User talk:Ashmedai 119

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Ashmedai 119, 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 Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Nehwyn 12:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

HELP US MAKING THE PROJECT OF ANCIENT GREEK WIKIPEDIA[edit]

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

Thanks a lot for your help. Ἡ Οὐικιπαιδεία needs you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.40.197.5 (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


reorganization of articles on Hellenism[edit]

Hi Ashmedai 119,

I just saw your post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome#Hellenistic World (to which unfortunately noone has responded so far). I made a similar request at Talk:Hellenism#reorganization and foreign-language articles. Perhaps you may want to comment there?

Joriki (talk) 16:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Kingdom of Pergamon references for verification? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 17:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Sicily[edit]

Order of relevence, for example if people are looking for articles on Sicilian history, its kings and 700 year Sicilian kingdom is likely to be of the most forefront of interest/relevence. - Gennarous (talk) 00:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries[edit]

Welcome to wikipedia. If you do edit an article, especially something as recent as the protests in Iran you must use edit summaries. You write them in the small textfield above the "Save" button. Wandalstouring (talk) 08:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Articles needing work[edit]

Hello, I see from your comments on the Orlov revolt that you have thought a bit about issues of Greek ethnogenesis and so on. You might want to contribute to Greeks and Names of the Greeks, which currently are full of anachronistic essentialism, the sort of thing Rotzokos and others have criticized effectively. --macrakis (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Modern Greek Enlightenment[edit]

Hi, I was referring to the wrong link. But now it's correct. A Macedonian (talk) 15:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Re[edit]

Feel free to restore. I do not intend to argue nor to revert. I just have a constant worry about not gettting this article huuuuuuuge, but clarity is above everything. So, if you deem it necessary, readd it. Another worry I have is that, yes, as you had written, this was the Church's policy (which Orthodox Church's exactly? Of the Patriarchate?), but the reader may get the impression that the Church was phanatically anti-Revolution without any obvious reason. Yes, the Church (any Church) is traditionally conservative and reactive, but I think that Arnakis, when saying "though the Porte took care not to attack the church as an institution, Greek ecclesiastical leaders knew that they were practically helpless in times of trouble", offers another very interesting aspect. They knew that they could potentially pay for any Turkish death. And indeed Gregory, despite all these encyclicals, was the first target. It is a human parameter which should not be omitted. I may be pro-Revolution, but if I know that I may face retaliations - not only me, but my colleagues, my family, my people in Constantinople - then, what am I doing?--Yannismarou (talk) 07:42, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, I did not say that fear for retaliations was the only motive for the Church's decision, but it was a motive. Anyway, historians dealing with the Revolution tend to see this or this aspect of the stance of the Church. For instance, I do remember that Svoronos also regarded as an obstacle for the revolutionaries' efforts. Honestly, I do not remember which was Paparigopoulos' approach, although I had read him years ago. For me there is no straightforwarding answer, and no single truth. Historians may discuss the issue for years. See for instance this very interesting article in To Vima.
My opinion? Yes, the Church was conservative. Yes, the Church was initially anti-Revolution. But, especially the Patriarch had little place for manoeuvres. At least, this is my impression. And, judging from what happened with Gregory, I must say that, if I was Patriarch, I would also have anathematized Ypsilantis, despite my true feelings towards his course of action!--Yannismarou (talk) 13:09, 29 October 2010 (UTC)