User talk:Omnipaedista

Speedy deletion of Adiexodo

A tag has been placed on Adiexodo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Triwbe (talk) 04:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Ancient Greek Wikipedia

HELP US MAKING THE PROJECT OF ANCIENT GREEK WIKIPEDIA

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! Crazymadlover

500 most used Mediawiki messages

hello. we must effort to complete the translation of mediawiki messages, to ancient greek, specially of the 500 most used:

http://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special%3ATranslate&task=view&group=core-mostused&language=grc&limit=500

it is and important goal to succeed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.230.202.221 (talk) 13:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
—Identified now as User:Crazymadlover (Omnipedian (talk) 20:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC))

AfD nomination of Sacred Chao (band)

I have nominated Sacred Chao (band), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sacred Chao (band). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?
Slashme (talk) 11:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Eclipse

Per your edit to the eclipse article, from my browser you basically took out Greek characters that I was able to read and replaced them with boxes. I'm not clear how that is an improvement.—RJH (talk) 17:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I haven't replied for so long to this objection because I thought it was.. well, easily “debunked”. But now that I'm thinking about it, it might not be so obvious why it is so. The nub is that it should be easy for someone to trace the root of a non-english-originated English scientific term back to the foreign word it comes from. In this case it's an ancient Greek word that is traditionally written with diacritics in the printed bibliography. So, this form should be preferred in electronic bibliography, as well. Moreover, if you write a Greek word without diacritics, it may be mistaken for a modern Greek one and this confusion may hamper one from finding the correct lemma in a dictionary such as Wiktionary. Omnipaedista (talk) 15:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

As for the technicalities, I always employ Wikipedia's character insertion utility below the edit box (or copypaste Arial Unicode MS characters) when I insert grc diacritics; these are always displayed properly when one employs any of the major web browsers (though they may appear a bit "disfigured" with IE) unless one has an extremely obsolete version of them that doesn't support the standard extension of the Greek alphabet. During the past 16 months, I have entered Greek diacritics in hundreds of English, French, and German Wikipedia articles and even written whole articles employing grc diacritics on Incubator and nobody ever complained about badly rendered characters except for two English Wikipedia users: User:Slashme and User:Rwflammang. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia again

Please see this, someone has requested, again, a Wikipedia in ancient Greek, and support. Crazymadlover

Wikisource

I have requested a Wikisource in ancient Greek, maybe you wish to contribute. Crazymadlover

100% mediawiki messages

i changed my language interface in all wikimedia pages, to ancient Greek, i enjoy. but often find English phrase without translation. you must be very busy in the real life. but i might ask, cordially, complete the translation of 100% of mediawiki messages. I ask you because you are certainly one whose better knows the language. clearly that it may not be entirely useful at this time, but I think that the ability to translate these messages demonstrate the power of language, and is also a matter of pride and self-esteem. Crazymadlover —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC).

Lately, I've begun translating the Extension messages too. There is however a big obstacle. Literally hundreds of new entries have been added to the list of both the extension (from 5,300 to 5,600) and the "core" (from 1,800 to 2,100) messages during the last 6 months, while the majority of the translating community (apart from you, Leigh, and me) has been pretty much idle. If so many new messages keep being added so fast, it will be very hard for me to keep up translating them equally fast, either all by myself or even with the help of just 2-3 more people. Omnipedian (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to the Africa Project!

Hi, Omnipaedista, and welcome to WikiProject Africa! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles relevant to Africa. Here are some points that may be helpful: Our main aim is to help improve Africa-related articles, so if people ask for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able. Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it. The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, which you are welcome to participate. If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign Africa topics. You may also be interested in joining one of the descendant projects related to a specific African country. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We hope you enjoy working on this project.

T L Miles (talk) 17:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

τέχνη

μπορεις να μου εξηγησεις τις διαφορες της αρχαιας προφορας με της νεας? ειμαι πανασχετος. (Ancient Greek: IPA: [tékʰ.nεː], Modern Greek [ˈtex.ni] (help·info)) τι διαφορα εχουνε τα τ,ε,χ,ν,η? αλλο ταυ εννοουσανε οι αρχαιοι? και το χ ητανε καππα? ή πιο κοντα στο καππα? ή σα το εβραικο με το λαρρυγγι? και το ν ητανε σα το χωργιατικο πχ. της Λαμιας? ειλικρινα δε ξερω μη νομιζεις οτι αμφισβητω.CuteHappyBrute (talk) 23:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

(To non-grecophones: this is a popularized description of Ancient Greek language's phonology intended for native speakers of modern Greek; it's based on the literature given in this article. The occasion for this discussion is the accuracy of the IPA transcriptions of ancient Greek words in Wikipedia.)

Χμμ.. Από την διάσπαση της Πρωτο-Ελληνικής μέχρι και την ύστερη περίοδο της Κοινής Ελληνικής, τα δασέα, χ-θ-φ, ακούγονταν σαν τα άηχα κλειστά σὐμφωνα (=ψιλά με την ορολογία των Αλεξανδρινών), κ-τ-π, με την μόνη διαφορά ὀτι η εκφορά τους συνοδευόταν από ένα γλωττιδικό τριβόμενο (ακριβώς όπως το h στη λέξη happy). Αν ακούσεις προσεχτικά Αγγλόφωνους θα παρατηρήσεις ότι προφέρουν ως δασέα τα «ψιλά» σύμφωνα της μητρικής τους γλώσσας, όταν το επόμενο φωνήεν τονίζεται· πχ. αν θέλαμε να μεταγράψουμε φωνητικά αγγλικές λέξεις στα αρχαία ελληνικά θα γινόταν ως εξής: kills “φόνοι” - *χίλς, tin “τενεκές” - *θίν, pin “καρφιτσώνω” - *φίν. Όσο για τα "μέσα", γ-δ-β, προφέρονταν, ως g-d-b. Έτσι οι αρχαίοι Ἐλληνες το μπέε (βέλασμα) το γράφανε βῆ, ενώ οι Λατινόφωνοι όταν μεταγράφανε ελληνικά ονόματα, το κάνανε ως εξής: Θῆβαι - Thebae ή Thebai (και όχι ως *T(h)ive, αν η κλασική προφορά ταυτιζόταν με την αρχαία). Τα φωνήεντα της αττικής διαλέκτου: ει: μακρό ε με τα χείλη τεντωμένα δίαπλατα αλλά σε καποιες περιπτώσεις (προκλασσικές κυρίως) σαν το a στη λέξη game, η: μακρό ε με τα χείλη χαλαρά, υ: σαν το Νεοελλ. ου προκλασσικά αλλά σαν το γαλλικό u στην Αττική, ου: μακρό ου (αλλά στην προκλασσική περίοδο: μακρό ο με τα χείλη πολύ κλειστά ή ενίοτε σαν το ow στη λέξη snow), ω: μακρό ο με τα χείλη χαλαρά, αι: άι (αλλά στο τελός των λέξεων σαν το αγι στη λέξη κανάγιας), οι: όι (αλλά στο τελός των λέξεων σαν το ογι στη λέξη λαμόγιο). Το ζ προφερόταν σαν το j στη λέξη jump στα Πρωτοελλ., σαν το τζ στο τζαμάρω στην προκλασσική Αττική και μάλλον και στην Κοινή), και σαν το zd στην περσική λέξη mazda στην κλασσική Αττική διάλεκτο. Το ν, ποτέ, στην προ Κοινής περίοδο, δεν φαίνεται να ήταν ουρανικό («χωριάτικο») πριν απο τα ι & ε . Αυτό το φαινόμενο εμφανίστηκε πολύ αργότερα σε κάποια ιδιώματα της Μεσαιων. & Νέας Ελλ., αλλά ποτέ δεν απέκτησε πρεστίζ γενικότερα, για αυτο και σήμερα είναι κοινωνικά στιγματισμένο. Όσο για τους τόνους, ακούγοντας Ιαπωνικά μπορείς να πάρεις μια ιδέα. Η οξεία ακουγόταν σαν ερώτηση, η βαρεία σαν απάντηση, και η περισπωμένη σαν το Νεοελλ. επιφώνημα ώ-ω (που σήμαίνει “όχι”). Πληροφοριακά, επειδή το ανέφερες, κάποια από τα «σπάνια» σύμφωνα της Εβραϊκής υπήρχαν στην Πρωτινδευρωπαϊκή (ΠΙΕ: 5000-3000 πΧ): όλα τα α της Πρωτοελλ. (ΠΕ: 3000-2000 πΧ) προέρχονται από τα φαρυγγικά τριβόμενα φωνήματα της ΠΙΕ, και πολλά από τα ε της ΠΕ προέρχονται από το κλειστό γλωττιδικό της ΠΙΕ. Τώρα, ίσως αναρωτιέσαι πως είναι δυνατόν για την Ακαδημαϊκή κοινότητα να είναι τόσο σίγουρη για την προφορά γλωσσών τόσο αρχαίων χρόνων: η απάντηση είναι ότι υπάρχουν συγκλονιστικές ομοιότητες στον τρόπο που αλλάζουν με το χρόνο τα φωνητικά συστήματα όλων των γλωσσών του κόσμου, και έτσι έχοντας ένα επαρκές σώμα δεδομένων (οι διάφορες αρχαίες Ελλ. διάλεκτοι μαρτυρούν, π.χ., τη μορφή της ΠΕ) ή, ακόμη καλύτερα, περιγραφές των ίδιων των ομιλητών (Αρχ. Ελλ. φιλόσοφοι και γραμματικοί, εν προκειμένω), μπορεί κανέις να ξεκινήσει την αποκατάσταση, και έτσι να αποκτήσει μια ανέλπιστα ξεκάθαρη εικόνα για τον φωνητικό συστήμα οποιασδήποτε νεκρής γλώσσας, αρκεί να βουτήξει στις ανατριχιαστικές λεπτομέρειες και τεχνικότητες του θέματος.
Omnipedian (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I stumbled on this belatedly, but I could not resist a minute intrusive footnote on the unshifted "μέσα" consonants, δ-β, in spoken, as opposed to written modern Greek. (Pardon the use of English by dint of keyboard challenges. The phenomenon is also attested in, e.g., Joseph & Tserdanelis, "Variationstypologie".): It looks like the pronounciation of δ has been protected by a preceding ν and that of β by a preceding μ for about 3000 years. Consider δένδρον, άνδρα, ένδεκα, κόμβος, γαμβρός, εμβαίνω. The "unprotected" pronounciation is strictly orthographic and derives from formal education and writing; and has barely invaded rapid, informal, colloquial speech and song. So, one hears in songs the same phonetic values for άνδρα, one may well have heard in the first word of the Odyssey... Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 14:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Indeed! The pronounciation of δ has been protected by a preceding ν and that of β by a preceding μ for about 3000 years. --Omnipaedista (talk) 01:11, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I left νγ/γγ out, cf. συγγενής, since the protection is already codified in γγ, and there can be no orthographic "evolved" (mis)pronounciation! Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 16:06, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Re:Stub categories

