User talk:Xenovatis/Archive 1

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Καλωσήρθες! NikoSilver 21:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

CrCulver
I'm no anti-hellenist, I'm simply trying to ensure women and minorities are represented here. Since the Slavs and women were in an inferior position in the Greece of ca. AD 850, Sts Cyril and Methodius' Slavic identity inherited from their mother Maria should be emphasized here. And by the way, Lunt has written quite a bit over his career, but you should be able to tell from the accompanying references what exact book-length work of Lunt's I was pointing to. CRCulver 09:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Your noble pretentions ring hollow when coupled with the abscence of facts that accompanies them. For their mother's descent you have only mentioned the Vitta but you have (1) not supplied any direct quote, (2) not anwsered my objections on it as a historical work detailed in the Cyril talk page, (3) not attempted to disprove the sources by actual historians explicitly stating that they were Greek, (4) not anwsered my argument that following your logic there can be no limit on the inflationary tendencies of multiple identification again detailed in the Cyril talk page. As for Lunt again you have (1) not cited book chapter and verse as I have done, instead vaguely asserted that he supports your position, (2) this as I have shown (by citing an exact passage) is false sinceLunt himself explicitly calls the brothers Greek. Further (3) Lunt, like the other OCS linguists you mention is not a historian and hence not the expert to be consulted in determining a historical fact such as the brothers' ethnicity. Finally please follow up this discussion on the Cyril talk page so that other users may follow the exchange of arguments as well as so that it is in context within the framework of the Cyril and Methodius discussion. I will be copy pasting this segment to Cyril Talk for completeness. Please respond there. Xenovatis 19:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Xenovatis, whatever your opinion of user Crculver, comments such as this are poor form. It is kicking him while he is down. He has already been blocked ... there is no need to provide further comment. Please try to remain civil. -- Pastordavid 21:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing uncivil about the below comment. I, unlike CrCulver, never resort to adhominems and personal attacks, nor and this is important, do I ever use profane or innapropriate language, again unlike user Crculver. Please see below. Any further comments on your part on this subject are superflous. I would like to point out that I have faced such behaviour (mechanical edit warring without a single edit at the article's talk page) from user Crculver my self. I hope he will be sufficiently chastened this time not to engage in such antisocial behaviour in the future. If he doesn't it is at least good to know that he has been exposed as an antisocial element by other users as well. Xenovatis 19:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)Xenovatis 10:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Nothing personal
In the Pontic Greek Genocide article, I want to get it right, and avoid a massive amount of fighting. I have nothing personal against anyone- I try my best to keep all of the articles as bias-free and as neutral as possible. I know of many scholars who have certain tendencies and personal views who join various organizations that have an agenda, and I think if we stick to the facts, we can fix things. I fully support the existance of this article, and wish to see it succeed as I personally believe it did happen. However, my personal feelings have nothing to do with the actual sourced material. WP:OR here is just not permitted :) Monsieurdl    mon talk-mon contribs 22:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Your note
Let's resolve this before it degenerates into revert war 1. Do newspaper articles constitute reliable sources per WK:RS? No. 2. Article is wrong on assertion since almost all EU countries have much higher book per capita book publication rates. 3. Article is also wrong on number of books in France (very doubtfull that '05 figure would be about 30% lower than '96 one, see trend in Unesco page). Additionaly the wording "published every year" just shows the person who wrote it is clueless. This is not a correct average (see Unesco statistics) and it's doubtfull it is even a correct figure for '05. 4. In light of the above I propose removing it completely per WK:RS. Xenovatis (talk) 06:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Of course newspapers are reliable sources. Haaretz is used all the time as a source. How do you know that almost all EU countries have higher book per capita rates?


