoolCat stated: "So no I dont care about this vote at all. I have no reason to keep nonsense like this on wikipedia, I will eventualy get it deleted, watch me" Please see Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_March_3. Bertilvidet 17:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Yes, I vaguely remembered there was a pre-history of Kurdistan-related CfD's, but I wasn't aware of that detail. Lukas (T. 18:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm... He is only trolling. This RfC has nothing to do with that. -- Cool CatTalk 03:23, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Zmmz ArbCom
Indeed, I did notice that you're trying to drag me in and get me and others involved in the ArbCom process. All the best.--Zereshk 03:44, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

The rfc
Umm... Why did you modify the date? I personaly believe you are too stuck with policy. Anyways now its all good. I moved the old page and copied most of the stuff. So it is perfectly paralel to policy now. I however still feel this was unecesary work on my part. -- Cool CatTalk 10:24, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The date as you had inserted it seemed to be not a fixed time stamp but a dynamic time template, which got updated (thus seemingly resetting the 48-hour clock) every time the page was modified. - As for the rest, I'll give it a look later, and modify my comments where appropriate. Lukas (T. 10:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess you are trying to shoot the rfc down simply by using the time stamp. If this is an effort to get me enraged its nt working. Stop inisting on the validity of the RfC. You said you were going to assist me with the rfc, you need to do so in 48 hours since the start of the RFC. -- Cool CatTalk 03:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Huh? Lukas (T. 07:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm not trying to get you enraged.
 * 2) My main concern is not the timestamp, but the lack of a clearly defined topic. I gave you some advice, but you didn't follow it. I'm simply concerned those problems are still there, and an RfC is unlikely to have any constructive results if people don't have a clearly defined issue to comment on.
 * 3) I'm not going to insist on the deadline issue, but still, you made a mistake, I pointed it out to you. If I hadn't intervened, your RfC would just have sat there in its faulty form and would have been de-listed by now. I don't see why you expect that your making a mistake should buy you an extra advantage, in giving the RfC a longer deadline than it would have deserved even if it had been valid from the start?
 * 4) If you want me to help with surviving the next 48-hour deadline (supposing people let you get away with that), there's no way I could do that, because I was never involved in whatever the dispute is supposed to be. You need somebody bringing and certifying evidence of trying to solve the dispute, for each of the sub-disputes that you've listed. The most I can do is to endorse some summary later.
 * 5) In general, I didn't promise I would support; I just didn't exclude it. As my impression currently strengthens that this might all be part of a vendetta against those who were supporting the "Turkish Kurdistan" coverage, I'm less and less inclined to. I just happen not to agree with you on this matter of content.
 * Look, I am just overwhelmed with too many things that are interconnected. I sometimes loose patience and screem at the wrong person. Sorry about that. However I do ask you to help with the rfc. I obviously do not clearly know the policy. It might be best to fix whatever is flawed.
 * This is not a vendetta against those who were supporting the "Turkish Kurdistan" coverage but a

"vendetta" against problematic people who are rude, abusive, and annoying.
 * -- Cool CatTalk 00:51, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 06:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

ancient Macedonia
Hello Lukas! Can you find at your library "Επιγραφές στην Μακεδονία" (two volumes), by Ιωάννης Τουρατσόγλου? talk to +MATIA 11:41, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, no luck. Not even in the wider region so that I could get it through inter-library loan. What do you need it for? --Lukas (T. 11:52, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * P.S.: Giving it another look, it seems (some of) the contents are online in the Epigraphical Database here: . Look for "Northern Greece", and then for "Ano Makedonia" and "Kato Makedonia", that seems to be based on the Touratsoglou publications. Do you want me to help you find something specific? Lukas (T. 12:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I had seen the book (long time ago) and I was wondering if it could help with XMK. I was hoping that you could find it, understand it and make something useful out of it. The epigraphical database seems very nice, I'll add it as an external link at xmk. talk to +MATIA 12:49, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. The only trouble is, those inscriptions aren't really XMK - if I'm not mistaken, they are for the most part simply Koiné Greek, i.e. Attic-based. It's a bit as if we were writing an article on Scots and then reference a corpus of British government decrees as a source - the decrees will be in Standard English and hence rather irrelevant. So even if the speech of the common Macedonian population was some Greek dialect, it wouldn't have been the dialect shown in the inscriptions. That's why the article mentions the Pella katadesmos so prominently: It's the only written text that at least may represent something that was (a) local, (b) widely spoken, and (c) clearly Greek at the same time. --Lukas (T. 13:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Mutual aid
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Hurriyya_notice_board

