User talk:NikoSilver

NikoSilver is currently working his ass off in real life and has decided that it is about time his long RealLifeBreak in favor of WP was interrupted. He will make frequent brief RealLifeBreaks, but you won't see him as much as you may be used to. (Yeah, he knows you're better off!)

Template:Puic

NikoSilver would like to thank everybody with an opinion about The TruthTM on this page, undeterred about those monitoring this page and uniting to prevent its enforcement. Keep sending that valuable feedback please.

Archives
1  •  2  •  3  •  4  •  5  •  6  •  7  •  8  •  9  • 10 11 • 12 • 13 • 14 • 15 • 16 • 17 • 18 • 19 • 20

Remarks

1. I will post responses below your comment right here, so "watch" my page (or select to watch whatever you edit in your prefs). Same I will expect from you when I message you. Otherwise, continuity is completely lost.
2. You can spy if you want... Only morons don't use e-mail when they want to conspire...
3. My e-mail application actually has a bell thingy. I'll read them faster if you don't message me as well that you sent me one. Actually, it'd be more alarming to send me an e-mail, telling me you've left a message in my talk! :-)
4. This talk is being automatically archived. All comments that are older than 31 days are removed and placed in the respective archive. In the rare case I don't respond to a comment, please remind me so.
5. Sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) that produce your name and the datestamp. The automatic archive doesn't work if it doesn't see a timestamp!

Δε θα κάνεις archive το talk page σου ποτέ; Telex 1 3 : 0 5 , 2 M a y 2 0 0 6 ( U T C )

Μπα! :NikoSilver: ^{(T) @ (C)} 1 3 : 1 8 , 2 M a y 2 0 0 6 ( U T C )

---

Kosovo

Some streets of Belgrade were very ugly yesterday. The Balkans keep disappointing me day after day, more and more, again and again... --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I think we can all agree on that. BalkanFever 09:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Compared to the conflicts of the not so distant past, a few smashed windows barely register. By the way, there were similar scenes outside the Greek Liaison Office in Skopje yesterday, but of course they'd never make the international news headlines. ·ΚέκρωΨ· (talk) 06:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, let us all hope that the ICJ will help the whole mess. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Take a look......

Romanization of Macedonian ;-). BalkanFever 23:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Ар ју риферинг ту мај персистент сабститушон ов "к" уит "c", уич ризалтед ин миспелинг де президент'с нејм? (ов олл!!) НикоСилвер 00:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ιντιδ αι εμ. Ολσο "Μιλοσοσκι" ινστεδ οβ "Μιλοšοσκι". Τραιδ το φιξ ιτ, μπατ ιντερνετ ιζν'τ ωορκιγγ. ΜπαλκανΦιβερ 00:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Фигиурс... де латтер из бикоуз уи дон'т хав дис саунд ин Грик. Мац лаик иу конфиуз "δ/Δ" уит "Д/д"! Си Romanization of Greek! :-) НикоСилвер 00:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ωell, wι σλαβοφονζ δον'τ λαικ αυρ δενταλ φρικατιβζ... ;-). Πιτι αμπαυτ δε σαυντζ δο, δετ'σ ωαι ωι χεβ αυρ οων αζβμπουκα. Τσεκ δισ αυτ εζ ωελλ: [1] ΜπαλκανΦιβερ 01:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Δατ σαϊτ ολμοστ μειξ μι κραϊ. Θενκς φορ μπρινγκινγκ ιτ απ. Ιν Γκρικ γουι γιουζ Ν πλας Τ του σεϊ D, εντ Μ πλας Π του σεϊ B. Ολσο, δεαρ ιζ νο ντιστίνξιον μπιτουίν "ντ", "νd" εντ πλεϊν "d". Γουι προνάουνς δεμ χαουεβερ γουι λαϊκ εντ ιτ ις ώλγουεϊζ κορρέκτ φορ ας. NikoSilver 01:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ω, οκει. Ιτ τζαστ φιλζ γουιρντ το γιουζ "ντ" φορ "d" αντ φορ "nt" ιν δε σειμ γουωρντ... Μπαι δε γουαι, δετ σαιτ ισ δε μειν ριζον Ι λερντ δε αλφαβιτα ιν δε φιρστ πλεις. BalkanFever 01:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, truly admirable effort, though. Congrats and wow! BTW, I can understand much of it. The first article speaks about some kind of newspaper printed in Skopje by the Aromanian Scientific Society which [includes] some document on the phenomenon of unity between Roma la Armanli -lost it here- [with]...[can] Orthodox Church of Greece or Romania? What does it say? NikoSilver 01:37, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