"propose the following templates, categories if they reach 60". Taking {{Romania-writer-stub}} as an example. first create the template upmerged to Category:European writer stubs and Category:Romanian people stubs. Add the template to any relevent articles, then if there are 60 articles (which is what WSS use as a starting point) on "What links here" then create Category:Romanian writer stubs, if not it gets left upmerged until it reaches 60. Hope this explains, if not let me know and I'll try to explain further.Waacstats (talk) 23:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I think I got it now. Thanks for the clarification. Of course, If I face any problems when trying to apply this procedure I'll let you know. --Omnipedian (talk) 20:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Unified login

Giving a heads up: after having merged my accounts on all the Wikimedia projects' user namespaces, I transferred my previous account here (User:Omnipedian) to the “unified” User:Omnipaedista and I will be using only the new one from now on. Omnipaedista (talk) 05:13, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Years

In 2009, WikiProject Years developed a essay for the inclusion of events "recent year" articles.

Important policy discussions took place in January 2009 at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years.

Deilvered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC) on request of Wrad

Two Sri Lanka templates

Your removal of two templates from Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal did not appear constructive, and has been reverted.

I assume you just misunderstood the instructions in WP:SLR/bluebox. The first, bold link, points to the reason why the template is on articles. The link to the project talk page is for you to report any issues you have, including when you would like to remove the template. As most other talk pages, it is regularly archived. Absence of a discussion from that talk page is therefore no indication that such discussion has not taken place.

As for {{Sri Lankan Conflict}}, I can not think of any reason for a good faith editor to remove that template from an article covering a paramilitary group participating in the Sri Lankan Conflict.

Please do not remove such templates from pages on Wikipedia anymore. — Sebastian 21:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm really sorry about that. It seems that I did misunderstand the instructions of WP:SLR/bluebox. The removal of the conflinct-template was completely unintensional (uncareful selection of text before I pressed delete). However, I've never removed any similar templates before nor I actually intend to; the only thing I remove in general is obviously-outdated tags (such as recently-died-tags, unreferenced-tags in articles containing footnotes and reliable literature section, etc), and (since Dec 29) very specific outdated merge proposals about which I had no complaints so far. Omnipaedista (talk) 06:53, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your gracious reply! I apologize that I was a bit harsh. It turns out, you were not the only person who misunderstood it: Another editor came to our talk page with a similar question, so I'm thinking about how to word it more clearly. We might even remove the box from this particular article after all, as nobody spoke up for it to remain there. So you see, something good came from it. — Sebastian 08:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)    (I stopped watching this page. If you would like to continue the talk, please do so here and ping me.)

Wikinews in Greek

Accordying to analysis page, the project of Wikinews in Greek needs have an active test project with at least 3 active contributors and complete the translation of Mediawiki messages and all MediaWiki extensions used by Wikimedia --- Crazymadlover. —Preceding undated comment added 01:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC).

The problem is that apart from Consta and me, noone works on the MediaWiki-extensions-used-by-Wikimedia anymore. Moreover these messages are among the most technical that exist, and in many cases a small research of literature is a prerequisite in order to render them properly. So, as I said on a similar occasion elsewhere, progress will be slow. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Update: now I've completed 90% of them. User:ZaDiak has provided some help as well. --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The WikiProject Greece April 2009 newsletter

The April 2009 issue of the WikiProject Greece newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.--Yannismarou (talk) 02:31, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

grc

Where did you learn Ancient Greek, and what difference is it to Koine Greek? Bugboy52.4 (talk) 22:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		You are an angel! For your work on Noetic Consciousness‎. LoveMonkey (talk) 00:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for that! --Omnipaedista (talk) 22:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles on Consciousness

Here are two very current articles on theoria and the nous. [1], [2] They explain allot and I was hoping to integrate them into the theoria, nous, gnosis, contemplation and Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences articles. I am now however retired so I must stop. If you could pretty please with money on top, review the articles and maybe integrate them. LoveMonkey (talk) 19:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know these terms are mainly used in Hesychastic Monastic Orthodox Christian Theology. This is a very specialized doctrine and I am not sure if I will be able to achieve a successful summary. Plus, I will have to find the original theological texts where these concepts are further explained. Allow me to add here a disclaimer: I am indeed interested in Theology, but this because I find its literature interesting; this means that my top priority is to clarify which concept belongs to which treadition and to reduce the POV interpretation of each doctrine's tenets by editors who embrace a different doctrine. I generally favor the use of Comparative Religion theoretical descriptions over Theological ones (and regarding my contributions to mind-related articles, I generally prefer to work on documenting the traditional philosophical/scientific treatment of consciousness-related phenomena than on any other alternative treatment). --Omnipaedista (talk) 22:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Article on Participle

Hello.

Could you write, in the article Participle, the sections of Ancient and Modern Greek?

Btw. I and another anonymous user let you a question (main page) and suggestion (Georgia article) at Ancient Greek Incubator test.

Crazymadlover. —Preceding undated comment added 20:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC).

OK. Just give me some time. (Both questions in the incub. have been replied now.) --Omnipaedista (talk) 07:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Update. I have added a Hellenic languages section to the article but I am keeping it hidden because I want to find some good citations first (and amend its wording in general). --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Attention: In fact, you have written a section in Infinitive article (thanks for that, too). But i suggested in Participle. Crazymadlover. —Preceding undated comment added 01:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC).

Neon Genesis Evangelion

thanks for improving this article, about one of my favorite animes/mangas. Two thumbs up. Crazymadlover —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.41.2.98 (talk) 21:24, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Omnipaedista. You have new messages at MLauba's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

MLauba (talk) 05:56, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Eurynorhynchus

I have not been able to figure out the etymology of the Euryno- bit. Any help is highly appreciated. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 23:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I've just created the relevant entries in the Wiktionary: wikt:εὐρύνω + -ο- + wikt:ῥύγχος. This root (eurȳn-) is a verb root, of course; it is one of the rare cases where the first compound of a Neolatin noun is a verb root (another example is piezoelectricity) instead of a noun root. B.t.w., thanks for notifying me about that. Don't hesitate to indicate me any other species names with non-transparent etymology; my personal dream is that someday all the species-related Wikipedia articles (or at least their respective Wiktionary entries) will have an etymology section; those etyma are notable both for biotaxonomy mnemonic and historical linguistic reasons. --Omnipaedista (talk) 01:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		Omnipaedista is hereby awarded with a Rossetta Barnstar by me, Crazymadlover, for tirelessly making necessary (but tedious for most users) translations of Mediawiki messages to Ancient Greek. Your work is truly appreciated. --Crazymadlover 10 June 2009

Thank you for that! Sorry for having transferred it to my talk-page but, in general, I prefer not to have an awards-section in my English Wikipedia user-page :)
--Omnipaedista (talk) 03:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Gothic keyboards

About a year ago, you left a message on my talk page about text-entry for the Gothic Wikipedia. If you use the Mac (and if you're still interested), I can supply Macintosh input methods for Gothic and all the major runic transcription systems. Just leave a message on my talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emk (talk • contribs) 02:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Theatre of Pakistan: Urdu drama

Your comment from December 2008 is observant, but the article has not been improved. The contributor has not answered my message about potential deletion. I really don't see the value of what is currently on the page. Ed8r (talk) 20:26, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the notification. As I said in my edit summary: "the article seems to be still full of copyvio, advertizing prose, POV, and lack of hierarchy" and as you said in the talk-page: it's "virtually incomprehensible". Alas, the only knowledge I have for the matter at hand is limited to some very broad historical info on Urdu theatre, so I can't really help in improving the article. However, I --for one-- strongly oppose to its deletion. Instead, I propose one of the following: 1) either trim it down to a few (semi-trivial) sentences and just improve its general literature/references section, or 2) turn it into a redirect (without deleting it) to the article-section Culture_of_Pakistan#Drama_and_theatre so that anyone who might want to work on the subject-matter can do so in the more general article (and if its section gets really improved sometime in the future then it could qualify to be split into a new article). But I would really like to hear your opinion, as well. --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm certainly open to ideas from someone with more experience than I . . . that is, you. A redirect sounds like a good solution, but I have no idea how to proceed.Ed8r (talk) 23:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Suggested edits

1. First, the expansion of the Hellenic languages sections at Augmentative
2. The creation of the section "Greek as a second language" in the Greek language (here both ancient and modern?) and/or Modern Greek articles. Furthermore, all of Greek languages articles should become features ones, some time in the future

Crazymadlover

1) I was too thinking that this section requires expansion. I will try to clarify the ell examples. In grc however (as in lat), there are not any suffixes that you can really call augmentatives. 2) To be honest, I am not really interested in improving the respective (academic-like) Wikipedia articles. Instead, I was thinking about contributing to the more practical project of Wikibooks: the books Ancient_Greek, Koine_Greek, Modern_Greek need a lot of work. There we could even develop a Spoken Ancient Greek book or something (cf. wikibooks:Spoken_Latin and wikibooks:Latin/Spoken): for example, recently, Santi Carbonell Martínez (Universitat d'Alacant) has developed a method for easier acquisition of the language by children in which the use of living dialogues is emphasized (here's the Scribd version and this is the video adaptation --both loosely based on the work of a Greek philologist). This method could serve as an inspiration for a special Wikibook (at least, in principle). Anyway, just wanted to suggest this idea. --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

ουικιπαδεια not βικιπαιδεια

do not make the same mistake user Geraki did.

