User talk:Cplakidas/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions for the period 7/2007 – 2/2008. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)
The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject 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.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:34, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
What is your problem with Reshid Mehmed Pasha being greek?
??? Reaper7 23:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Nothing, except the fact that he wasn't. He was from modern-day Georgia. He was the son of a Greek Orthodox priest, but that certainly does not make him ethnically Greek, since "Greek Orthodox" is a term encompassing far more people than just us Greeks... Cplakidas 07:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- Georgian Orthodox and Apostolic Church I think you mean this. There were Greeks in Georgia, many and guess what, many greek priests! Collapse of Soviet Union. Approx. 100,000 ethnic Greeks migrate from Georgia, Armenia, southern Russia and Albania to Greece.Reaper7 00:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, there were Greeks in Georgia, but most of them settled there during Russian rule in the latter half of the 19th century. And this does not mean that Mehmed Reshid was Greek. Anyway, I have never seen a reference to his ethnicity as being Greek, but only "from Georgia", i.e., which can mean a lot of nationalities, from Georgians, to Laz, Ossetians, Armenians, etc... During the period Mehmed Rehid was born, I imagine the only Greeks in the area would have been traders and senior clergy. At any rate, while his nationality is unclear (apart from being generically "Caucasian") it is very unlikely that he actually was a Greek. Cplakidas 17:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Praetorian prefecture of Africa
Hi Cplakidas. You are off to such a great start on the article Praetorian prefecture of Africa that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. The Main Page gets about 4,000,000 hits per day and appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Also, don't forget to keep checking back at Did you know suggestions for comments regarding your nomination. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee (Talk) 01:38, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
|
On July 30, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article praetorian prefecture of Africa, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Well done on a very comprehensive article. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Compliments
Stunning addition!!! Many compliments!!! I've a question: what do you think about Byzantine Empire article as a whole. Many people consider it a featured article, but I don't think. They just evaluate length, but details are greatly lacking. There are still many periods to examine better in detail, such as the 14th century or the 8th; I tried to cope adding some stuff from my Ostrogorsky for the period 9th-10th century, but in the end I got a bit tired. What do you think? Ciao and good work. --Attilios 09:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 1 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Artabanes (general), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Wizardman 16:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
|
|
On 4 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Rome (537-538), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Andrew c [talk] 11:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator selection
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 02:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
DYK - Ostrogothic Kingdom
|
|
On 10 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ostrogothic Kingdom, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Circeus 16:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 00:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Please see the discussion I started on the background color of this template at Template talk:Infobox Hellenic Navy. I would welcome your comments. Argos'Dad 19:37, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Rewrite and expansion of article on Battle of Heliopolis
As you noticed, I rewrote and vastly expanded the article on the Battle of Heliopolis. I welcome any critique you could offer, in the hopes I can improve my work. ArgosDad has been kind enough to offer me help in assessing my work, but I don't want to impose on him constantly. Thanks, John1951 02:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you - I appreciate the editing help. I did not check the discussion page there, and you explained your reasoning - thank you. I will respond there, but thank you again for your help. John1951 12:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)
The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject 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.
Delivered by grafikbot 09:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Did you know...
|
|
On 10 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Nisibis (217), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Allen3 talk 22:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Please see the discussion page as to why it should not have the word "Dynasty".
Without meaning to sound cheeky, please discuss such a bold change before implementing. Or at least leave a message.
Respectfully,
Tourskin 00:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hi there, thanks for the appreciative comments on my work. I kind of see what you are saying but I don't see how adding dynasty helps in my opinion it makes the title longer than it should be. And what are we to do with the other articles that are in this scope such as Byzantium under the Komnenoi etc. We need to have a similar name or something. I am willing to concede if you strongly insist but a similar name is important. Tourskin 17:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- You say the word "heraclian" is nonesense, but Norwich uses the words "Heraclian line". Norwich, John Julius (1997). A Short History of Byzantium. New York: Vintage Books.