I have set up a notice board to give collective support to those facing racism, nationalist bigotry and group intimidation while editing articles related to Middle Eastern issues. There are a growing number of people who are coming across the same problems with the same users, but are outnumbered and over-ruled. It is plain and simple bullying. They are being turned off Wikipedia because of this behaviour. I hope that we can all support each other.

The title is "Hurriyya", which means "freedom".--Ahwaz 17:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Hurriyya_notice_board

List of countries by Coast/Area ratio
Check if you like it :-) It's my FIRST completely new article! <font style="background: #777;"> <font style="background: #888;" color="white">N <font style="background: #999;" color="white">i <font style="background: #aaa;" color="white">k <font style="background: #bbb;" color="white">o <font style="background: #ccc;" color="white">S <font style="background: #bbb;" color="white">il <font style="background: #aaa;" color="white">v <font style="background: #999;" color="white">e <font style="background: #888;" color="white">r <font style="background: #777">  <font size="-2">(T)@(C) 15:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Aucaman
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Aucaman. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Aucaman/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Aucaman/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 19:50, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Arvanites
See bizarre edit by User:Miskin. He is always ultra-nationalist Greek, but in the past he has appeared more sensible than this. --Macrakis 01:55, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

It is indeed touching to witness how sweet and honest feelings Macrakis has for me, and how courageously he expresses them behind my back. Too bad wikipedia is not the right place for me to return the favour. Miskin 00:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I saw it. The author he objected to, Botsi, isn't even Albanian but herself an Arvanite Greek, and the section quoted is a state-of-the-art report describing that consensus. And the thing about those fringe Ancient-Arvanitic-Inscriptions claims does need a strong disclaimer, in my view. But I'd agree we need clearer information about who has said exactly what about any hypothetical "non-Albanian" origin of the Arvanites, and some references about people like Botsaris etc. would also be good. These are all leftovers from the poorly sourced versions from last year. Lukas (T. 06:37, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Both of you should be more polite, cheers. talk to +MATIA 07:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * No offense:)...i did it with good faith motivation towards that man (cause he decided to kill himself, instead of surrender), not to show that he was just an Arvanite for a brief period PM. anyway, i guess u are right about such info been placed in biographical articles. feel free to remove it --Hectorian 18:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Lucas, despite what's been said, I really do appreciate your mediation on this article and I hope that you don't take offense by my overtones sometimes. Miskin 00:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Khomeini
Hey I forgot to ask for your help on this. I added a section to the Khomeini article about his views on non-Muslims. The section has been renamed (wrongly in my opinion) and a verify tag has been added. The whole article is also tagged with npov, although no clear explanations have been given. Any ideas? Auca m anTalk 06:13, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

m/z
Lukas, you wrote:


 * Now, you yourself say above that "we try to fight a misconception that can very analytically be proven wrong. We try to explain this to smart people that should be experts in the field (the mass spectrometrists)" - which seems to indicate the idea you are promoting is not commonly accepted knowledge among a significant part of the scientific community. In which case, Wikipedia is not the vehicle to tell these guys what to do and what not to do.


 * your impression is wrong. The mass-to-charge ratio is used by scientists dealing with charged particles. Mass spectromerty is only one of about 40 communities using the mass-to-charge ratio. As far as I can see no other community claims that mass-to-charge be dimensionless. Also, m/q is the more traditional term. And it complies (better) with the superseeded IUPAC green book.