This thread doesn't belong here, but there. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Explanation

I understand your point, and I agree with you that the Geometry section should have its entries placed under appropriate proper subsections. In fact, I created most of the subsection hierarchies in the List of important publications in mathematics article including the ones you mentioned for Algebra. You suggestion of "Traditional Geometry" for the older publications works for me. An alternative might be "Classical Geometry". Symplectic geometry deserves a place (and some listings), as does differential geometry. Hilbert's and Coxeter's works will need to find a home as well. Note that Algebraic Geometry already has a distinct section, as the subject has become enormous in its own right following Weil, Grothendieck, et al. Please feel free to add whatever sections you feel are appropriate under Geometry. Thanks! — Myasuda (talk) 15:09, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

October 2009

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Hogenakkal Falls. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Doctor muthu's muthu ^{wanna talk ?} 16:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you are referring to this edit. For the record, I had just reverted an apparent vandalism myself; then I got reverted and instead of just reverting the vandalism for the second time (as I should have done), I tried to remedy the situation by *relocating* (not deleting) a name from the first infobox to the second one; I admit that my edit summary may have been hasty, but by no means would I call the edit a vandalism or a bad faith one, because I have no interest in doing that (I did not try to deliberately impose a controversial personal opinion; I was honestly trying to help) and I had never edited the article before. To be honest, I am not even entirely sure if the relocation was indeed unconstructive; I was wondering how the falls are called in Kannada (the falls may belong to a state where Tamil is the official language but the info about how the the kn name of the falls is still useful); in the talk page there is nothing mentioned on the matter but I saw somewhere in the article the name ಹೊಗೆನಕಲ್ ಜಲಪಾತ which is obviously what I was looking for, and I just added it to the lede in order to improve the article. My question is why shouldn't that name appear in the article's lede? This situation reminds the one with the articles on Greek villages who happem to have nonGreek names in neighbor-countries' languages, and there are often edit wars about whether these nonGreek names should be added as (neutral) info or be left out because their existence there may be inflammatory. Am I missing something fundamental here? Are you sure you haven't mistaken my edits for the unconstructive edits of the two users (with the single-purpose accounts) that edited the article before and after me? --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Perseus

Hi. I noticed in my watchlist that you removed some references at marble due to deadlinks. I checked the site, and found that there is a newer version available (http://old.perseus.tufts.edu/lexica.html links to the new http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/ ).

Perhaps some of those references could be restored/repaired, instead of removed? Always best to preserve information when possible! :) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree with that: in principle, info should be preserved and that broken links should not be removed but instead be appropriately replaced when possible. The only thing is that most of the Perseus links that have been inserted in 'pedia by this user are not so innocent. This user has a long history of applying a "policy" of his to introduce inaccurate, false, or "graecocentric" POV-pushing etymologies (in good faith, nevertheless), and instead of properly referencing them (to a link that proves that these English words are indeed from the purported Greek words), he just linked to Perseus in order to merely prove that these words exist in grc. This means that he had added, for example, to the article his fringe opinion that trope comes from τροπή and instead of providing a reference he just inserted a link to prove that the word τροπή existed in Greek. In an other case he misleadingly claimed that Greek-compounds-including Neolatin words come directly from Classical Greek which is wrong, and he even attempted to link the hypothesized Classical Greek words to Perseus, even though they do not exist there, exactly because they are not classical but modern Greek patterned after the Neolatin ones: biorhythm, xenoglossy, epicenter, etc.. Not to mention, that even if he got the eng etymology right, the meanings he gave to the ancient words were often made up. In other words, I didn't just removed the links because they were dead but because they were deeply misleading; thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify that. :) --Omnipaedista (talk) 04:24, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Much thanks for the abundantly clear reply! My condolences and thanks for clearing up the mess, then. Fans are never fun, with or without the facepaint. -- Quiddity (talk) 07:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Help with dermatology-related content

Are you interested in dermatology-related content? I am looking for more help at the dermatology task force, particularly with our new Bolognia push 2009! Perhaps you would you be able to help us? ---kilbad (talk) 21:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Trope (music)

I was unaware of the vandal misusing Liddell and Scott. However, I believe I was the editor who added the L&S etymology to Trope (music). I did not double-check before reverting your edit, however, to make sure the citation had not been tampered with. I shall do so when I get to the office tomorrow. If the citation is unadulterated, will it be sufficient to say so in my edit summary when I restore the L&S version? Merriam Webster is really not good enough.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 04:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. The thing is this: ideally, we should have two different citations; one that certifies that the ancient Greek word's meaning in English (and this is where we need L&S LSJ), and, more importantly, one that certifies that the English word trope comes from the ancient Greek one. So, all one has to do, is to carefully insert a reference to an etymological English dictionary (or even two: OED due to its credentials and MW for due to its online accessibility), and along with that, a reference to L&S (lemma: τρόπος "turn, direction, way") to certify the existence and English meaning of the grc word. --Omnipaedista (talk) 04:23, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

See also the penultimate thread before this one. --Omnipaedista (talk) 04:27, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Ziteitai pseftis

Thanks for letting me know. Yes, it looks like it's the wrong title! Lugnuts (talk) 14:10, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Delmatoi

Greek: Δελματοί - Delmatoi; Latin: Dalmatae - what is the problem? Zenanarh (talk) 07:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Simple: I want to see a reference to an Ancient or Medieval Greek text that confirms that their name in Greek was that. I have searched the literature and all I could find was Δαλμᾶται. I just want to make sure that Delmatoi is not made up, or that it is not a wrong transliteration from Greek. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Hetaireia

You are quite right. I can't really think what caused me to use the circumflex. Well spotted! :) Constantine ✍ 00:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

For a Unbiased Bold Editor

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		The Barnstar of Diligence is hereby awarded for your effort in stopping Tamil group from pushing their POV in Hogenakal Falls article. By a long term wikipedia reader but Not a Editor.75.62.179.195 (talk) 06:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Requests

Hello:

I resquest you if you can make a Grc version of

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias

I am defuzzying Greek messages at Translatewiki, check it, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.41.2.98 (talk) 15:04, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

And if you can Help ZaDiak with the creation of new articles in Pontic.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazymadlover (talk • contribs) 13:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Omnipaedista. You have new messages at Grk1011's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Diacritics

I see you got it wrong with Georgy Voronoy. I see you don't have ru-4 infobox. I am not sure which source you are using then, but "do nothing when in doubt" might be a good rule in this case. Mhym (talk) 18:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for noting me about this. I generally use online sources (mainly the Russian Wikipedia but also forvo, specialized pronunciation guides, Russian-language documentaries) for the diacritics of Russian surnames. The only cases when I was in doubt (I had no sources at all) but actually edited the relevant articles were: Georgy Voronoy and Nicholas Poppe. Of course, you're right; next time I'm in doubt I will not edit the article myself but I will ask the assistance of a russophone editor instead. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:16, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

The Anglo-Saxon Wikipedia calls upon you

It's been a while, come give us a visit sometime. —ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ (ᚷᛖᛋᛈᚱᛖᚳ) 11:46, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Blut Aus Nord

You're right the name of the band is from German, so the correct pronunciation would be /blʏt.aʊ̯s.nɔrd/. Thanks
Java13690 (talk) 15:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Ευχαριστω

...για τις διορθωσεις. The Cat and the Owl (talk) 17:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Political correctness

"This user likes hip–hop"?Lestrade (talk) 18:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Lestrade

Inna (given name)

Hi. I noticed this revert you made on the article, however sources provided by anon user (LGPN, LSJ) are reliable, while 20000-names.com and MN Weekly (Russia) Moscow News Weekly are not. I suggest we keep a perhaps of Greek origin, per reliable sources. A Macedonian (talk) 08:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I added back Greek Inna and references but with better wording. A Macedonian (talk) 12:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, would you be so kind as to give us support!

Hello, I hope you are doing fine and I sincerely apologize for this intrusion. I have just read your profile and you seem a very learned person and interested in (small) languages and cultures so maybe I am not bothering you and you will help us... I'm part of an association "Amical de la Viquipèdia" which is trying to get some recognition as a Catalan Chapter but this has not been approved up to this moment because it does not belong to one state. We would appreciate your support, visible if you stick this on your first page: Wikimedia CAT. Thanks again, wishing you a great summer, take care! Capsot (talk) 17:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I'm really glad to count on your support! Take real care! Capsot (talk) 21:16, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Dermatology

Any interest in dermatology? If so, we are always looking for more help at the Dermatology task force, particularly with the ongoing Bolognia push. I can e-mail you the login information if you like? There is still a lot of potential for many new articles and redirects. ---kilbad (talk) 01:07, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Genitive

Hi there. I notice you're adding the genitive of Greek words to articles. I don't think that is really necessary, since we're not a dictionary, let alone one of Attic Greek. RJC ^Talk_Contribs 21:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello. The genitive seems to be useful especially in the case of the Attic names that end with -ōn since it is not predictable whether their root retains its longness. This is also a piece of useful information because one can extract the modern Greek name this way (A. Gr. -ōn "is replaced" in M. Gr. either by -ōnas or -onas depending on the ancient genitive). Anyway, if I can link to a Wiktionary entry where there is a declension table, that would be enough for me. But such Wikt entries aren't always available. --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Mechanical filter FAC

The mechanical filter article which you have previously edited and/or reviewed has been nominated as a Featured Article. You may give your opinion on whether you think this article should be promoted to Featured Article status by leaving a comment on the nomination page. SpinningSpark 18:33, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Alexander Kronrod‎

Re: your stress edit. Please stop making wrong ones. If in doubt, do nothing. I corrected this one, but I don't want to check up on all your stress edits. Mhym (talk) 23:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, in the case of this name I was not in much doubt since I had checked before editing both the Slovenian Wikipedia article which gives [krónrod], and the transcription of his name into Greek which is Κρόνροντ, Κrónrod (and transcriptions of Russian names into Greek are almost always correct as far as stress marks are concerned). --Omnipaedista (talk) 11:01, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

IPA text

Hi:

In the sample text section of Modern Greek article the insertion of IPA text has been requested. I wondering if you could write it. Crazymadlover. —Preceding undated comment added 23:09, 22 November 2010 (UTC).