Since this discussion is not yet over, the article should be as it was before the change and yet it isn't. Thats wiki policy isn't it?Tourskin 23:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Listen here buddy. I don't give a damn what mood ur in, how annoyed you are or how much sleep u r losing. Being rude with never works. You didn't say anything about nouns or adgectives or whatever. I just can't see how Heraclian is not the same as Komnenoi or Palailogoi. Tourskin 00:51, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- I understand now. I fully accept your apology and I take back what I said in the previous message. Can we use Heraklanoi? Or Heraclanoi? In the mean time I will change it to Dynasty. Tourskin 18:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oh I missed that one. Heraclians? By itself? I am for that one! Tourskin 17:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Pentapolis (North Africa)
The article "Pentapolis" is a verbatim copy of most sections of the "Cyrenaica" article, and provides no new or specific information on the Pentapolis itself. As such, it is redundant. If no objection is noted or significant material added to the Pentapolis page, I'll turn it into a redirect page. Cplakidas 23:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- I think that Pentapolis (North Africa) has information about a part of Cyrenaica and these are not included in the article Cyrenaica
Including the information you mentioned is important to explain relationship between Pentapolis (North Africa) and Cyrenaic.
The article Pentapolis (North Africa) is being developed to include information about the history of the Eparchy as part of both the Coptic Orthodox Church and the Greek Orthodox Church.
I am in favour of keeping them separate. --Ghaly 19:47, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- I have done the redirect to requested--Ghaly 20:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)
The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject 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.
Delivered by grafikbot 09:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
DYK October 20
|
|
On 20 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Greek submarine Delfin, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Andrew c [talk] 22:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
dhe
Ah very nice, didn't know that was meant. Mallerd 12:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Re:Turkish-Portuguese War
Hello! I rather to remove the Turkish-Portuguese War in the board. Doncsecz —Preceding comment was added at 14:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
There the Battle of Matapan, near the combatants Kingdom of Portugal. And on of the my references one hungarian book: Attila and Balázs Weiszhár: Lexicon of Battles (Csaták lexikona). This enough? Doncsecz —Preceding comment was added at 16:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Greco-Italian War
Naturally, I added my comment even though it is quite difficult to even begin discussing with a guy like him who talks to things such as national fighting mentalities etc. which belong in a Nazi-era textbook rather than Wikipedia. Na eheis iremia, den tha kerdiseis tipota an fenete oti eheis mallosei me ton malaka... mono boroume na kanoume revert kai tha ton blokarisoun. AlexiusComnenus 21:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
East-Hem Maps and your Roman Maps
Wow Cplakidas, I LIKES that map you made of Rome in AD 400! It looks like it's based on the same map I based my East-Hem maps on. How did you get one that was so large? I'd like to get a full world map that zooms in as close as yours does, but haven't had much luck finding one yet. I actually had to piece mine together (and that wasn't easy!).
As for your questions regarding the borders on my maps, I'd be happy to correct them if you could send me source information I can use to correct the borders. Non-wiki source info please; I've already seen too many errors on Wikipedia, and too many editors who have agendas to keep out correct information.
Thanks for your comments though; I look forward to working further with you. Great map of Rome! Thomas Lessman 22:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the source maps, Cplakidas. I remember seeing the ones on the geocities site a while back, but the borders were 20 years out of date for the 565 map. Looking at them, I can see my borders are most likely off, but by how much? I actually had used the first map you posted as the source for my borders of Yemen and the Lakhmids in 565, but I can tell I need to re-work them as well. How would you depict the borders of the Arab states in 565 and in 600? Thomas Lessman 20:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Wow, I can see I was pretty far off on my borders in Nubia/Sudan. I had previously thought the Blemmyes were destroyed before the 400s; I now understand I was way wrong. It looks like they were around until at least 1000 AD, if not longer. I think you're right about the Lakhmids maintaining until at least 602; I thought they fell a few years earlier. I'm trying to figure out how I'll redraw the borders in Arabia. There may be a lot of land under the ambiguous "Arabian Tribes" designation, and I'll be doing a bit more work on the Sassanid/Arab borders tomorrow.