 * Which article is wrong about France? SlimVirgin  (talk) (contribs) 06:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, this would be better on the article talk page. Moving it there. SlimVirgin  (talk) (contribs) 06:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Cyril
Thanks for your work to merge Cyril into Cyril and Methodius. -- Evertype·✆ 19:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

That's very kind of you. Take care.Xenovatis (talk) 02:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

PGG references
I suggest you add those references inside the article instead of the talkpage. Add all those that call it a "genocide" next to the ones that already exist there. You may also wish to expand the article Academic quotes on the Pontic Greek Genocide. NikoSilver 09:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Will do Niko. Thanks.Xenovatis (talk) 09:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Dear Xenovatis, you acknowledge there is a dispute over the title, therefore please do not unilaterally remove these tags, this achieves nothing as they will simply be reverted. Unfortunately I have barely had enough time to log on in the past few days and have not yet been able to make a proposal but will make one in the coming days. Thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 19:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Genocides in history
Please see Talk:Genocides in history --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Chameria, Chams, Cham issue:

 * Hellenic Institute of Strategic Studies (HEL.I.S.S.) On Chams. 1700 convictions as war criminals & the legal frame of the whole situtation,Chart of cham crimes & collaboration....By P.Laggaris major general of the antiterrorist service . Megistias (talk) 21:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks but I don't think it passes WP:RS and it is in Greek not English. Do you happen to have any academic sources? Perhaps we could do something with those even if they are in Greek. I am particularly interested in Manta's new book that Kalyvas has written about, it is supposed to be quite good on the subject.Xenovatis (talk) 21:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vaskania1.jpg source
Hi, it would really be helpful if you could provide a link as to where on the web you found the image. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Did so as per your request. Feel free to delete if still not compliant as I have removed it from articles in advance. If it stays I will reinsert into articles. Apologies about that and thanks for your time.Xenovatis (talk) 08:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

talk:Pontian Greek Genocide
With reference to your posting to my talk page Your refusal to compromise, it is not clear to me over which specific items you think I should compromise. Most of what we have talked about is part of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. To date other than adding back a template, over which edit warring got the page locked, I have never edited the page.

Your comment about "the matter of altering the lead to reflect only one reference" is not something I thought was needed. What I suggested is done is was that genocide is not used in the passive narrative voice -- this is similar to the idea behind the use of WP:TERRORIST -- but it also has the advantage that the events can be described using sources other than those that describe the events as genocide. You have not explained why you are opposed to not including genocide using the passive narrative voice, because if you try it you will find that you can still include all the information that you wish to include, but the article will not be seen as taking a specific stance on the term. I have given a number of style tips that other Wikipedians have found useful in this area. Like "writing for the enemy" and let the facts speak for themselves which should help you see the approach I am suggesting using.

I admire your tenacity in digging out lots of references claiming that "it was a genocide" but I think the time and energy would be more constructively used digging out facts about what happened and creating a section on the events and a timeline to go with it.

Xenovatis, please don't misunderstand me. I appreciate you engaging in this conversation because it shows good faith. I think it is a pity that some of the other editors of this article are not as willing to engage in a constructive discussion. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 11:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

From my talk page:
 * Philip, I will reply to your points in detail in a minute but for now a quick question if you please. Do you consider that the term genocide applies to the Armenian Genocide? You are intelligent enough to realize I am not being wilfull or obtuse here and that there is a good reason I am asking this question.

I am not qualified to judge and have no wish to do so. Neither I am not discussing the merits or otherwise of whether the Turks committed any other genocide. What I am discussing is presenting the arguments from a neutral point of view and letting the facts speak for themselves. You will see from my edit history that I have spent a lot of time working on various genocide articles, I have done this not because I am particularly interested in the subject, but because I think that many of the articles in this area are very badly written and that many editors would rather push a POV than write a balanced article.

I would point you to this ARBCOM ruling Requests for arbitration/Macedonia. While this article does not fall directly under that remit -- because it is outside the Area of conflict -- it highlights the problems of that passionate nationalist feelings cause. These are by no means restricted to the countries at the eastern end of the Med. Similar problems also occur other regions as well -- just have a look at the talk pages of Liancourt Rocks in that case the comment in WP:LAME "Serious Wikipedians (of Japanese or Korean) may even choose to make these rocks their place of residence (living there not required!) to bolster their case." I would not be surprised if it is true! --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 12:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I want to answer some of the points you have made on my talk page:
 * I have also visited the GenPortal where I saw a rather troubling comment by yourself on an alleged genocide that should not be included in the portal. This is the reason I asked that particular question. If you are not convinced by the case for the AG then you will categorically not be convinced by the admittedly less plentiful evidence presented so far on the PGG.