Someone has edited that. So, please, check it out if it is correct. Crazymadlover. —Preceding undated comment added 21:22, 7 May 2011 (UTC).

I just corrected it. --Omnipaedista (talk) 09:53, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Καλημέρα!

Hi there. I noticed you are a WP:Etymology member. Will you please have a look here? I had a disagreement with user:Yair rand after I reverted his two etymology sections deletions, here and here. Thank you. A Macedonian, a Greek. (talk) 09:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Dacia

Template:WikiProject Dacia Invitation --Codrin.B (talk) 05:15, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with the Getic and Thracian tribes. We'll be happy to have you in the project. Regards. --Codrin.B (talk) 20:57, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Maths rating

I noticed you added the maths rating template to a few article talk pages. When you do, please fill in all three of the parameters "class", "priority", and "field" per the template docs. The math project already has a List of mathematics articles, and so we don't need to tag the talk pages just to know that the articles exist. The only reason to add the {{maths rating}} template is to assess the article's quality, priority, and field. If you don't feel comfortable doing that, you can leave off the maths rating template, and someone else will get to it eventually. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Subdivisions of Austria-Hungary

Template:Subdivisions of Austria-Hungary has been nominated for merging with Template:Provinces of the Austrian Empire. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 15:18, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

French departments of Greece

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of French departments of Greece, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://feedbus.com/wikis/wikipedia.php?title=French_departments_of_Greece.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Émile Durkheim

Hello Omnipaedista,

Could you please explain me this edit? Thanks, Korg (talk) 20:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The transcription you had added was completely arbitrary; I provided the correct one: [3] & [4]. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The transcription I added was certainly not arbitrary. It reflects how his name is commonly pronounced in French. On the contrary, the links you provided do not show the correct pronunciation (I would be tempted to add a negative vote to the Forvo pronunciation, and I'll correct the transcription on the German Wikipedia). Please have a look at this video: [5] (at approximately 03:10 and 03:35). Regards, Korg (talk) 13:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the very interesting link! Is it the case then that the pronunciation given at Forvo is an alternative (less common/"uninformed") one? --Omnipaedista (talk) 06:40, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know... Personnally I've never heard this one before, but that doesn't mean it is incorrect per se. In any case, the article should mention the other pronunciation. Would you please undo your revert? Thanks, Korg (talk) 16:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I will copy/paste our discussion to Durkheim's article talk-page and undo my revert as soon as possible. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

German words in English

I have again reverted your capitalization of German words on the Appellplatz article. English rules apply in English. Foreign words are not used with non-English grammar or punctuation, nor do German nouns get capitalized in English. I notice Germans are not afraid to hyphenate English words whenever they use them, although the same words are not hyphenated in English. They also don't hesitate to call ice cream "maple walnuts" or put other flavors in plurals even though this would never be done in English. They write what makes sense to German readers. German rules apply to German writing. It's the same here, English rules apply in English writing. Capitalized nouns otherwise look like proper nouns or mistakes when written in English. Italics or quotation marks are used to indicate the words are foreign. To use the reasoning you stated in your last edit would mean that a noun that was commonly known would be used with normal English capitalization, but that an unknown noun would take a cap. This is obviously silly because if you had two such words in a sentence, it would be inconsistent and look like a mistake. I will confess that not being a professional translator and working so closely with German originals to write these WP articles, I have often just forgotten not to use an initial cap when using a German word in English (and I do tend to pronounce a word foreign word in the foreign accent, to the best of my ability) but I have also gone back and corrected some of these, such as with the article Stolperstein. Marrante (talk) 13:47, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're missing the point. Writing a word of German origin that is used in English as a technical term, i.e. a recently naturalized word (such a word is appel(l)platz; see here, for example), according to the English rules is legitimate (as you said: "this is the English Wikipedia, where nouns do not take capitals and sometimes, there are foreign words that are commonly misspelled"; confer also Größencharakter > grossencharakter). In this case it is relevant to appeal to the fact that "this is the English Wikipedia."

But in the case where you are just giving the etymology of the word, it is irrelevant to appeal to the fact that this is the English Wikipedia. When giving the etymology of a foreign word, the scholarly standard is to indicate the "foreignness" of the compound-words, so one inevitably follows the rules of the foreign language (as I said: "the specific nouns [Appell, Platz] of which the word [appelplatz] is composed are to take capitals since they are not English words per se"). This is common Wikipedia practice, as well; see here, for example, or check out other articles in this list. Also, it's not "silly" per se (maybe only "weird" or "uncommon") to write a German noun that is commonly used in English with normal English capitalization, while an unknown (or unnaturalized) German noun with German capitalization in the very same sentence. In mathematics literature, at least, it has become a common practice: ansatz and ersatz are almost never capitalized while Nullstellensatz or Entscheidungsproblem almost always are. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:16, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I think you're missing, or perhaps, overstating the point. It's clear from your user page, you have a math background. The Appellplatz article, however, is not about math, it's about the Nazi era. The New York Times (for one) does not capitalize German nouns. Marrante (talk) 09:29, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I insist on the appropriateness of my very last edit to the article (capitalization of the initial letters of Appell and Platz in the lede). I'm talking about standard dictionary-like practices when indicating the etymology of a foreign word in a scholarly source (including Wikipedia and Wiktionary). There has to be a Wikipedia policy regarding this sort of issues... --Omnipaedista (talk) 09:40, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

So do you suggest that Lust in the article wanderlust should be decapitalized? This would be against the practice of every respected etymological source (including the Oxford Dictionary and the American Heritage Dictionary). (See also: Doppelgänger#Spelling, Schadenfreude#Linguistic_analysis.) --Omnipaedista (talk) 10:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Do what you want. There are so many more important things to me than to spend days arguing about this with you. Make yourself happy. Marrante (talk) 16:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Omnipaedista. You have new messages at Talk:Tsifteteli.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-Kordax (talk) 06:20, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Omnipaedista for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 12:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

No evidence of sockpuppetry was presented. I have closed the investigation and blocked the account that created it as a sockpuppet. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

After this discussion (in which I notified a user who edits regularly the relevant articles in order to watch them), Basstonic/Kordax ("always there when needed") immediately created the account Supertusta and copied my message and posted it to the talk-page to prove that Supertusta was my sock. (My comment "File a formal request against me in the appropriate page and let CheckUser check me." was to be taken literally--I have nothing to hide). His amusing/naive trolling practices included copying infoboxes from my userpage to his sockpuppet's userpage, and editing the article tsifteteli in a way that seems to be defending my edits (but I would never make such a naive edit; not to mention that I would never create a sockpuppet in the first place, as an established user who follows Wikipedia policies). Even if I were to use a sockpuppet, I would not be so naive as to make it so obvious. Kordax also accused me of being a sock of Yangula just because Yangula was the first to file a report against Plouton2. Needless to say that I never reverted any edits as an IP and that I never created a sockpuppet account (I expect whoever accuses me of such a thing, to refer to IPs and accounts suspected to be me). CheckUser can verify this. I also sent a private email to HelloAnnyong a while ago in which I asked him about which is the proper procedure for opening a case on WP:SPI (in order to investigate Kordax and Basstonic). My question was honest (I did not intend to bypass any procedures; I was just delaying it until I had enough evidence (I wanted to be meticulous) and new more about the procedure; I've done just once in the past). I was greatly disappointed that a file opened against me instead. Also, a note about why I suspect Valeristemperec to be a sock of the accounts named above (Basstonic, Kordax). As them, he inserts/removes Greek POV pushing cats to articles (check his contribs and confer [6]), he awards himself with barnstars (see his talk-page), he seems to be stalking my contribs and making edits to the respective articles afterwards. If one applies the Duck test, they can conclude that he is a sockpuppet of Kordax. If the three users (Kordax, Basstonic, Valeristemperec) prove to be socks of Plouton2 and if he continues creating new accounts, I would like to sincerely ask whether there is a less bureaucratic process in order to ban him next time. --Omnipaedista (talk) 13:00, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

As a matter of fact I had independently come to the conclusion that Supertusta was probably a sockpuppet account set up to discredit you, and came back to this page to tell you. What you have written here has strengthened my conviction that this is the case, and I have blocked the account. I had already blocked Basstonic as an obvious sockpuppet. I don't have time to check Kordax, Valeristemperec now, but you may like to add them to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Plouton2. Also please feel welcome to contact me via my talk page for further help on this, but I won't be able to do anything for at least 20 hours or so. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much. You have already done too much for me and for Wikipedia. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

False accusations

I came here to tell you that I took care of those edits. Thank you for notifying me. Now I saw the case above and my response to that is below. Best Regards Aigest (talk) 11:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		Some trolls tried to "prove" the contrary and they got what they deserved. You deserve this star. Congratulations Aigest (talk) 11:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. Thank you for clearing up the mess. Greetings. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Gaius Julius Alexio

Hi Omnipaedista

Thanks for correcting the Greek inscriptions and names that I have put in Wikipedia recently. I have instantly picked up that you are Greek. When you are doing articles about your cultural history, sometimes the ancient Greek names or inscriptions can be difficult and challenging, to copy or translate into Wikipedia.

Another article you can look at is Gaius Julius Fabia Sampsiceramus III Silas, I have put in there recently ancient Greek inscriptions.

Thanks once again for your contributions,

Anriz. 13 August 2011

Thank you for creating all those wonderful articles and for improving the existing ones; you provide a great service to WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. It is true that the accurate copying of Greek diacritics can be tricky. When in doubt about the diacritics of a Greek inscription, feel welcome to contact me via my talk page. I'll be really glad to help. --Omnipaedista (talk) 10:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Omnipaedista. You have new messages at C.Fred's talk page.
Message added 21:53, 13 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Archagathus of Libya

Hi Omnipaedista

Its me again!

Hoping all is well with you!

I have just done an article called Archagathus of Libya, who was the nephew of Magas of Cyrene and Ptolemy II Philadelphus. I have added in some Greek inscriptions, which I have translated into English.

If you are able, could you please check the Greek and English translations are correct, although I have check them myself already a few times. If anything needs to be changed or fixed in the translations and the article, please do so.

Thanks for your help,

Anriz. 27/8/11.