Yikes, just when you think you might have a finished map... lol Thomas Lessman 22:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay Cplakidas, I corrected one of the maps (565AD) and uploaded it. Might not be refreshed yet in Wikipedia's site. You can see the updated version on my website, at www.ThomasLessman.com/History/images/East-Hem_565ad.jpg. Please check it out and let me know what you think. If it's correct, I'll start working on the other maps. Thomas Lessman 16:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
John Troglita
|
|
On 2 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Troglita, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--howcheng {chat} 18:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)
The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject 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.
Delivered by grafikbot 13:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
DYK: Nea Moni of Chios
|
|
On 4 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nea Moni of Chios, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--PFHLai 11:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Template:Greek_Ship proposed for deletion
Please see this discussion: [1] Argos'Dad 16:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Re: John at Dara
Hello Cplakidas. Sorry for my delayed response, I have not been on Wiki that often as of late. I am quite confident it was Troglita, after all he was named dux Mesopotamiae when he was assigned to the Eastern frontier with Belisarius. It would be my pleasure to show you a source. Here it is:
J.A.S. Evans, The Age of Justinian: The Circumstances of Imperial Power, Routledge 1996, p. 166.
I actually got this citation from another Wiki article. It happened to be the the John Troglita article itself. Under the first sub-level headline is a title reading "Early Career". And the last sentence of that paragraph (footnoted by the above source) reads:
"...He achieved several small successes against the Persians: he led his army in a successful night attack against the Persian force besieging Theodosiopolis, and then defeated another Persian army besieging Dara, capturing its general, Mihr-Mihroe."
Warmest regards, friend. --Arsenous Commodore 03:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, scratch that, my mistake. It appears I have confused the Battle of Dara in 530 involving Belisarius with the one 12 years later in 542 where Persian general Mir-Mihroe is captured during Khosrau I Mesopotamian offensive. I guess that source is discussing the latter battle of Dara. Now I'm not certain which John it was, lol. I guess you are correct, it would be most prudent to switch it back to the simpler "John" for now; until some source/historical certainty is gathered. I'll switch it back. Thanks for the correction, and nice eagle-eye on that one! :) --Arsenous Commodore 03:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a lot!
Vale Costantine ;-)
I wanted to thank you a lot for improving the article about Gül Mosque. What do you think about it? Except the language style, of course... :-( Too long, too short, too unbalanced? I am trying to cover all the "minor" Byzantine Churches of Istanbul, and comments are welcome! Thanks again, Kalimera, Alex2006 (talk) 12:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
RE:Byzantine churches
Hallo Constantinos,
I am really touched because of the barnstar that you awarded me! I don't think that I deserved it, but this is a further incentive to write good articles. Thanks a lot for your help! I am also glad that a Greek is helping me in describing this subject. I have been studying ancient Greek at the high school, but now it became a little bit stiff. ;-) Vale, Alex2006 (talk) 13:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)
The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 01:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Roman legions
Sorry to undo your shrinkage of the Roman empire map, but I can't see how it interferes with the text in any way. These is no point in having the map so small that you can't read the captions. This is incovenient for the reader, who has to click evry time he wants to use the map 3 December 12.10 (UTC)EraNavigator 12:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK for Column of Justinian
|
|
On 10 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Column of Justinian, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Royalbroil 04:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Roman legions
Thanks for the map info: excellent map of the empire by the way. I wish I knew how to make maps: is there some beginner's software you would recommend? By the way you might like to read the articles I've written (wholly or mainly): Roman auxiliaries, List of Roman auxiliary regiments (nearly complete), Late Roman army (started), Roman roads in Britain, Via Aemilia, Battle of Navarino, Cape Sounion, Paros. Your comments on any of these would be much appreciated. Best wishesEraNavigator (talk) 19:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC) Also: Peregrinus (Roman) and LaetiEraNavigator (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