I would delete the whole genocide portal. I think the subject is far too controversial for a portal and access to the information is readily available through the genocide page. Portals should not be the place to argue content therefore they should act as gateways to information in Wikipedia. So if the portal is to exist at all it should only list information that is not controversial and is well cited. At the same time that I was involved in a discussion over content of this portal I was also involved in one for the Portal:RuneScape which has since been deleted.

If you look at the debate over the Portal:Genocide/Genocide news where I argued that the presentation should be NPOV as it is in the news item after all if a news agency like Reuters can present the information in a NPOV way, then we ought to be able to do the same thing. BTW the follow up to that news item can be read at these 2 URLS http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN30472256 and this site that claims it is quoting Associated Press http://coalitionfordarfur.blogspot.com/2007/05/genocide-exhibit-opens-at-un-after.html. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Renaissance
Hey, I've responded to your comments at Talk:Renaissance. Thanks for being civil. mais (talk) 14:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to respond. Replied to your comments.Xenovatis (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ἔρρωσο!
Hi. Sure I'm interested in helping out with any article if I can... Which article do you exactly mean? And who is Gali? The Cat and the Owl (talk) 19:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hello. I’m quite busy lately and therefore got no much time for wikipedia… I can hardly steal 15 minutes every morning and as much every night just to have a look at my watchlist. However, as soon as I’ll have some more free time, I would like to work on your plan. Γεια και χαρά! The Cat and the Owl (talk) 05:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Greek scholars
I hope very much you intend to add something to these articles. At the minimum, you should add the titles of their extant works. (and the subjects of them if not obvious). I suspect they will be challenged, and I'll be glad to defend them if I have something to go on. DGG (talk) 00:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Iakovos Trivolis and others
While sorting through I moved a number of articels to  which you seem to have reverted, I was just wondering why? Waacstats (talk) 15:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * These people for the most part lived in Italy several centuries before Greece was founded. I thought the Greek flag there a bit anachronistic. That's all. If you think it is important I will not be changing them in the future and adding the Greek ref myself.Thanks for taking the time to do this.Xenovatis (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Greeks3.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:Greeks3.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Formatting
Hello Xenovatis, can you please stop using random insertion of linebreaks for formatting. I assume you are doing it in order to get some images display better for you; be advised that image placement is heavily dependent on the reader's system (screen resolution etc.) and what may be an improvement for you may not be for the next reader. Image positioning should be handled through appropriate use of code ("float" html parameters etc.) If you see a problem with a particular image and can't fix it otherwise, let me know. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Future. Thanks for the heads up. I will be taking it seriously. Could you please point me to the WP article that explains the html formatting? Thanks for your time.Xenovatis (talk) 13:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, sorry, I'm not sure we have such a thing. For me, it's all trial-and-error. There must be some coding in the Infobox Ethnic group or its parent templates that controls how it gets positioned with respect to the intro, TOC, first section heading etc. I've found it pretty confusing too whenever I've tried to play around with these details. What was the display problem you were trying to fix? Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Vielend Dank. Ignoriere bitte meine Meldung in dein Talk page.Xenovatis (talk) 13:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Seems like this bit from MediaWiki:common.css is what controls the behaviour: /* Infobox template style */ .infobox { float: right; clear: right; Now, what exactly the "clear" does I'm not sure. But I guess it's the intended default behaviour of all infoboxes, so whatever it is that causes you problems about it, it won't be too easy to fix. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for that. Take care.Xenovatis (talk) 13:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

H.A.
Pleas don't use various accusations made by anarchists in Athens Indymedia as a source.