Done. There is only a problem with the verse "καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ? Στρατονίκη". I suppose the missing word is οὗ. Could you verify this? --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:05, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help again. The sentence you are asking about is καί ή γυνή νν Στρατονίκη. I got this inscription is from the site: Ptolemaic Genealogy: Theoxena, Footnote 5

Sockpuppet accusation

I have removed the sockpuppet notice from your user page, as the accusation was totally unfounded, for the reasons you have described. I agree totally with what you have said about this. The "evidence" given was you clearly indicating that you had edited from the IP address, which obviously is not evidence that you were attempting to avoid scrutiny or appear to be a different person. You may like to put a note on your user page saying that you sometimes edit from that IP address, so that if anyone accuses you again it will be clear that you were never trying to hide anything. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:03, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Encyclopedia — reduced to a single word due to an error

You removed my edit (...but it was reduced to a single word due to an error by medieval copyists of Latin manuscripts.) claiming that it was unreferenced. Obviously you haven read the etymology section. See also any reliable encyclopedia such as Britannica or any reliable dictionary such as the American Heritage Dictionary. --Odysses (₪) 09:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Mind you that your phrasing was problematic. 15th century humanists are not "medieval Latin copyists". Nowhere in the sources you give can one find this phrase. --Omnipaedista (talk) 18:57, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Beekes

Hello! You have made these edits [7] [8]. What is the source of your version? Is it an Anglicized pronunciation? As far as I know in Dutch <ee> is usually /e:/. Best regards.--Luboslov Yezykin (talk) 02:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I guess you are right; it should have been [ˈbeːkəs]. I had heard it pronounced by a Dutchman once and I had the impression he pronounced the vowel as a diphthong. But the standard IPA value is a geminated vowel. --Omnipaedista (talk) 23:36, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, it is necessary to transliterate properly his name to Cyrillic. Although you can be also right, as two pronunciations exist. May be a native speaker of Dutch would decide the dilemma?--Luboslov Yezykin (talk) 04:28, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

In Russian it's transliterated as Беекес. I guess this should be fine for every Slavic language. Transliteration does not necessarily follow pronunciation; in many cases it just matches the foreign word's orthography. As for the name's original pronunciation, I am now quite certain that it should a diphthong ([ˈbeɪkəs]). The Handbook of the International Phonetic Association gives [eɪ] ~ <ee> for standard Dutch as spoken in the Netherlands. Besides, as I said before, this is how I had heard it pronounced by a Dutchman. Thanks for clarifying this fine point. Omnipaedista (talk) 15:57, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Exactly the current transliteration has made me clarify his name's pronunciation. Dutch <e> and <ee> are traditionally both transliterated to Russian as simple э/е. I had already intended to rename Беекес to Бекес, but the information in the English version raised doubts. Беекес seems obviously to be incorrect as it would be pronounced in Russian as /ˈbʲejɪkʲǝs/ making a superfluous syllable. It should be whether Бекес or Бейкес, the former seems for me more traditional and acceptable (and it is also mentioned in transliteration manuals). Best regards.--Luboslov Yezykin (talk) 09:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Edition

I made an edition at incubator.

http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wp/grc/%E1%BC%88%CE%BB%CE%BB%CE%BF%CE%B3%CE%BB%CF%89%CF%83%CF%83%CE%B9%CF%83%CF%84%CE%AF

It needs some translations. :) Crazymadlover —Preceding undated comment added 22:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC).

Sultan Khan birth place

Hi. You cited the Qureshi book here but the information you give is false. Do you have the book? Hekerui (talk) 19:47, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Jaipur is what I intended to write, but I was confused by what was (mistakenly) given as place of death before I edited the article (Jodhpur). --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:01, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree, the sources published after his death can be confusing, because many mention Jodhpur - it seems like this city was home to his family. Best regards Hekerui (talk) 13:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Swedish, not Norwegian IPA pronunciation

Hi Omnipaedista!

I improved the IPA template for Per Enflo, which originally had Norwegian pronunciation. Notwithstanding pan-Scandinavian unity and the historic Norwegian-Swedish friendship ("Don't mention the war!"), Enflo is Swedish.

Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	Very impressive profile indeed!! you know so many scripts and languages, like so many different topics. really appriciated. _M_ (talk) 14:26, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Imre Lakatos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Worrall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for improving the article about Georges Sorel!

Enjoy a brownie! Sapere aude22 (talk) 22:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Comparative psychology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conditioning (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Thomas Piketty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clichy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Editing birth/death dates

I have reverted a number of edits you have made to the above because they do agree with the Wikipedia Manual of Style for these items. They should not include places of birth and death - see MOS:DOB. Also, the dates should be separated by an n-dash. Finally, names of well-known geographical places do not necessarily need to be wiki-linked. Hohenloh ⁺ 13:53, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

I am aware of the MOS but I am also aware that the part about not including places of birth and death in the lede is not so restrictive. I can cite hundreds of articles where this is not followed. Wherever I can edit the article's main text or create an infobox in order to include the places, I do it. But in some cases it's hard to enter the places without having to rewrite a section or create an infobox from scratch; in that case I just edit the lede. I am aware of the n-dash rule and I usually follow it. So I can replace the hyphens with n-dashes; but I don't think that hyphening is a reason for revert. Finally, the rule "Avoid linking the names of major geographic features" is a bit fuzzy. For example, the way I see it cities,= (even famous ones like Oxford or Paris) should be linked at least once in an article. So, why shouldn't my edits to those articles be kept? --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:06, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

The concept of "well-known geographical places" becomes problematic in the case of historical states; for example, Congress Poland is not the same as Poland. Also, I would like to note that since this discussion is not about whether this kind ofinformation (birth/death places) is useful, but about the manner it should be displayed in the articles, I would like to have your input and suggestions. --Omnipaedista (talk) 17:21, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I mainly wanted to inform you of the reason for my edits, and added the other information as I thought it might be relevant to edits you have made. As regards the places of birth and death in the lede, I could cite many more times as many articles that do not include this information in the lede, in fact the overwhelming majority of articles I have looked at over the years follow the convention in the MoS, which does not advocate place names. I have also noticed that the editors who include the birth and death place information are often non-native English speakers who also edit other Wikipedias such as the German, which does include the places in the lede. I suppose due to my work as a technical writer I'm a bit of a stickler for sticking to style guides. I'm a little easier on the n-dash and will only correct this as part of a more extensive edit. As regards the linking of major geographic features, I rarely remove the links unless it's part of a copy-edit and/or there is considerable over-linking in an article, but I have noticed a trend over the past year or so to cut down on the number of links to geographic places in articles. I suppose this must have been discussed somewhere, so I thought I would mention it. Cheers, Hohenloh ⁺ 15:28, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Years

Hi, since your name's down on this project, I'm just writing to let you know that there's a discussion going on at the moment on how to format events – and in particular, events that go on for multiple days – on year pages. Your input would be appreciated. — Smjg (talk) 18:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Alexandre Saint-Yves d'Alveydre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Pau

Christian Møller (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Alsen

Theodor Lipps (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Unconscious

Yolande, Duchess of Lorraine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Nancy

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Freemasonry

Could you please explain your removal of the Freemasonry mention for 'unreliable source' for Hermann Hesse. It may not be commonly known but there are multiple European sources validating his Masonic association, as far as any Mason would validate membership. Both the Regular and United Lodges in Serbia have researched the matter. (http://www.rgls.org/en/freemasonry/famous-freemasons-world/161-hermann-hesse.html). If you feel the two sources I have provided are 'unreliable' would you please back up your statement. It appears you may have done this on a number of mentions to Freemasonry. Thank you. Iconoclast.Horizon (talk) 16:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Please read the relevant policy Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Questionable_sources: Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional in nature. Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against persons living or dead. You will have to find a reliable peer-reviewed secondary source (a scholarly source that actually cites its own sources) to back up your claim. Thank you. --Omnipaedista (talk) 15:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for Henri Delacroix tweaks

Hello. I saw you'd fixed a couple of my typos on the Henri Delacroix page. Thanks! BTW I'm impressed by all the languages you have.

Beth Holmes 1 (talk) 16:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. When you recently edited Joseph Pearce, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East London (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:09, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Pierre Laval (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Fresnes

Ragnar Nurkse (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Estonian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Stratford, London

I apologize for augmenting your edit on the GMHopkins article, but when an ignorant Yank (like me) sees "Stratford" he automatically thinks "Stratford-on-Avon". Didn't know there was a Stratford in Greater London. --Kenatipo ^speak! 01:10, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Agree that "near London" works, to avoid the anachronism. --Kenatipo ^speak! 03:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I changed it back to Stratford, Essex, because that's what the sources say. The closest link I could find is South Essex (UK Parliament constituency). --Kenatipo ^speak! 22:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiThanks

WikiThanks

Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.7.109 (talk) 22:22, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. When you recently edited Stanley Schachter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East Hampton, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

Hi. When you recently edited Håkan Westergren, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Georges-Henri Pingusson

Hi, thanks for that. Do you have a ref for your edit? Superp (talk) 19:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey. My source is this: http://www.architecture.com.fr/iletaitunefois/indexiletaitunefois.html . Feel free to add it to the article, if you will. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:38, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The idea here is kind of that when you add stuff, you add the source for that stuff. And edit summaries, your fellow editors love them. Superp (talk) 19:44, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Just done it. Usually, such pieces of information as one's place of birth or place of death are relativily easily confirmable so I mostly add references for them only when there is controversy. --Omnipaedista (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Jessie Baker

Hi! I noticed that you fixed a typo inside a quote within Jessie Baker. If you have the source to hand, could you resolve the "[sic?]" tag that I added near the end of the same quote? It would be nice to know exactly what the source says. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey. Nope, I am afraid I don't have the source. I missed that this was a "problematic quote". It seems that an anonymous user inserted the text along with some other unsourced statements; he possibly "adulterated" the original text. I restored the original lead section. --Omnipaedista (talk) 06:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting that out. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Claude Pinoteau (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Île-de-France

Norman Dello Joio (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to East Hampton, New York

Pierre Bost (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Lasalle

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Bengali script!