List of designated terrorist organizations
This page is in the middle of a pretty major clean-up, which involves removing organisations that have not been explicitly designated as terrorist organisations. As such, I've reverted your change, as the source you provided does not support their status as a designated terrorist organisation. If you can find another source saying that they are a designated organisation, then by all means, put them back in. -- Mark Chovain 21:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please take a look at Talk:List of designated terrorist organizations for discussion of the clean-up operation, and the lead section of List of designated terrorist organizations for the criteria of inclusion. The page is not a list of all terrorist organisations. -- Mark Chovain 23:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
That eubusiness reference looks perfect to me. Well found - I've added it back in with the new ref. -- Mark Chovain 01:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
On 18 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Panhellenic Union of Fighting Youths, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Cheers, Daniel 22:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Principality of Pindus
Hi. I edited Principality of Pindus but please disregard my edit summary - I didn't say what I meant to say. I'll just say it here: Most of the Greek speakers probably spoke Greek as a second language to Aromanian or Macedonian (now called Slavika). Alchiviad and the Italians discouraged the use of Greek because the principality was meant to be an Aromanian state. For those three years I doubt if anyone actually spoke Greek (let alone was allowed to). BalkanFever (talk) 04:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks and Happy New Year
Firstly, let me wish you a very happy New Year and thank you for all your help in the Milhist Tag & Assess 2007 drive.
|
Military history service award | |
| For tagging and assessing 250 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
Military history service award | |
| For tagging and assessing 500 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
Military history service award | |
| For tagging and assessing 1000 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC) |
Secondly, although the Tag & Assess 2007 drive is now officially closed, you are very welcome to continue tagging and assessing until 31 January 2008. Any articles you tag and assess during this time will be credited fully to your tagging tally for further award purposes.
Thirdly, if you can find the time, it would be good to have your feedback/comments on the drive at the Tag & Assess workshop
Thanks again for your help, --ROGER DAVIES talk 10:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)
The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Greek War of Independence template
I wrote a comment on the Greek War of Independence template discussion page concerning the Orlov revolt. Please, let me know your opinion. Ashmedai 119 (talk) 20:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Late Roman army
Salve, Cplakidas. Happy New Year. Just a few points arising from your recent contribs to Late Roman army.
(1) " comitatenses armies were composed mostly of cavalry." This is simply wrong. Most such armies were mainly infantry. P. Heather Fall of the Roman Empire (2005) 63). e.g. the comitatus Thracum, which contained 21 legiones (inf) and just 7 vexillationes (cav) (Not Dig).
(2) The supposed rise of the cavalry in the 3rd century. This is a Gibbonic fallacy, just like barbarisation. It does appear that Gallienus substantially increased the size of his own cavalry escort by attaching the cavalry from some legions, and some foederati, to the imperial horseguards. But there is no evidence that cavalry increased as a proportion of the army as a whole (Goldsworthy Roman Warfare 169). The evidence of the Not Dig is that the cavalry to infantry ratio in the 4th century was much the same as in the 2nd. (Heather Fall 63)
(3) The claim that the overall army size increased substantially in the late period. This view, based (I think) on AHM Jones, is also based on superseded data. It used to be thought that the 2nd century auxilia numbered roughly the same as the legions i.e. c150,000. But, using more recent diploma evidence, P. Holder has shown that they numbered at least 220,000 (and there is good reason to believe they were as many as 250,000 - see Roman auxiliaries). Adding in the c20,000 troops in Rome, that makes the 2nd century army (excluding fleets) 390,000 - 420,000 strong. The Lydus figure of 389,704 for the army (exc fleets) under Diocletian is thus at the bottom end of the 2nd century range. Although it is likely that army size increased substantially under Constantine, (and then diminished rapidly after Adrianople) the best evidence is that the 4th century army at no stage exceeded the 2nd century army in size. N.B. The Agathias figure of 645,000 is today discounted by historians (Heather Fall 63)
(4) A minor point. You state that the limitanei units were under the command of regional comites and duces. I thought comites commanded comitatenses only?
