User talk:Yannismarou/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Yannismarou. 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 5

←

Archive 10

Read

It's a shame that you defend those kind of creatures. I will stop. But I won't apologize. Because I have done the right thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperordarius (talk • contribs) 08:40, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the 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 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)

The August 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) 00:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

MKD

Здраво, Γιάνναρε! The discussions here and here may be of interest to you. Cheers. ·ΚΕΚΡΩΨ· (talk) 14:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Philitas of Cos

Thanks for your review of Philitas of Cos. I've tried to fix the points you raised and have made comments about them on the review page. Eubulides (talk) 19:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Ancient Greek

Can you also take a look in the conversation on the image depicting the distribution of the ancient Greek dialects?

GK1973 (talk) 12:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

They insit portraying Macedonia as a clearly and indisputably non Greek speaking region... They also moved the conversation to some template discussion.

GK1973 (talk) 21:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I wanted to say thank you for your very insightful and detailed peer review of the Olympic Games article. I sincerely appreciate not only your contributions to this article, but also for your commitment to maintaining the highest standards in all of your work. H1nkles (talk) 21:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

And I am not yet done with the peer-review! I thank you H1nkles for both the barnstar and the excellent co-operation in 1896 Olympics, and I hope you remain in Wikipedia devoting more of your efforts; the project needs editors like you!--Yannismarou (talk) 07:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughts, I have enjoyed our collaboration. Perhaps when the Olympic Games article is "finished" we can work together on the 2004 Summer Olympics article? H1nkles (talk) 17:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Any time you want!--Yannismarou (talk) 18:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar!

Wow, thanks a lot! That certainly gives one more incentive. :) I intend to bring the article up for FAC soon, but I am not very happy with the prose. It's quite choppy at places. Also, I don't really know how it appears to a non-expert, in terms of readability, information conveyed and (perhaps excessive) detail. If you can help or suggest any improvements, I'd appreciate it greatly. PS: I have been trying to create a template on Byzantine-related topics. It's not complete yet, nor have I settled on overall layout etcr. If you can check it out and comment on it, again, I'd be grateful. Thanks again, cheers, and keep up you great work! Constantine ✍ 14:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Alexios Komnenos

Hi Yannis. This is to let you know about a violation of the ODB onomatology followed on Wikipedia. Alexios Komnenos has been moved without any type of consensus or discussion to Alexius I Comnenus. Please check this out and move it back since I tried and I cannot move it myself. Thanks again. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 03:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC))

Hi Yannis. Your help is greatly appreciated but there have been more moves in this direction as per These contributions. To wit: Komnenos dynasty has become (you guessed it) Comnenus dynasty. Also Alexius V Ducas, Alexius II Comnenus, Heraclius, Tiberius III Apsimarus and Alexius III Angelus. And since we are at it could you also fix Maria Angelina Ducena Palaeologina, although unrelated to the recent moves it was wrongly changed some time ago. Thank you again and take care. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 14:17, 13 September 2008 (UTC))

BTW could you also fix the talk page of Alexios I Komnenos because it is spelled as Alexios I Comnenos. Thanks again. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 16:01, 13 September 2008 (UTC))

I fixed most of them with the exception of Heraclius, where the standard orthography throughout the bibliography does not seem to be "Herakleios".--Yannismarou (talk) 10:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all. Thank you, as always. for the excellent job and the speedy resolution you provided to this matter. Take care. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 11:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC))

I don't know if there is a "resolution". There may be a continuation of the whole issue. But I hope this happens through the proper channels and procedures.--Yannismarou (talk) 11:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

This matter, as you know, was the subject of bitter debates and mediations some years ago. I participated in those endless discusssions and I know how frustrating it feels. The trend nowadays has become even clearer in favour of the ODB onomatology. I think the case for ODB can be made even stronger today that a few years ago. I hope we don't repeat the long, mercurial and unproductive debates of the past. Your suggestion for an RFM however is the only fair way to proceed if any are so inclined as to reopen this debate and wake up the old dogs. Bye for now Yannis and thanks again. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 11:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC))

User:Emperordarius

Hey there, I noticed that you've dealt with User:Emperordarius previously. I wanted to ask your opinion on this personal attack and perhaps your thoughts on a course of action. GlassCobra 16:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I see he has been already warned by another administrator. Therefore, | think that for the time being no further action is needed. The warning is clear and sound.--Yannismarou (talk) 07:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey Yanni, how's it going? Concerning Emperordarius, he's back in Pyrrhus.Regards,Michael X the White (talk) 19:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Alexius II Comnenus

~~I just found another one Alexius II Comnenus. What can I say? Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 17:05, 14 September 2008 (UTC))~~ Update: I redirected this myself. Not sure quite how or why it worked. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 17:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC))

Plus Talk:Tiberius III Apsimarus needs to be synchronised with Tiberios III. Dr.K. (talk) 17:11, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again Yannis. By the way can you, whenever you have the time, explain to me how I was able to move Alexios II Komnenos? The redirects and everything else were the same as the other articles. Yet I was able to move it without your help. How is this possible? Take your time answering this because I really overloaded you over these few days. Take care. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 20:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC))

TOP IMPORTANCE!! Map-creator found.