About this edit according to recent consensus it was decided not to add any Indic script in Indian portal articles lead. --Tito Dutta ✉ 21:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I see; I can remove the Indic script. If you may, I would like to see the relevant page where this decision is explained, though. --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

At this moment I can find only these: User_talk:Titodutta/Archive_3#Indic_scripts_.26_IPA, there were many more discussions, but, I have not followed all, if you want I may try to find one or two more. --Tito Dutta ✉ 22:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, I am aware from experience that Indic scripts create disputes. But I am also aware that currently there is no real consensus about the matter. I understand that the real issue is with geographical locations, not people. I cannot see why we shouldn't include one's original name in Bengali, while at the same time we do include an IPA-transcription of his/her name's pronunciation in Bengali. It would be helpful if you could find a few more discussions on the matter. --Omnipaedista (talk) 22:47, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Have you read User_talk:DeltaQuad/Archives/2012/January#Native_languages_in_lead The consensus is to remove the scripts and replace them with IPA to clarify the pronunciation.? A major problem I have faced with so many languages in India, when you add one language, other people start adding their languages too. I can remember most probably there were 5 or 6 scripts in the lead. Personally I did not fully support this consensus, I suggested to add only person's mother tongue. You can ask User:Animeshkulkarni who can give a better explanation, I think! --Tito Dutta ✉ 23:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

It's clear, now. I have removed the script from the article. --Omnipaedista (talk) 23:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

However, I would like to note that in many articles (such as Ritwik Ghatak, Swami Vivekananda, and Ramakrishna), I have found Bengali transliterations being mentioned as IPA transciptions. This is extremely misleading. These articles should either include a correct IPA transciption or no transcription/transliteration at all. Could you indicate to me more articles that feature this problem? --Omnipaedista (talk) 23:26, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

• (edit conflict)Bengali script (Vivekananda was Bengali) is helpful. But, script flooding is not (but, sometimes it is a Big problem, you know)! For example see this version of article, so many Bengali words were not necessary, I started manually copy-editing (with other fmt correction), still the problem persists.--Tito Dutta ✉ 23:38, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
• Your second question: That's the thing I have highlighted, if we replace Indic script with IPA, then which IPA we should follow? The isue has been raised 1-2 times, one I can find at this moment: Talk:Swami_Vivekananda#IPA_-_Swami_Vivekananda_-Lead. Animesh felt, this issue will remain unsolved forever. BTW. the three articles you have mentioned, there IPA for Bengali is being followed. I verified Swami Vivekananda and Ghatak, can not remember Ramakrishna!
• Frankly, I am not in Indic script removing team, that means I'll not edit an article only to remove scripts. In a low traffic article (less than 50,000 per month) or stub articles, I simply ignore Indic scripts. But, in high traffic Indian articles (where we have faced edit warring already, I try to follow that consensus). --Tito Dutta ✉ 23:38, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

(outdent) On your reply: "if we replace Indic script with IPA, then which IPA we should follow." I totally agree with you that one should add only a person's mother tongue; but my point is a different one: Shami Bibekānondo, e.g., is a transliteration of his Bengali name, while [ʂāmiː biːbeːkānoːnɗoː] is appears to be an IPA transcription of his name's pronunciation in Bengali. The aim of my edit was to clarify this point; the same applies for my other edits ([9], [10]) as well. One should be careful not to make a transliteration pass for an IPA-transcription. --Omnipaedista (talk) 23:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh! I really did not notice these edits. Firstly if you add that audio link, readers don't get the IPA guide, actually we were following the same thing what you have done now, but later linked: Wikipedia:IPA for Bengali! And no, there is not any "ʂ" in Bengali, "Sw" is pronounced "Sh" which is "শ" so, it is applicable "ʃ" which was added there. --Tito Dutta ✉ 00:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

And we did not add ogg file link directly to avoid open help info links etc! And you could also use bars in your IPA scripts. --Tito Dutta ✉ 00:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips! It is evident that some of the IPA transcriptions given in related articles need to be checked; they contain consonants that do not actually exist in Bengali. I will try to fix that as soon as I can. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Swami Vivekananda IPA Bengali pronunciation was correct, yes, some others need to be checked. Now, after recent edits read the first line of Swami Vivekananda, you have to read the word "Swami Vivekananda" (or variations) thrice in the very first line

Swami Vivekananda (About this sound Shami Bibekānondo (help·info); pronounced: IPA: [ʂāmiː biːbeːkānoːnɗoː])

That's the thing we tried to avoid) actually! Hope you can understand! --Tito Dutta ✉ 00:46, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, "repetition" in this case is not something to be avoided: confer the article on Dostoyevsky which begins like this: Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky (Russian: Фёдор Миха́йлович Достое́вский; IPA: [ˈfʲodər mʲɪˈxajləvʲɪtɕ dəstɐˈjefskʲɪj]. In my opinion, this is a good encyclopedic practice that clarifies things up. What is to be avoided is irrelevant information; for example the pronunciation of a Sanskrit name in Hindi and/or Marathi being placed in the lead of the relevant article. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:56, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

About repetition at the starting, I have started creating an article, where you'll find a peculiar start with a repetition. After doing lots of searched, I could not think of any other way to start it. I have been planning to get some second opinion about the article's first line, here is the article: Debshankar Haldar --Tito Dutta ✉ 01:09, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Basically, what you did there is optimal. I can't think of any better way to include both the alternate spellings and their citations. --Omnipaedista (talk) 01:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Indic scripts in lead

I have found one article where you'll find Indic scripts flood in lead Puffed rice --Tito Dutta ✉ 05:58, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Adolf Wölfli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Waldau

Carl von Linde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Berndorf

Reinhard Oehme (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hyde Park

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:19, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

HumanNaturOriginal

[11] JamesBWatson (talk) 14:15, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

Hi. When you recently edited Georg Bühler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Borstel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: Your edit in Tagore article

Yes, I have seen it. Was there any error in re format? Why did you change it? --Tito Dutta ✉ 23:57, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I changed it because the order of the Greek numerals was wrong. If I understand correctly there is an informal convention in certain India-related articles to separate notes from citations; according to that convention the notes are named after Greek numerals. This is fine; the only issue is that the numerals should be in the correct order, i.e., "α, β, γ, δ, ε, ϛ, ζ...", not "α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η..." (the "problem" may arise only in the case of articles with more than five notes). Are you aware of any other articles that feature this convention? --Omnipaedista (talk 00:08, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I have added name in your signature above, hopefully you have same signature! And about edit in Tagore article, I don't think there is any problem in your edit. I generally use ref group directly (for example lower-greek). --Tito Dutta ✉ 00:21, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind, I reverted my edit; the 'ref group' footnote names are default names, so if one changes any of those footnote names manually in a specific article, they just don't work. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Transcription of Ancient Greek

Please review the WP:GREEK guideline for information regarding the two possible Romanizations of upsilon from Ancient Greek words and roots. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:12, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I have no special preference over the one or the other possible Romanization. My point is a different one: in your edit summary you wrote that "the article uses Classical transcription"; but "fyton" is a transliteration from Modern Greek. It was a misleading transcription, anyway. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

The correction to f was accepted and not changed. The use of Classical transcription is preferred here because the terms passed into scientific use via Latin, and the Classical Latin is bryon for the former term. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

your edits of Boris Levitan et cet.

Hello,

though I understand the logic of your edit here, technically, the previous version was also correct: the term 'Belarus' existed also at the time of the Russian Empire (and described the geographic region which is now the country Belarus). So there is absolutely nothing anachronistic in writing "Belarus, Russian Empire" (perhaps one can discuss the spelling of Belarus, but that's the only questionable point) — in fact, this (as well as "Ukraine, Russian Empire", et cet.) is quite common in the literature.

Best regards, Sasha (talk) 16:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, last year I had a long discussion with another user regarding what qualifies as a place of birth/death in an infobox. What I advocate (and what is the case in most articles about people living in modern times) is that only polities should be mentioned in the relevant infobox field parameters, not geographical regions. I argued that it is quite confusing when polities (including administrative units) are intermingled with regions, especially when the name of a loosely-defined region is also the name of a modern country (such as Belarus, Macedonia, or Italy). I was planning to establish the practice I advocate as a part of MoS, but the above mentioned discussion stagnated and right now there is no "official guide" to what is preferable. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I am definitely not going to argue about this. Sasha (talk) 16:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ernst Viktor von Leyden (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Frederick William University

Heinz-Gerhard Vogt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Greater German Reich

Herbert Pagani (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Californie

Karl Wilhelm von Nägeli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Kilchberg

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:27, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Hesse-Kassel

Hello. On your last edit to Hesse-Kassel you gave two reasons for reverting to a disambiguation page: "many of the links pointing here refer to the Electorate of Hesse; confer http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Electorate_of_Hesse&oldid=227402258 and de:Hessen-Kassel; Hansmccx who created this page is a sock of User:-Ilhador-" As to the first, if the links are wrong, do you intend to fix them? As to the second, usually the fact that a page was created by a sock is a reason for not reverting to that version. This really doesn't make much sense. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I insist that my rationale is valid and I can elaborate on it: 1) The links of other articles pointing to Hesse-Kassel are not wrong; they either are just ambiguous (I have already started disambiguating those), or refer to a historical region of Germany, not any specific historical polity. The term Hesse-Kassel itself is a historically ambiguous term; it may equally well refer to all the following: the Landgraviate of Hesse-Kassel, the Electorate of Hesse, and the Province of Kurhessen (since all these polities were in the region of Hesse and had Kassel as their capital; this pattern is not unusual, confer Saxe-Weimar, a polity in the region of Saxe that had Weimar as its capital), and it may also refer to Kassel (region) (a Regierungsbezirk of modern-day Hessel) or the historical region of Hesse-Kassel. None of the above could be described as a primary topic in either English or German usage (that is why German Wikipedia already has a dab page and that is why the English one should have one, too); a simple hatnote won't do the job. But obviously even if I fix all of the links in Wikipedia, the dab page will still be necessary; conflicts always arise when a single term is ambiguous. 2) Concerning User:-Ilhador-: almost all of this user's redirects and taggings are highly controversial. Since January 2012 -Ilhador-'s agenda has been to substitute the use of Electoral for the adjective Palatine and promote use of Palatine only in the noun-form of Palatinate -- unlike standard English (which prefers, e.g., Elector Palatine). He now pursues the goal to eradicate the use of the use of the phrases "Electoral Saxony" and "Electoral Bavaria" in the English Wikipedia. His case has been examined here; see also this and this. Therefore, for me, the rationale behind his creation of a redirect instead of a dab page in the case of Hesse-Kassel is to be seriously doubted. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Gyula Kőnig (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hungarian

