User talk:ΚΕΚΡΩΨ

Welcome!

Hello, ΚΕΚΡΩΨ, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Mushroom (Talk) 18:17, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

"Ancient Greek" Image Question

Visit the article and look at the map given for the distribution of the Greek dialects. My objections are :

• that it does not give a correct time period (first it read 400 BC (days ago), then 600 BC. now 700 BC)
• when it read 400 BC, I proposed that the distribution was incorrect since many Greek spaking regions visible on the map were characterized as non-Greek (Macedonia, Chalkidike and Samothrace, the Greek cities of Illyria and Thrace among them). This is why it was later changed to 600 and 700 BC.
• The caption of Macedonia is placed north of Chalkidike and of course placed in the non Greek speaking world. Macedonia comprised these lands in the 4th century BC but not before. So, either the map is showing Grece in the 4th century (after 400 BC) or Macedonia should be erased to be able to say that the map is about the Greek speaking world of 800 BC.

Please see to it, read the discussion and place your opinion. The image was provided by "Future Perfect at Sunrise", with whom you keep correspondance, so he could make any corrections needed. I do not want to plunge into yet another debate over whether Macedonians spoke Greek or not but the map as stands today is just wrong and can easily be corrected. Unfortunately, any mention to Macedonia is greeted with scorn and characterized as another attempt to politically manipulate Wikipedia, which truly is not the case here...

GK1973 (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that any inaccuracies should be corrected, and Macedonia presented as distinct from the indisputably non-Greek-speaking regions. Have you tried approaching FP directly? ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· (talk) 12:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

FP moved the discussion and took back his supposed "reconciliatory" promises. He insists on portraying Macedonia as a clearly and indisputably non-Greek speaking region. He and some other guy agreed that my position to somehow make clear that Macedonian is either a probable Greek or a possibly non-Greek dialect were nationalistic and non-mainstream archaeology and he has made it absolutely clear that he will not do something like that. Please visit this new "template discussion" and see for yourself. I thinkl he only made that discussion to avoid "unnecessary" attention to the conversation by people who have tagged the article discussion. I do not know what your opinion is on FP but his persistence to not comply with such a clear demand, to be in accordance with Wikipedia's own article, let alone archaeology and history is really peculiar and aggressive. I even proposed to leave it be, take out the name Macedonia and date the map at 700 BC when Macedonia was anyway mostly within the boundaries of the proposed Greek speaking map but this was also not to his liking since this would not suit his agenda...

Thanks

GK1973 (talk) 21:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Kékrōps for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. De728631 (talk) 19:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Not so fast! User:ΚεκρωΨ and User:ΚέκρωΨ are his old accounts. What you think that he is sock puppet? What a fool you are, you accuser of Kekrops! He simply might want Greek script over Latin script. 87.96.89.68 (talk) 20:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

About those archive deletions: can you list once more which you want deleted, and where the legitimate real archives are? There's been so much confusion with the sock it's a bit difficult to see through. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it's probably best if all the remaining archives are deleted, i.e. /Archives/2008/September, /Archive 0 and /Archive 1. That way I can just start again from scratch by reverting my talk page to the status quo ante so the bot can do the rest. Cheers. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 18:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Name change

I have a question for you on WP:CHU. By the way, the reply you posted was for a question meant for another user, so I removed it. bibliomaniac15 05:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I know, I only just realized. Sorry for my blond moment. I shall reply to your question on the project page. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 05:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Requests for comment

There's an ongoing requests for comment. Please check it out... and notify anyone interested. --Crossthets (talk) 15:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what I could possibly add that hasn't been said already. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 15:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I've added my own two cents on the matter. My best guess is more will continue to add their names.

Any how...if you have the time... I have a question about Wikipedia etiquette (I seem to have an admirer). I've done a bunch of reading but it is a bit overwhelming for a newb to take it all in at once, deal with the trolls on political pages, and attempt to perform edits at the same time. Can you perhaps give me any advice? (preferably on my talk page for quick reference)

And here are a few things that are vague to me...

• use of the words "nationalist", "FYROM-supporter"? Are they acceptable? I prefer to focus on the articles and not to use them against specific contributers but when some troll comes at me in this manner how is one to respond?
• some vague rule about using article talk pages as a "forum"?
• To what extent am I allowed to use your/my talk page to discuss potential future article edits?
• I have a boatload of facts that appear to be missing from articles. I'd like to assemble them into a central repository to-do list (formatted to Wikipedia standards) but am unsure where the line between to-do list and "soapboxing" falls.

Thanks for any advice you can provide--Crossthets (talk) 22:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

btw - I've added some comments about the language map on the Greece page. I support its immediate removal... as well as another one from the same homemade source I think. I suggest arbitration if someone doesn't agree. --Crossthets (talk) 05:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm probably not the best person to ask about etiquette. I'm hardly the bubbliest editor on Wikipedia, am I? I understand the frustration you sometimes feel, but making things overly personal will only get you blocked in the end. The best way to deal with a tense situation is probably to take a break for a couple of days to cool off. The stuff about soapboxing is fairly simple; don't clutter the talk pages with loads of "evidence" that no one will ever read. They'll just see it as spam and treat you accordingly. Σιγά σιγά, με το μαλακό. Μη βιάζεσαι. Βλέπω ότι έχεις πράγματα να προσφέρεις. Με λίγη υπομονή και καλή διάθεση μπορείς να καταφέρεις αρκετά. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 04:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Kέκροπα,I ,too , would really appreciate your opinion in the RfC. It's on a very important matter I think.Regards,Michael X the White (talk) 09:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Please don't insist, guys. There are so many incidents and so much material to cover... I simply don't have the time or energy to rummage through edit histories just to score a cheap point against the German, who is actually one of our best editors anyway. Sure, he can be a nightmare to deal with but he sure knows his scheiz. Good luck with whatever it is you hope to inflict on him, though. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· 11:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)