...and with/like that the [something] of the Orthodox Church of Greece and Romania could not be built. The author of the text published in the (*ugh*Slavo-)Macedonian language Octavian Barlea, from Germany [verb, possibly "compares"] the problem of the Aromanians and Roma[?] with that of the Bulgarians and puts them in the broken persons [maybe "personalities"] which [verb, maybe "donated"] the most for making a Greek-Orthodox Aromanian church.....that is a (very) rough translation of the first part - I'm only rup-1 after all :(. But yeah, I think they want an Aromanian Catholic Church, but they don't know if it should be Roman or Byzantine or something like that.... I'll try get back to you once I read the whole thing about 10 times. BalkanFever 02:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Former toponymes of Greece places

Please contribute to the talk page of Former toponymes of Greece places. Especially the part of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Former_toponyms_of_Greek_places#revert_to_a_previous_more_neutral_description . There is some dispute of how the article should be written! Check the version of user macrakis and mine. Your opinion is highly appreciated. Seleukosa (talk) 16:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw the discussion there. I am not an expert, but I see no dispute. Why is there a fuss? NikoSilver 16:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Fruit salad

any good point a link to fruit salad is included in an article about geography/history?

• yes. --1) the only applicable Balkan-Macedonia-related term _not_ linked in the article, --2) humor (quite descriptive isn't it :-))

Ok, yes, I find it funny but I think this is not a place for humour. Besides, since the link is already in the main disambig page (Macedonia), I don't see an obvious need for include just this one in the article we talk about. Reconsider, ok? Cheers :-) --Tone 22:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

In such a contentious article, if we can slip in humor through the keyhole while being technically correct, then I'm all for it, but I'll surely not be the one who imposes it. There were quite a few editors involved when this was first inserted and throughout the WP:FA discussion, and most decided to leave it. I think it was User:Pmanderson (aka "Septentrionalis") who enjoyed it the most. If you want, bring it up again in the talkpage. NikoSilver 23:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right, it adds a lighter tone. Maybe I'll bring this to the talkpage in a couple fo days, I will see. And for today, I've had enough editing, it's a busy day tomorrow... Have a nice time. --Tone 23:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth.......  :)

This wasn't politically motivated or anything - I just did what Noompsy and Bojancho suggested. Right now I'm getting annoyed with talk pages for some reason. Feel free to discuss it with them for as long as you want. Cheers, BalkanFever 04:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, looks like the naming dispute talks have gone to hell. BalkanFever 13:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sadly yes. Having solved my Macedonia and your Macedonia, only me Macedonian you Macedonian, and yours Macedonian mine Macedonian seem to continue being the problem. NikoSilver 20:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Btw, we need to discuss the FYROM thing again, because the sources are wrong, or we need re-wording. I really don't understand where you were going with "we all know that" because it's quite obvious that nobody knows anything, anywhere. BalkanFever 01:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

• UN
• EU
• NATO

I see other users were ahead of me in this. (I told ya this page is being constantly spied on!) NikoSilver 11:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

:D. What do you think of the new intro? BalkanFever 11:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

This version is fine. NikoSilver 12:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Macedonia (region)