Moinuddin Chishti (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Khorasan

Omar Khayyám (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Khorasan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Boldface

Hi, Omni. Could you point me to the MOS guideline you're using for undoing the boldface in alternative forms of the article title when it's a name? I thought it was legitimate if, for instance, two forms of a personal name or theonym were in usage to highlight both in bold. I'm truly just asking in order to inform myself. I'm not seeing it at WP:Boldface, and I've found that sometimes style points are noted somewhere other than what I might consider the most obvious place. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:27, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello. It has been a common practice for the past couple of years not to show a foreign name in bold type in the lede. It is documented here: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Foreign_language: "Do not boldface foreign names not normally used in English, or variations included only to show etymology; Inuit (plural; the singular Inuk means "man" or "person")." The same applies to theonyms not commonly used in English (such as Menrva, Vulcanus, Mercurius, and Iuppiter). In fact, most of articles on Roman and Greek deities had been already fixed by other users; I just formatted the few ones remaining to be formatted. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:11, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited J. P. Stern, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FBA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Dave Sim

Hi, Omni. Regarding your edit to Dave Sim, which part of MOS:DOB were you referencing for the removal of his place of birth? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 14:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. Please see discussion above. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:40, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Castoriadis and Arendt

You added Arendt as an influence to the Castoriadis Infobox. do you have a reference for that? I ask partly because I've been curious since noting some influence in the other direction, from memory in "On Revolution", but don't recall seeing discussion of this anywhere. AllyD (talk) 20:43, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I just added some references. Arendt explored the analogies between social-movement theory and ancient Greek political theory back in 1958 in her book The Human Condition. Castoriadis started drawing on Aristotelian political thought much later; his turn to Greek thought occurred sometime in the '70s (see the second part of L'institution imaginaire de la société (1975); see also Adams, Suzi (2008)). Later on Castoriadis discussed the differences between his conceptions and Arendt's in several talks and interviews he gave in the '80s and '90s. He respected only few of his contemporaries and Arendt was one of them (see his 1996 interview to Max Blechman). It seems that the two thinkers eventually arrived at somewhat similar conclusions (see Castoriadis, Arendt, and the Problem of the New by Linda M.G. Zerilli) but not entirely independently of each other. --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:39, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charles Andler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malesherbes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Globalization and Its Discontents (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Libertarian

Hypostasis (linguistics) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hypostasis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Edward S. Shaw

Those weren't bare links. They were in fully established cites. I recommend you put them back. - Denimadept (talk) 20:35, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I just edited the page again. I think it looks better now. --Omnipaedista (talk) 20:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Masefield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abingdon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Assistance with SPI

Hello. I have noticed your name on the Music of Greece talk page as well as a user supplying evidence in this SPI case from last year -- [12]. I am a newbie and have come across the same behavior from a user(s). I opened a case with suspected socks I believe to be the same user as Plouton2. Since you had experience with the first case and the user's behavior, I was wondering if you have seen any recent behavior from any users who edit the same way. Please look at my case here -- [13]. I am trying to have the admin who closed it to re-examine or perhaps I'll have to ask another SPI clerk or bring this up at an ANI board. I feel like it's a serious matter since the user(s) is targeting multiple articles of certain ethnicities and removing cited content and replacing it with uncited content, some of which is fictitious. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thank you! ProfessionalScholar (talk) 01:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

We could also check the following accounts: HailEpov, Tromakton, FromGr, Heavypic, Phallussok, Dactarianou, Zeromaker, and IPs: [14], [15] as suspected sockpuppets of Plouton2. --Omnipaedista (talk) 02:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

SPI continued

Please also take a look at my comments regarding the case here -- [16] Any assistance would be appreciated. If you think I should bring this up on each article's talk pages, or go straight to an ANI board, or the Ethnic/Culture board? Thank you! ProfessionalScholar (talk) 02:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Bringing up this matter in each article's talk page would be a good idea. I support increasing awareness about it in any sensible way; we need more editors having these articles on their watchlist. You might also want to contact User:Future Perfect at Sunrise; he is also familiar with the case. --Omnipaedista (talk) 02:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I thought that too but the only problem is the user targets so many articles, I'm sure there are a lot more unaware of. I think you can add the usernames and IPs you provided under 'other user's comments' on the SPI case I had opened, but I'm not really sure how that works. This was my first SPI case. If you know how to bring User:Future Perfect at Sunrise attention to your talk page so he can read our comments, that would be great. I'm trying to figure out how to have the SPI reopened since I don't know how to go about that. I left the SPI clerk who closed the case, Dennis Brown, a message here -- [17] to see if he can reopen the case since I strongly feel this is not something that should be ignored. If it is the same user as Plouton2 then it's a serious matter since that user is still doing the same thing a whole year later, not to mention the edits where they are inserting fictitious sources. That constitutes as fraud. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 02:52, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I strongly suspect that these accounts are indeed Plouton2's sockpuppets; there exists an adequate evidence base, that is, the common behavioral patterns (see WP:DUCK). When I get the time I will look into it and I will help reopen the SPI case. --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help! It is much appreciated. I think if we can get them to look at the SPI again and it is proven to be Plouton2's accounts, we can then start discussing the articles on the talk pages so that other editors can help out with the content. I think as of now a lot of these articles do not have a neutral point of view base and instead have some POV pushing and bias, as well as fictitious material from that user. So it would be good to discuss this all on the individual talk pages of these articles so that everyone can comment about what they feel is best to improve the articles and make them more balanced to support the neutral point of view guidelines. I have seen some of your comments on the Music of Greece talkpage and I completely agree with you about having to improve the article's reliability of sources. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 04:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I just left a comment on User:Future Perfect at Sunrise talk page. Also, I just noticed that a revert was done by this IP -- [18] and then after was done again by Fleris -- [19]. The IP is from Athens, Greece, which makes me suspect Fleris even more now since chances are that user is from Greece too, the same location as all the other suspected socks. Those two reverts are from today so I think they are of value for SPI case. I may not be around for the rest of the day or next couple of days. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 18:14, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

One more thing, I just saw the diffs Fleris showed as examples on Future Perfect's talk page. Most of those diffs showed my reverts to one of the suspected sock accounts of Plouton 2 -- [20], another reason to suspect Fleris as a sock as well. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 18:33, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

(outdent) Thanks for the heads-up. By the way, I would like to ask you about this diff. This edit-warring might have been a genuine content dispute between you and Jerome Kohl; but it could also be the case that you had further motivation beyond improving the article. Would you please share your thinking on this matter? Also, I noticed that some of the sources you used when you edited articles before your blocking were popular websites, not scholarly sources: 1 (nevertheless I agree that the text you inserted is in principle verifiable by reliable sources). Lastly, I noticed that some other edits of yours contained poorly justified removal of referenced content: 2. I just wanted to say that while I agree with many of your edits you made before your blocking, I strongly disavow such tactics. --Omnipaedista (talk) 19:21, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I can explain anything you ask. When I saw the Arabic article, it seemed empty and not full of reliable source material. I removed that paragraph for that reason. The cited source was of a "Review" not an actual factual book. Jerome restored and said it was a well-documented source. I asked for proof of that, he did not provide any. I then researched the web and found that source, it was a review on the website, and I noticed that the middle content in the paragraph was removed so that it would only read the first and last sentence which I later researched and saw that the suspected socks were removing the middle content in the past. See here, what was removed & I therefore replaced -- [21]. The source on the Greek article was the only time I used a website source and only because that information has been accepted as truth by society. I can look for books perhaps to back it up. But normally my edit did not involve me including content but repairing sourced content that was removed, or removing content that was not sourced or sourced but not reliable. And again, the last example you show, that is the same source used in the Arabic music article which is simply a "review" of someone's. And it did not have anything to do with the last article you inquired about. These are good questions, maybe something we can also talk about on these talk pages later? ProfessionalScholar (talk) 19:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I see. Yes, the right place to resolve such disputes is the talk-page (Jerome is a knowledgeable, established editor; I am sure that you could have resolved that dispute in a better way). --Omnipaedista (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Which is why I asked him for proof of his claim about it being a well-documented source, but he did not provide any so I found the source myself after doing research. Also, I was a newbie so I was not aware of content dispute boards, etc at the time. And I feel that it takes two people to dispute, and he was not showing me any willingness to provide the proof of the source, so nothing was being resolved that way.ProfessionalScholar (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I noticed you made an edit on the Belly dance article, but do you think it's best we let an administrator see this -- [22]. I think that an administrator should look at this edit, since it was already reverted a couple of times since 2 other accounts besides Koyrda66 made that edit. All of which I feel are suspected socks of the same account. The reason I think an administrator should look at it is because not only was a fictitious source used, but the other things they said too, they moved what was already in the article under costume under a new category Ancient Greek costume (which would be vandal) and then they added a sentence of their own at the end. They also removed what has been in that article before that it's known as Middle Eastern Dance or Arabic dance in the west. I think their whole edit needs to be evaluated by an administrator since this would be the fourth time they have pushed this fiction source on the article if it's proven to be the same account. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 20:24, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I see your point. Eventually, if no reliable source can back up the other claims, they will be removed as well. But that specific paragraph I have just removed was a hoax; such hoax-like claims can be removed without waiting for discussion. --20:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I see. I will bring their edit up on the talk page. Do you think I should ask for Administrator help on the page, I'm not sure what the correct template is for that. I have also brought up a discussion on the Oud talk page.ProfessionalScholar (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Administrators are just Wikipedia editors who have been granted the technical ability to perform certain special actions; they are not necessarily experts on specific matters. Experts on music and Middle East can be found in the respective portals (Portal:Music, Portal:Middle East). Regarding that talk-page, as you can see in Paradosiaká: Music, Meaning and Identity in Modern Greece, p.49, oud (outi in Greek) is a Greek instrument, too. --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:23, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Greeks use the instrument but it's not a native Greek instrument by origin. It was brought over to Greece. That can be said about any instrument a culture uses, but does not mean it's their native instrument. That was the point I was making. If that was the case, we can include all instrument templates on all cultures.ProfessionalScholar (talk) 21:33, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Here is the "problem": "oud" is an item in Template:Greek_Musical_Instruments, a (useful) template apparently created by User:Folkloreteritive (whom I suspect to be a Plouton2 sock). In theory, most articles about the instruments listed there can have this template featured in them. But this is not mandatory. For example it would be absurd to have this template featured in the article about piano. But I am uncertain whether oud should feature it. --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

(outdent) I just received a response from the SPI clerk, so now is the time to bring up your new evidence as well. See here -- [23]. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 21:18, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Omnipaedista, I am a little time limited lately, but I do like to further discuss our conversation sometime soon. Just letting you know that I did not abandon the topics of our concerns. Had a quick look around some of the articles and looks like the username you recently had blocked as a sock of Plouton2 is at it again with another IP address. Just thought I'd give you the heads-up. I don't see this user giving up. I think it's best we bring all this to an ANI board since this is getting out of hand. There is a long list of suspected socks & they keep multiplying. I probably won't be able to participate in the conversation until Friday or the weekend so you may want to hold off on it till then. If there is something else you suggest, please let me know. Thanks for all the guidance you have provided me. I really do appreciate it. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 02:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I am quite happy to help out anyone who seems to have a head on their shoulders; you might be surprised at how rare that actually is =) —Omnipaedista (talk) 05:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Omnipaedista! I am available now. Can you help me reopen the SPI case? I had spoken to the clerk who closed and he said it was fine to have another admin/clerk examine it. I got the impression he was busy with a lot of other things. I think it's best if someone who is familiar with the first case (Plouton2) to look at this case since it can be examined by behavior alone but a CU would be nice too in case there are sleepers. Also, if this is Plouton2, which you and I both are confident about, then all these suspected accounts that were made after would be an evasion of block, wouldn't it be? This user is not showing any improvement (example: still making many accounts and pushing POV in articles, purposely putting fiction in articles as a source and lying about it, making up information without any solid background, removing reliable source content, personal attack, etc.). These are being done to multiple articles and that is against Wikipedia guidelines. We need to reopen the case or take it to the ANI board. I feel this case is being dragged out too long and needs to have a resolution soon, one that also involves preventing this from happening again. Don't you agree? ProfessionalScholar (talk) 05:06, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

(outdent) I hope it's okay that I mentioned you here. Please take a look and feel free to add anything you feel is relevant [24]. Thanks. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 19:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

I've also commented in that thread. --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:31, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I thought you might want to read the outcome regarding both of our SPI cases on Plouton2 - [25]. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 19:43, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Our Plouton2 cases are now closed, all the suspected socks have been blocked in both our cases. In looking for past diffs and histories, I came across a "false" SPI that a Plouton2 sock did on you, where he set you up as a sock. I'm very sorry you had to deal with that! DQ was telling me about a softblock option to block his possible IP range since he seems to still be at it [26]. He doesn't quit! Thanks for all your help during this :-) ProfessionalScholar (talk) 05:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

You must have many already, but here's one more!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your many tireless edits around Wikipedia, improving a multitude of articles. LK (talk) 04:16, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

---

Thank you very much ! —Omnipaedista (talk) 05:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed new article entitled Hypostasis (literature)

I agree that it doesn't belong in Hypostasis (linguistics).

Hello, Omnipaedista. You have new messages at Talk:Hypostasis (linguistics)#Proposed new article entitled Hypostasis (literature).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Bejnar (talk) 19:30, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Augustin Meinrad Bächtiger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gossau

Calvin B. Hoover (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Soviet Russia

Mózes Székely (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Brassó

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Dark Matters

On your User page, you declare that “This user would want to know what a black hole looks like from inside….” Unlike Karl Pearson, Albert Einstein, and a few others, most people concern themselves solely with the object of their interest. In this case the object is a putative black hole. They forget that the experienced perception of an object consists also of 1) the viewing subject and 2) the means by which the subject views the object. In this case, the means would be light. According to contemporary physical speculation, there can be no viewing subject nor light inside of a putative black hole.Lestrade (talk) 00:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC)Lestrade

According to the so-called 'use-theory of meaning,' the meaning of a word or phrase is to be analyzed in terms of the dispositions of those who use the word in a specific context. Thus, the phrase "looks like" as is used by physicists in that specific context is not "literal." "What a black hole looks like from inside" more or less means "what happens to an infalling observer when she crosses a black hole event horizon." Omnipaedista (talk) 07:40, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Socking advice

You asked for my assistance / advice in the Ilhador matter. I don't have very good advice, unfortunately. With serial sockpuppeteers who have a wiki-agenda to push, indefinite blocks don't always help (proved by the hundreds of socks/IPs of e.g. Sheynhertz-Unbayg, the only editor I have ever organized a ban for). In preparation for an indefinite block proposal, I would suggest to first raise the issue of problematic content edits with the relevant WikiProjects (say, ask at WT:GER what would be a good convention for lists of rulers versus articles about the realm they ruled) and get some consensus and a reasonable number of other eyes and watchers for the pages in question. When the editor does not abide by this consensus (again), but creates more socks, go to WP:ANI explaining the issue, pointing to the sockuppeting history and the disruption caused. The more people are aware of the problems, the easier it is to have further sockpuppets identified quickly. And then, maybe, the sockpuppeteer gives up and goes away for a while. It is often frustrating work, but it helps if somebody does it. (I do not currently have the time or wiki-energy to pursue this matter, and don't expect that to change before next summer). Anyway, good luck and happy editing, —Kusma (t·c) 08:57, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

That was helpful. Thank you very much. --Omnipaedista (talk) 09:25, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Rockhill

Hi, You removed the "Notability issue" tag on G. Rockhill article, for the following reason : ‘’the subject passes criterias 6 and 7’’. I am most sorry but it can neither be said that an Assistant Pr. at Villanova (not to mention « directeur de programme » at CIPh (which is a mere honorary status as abroad consultant)) can be considered to equal positions at the highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society (crit. 6) nor can it be said (or if so, well, let the page prove it, which is now absolutely not the case) that Rockhill has made substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity (crit. 7). I therefore put the tag back, with your permission, hoping you will agree. --210.159.191.89 (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Regarding criterion 6: by what I read in Collège international de philosophie I see that holding the chair of the director of program is not an honorary title: "directors of program are competitively elected for 6 years." If this is right it means that Rockhill has indeed held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution. If an academic meets that condition, as substantiated through reliable sources, s/he is notable. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I answered on the article TP. Thanks.--210.159.191.89 (talk) 02:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Dresden (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:45, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Contemporary philosophy

Hi again, do you really think the link you restored here is a reference site and provides clear information on the subject that you cannot find in the body of the page ? I, for one, don’t.--210.159.191.89 (talk) 20:49, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

It is quite clear to me that the Philosophical Gourmet Report's description elaborates on the subject matter in a clearer way that the article does. The article as it stands now is a sketchy juxtaposition of each tradition's history and does not say much about the contemporary status of the Continental/Analytic divide. --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

User:JHUSPO

I've replied to your message on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Genealogy (philosophy)

While I appreciate that including only referenced material as you propose is better than the state of the article Genealogy (philosophy) previously, I don't fully agree with your rationale. The point about the absence of secondary sources I made is not that no one has written anything in secondary literature about the concept of genealogy in Foucault, but rather that there is no secondary literature specifically about this topic. By contrast, Foucault does provide a secondary literature to Nietzsche's use of the concept, specifically in Foucault's article 'Nietzsche, Genealogy, History'. I will add a reference to that to the stub. esperant 00:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I still contest that there is no secondary literature specifically about this topic. I had a quick look on Google Books, and found the following: Philosophical Genealogy Volume I: An Epistemological Reconstruction of Nietzsche and Foucault's Genealogical Method, Foucault's Nietzschean Genealogy: Truth, Power, and the Subject, Nietzsche, Genealogy, Morality: Essays on Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals (pp. 251–460), Bernard Williams's Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy, and Reading Bernard Williams (pp. 24–43). —Omnipaedista (talk) 02:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, I concede the point regarding the page as such. I stand by my deletion of what was an OR essay, however, though I take it you didn't challenge that. Hopefully, we've reached agreement now. Cheers esperant 05:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

We have reached an agreement indeed. --Omnipaedista (talk) 05:15, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Cornelius Castoriadis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Unconscious

Franz Bopp (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Friedrich Schlegel

Terry Eagleton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Continental

Ylla (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bharatpur

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:54, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

TOC TOC

Hi, what was your thinking with this edit ? --210.159.191.110 (talk) 01:06, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Francis Bacon

Hello,Looking back on the article about Francis Bacon, I see one of your contributions (here :1), summed up as "Fix edits by User:Chateau Brillant" (that’s me). I can not understand what your edit has to do at all with the ones I had done in a row (see here 2)) a few days before. Would you be so kind to explain so that I know what was to be fixed there, if that was indeed the case ? Cheers, --Chateau Brillant (talk) 10:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

A fairly late reply

Hi Omnipaedista

I'm not sure whether you remember me, but I was one of the more active members on the Ancient Greek test project a few years ago. I randomly logged into my wikipedia account just now, and there are messages asking me where I went. I feel guilty :<

Anyway, I didn't visit wikipedia any more because I was completely snowed under with work at university, and thought it best to dedicate my attention to that. I probably should have made some announcement to that effect, so I think I should apologise. I won't be returning to wiki editing, since I'm even busier now; I was just overwhelmed with nostalgia ;) LeighvsOptimvsMaximvs ^(talk) 21:50, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Your understanding of MOS

Hello, I don’t understand your refering to MOS:DOB when it comes to Places of Birth⁄death. As you seem to edit quite a few pages by doing so (at least some I happen to have seen), I wanted to ask you which of the following tendencies you eventually think is right : is it when you make this type of edits or that type ? I ask that because seeing your edits, you either remove⁄erase the places of birth and death when they are mentioned or you put them in place when they are omitted. Is there any reason for you doing so ? 59.156.8.198 (talk) 02:45, 4 December 2012 (UTC)