 * It would of course also be a matter of fairness to add why those other guys prefer m/z - surely, they must have some reason for doing so? --Lukas (T.|@) 20:01, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I actually have no clue why they stick so much to the confused m/z. As you can read on my talk page by a very good physicist (much better than i am) it is a total misconception. It is more a question of psychology than science why the analytical chemists so urgently try to stick to this faulty concept. Kehrli 16:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kehrli"

Nothing particular
Just wanted to have a chat...--ManiF 09:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Language death
No offence lucas but I will re-edit the last section of dead language. I have no personal ties to what it says (if for some reason is that what you think), but I just know that this is a single editors POV's which has no scientific basis whatosever. I know who wrote it, when and why. And I know it's Sci&Fi. I don't have a personal agenda, it's just a ridiculous claim. Miskin 15:06, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Well that's interesting, and I really am amazed to read something like this. However I know the person who made this edit and the whole story behind it (this was the result of a different content dispute), and I could put my hand on the fire that he didn't have a source. Anyway I suppose that your sources partly justify some edits, although the author admits that the mainstream of scholars regard latin as a dead language. As for the trasition from Latin to Italian, I'm surprised to hear something like that. The Italian language was almost the invention one single person. So it's strage. The source is somewhat contradictory as it questions the status of the Romance languages as an independent language family. I think that the author might see the "life" of Latin via all european languages which have assimilated its words (whether Romance or not), and not Latin as a linguistic unit. I can't believe that no modern linguist has ever detected a deadline of Vulgar Latin. I think what is mean by the reference to Italian, is that its contemporaries never noticed that their language went through a significant transition, which is natural. In modern linguistics however, that's not the case. Miskin 19:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Minio and Mazaris Articles
Oule, Ave and Hello (try saying that five times fast). I thank you for your message Lukas. Just so you know, I updated the Maximus Mazaris article by placing an external link on the page. Also, keep in mind that the Internet does not provide a lot of information pertaining to the work of Mazaris. However, all is not lost. I did find a reference to a publication that translated Mazaris' work. This, in turn, will save you time searching for Mazaris on the website I placed in the external links section of the article.

Here is the reference:

Mazaris' Journey to Hades: or, Interviews with dead men about certain officials of the imperial court, Greek text with translation, notes, introduction and index, / by Seminar Classics 609, (Buffalo NY: Dept. of Classics, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1975).

I would need to acquire this tome in order to expand the contents of the article, as well as to verify the information already existent in the article currently. As for Bartolomeo Minio, it is alright if you want to place sources in the article. In fact, I encourage you (or anyone for that matter) to expand the article as much as possible. Anyway, I will definitely check for sources pertaining to Minio, as well as provide a cross-check analysis of any other sources you or anyone else will put in the article.

Overall, there is no need to worry about the Mazaris and Minio articles. Irrespective of them being short, they both deserve a place in Wikipedia (regardless if people in general have not heard much about them). Take care. Over and out. - Deucalionite 4/7/06 9:49 A.M. EST

RFA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RFAR

Miskin
You have obviously been observing Miskin behaviour, as you know he use personal attacks to supress legitimate comment. He continually use unfounded assumptions and naturally come to nonsensical conlusions about the Arvanitic language and the ethnic background and identity of the Arvanitis people. Besides that, he use unfounded comparisons between different ethnic population groups and languages to justify his ignorant view on Arvanitis people, and their mother tongue Arvanitika. He overlook the fundamental facts that Arvanites are the decendants of immigrants of Albanian ancestry, and their mother tongue Arvanitika is an old variety of the southern Albanian dialect Tosk. Both of the facts are not disputed in the Swedish version of Wikipedia. According to the swedish articles: Arvaniter är en albansk folkgrupp in Grekland (translation: Arvanites is an Albanian population group in Greece). Arvanitiska är en gammal variant av dialekten toskiska av albanskan (translation: Arvanitic language is an old variety of the southern Albanian dialect Tosk.) --Albanau 16:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Albanau forgot to mention who wrote the swedish article and whether he got banned. talk to +MATIA 18:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)