 * Hi it is a valid source and I use NPOV language. I don't say they are or aren't just that some people claiming to be HA members claim they are. Personally I believe it but that is not the point. Anyway I will revert the wording to more NPOV. Xenovatis (talk) 15:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

File ta peri michaloliakou grapsta sto indymedia oxi edw. Edw einai wikipedia. Koita to talkpage. Mitsos (talk) 18:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Giorgos
Thanks for the prompt response. Hope I didn't upset you. Την ψειρίζω μάλλον πολύ τη μαϊμού...--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 19:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. In fact that is exactly how most WP editors like it and the more accurate you are the better. Καλή αρχή και αν θες βοήθεια σε οτιδήποτε γράψε. Αλσο λοοκ ατ μαι γιουζερ πειτζ εντ τραι σαμ οφ δοουζ λινκς. Αλσο λουκ χιαρ. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk Τεικ κερ!!Xenovatis (talk) 19:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Θα σ'ενοχλήσω φίλε μου κι εσένα γιατί για την ώρα έχω πάρει τον Τάσο φαλάγγι. Ελπίζω να μη σε πειράζει να σου γράφω στα ελληνικά πότε πότε. Σκοπεύω στο μέλλον να δραστηριοποιηθώ πιο ενεργά, αλλά για την ώρα μαθαίνω ἂκόμα τα κατατόπια όποτε βρίσκω λίγο χρόνο. Το σχόλιο σου για την Υπατία δεν το βρήκα, πού πρέπει να κοιτάξω; Δεν σε ρωτάω επειδή αμφιβάλλω αλλά επειδή εξακολουθώ να είμαι γκαβός και καλό είναι να ξέρω που να ψάχνω στο μέλλον προτού αρχίσω να αραδιάζω βιβλιογραφίες.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 19:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Έλα μου, μόλις ανανέωσα τη σελίδα και αναδύθηκε το σχόλιο σου... Έπαιξε μάλλον μπέρδεμα...--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 19:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's generally better to use English since you might get told off by an admin if you use Greek (or any foreign language) alot. That's cause these talk pages are supposed to be public forums as well and anyone should be able to read what you write here. Occasionaly doesn't hurt though, just as long as it isn't too prominent. You can look here Hypatia and my comment was just below yours. In any event I agree with you and have removed the al-Rhiatab portrait allready. Good start and please keep on bringing those bibliographies! Take care!Xenovatis (talk) 19:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, thanks again, I' ll do just that. I'm a translator specialising in History of the Arts and I end up in libraries all the time browsing endlessly (in despair mostly) through heaps and heaps of volumes. I would be more than happy to help out with specific or hard to find bibliographical references. If in the future something comes up please don't hesitate to contact me. I would be more than happy to help. The only thing is that I rarely visit the wikipedia pages, but I will most certainly respond. Να 'σαι καλά λοιπόν και καλή συνέχεια--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 19:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Βασικά
Αναφέρεται ενα τουρκικο πρακτορειο "χις" αλλά δεν βρισκω τιποτα στο νετ.Σε κάθε περιπτωση μην περιμενεις να βγουν και να πουν οι Τουρκοι οτι βρηκαμε ομαδικο τάφο.--Eagle of Pontus (talk) 14:04, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Greeks Gallery
It just came to my mind but what about Katina Paxinou, Dimitris Papaioannou, Dimitris Mitropoulos, Maria Kallas, Kazantzakis, Hadjidakis, Seferis, Elytis. They are all notable and they most certainly represent modern Greek culture.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 10:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Maria Kallas is a GREAT idea. I will make another one with her included. I was also thinking of Papanikolaou of Pap-test fame.Thanks.Xenovatis (talk) 10:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I made some minor changes in the language of the article but I' m not at all satisfied. Have a look at my comments in the talk page and tell me what you think. I invited sthenel to do the same--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 13:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm very happy that you didn't get upset with my remarks. Unfortunately I have an appointment and I have to go now but I' ll be back . You seem to have given a lot of your energy into this article and I have to congratulate you for that and for your extremely civil way of handling a discussion.