Please let me know your views. Vale 86.85.44.73 (talk) 09:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC) Sorry, forgot to sign in. EraNavigator (talk) 09:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Salve. Thanks for responding. I would develop the points as follows:
(1) I remain unconvinced by the rise of cavalry/decline of infantry thesis, for the simple reason that there is no cogent evidence of it.
(a) Cavalry numbers:
- (i) Goldsworthy Roman Warfare (2000) p169: "It has often been claimed that cavalry assumed a greater importance in the later army, although it has proved difficult to trace any specific changes. In part, this view derived from a misunderstanding of the great importance of the auxiliary horsemen of the Principate. Although a slight change is possible, there is no good evidence for a significant increase in the proportion of horsemen, and the ideal, as in earlier periods, was to have a balanced army composed of both foot and horse, the latter always in a minority. The number of heavily armoured units, cataphracti and clibanarii, did increase, especially in the eastern army which often had to face the equally heavily armoured cavalry of the Persians... However, the specialist shock cavalry were not more numerous than the units of specialist light horsemen." (ii) Heather Fall of the Roman Empire (2005) p63: "In terms of numbers, the late Roman army continued to be dominated by infantry, especially the mobile field forces..."
(b) Cavalry status: Cavalry already had a higher status in the 2nd century: although an auxiliary infantryman was paid less than a legionary, an eques cohortalis was paid the same and an eques alaris 20% more. The 4th century situation was thus nothing new.
(c) Infantry efficiency: The view that the efficiency of the infantry declined and that cavalry was the only effective element of the comitatenses really has no support in the evidence. In all the battles described by Ammianus Marcellinus, the infantry are as important (and effective) as in the 2nd century.
In conclusion, I suggest you drop the rise of cavalry/decline of infantry thesis altogether. The 4th century army had a broadly similar ratio of cavalry to infantry as the 2nd century army and relied on both in the same way, with the proviso that the number of heavily armoured cavalry units increased.
(2) You raise the interesting point about Belisarius' army. As I originally envisaged it, the scope of this article was to encompass only the army described by the Notitia Dignitatum and Ammianus i.e. the army in the 4th and early 5th centuries. But we can certainly cover the 6th century East Roman army also, so long as we remember that it was a different army to the Notitia army. For one thing, it did have a higher proportion of cavalry (although to what extent, I don't know) and it was also smaller than the Notitia army: according to Agathias, 150,000 (hence his complaint about its decline from its supposed peak of 645,000 in earlier times: his comparison is false, because the latter figure refers to the whole empire: in the 4th century, the eastern army was probably c200,000). If you do cover the Belisarius army, I suggest you make a clear distinction between the Notitia 4th century army and the 6th century Eastern army (perhaps even separate sections?)
(3) Overall army size: Agathias' figure is widely dismissed because he was hardly contemporaneous (late 6th century, up to 3 centuries after the event) and also because he does not specify which period his figure relates to (it has all the appearance of a rough guesstimate probably based on a jumble of sources from different periods a la Vegetius). The Lydus figure, on the other hand, is given greater credit because it is very precise (implying that it comes from a single and official source) and it is specifically related to the rule of Diocletian. It also matches closely the much more certain size of the 2nd/3rd century army. I appreciate that Constantine's army has been estimated by some at 450,000: but this is just speculation. In sum, I suggest that the only safe position is to say: there is no convincing evidence that the 4th century army ever significantly exceeded the 2nd century army in size (except possibly under Constantine I, when it may have been 10-15% larger).