I found someone who could make us a map for the mission. Contact me as soon as you can so that we see what exactly we need and meet the requirements.--Michael X the White (talk) 17:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

In fact, it is User:Future Perfect who offered to make a map...You could discuss this directly with him if you want to.--Michael X the White (talk) 14:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 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 fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Citation format question

Hello, I'm wondering if you can help me figure out the format for the web citations for the Olympic Games article? My question specifically relates to the difference between the "work" and the "publisher". I've been listing the work as the web site with the publisher being the larger entity that the website represents. For example, the IOC website is quoted often through the article. So I've listed the work as Olympic.org with the publisher being "The International Olympic Committee". Would this be correct? When there isn't a differentiation between work and publisher then I've listed the website as the publisher. Your insight in this would be appreciated as I prepare it for official peer review. Thanks! H1nkles (talk) 03:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm .... This is a distinction that I may not have understood very well for some time, and your comments made me think a bit more about that! I think you are correct, and I had misunderstood for some time the "work" section, using it for subsections in a web page. Something that would have been logical, but the template's explanations do not vindicate me! I think your interpretation of the guides is more correct than what I used to do. But in order to have a more "professional" opinion, you could ask User:SandyGeorgia, who is an expert not only on MoS but on any kind of technicalities.--Yannismarou (talk) 17:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I've asked SandyGeorgia as well. I'll let you know what she says. H1nkles (talk) 18:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Goliad

Thank you for your comments at the FAC for Battle of Goliad. I have been without internet access due to Hurricane Ike but am back now and have responded to your comments at the FAC. Karanacs (talk) 16:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Greeks

Check your email as for where I had been. Nice to see you back. Cheers! --Hectorian (talk) 16:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Mission 1!

Hey Yanni, how is it going?? Can you check (and evaluate) the progress in Greek War of Independence?? And if so, could you update the Mission Page?? Regards,Michael X the White (talk) 14:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll go through it. I admit I neglected it lately, but I completely ran out of wikitime! I hope that from next Friday it is going to be better.--Yannismarou (talk) 11:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Law

Yannis; Although the article's touch stones are easy to me, the language and phrasing is not. I'll commit to a copyedit over two weeks if you can keep the far open; but I cant say it'll be very good. I might you to watch my back on this one. Ceoil ^sláinte 18:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Damn it! My internet connections was a mess yesterday. My time is very limited during this period, but I promised I'll back you on that, and I'll keep my promise.--Yannismarou (talk) 19:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I havn't look at this again in a while, but let me know if there are any other sections I could help with. I won't vote because although I have a BCL, that was A Long Time Ago, and it never held a fondness for me, and I dont feel qualified to say one way or the other. After law, I switched to the dark side as soon as my legs could carry me, and never looked back. Ceoil ^sláinte 23:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Persistent, disruptive editing by User:Vision_Thing

Hi Yannis, please leave a message here. Wik idea 11:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 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) 00:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Princess Olga, Duchess of Apulia

If I'm not mistaken, you are the (probably unwitting) source, via Google newsgroup alt.talk.royalty, of a reference that has become the subject of recent dispute in edits of an article on a member of Greece's former royal family. She has just married an Italian prince whose father claims that his cadet branch (Aosta) of the House of Savoy, has replaced the senior line (descended from Italy's last king, Umberto II of Italy) as rightful pretenders to the Italian throne because Umberto's two remaining male descendants are married to commoners. Olga is now the wife of an Aosta prince, but the issue is Olga's own dynastic birth status. Your past reference to a Greek "legislative decree", cited here is key. Is there now an online source for this decree? An English translation? Have you any further info or comments on the matter? Thanks for any feedback. FactStraight (talk) 04:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I mistook your handle, "Yannismouru" to be a variation belonging to the "Yannis" who commented on the Greek monarchy and dynasty at alt.talk.royalty several years ago. Thank you for replying nonetheless, and for going to the trouble of attempting to sort out the issue enough to add a useful translation. That's unusual and much appreciated courtesy. FactStraight (talk) 23:12, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome!--Yannismarou (talk) 12:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Law

It is certainly ironic (at best) that the first thing I see on your "talk" page is "be civil," considering your decidedly UNCIVIL message to me.