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 14:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You are probably right, I will start editing more boldly. The thing is that I am still looking around trying to choose articles that may also interest me. I made some changes and I plan to continue. Thanks for your kind words--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 20:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You 've been doing a very nice job in the Greeks article. It is getting better and better... had to say that.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 09:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Greeks
No problem about Falmerayer. My main concern were about the sources used. I have made some changes mainly about the incredible character Mr Seann Gabb. See the talk page of the Greeks article. Seleukosa (talk) 23:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Μακεδονία
Hey, do you think the genetics section is really needed? 3rdAlcove (talk) 15:57, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I am not married to it. The only reason I wanted to include it is the whole furore with RoM and the theories tossed around that Northern Greeks are Βούλγαροι. Οπως φαινεται απο τα στοιχεια εχει μια δοση αληθειας (το ποσοστο ανεβαινει στο 18% απο 10% στο Νοτο αλλα δεν ειναι οπως τα παρουσιαζουν οι Σλάβομακεδονες εθνικιστες ή οι Αθηναιοι τοπικιστες. Αν ηταν ετσι θα ηταν γυρω στο 35% που ειναι και στη Δημοκρατια της Μακεδονιας. Κατα τα αλλα δεν με πολυαπασχολει οπωτε αν δεν σ'αρεσε και οντως δεν ξερω αν πολυταιριαζει καθως εινα γεωγραφικο αρθρο, σβηστο. Τσαγια.Xenovatis (talk) 16:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, r1a1 is also connected to IE expansion. That's it, the northerners are more Indoeuropean, you pre-Hellenic Pelasgians! ;) As for the Βούλγαροι allegations, those belong to the realm of sports only, of course. ;) I will delete it since you don't mind, since I'm not certain if it adds anything important to an article discussing a region as you rightly said (well, it might belong to the Greeks page, for anyone interested in the genetic component). Thanks! 3rdAlcove (talk) 16:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No probs. Take care 3dAlcoveXenovatis (talk) 17:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Στη Δημοκρατία της ποιας; ·ΚέκρωΨ· (talk) 17:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hellenes
Re: the el- etymology, I've seen it before but I'm not sure if it's a folk etymology; are there any reliable sources for it? The article on Helen connects "Hellenes" to the IE root *sed-, which would make them the "Settlers", I guess (doesn't cite a source either, though). 3rdAlcove (talk) 19:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately not. I looked and all I could find were references tracing it to Hellen but not further than that. The etymology from el- I first read in Wiktionary (etymonline uses Hellen) but of course Wiktionary is not a WP:RS. I will remove it since you brought it up. Thanks 3dAlcove!Xenovatis (talk) 19:15, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Those etymologies are a mess indeed. Why do people write this nonsense without any quotes? The *sed- proposal is inherently not too implausible of course. The connection to the Selloi would make sense too and might be compatible with it; the Selloi link is also assumed as correct in the Babiniotis dictionary (the first halfway reliable source we seem to have). Hellen is of course just an eponymous legendary figure just like all the other legendary founders; he's derived from the ethnonym, not the other way round. Any etymological explanation further back than that is apparently considered impossible today. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * " Page 38:... the quotations, s.v. ' proaeknoi,' in the Thesaurus of Stephanus. Thus the same change of initial letter is attested for Hellenes-Sellenes, as for the Helloi.Selloi at Dodona. ! Or Galeoi. The above cited Cumean vase-painting shows most probably a dance of ...","Page 37:

... FISH-TOTEMISM 37 Nov it has long been admitted that the most glorious name of classic antiquity, ' Hellenes,' as the ' Graioi' called themselves after the Deucalionic flood,'. is derived from the cult-title of these Dodonean ' Hello'.,' ..."",Orpheus The Fisher by,Robert Eisler,1997,ISBN-10: 1564590291
 * But it doesnt seem RS judjing from the writer.Megistias (talk) 20:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * As I said, Selloi/Helloi may very well be related, that's totally plausible. Pre-Greek *s regularly becomes h word-initially, so Selloi would just be some archaic word form, possibly preserved by some of the outlying dialects at the margin and then re-borrowed into mainstream Greek as a local tribe name. Apparently, Helloi with the same meaning as Selloi is also attested somewhere. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Romaniotes
Dear Xenovatis, are you sure about the Romaniotes? I think that they were almost entirely exterminated during the German occupation and the survivors of the community never actually returned to Ioannina. There is a Romaniote association in Israel and I have a book about it somewhere though I can't find it right now --Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 09:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * holocaust


 * On March 25, 1944, the Jewish Community of Ioannina, Greece, was rounded up and deported to Auschwitz-Birkenau. Of the 1,960 deported, 1,850 would never return. They would perish in the Nazi death camps.


 * See the whole textMegistias (talk) 09:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok I will remove it although all Jewish Greeks I know consider themselves ethnically Greek not Jewish.Xenovatis (talk) 10:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You misunderstood but it's my fault. Greek Jews are of course Greeks with a Jewish faith. Their tradition is wonderful and extremely interesting (if you live in Athens you should visit the Jewish Museum). The extermination of the Romaniotes was an absolute tragedy and deprived our society from one of its oldest elements. Their presence was attested as early as the third century BC and they managed to retain their greek language and their religious beliefs for 2000 thousand consecutive years.--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 17:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Greeks
Personally, I wonder how the "Modern and ancient" section could be improved. It mentions only 1 cultural link (the language; the genetic links are discussed above) and various theories of disputable usefulness. David Duke, Rosenberg? It should be mentioned that this has been the opinion of many people, historically, of course but I'm not sure if the examples used are the best. 3rdAlcove (talk) 07:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The intro, btw, could use some revamping. "who have populated Greece and the various historical centers of the Greek world from the 16th century BC to the present day" might sound a bit POV, since one could view it as a proclamation of the existence of a specific, monolithic, unchanging Greek 'ethnicity'. The sections discuss the transformations much better than it can be summed up in a single sentence, methinks. 3rdAlcove (talk) 08:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Please make any changes you feel with improve the article by removing nationalist POV. I was also thinking of making a subsection on archaeoplexy/archaeolatry either in the culture or identity sections. What do you think?Xenovatis (talk) 08:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

εσυ εβαλες το Modern and ancient μερος?? ειναι αθλιο. ή βγαλτο ή φτιαξτο πληζ. 150.140.226.42 (talk) 03:37, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Answer
Thank you for your kind words )) Alæxis¿question? 11:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Cretan School
Art articles must have an image in the lead section. If the template has to go lower, so be it. Johnbod (talk) 22:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, no probs.Xenovatis (talk) 22:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've asked Dimboukas if he can redo the template horizontally, saying "It always causes problems when art templates are vertical; art articles should always have an image at the top, and generally space for images is always very limited. It would be greatly preferable if the template was redone horizontally. See also the Visual arts Manual of Style." Of course it is shorter than the old template, but I think this article shows the problems. Johnbod (talk) 22:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I have returned the image up top as you suggested and resized so that text is not jumbled between template and images. Please feel free to revert any changes you think have not improved the article. Thanks.Xenovatis (talk) 22:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I live in hope the template will be redone, so we can get the El Greco back, and all the other articles get a lead pic. Johnbod (talk) 22:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you John for all the excellent work you're doing on the art2-icles! Xenovatis (talk) 22:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

LOOOOOL
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alexander_the_Great&diff=prev&oldid=204404771 Too funny. ;)] 3rdAlcove (talk) 08:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Greek minority in the Republic of Macedonia
I will like to give you a suggestion that these two sources, are used in the article as references. But blogs should not be used as source per WP:RS. I will not edit the article, but I am afraid this may not be considered reliable source to other editors. Please consider replacing it with some other sources. Thank you.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 13:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the suggestion. I will try to move them to external links. Take care.Xenovatis (talk) 13:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I moved source [3] to external links and qualified statement. Source [2] is an article from a mainstream daily, it's just hosted online on a blog but it is the newspaper that is cited not the blog itself. Please advise if you think there are any further issues. Thanks.Xenovatis (talk) 13:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Elgin Marbles
I hadn't gone anywhere- I was watching the article. I don't have any comments about what you wrote on the discussion page- there wasn't really much to say apart from "okay"- I will be removing some of the crap added about Gabb- He's not that important and what does his opinion about the Greeks have to do with the marbles????? D666D (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Highly relevant since it also mentions the marbles and the marbles issue involves the Greeks. And I don't think Seannie will appreciate your calling his stuff crap. You didn't have a problem using it as a source when it suited you. Xenovatis (talk) 22:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Dear Xenovatis please take a look at the Elgin Marbles talk page. I think that the citations from the King book need to be verified and further scrutinized. I would appreciate your opinion on the matter--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 09:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Dear Xenovatis, I have plenty of sources to provide on the Φιλόμουσος Εταιρεία or Εταιρεία των Φιλομούσων but they are in Greek. The only reference in English, I know of, can be found in John Travlos, "Athens after the Liberation: Planning the New City and Exploring the Old", Hesperia, Vol. 50, No. 4, Greek Towns and Cities: A Symposium (Oct. - Dec., 1981), pp. 391-407 published by the American School of Classical Studies. I have it in one of my old translation notebooks but I will have to check it in a library first to avoid any danger of misquotation. Does it matter that Travlos was Greek? --Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 11:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)--92.118.170.217 (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Excuse the mess. I am experiencing internet connection problems today--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 11:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Not at all. Academic sources from foreign language publications are admissible. I don't think you need to go to the trouble of checking it at a library though. That may be more trouble than it is worth. I will chekc it out in Google book or Google scholar. Great find that!Xenovatis (talk) 11:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No trouble at all. I practically live in libraries...LOL--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 11:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for Kali review
I have made changes as suggested. Please take a look at the article, and leave a note on article talk if any more changes are required to Meet Ga criteria and go beyond Ga. Thanks.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the prompt reply. Following implementation the article now fulfills all WP:GACR and passed. I have let a few recommendations and more ideas could be had by reading the WP:MOS. Well done Redtiger!Xenovatis (talk) 10:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you forgot to remove Kali from WP:GAN list.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Link
What's that link you just posted in the Greeks talk page? It doesn't seem to work--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 14:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC) Thanks for the heads up.Xenovatis (talk) 14:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

German occupation and Fallmerayer
Why did you remove this piece of information form the Modern and Ancients section? I included the source and you can also find the citation in the discussion page. I believe it is relevant and I find it interesting to show exactly how Fallmerayer's theory was used by the occupation forces. --Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 15:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry στραβώθηκα πάλι--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 15:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Request! (Greeks GAN)
can you please replace the timeline with proper table, like template:Geologic time scale. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 12:43, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sushant, thanks for taking the time to review the article. Updating as suggested. Xenovatis (talk) 13:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * may i know why in the Surnames subsection, there are some words in bold and bold italics. also there is inconsistency in the cases of the first letters of these bold letters. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 15:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Ar-Rum
What do you mean with 'extolt' btw? As for Rum, do you know exactly when it acquired the meaning of "Greeks" rather than "Rhomaioi"? I'm thinking modern times, probably, but I'm not sure. Clarifying why Rum is connected to "Greeks" in a note would be nice, methinks. Cheers. 3rdAlcove (talk) 00:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * sp should have been extol
 * modern times indeed, post 1832, the Arabs made a clear distinction between Yavan (whom they admired) and Rhum (whom they didn't, althouth you will be interested to read this as well

p.44
 * Added Greek translation, feel free to ammend as you wish Thanks 3dAlcove.Xenovatis (talk) 11:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Greeks
Hi there,

Thanks for noticing I was doing a little copy editing on the Greeks article. I'm still doing some more work. I would note, however, that the article is, for the most part, exceptionally well-written. I am only doing minor edits, but would you be so kind as to check my edits to make sure that I have not changed the content? Thanks! Lazulilasher (talk) 11:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Congrats, i have passed it. Sushant gupta (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * timeline section looks better now! thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 11:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This was a nice improvement by User:NikoSilver.Thanks Sushant!Xenovatis (talk) 11:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Giorgos
Sorry but an urgent family thing has been keeping me away. Δεν έχω μυαλό για wikipedia, αλλά θα ρίξω μια ματιά, ελπίζω σύντομα να ασχοληθώ όσο θέλω--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 21:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

deleting sourced references
you have been deleting the censused sources on the page Greeks although you would prefer to have the numbers that correspond with the Greek Foreign Ministry, the census' are accurate and truthful, and it is not vandalism! PMK1 (talk) 12:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * No you deleted sourced references, the ones from the MFA. And that is vandalism.Xenovatis (talk) 12:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Greeks
Congratulations first of all! I'll go through the article, and I'll make some detailed suggestions in a peer-review. If I am allowed, I am also going to edit some parts, in case some of my sources could help.--Yannismarou (talk) 11:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

hello
Hello, marry easter for my dear greek orthodox friend. PelasgicMoon (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Elgin Marbles
Finally found the time to add some more perspective to the Legality Section. I would appreciate your comments and your suggestions--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 14:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's my turn to ask "where did you get lost". 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)

Fighting propaganda and irredentists
I would like to thank you and to encourage you to keep fighting propagandists and irredentists in Wikipedia, to have good, clean and propaganda/lies free articles. Many sources out there are pure manipulation and thus untrustable. You deserve a star as a propaganda and irredentism cleaner. Good job! Keep it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.219.84.207 (talk) 14:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Greeks
While the edit you just reverted probably didn't belong at the very top of the article, can you explain the "racist pseudoscience" comment? Evercat (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Pleasure. Arnaiz Vilheina has been widely discredited for his work on both Greeks and Jews, hence pseudoscience. Further the team that produced the relevant study was mainly composed by academics from Fyrom hence racist. If you insist then the study can be included along with all rebutals and Vilheina's conviction for embezlement along with the fact that it was written and commisioned by Fyrom Slavs. That said the genetic section is allready large enough as it is. Your call.Xenovatis (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Incidentaly, and in case you feel the need to defend it the study has further "proven" the immediate genetic relatedness of the Japanese as well as the Greeks to Ethiopians. Like I said, pseudoscience.Xenovatis (talk) 20:07, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. Isn't Tissue Antigens a serious journal? Evercat (talk) 20:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It is. Like I said, this has been around for some time. If you feel it should be included do some reading, gather the rebutalls and include a paragraph. It should mention the points I made above. That given it can and should be included.Xenovatis (talk) 20:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

OK I'm looking at it. You win, for now anyway. Evercat (talk) 20:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

However, I certainly don't see how a claim that Greeks have some relatedness to Africans is in any way racist. Evercat (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It is if it used to contend that they have no relation to the Greeks of Classical times, who included the ancient Macedonians, as indeed it has benn. In fact this is very typical of Slav-Macedonian nationalim which is centered on race and biological descent since, unlike Greeks or Jews, they have no obvious cultural, linguistic or religious links to their chosen ancient people. If you want to you can make a short precis of the relevant para in the Antonio_Arnaiz-Villena article which includes criticism.Xenovatis (talk) 20:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Well there's obviously a disturbing amount going on beneath the surface so I shall bow out of this controversy. Evercat (talk) 20:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * In addition the study gets great play in various racist websites, to wit.

And let's not even get started on Afrocentrism here. 20:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.white-history.com/refuting_rm/7.html
 * http://white-history.com/greece_negroes.htm

Well. I would urge you not to conclude anything from that alone. i.e. I note that that website also makes use of W. D. Hamilton. Lots of good-faith scientific research can be used for whatever nefarious purposes. But as I say, I'm not getting involved. :) Evercat (talk) 20:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, take care!--Xenovatis (talk) 20:26, 14 December 2008 (UTC)