Anyway, I am glad you are involved in expanding this article. I intend to add to it myself, so no doubt we'll talk again about it. Vale 86.85.44.73 (talk) 23:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC) EraNavigator (talk) 23:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Salve. I have revised Late Roman army to take account of the points I made above. I have also re-ordered the sections so as to set up a separate section for the 6th century Belisarius army. Please let me know your views. P.S.you did not give a reference for Handbook of the Roman army, which you quote frequently: Who wrote it? When? Is it authoritative (i.e. produced by an academic expert in the field? Vale EraNavigator (talk) 11:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Hagios Andreas en te Krisei
Ciao Konstantinos, and happy New Year! If you have some time, can you please have a look to this? I have been again in the City... ;-)
Thanks, Alex2006 09:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Beautiful! Actually, I already decided that some of the articles should be enlarged, and Zeyrek was a candidate. Now I have something to read this evening on the train! By the way: this morning I uploaded on wikipedia also this one. Now I hope that I am finished with Mustafa Pasha (the "Rum" Great Vizir)... Thanks again, Alex2006 (talk) 12:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! TomStar81 (Talk) 02:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)
The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Some work again...
Hallo Konstantinos, kalimera! Again some work for you, if you have time and lust, of course. I am running short of churches in the City... ;-) About Zeyrek, on that paper there was not much worth of being written on Wikipedia (was a pre-pre-paper). Many thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 08:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hallo Konstantinos, thanks for your help! I corrected the article. a) About the Halkali net, unfortunately my newest source ist Mamboury :-( , who in one chapter says that the aqueduct started to collect water in the slopes between the Sweet Waters of Europe and Marmara, in another other chapter talks about Halkali. I removed this last citation, and used the first, which makes more sense. Personally, I seldom look at web references. On the other side, many greek authors say that Constantine brought water from 'Bulgaria' (about 60 miles from the City), so maybe also this information should be added. Anyway, I think that all this should go in a separate voice about water in Constantinople. b) It has been already corrected by another guy (power of Wikipedia). But it is really incredible that on two turkish books it is described as a word of greek origin.... c) I corrected it using Janin. It was a mistake by Mamboury (it is a french book, but I got the english edition, which - being printed in Istanbul - is filled with errors). About the walls, I never read Van Millingen, but i have his book about the Churches. It is very good on the historic side, but totally outdated on the architectonic one. Anyway, as soon as I will have time I will take care of your pet... ;-) Ciao and good like for your exams! Alex2006 (talk) 09:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Template:Greek Ship/doc
A tag has been placed on Template:Greek Ship/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates. Please vote here by February 28! --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 12:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Another little job
Hallo Konstantinos, something small for you again...Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 06:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks Konstantinos! I saw that you removed the adjective "european". Actually it comes from Janin, who describes the Milion as "origin of the european roads", but I am perplex too. Why should be the other roads (and cities) excluded? Just because of the Bosforus? Alex2006 (talk) 13:11, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Byzantium under the Palaiologoi
Awesome work there, my Greek friend. (I'm a Grecophile). If I wasn't Assyrian, I would like to have been Greek. Tourskin (talk) 01:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
A little Hommage to my co-writer ;-)
I Megali Ekklesia on 18 February, 2008. Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 11:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hallo Konstantinos, nice that you liked my picture! Actually I travel to the City about every other month, but last weekend it was the first time that I could see it under snow, and it was really magic! Regarding the Augustaion, you have been faster than me ;-), since I was already collecting material to cancel that red spot on the Milion article ;-). Anyway, I will use it to enlarge the article. Have a nice day, Alex2006 (talk) 06:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Alexios Philanthropenos DYK
|
|
On 26 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alexios Philanthropenos, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--BorgQueen (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
|
|
On February 28, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cretan War (1645-1669), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 06:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
|
|
On 29 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alexios Strategopoulos, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |