User talk:Parrisia

Image tagging for Image:PAPPOUS 04.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:PAPPOUS 04.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

3RR on Military history of Bulgaria during World War II
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Todor→Bozhinov 17:36, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

The way you are describing it, the 3RR also applies to the person who reverts my "reversions"

Parrisia 20:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It does; but I'm watching my edits: I made three in 24 hours, you made at least four, and I wouldn't revert again. Todor→Bozhinov 21:02, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

WW II
Re: Bozinov's article:Military_history_of_Bulgaria_during_World_War_II

Bulgaria signed the Tripartite Pact in 1941 and attacked Greece. No amount of smoothtalking ("e.g. Bulgaria retained its prosition of passivity" - oh please!) will ever change the malignant role of Bulgaria in the history of WWII. Soviet occupation must have given Bulgaria a good idea of what NE Greece went through during the "glory days" of Bialomorska Balgaria. Parrisia 20:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Malignant? I don't think we did anything even comparable to Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Imperial Japan, or even the Independent State of Croatia, for that matter. History is not a simple thing, at least not as simple as you present it (as if we just signed the pact and attacked: we didn't sign the pact like that, we were, to a large extent, pressured into signing it; and we never attacked, we were assigned the control of already German-conquered territories). You totally disregard the role of politics and diplomacy, and I don't see what's wrong with our constant passivity throughout the war, which is a historical fact &mdash; we never sent any troops to any front to help the Nazis, for example. And remember, we saved our Jews from the camps.


 * I'm not sure what that Soviet occupation is supposed to mean, and I don't think it gives me any idea of northeastern Greece, the matters are absolutely incomparable. Also, the feminine form of the Bulgarian adjective meaning "Aegean" is spelt belomorska. Best regards, Todor→Bozhinov 21:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

You are probably right. “Malignant” does not even begin to explain the criminal role of Axis partner Bulgaria during WWII. In the final analysis, if you really are into accurately presenting the facts, then you need to observe the following:

Even the fascist dictatorship who run Greece at the time, refused to capitulate to the Germans. The Greeks fought the Axis with all their strength, even managing to score a few points on the way (Greco-Italian War) and did not become the Axis “policemen” ("assigned the control of already German-conquered territories" – also in that job you apparently did not perform very well either – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust#Bulgaria). After the Nazis won the Battle of Greece, a fierce resistance was organized.

The "Osvoboditel", on the other hand, felt no need in doing the right thing i.e. making a contribution into the Allied effort and fight the Germans. Instead he saw the Nazi attack on Greece as a perfect opportunity to put his expansionist and "irredentist" agenda(against Greece and Macedonia, respectively) into action. He explicitly agreed about that with Hitler before signing the Tripartite Pact.

In the case of Macedonia, the "Osvoboditel" may have had a point since nationalist Bulgarians like to think that Macedonians are in fact Bulgarians, but, in the case of Greece his aspirations were totally groundless. It is like us Greeks saying that Instabul (formerly known as Constantinople) is still Greek despite its 99,99% non-Greek population and that we need to take it over.

This decision by the "Osvoboditel" rightly placed Bulgaria in the esteemed company (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Imperial Japan, Independent State of Croatia) that you yourself have described. But don’t kid yourself: Bulgarian occupation of Greece was far worse than the Nazi and Italian ones. Deportation of all officials (mayors, school-teachers, judges, lawyers, priests), a universal ban on the use of the Greek language even on a private basis, expropriation of land and housing, import of Bulgarian settlers, renaming of all towns and places. Nomatter how romantically you choose to look at this, Bulgaria, unlike Nazi Germany, set out to annex NE Greece. Parrisia 07:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, don't be so naïve, I already told you you're looking at things as if they're so simple. During that stage of the war, there was hardly good or bad, and what we were doing is protect our national interests: save our country from the destruction in the Nazi-occupied areas and achieve national unification by joining the Bulgarian-inhabited areas of Romania, Yugoslavia and Serbia to our country. Of course, the Bulgarians in Greek Thrace and Macedonia turned out to be already assimilated or deported, and substituted with colonists from Pontus. But that's quite fair, not like "renaming" towns (using the old Bulgarian forms of the names), huh? And as if the locals "Slavs" are allowed to speak Bulgarian in Greece today...
 * How Greece joined the Allies and Bulgaria the Axis is not a matter of good or bad, but of politics and diplomacy, as I already said. You could make the fierce Greek resistance as poetic as you want, I don't mind. We received no support from the Allies, so we were forced to join the Axis to save Bulgaria from Nazi atrocities. And we couldn't save your Jews because they were not Bulgarian citizens.
 * I'm not trying to justify Boris III's actions, it's just that there are reasons behind these actions that must not be omitted.
 * In conclusion, I'd say it's pretty much pointless to accuse one other of war crimes. Whatever happened was more than 60 years ago, and the situation has changed so much since then. We're good partners today, no matter what we did in WWII and what you did in the Second Balkan War. OK? Todor→Bozhinov 09:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Gosh, don't be silly and blindly anti-Bulgarian. I already explained just about everything to you, why don't you get it? Todor→Bozhinov 11:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

We fought the Nazis, you sided with them even becoming their policemen, end of story. It is not anyone else's fault that your useless statesmen made all the wrong choices both in WWII and in 1912-3. I guess the bottom-line is that you have to make something of our own and try not to steal somebody else's property. Parrisia 10:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Aristotelis Tsilingaridis
An editor has nominated Aristotelis Tsilingaridis, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 21:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Your personal attack

 * Re: I kindly request you to take back the message in my talk page and apologize, before I proceed to the due actions in order to protect myself from your personal attack.--Yannismarou 13:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

you can go ahead and klas my puts, Sherlock Parrisia 16:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Aristotelis Tsilingaridis. The notices and comments are needed to establish community consensus about the status of an article, and removing them is considered vandalism. If you oppose the deletion of an article, you may comment at the respective page instead. Will (aka Wimt ) 16:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Please take this as a final warning. Wikipedia is not a place to use as a nationalist battlefield, as you did in your polemics with TodorBozhinov, and it also has a very strict rule against incivility and personal attacks, like the ones you made against Yannismarou. Please stop your insults and your aggressive tone, or you will be blocked. Thank you, --Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

To: FutPerV

Wow... I use Wikipedia as a nationalist battlefield and not Zifkov...er,sorry, Bozinov the shamemless antisemite. If that's the case, my answer to you would have to be "Block dis, fool". Parrisia 12:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I would still want to use W to read your crap, is that OK?

Sigh. You have been blocked for 48h for repeated uncivility and personal attacks. It's time you understand that such behaviour will not be tolerated now and in the future, so I invite you to mend your ways or risk new and possibly longer blocks.--Aldux 12:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Gross motor function classification system
A tag has been placed on Gross motor function classification system requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Top Jim (talk) 19:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

October 2010
Thank you for your recent contributions. Getting started creating new articles on Wikipedia can be tricky, and you might like to try creating a draft version first, which you can then ask for feedback on if necessary, without the risk of speedy deletion. Do make sure you also read help available to you, including Your First Article and the Tutorial. You might also like to try the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version. Thank you. Fæ (talk) 20:54, 24 October 2010 (UTC)