The article focuses on history and ethnography (with some annoying chronological repetition, but I don't know if that can be cured). There are also more detailed articles on on recent history History of modern Macedonia and people Demographic history of Macedonia. I was thinking that article(s) or enlarged sections on the geography of Macedonia (region) and the economy of Macedonia (region) might be a positive addition? Does that make sense to you? I would hesitate if you think it will just cause problems. Jd2718 (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not worried about problems. The geo section/article might be a positive addition, and we have relative stuff also at Macedonia (terminology)#In geography. We need to seriously figure out how we're gonna split/merge info from all those relative articles. NikoSilver 14:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I can't say the same about the economy of the region though. I haven't come across to any relevant sources that would legitimize such an article (and I don't know how a multinational region is supposed to have such sources). What do you have exactly in mind? NikoSilver 14:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Why not just keep thinking about economy for now? There's no rush. Maybe considering separate elements (agriculture, transportation, tourism, manufacture, etc) we will find that most are impossible but that some can be integrated into the main article? But for now I am quite pleased that you like the idea of a geography article or section. I will compile something off-line, and put up a draft on a user subpage in a few days. Jd2718 (talk) 14:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Would you like a separate article such as Geography of the region of Macedonia, or do you think it would fit nicely within the existing Macedonia (region)#Boundaries and definitions section (which btw desperately needs expansion and sources)? We must also take into account that the geography is dynamic (i.e. changes significantly with time). Check also Macedonia (terminology)#In history. NikoSilver 15:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

For discussing Macedonia today, I'd suggest the Ottoman version (plains and littoral around Thessaloniki, extending east, mountains cut by the major rivers). I think we can produce enough for a separate article (basic geography, climate, soil, forest, water features), but we may decide that a separate article is not warranted, in which case just editing for inclusion in the existing article will be fine. In either case, there's something that can be created that's worthwhile. Jd2718 (talk) 15:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

This may be beside the point, but actually that is not the Ottoman version per se. The Ottomans didn't ever have an administrative subdivision by that name. It was the Western geographers that defined the region as such, and still there's debate over its exact definition. As the geo-guru H.R. Wilkinson puts it in his very first sentence: "Macedonia defies definition for a number of reasons". See Wilkinson, H. R. (1951). Maps and Politics; a review of the ethnographic cartography of Macedonia. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. LCC DR701.M3 W5.. I have the book, and the maps inside for the region vary from Greece's Macedonia to a little wider than what you call the Ottoman version. NikoSilver 15:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently (and to my surprise) it is at my work's library (DR701 .M3 W5), and is circulating, and not checked out. I will take it home tomorrow and have a good look. In the meantime I will keep searching - I had a wonderful British-authored travelogue from a mid-19th century journey to Ottoman lands - but my books have become disorganized, and I can't find it (for now - eventually they all show up). But, coming back to the question, you'd recommend working with a broader region? Jd2718 (talk) 15:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Νίκο, μπορείς σε παρακαλώ να δεις την τελευταία συνεισφορά μου και να βοηθήσεις. Έμπλεξα πάλι με τους εξυπνάκηδες. :-( Dexippus (talk) 16:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, you might want to read WP:CIV as well. The sites don't belong. WP:EL is clear in what not to link to. Sites that are inaccessible to a substantial number of users, Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject, Links to blogs and personal web pages. IrishGuy ^talk 21:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently disagreeing with Irishguy is in itself a grave breach of civility. Νίκο, άφησέ το, δεν πειράζει. Άνοιξε και το η-μέιλ σου.--Dexippus (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

How is the reading of WP:CIV coming along, Dexippus? IrishGuy ^talk 21:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Very helpful, thanks. One observation though, I think you have consistently violating civility, specifically WP:ICA.--Dexippus (talk) 21:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Ti phges ki eftiakses re arxhge :-) --   Avg    18:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

New Tzatziki Squad collaboration!

Hello! I'm here to inform you that the Tzatziki Squad has begun a new collaboration, history of timekeeping devices. The goal for the article is Featured status. Please pitch in as much or as little as you can, we appreciate your help! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Alexander the Great

Please will you take a look here? The Cat and the Owl (talk) 13:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I've reverted him this time too, but I don't want to involve in an edit war. The Cat and the Owl (talk) 13:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

RoM

Most of those edits were in fact bettering the article. Could you just copy-paste the intro from the history instead of reverting everything? BalkanFever 13:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)