One question: Who the hell are you to be deleting scholarly references from a list for "Further Reading" on any page? Do you think you are a god or something?

Unless this page is your personal property (it is not), I suggest you leave the constructive additions of others alone.Mervyn Emrys (talk) 21:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI, this is now at WP:ANI#Uncivil comments discourage participation. --El on ka 00:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Civility

As per the discussion on WP:ANI cited above, your edit summaries seem to be blatantly ignoring WP:Civil. You need to fix this. Continuing in this direction will find you blocked. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 00:19, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I have nothing to fix! For the record:

I did not offend the editor in question. I characterized "damn" the book and not the person. Thus there is no personal characterization.
I have the right to be ironic and sarcastic. Sarcasm does not necessarily contradict civility. And I have never been uncivil towards Mervyn.
Mervyn does not seem to understand the difference between "References" and "Further Reading". If he can't understand the obvious, this is not my problem. I do have the right to get angry, and express my annoyance to an editor, who IMO harms the article with his erratic edits. And I do have the right to believe that this editor has not been helpful to the article.

While you hastened to warn me, you found no word of condemnation for Mervyn who accused me of using "Further Reading" as a personal bookshelf. You found nothing to say to a person who insists on absurdly citing a book both in "References" and "Further Reading", a distinction a first-year university student can understand.

I thus decline your warning, and I ask you to be more careful next time. As a minimum act of recognition of your wrongdoing and of restoration of both my reputation and dignity among Wikipedians your misjudged warning harmed, I kindly ask you to remove yourself this highly offensive warning from my page, before I do it myself. Thank you.--Yannismarou (talk) 19:52, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

You have the right to remove this warning, but like it or not, you have been warned. Toddst1 (talk) 19:58, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Yannismarou, your contributions are valuable and appreciated. Cla68 (talk) 07:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I find it pathetic that a renowned wikipedian such as Yannismarou, who has contributed to human knowledge for more than two years and, moreover, is an administrator, has been more or less forced to retire from the WP because of some people’s inconsiderate comments. Some of his accusers were not even aware of the fact that he is an administrator.

One of these people also happens to be an administrator and was talking about administrators setting a good example. My question is: what happens when one administrator accuses a fellow administrator of uncivility? Is that a specimen of good practice among administrators? I, as a mere editor, would like to express my deep concern about this incident. And I hope that this comment will not be considered as wikilawyering as this is not my intention. Hoping that WP will find an editor and an administrator as or even more competent than Yannismarou, I am putting a full stop to my thoughts… Pel thal (talk) 08:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 08:23, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Yannis, you know, illegitimi non carborundum and all that. I can certainly sympathize if you want to take a break, but why give up the bit, it's such a damned hassle to get it back these days. By the way, a nice alternative for a break is doing some editing in some completely unrelated, non-controversial area. For instance, I do renaissance music whenever the Balkans suck too much. Got some nice peaceful hobby you could create a DYK about? :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I've taken the freedom of dedicating my newest article to you... Hope you'll like it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:30, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

[snip]

Unfortunately I didn't have the chance to comment on your latest remarks at ANI, so I will post them here just for the record. With all due respect Elonka, I sincerely fail to see this series of "uncivil comments" you spoke about and I really have to say that your interpetation of exclamation points in this case borders to the surreal. Time for Yannis to take a break? much as I respect your experience I have to admit that your remarks are of a highly subjective nature. The diffs "evidence" in which you base your high hat analysis of Yannis' motives and behaviour are open to several other interpetations. Your comments do nothing to rectify the situation but simply aggravate it. I can fully understand his decision to resign in view of the utterly incomprehensible thread at ANI and I really hope that the project won't end up loosing one of the most respectable contributors I have encountered in my short wikipedia experience. Saying that you are sorry to hear that Yannismarou has decided to retire while at the same time accusing him of overreacting, of being uncivil, and of "melting down in a high profile way" is simply incompatible. And BTW, Yannis has so far been a mighty good editor and not simply a "good editor" for that matter. I can't resist the temptation to tell you that the way you speak of him as if being able to penetrate into the inner workings of his mind would be just funny if he had not decided to resign. Nice way to go: driving away established contributors and then pretending that this ANI or Mervyn or still worse some of the comments I read had nothing to do with it...--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 15:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Giorgos

Just came back from a trip and found out this recent episode of paranoid behaviour against you. I simply wanted to let you know that you have my full support and uttmost respect and that your conduct has been one of the reasons I still contribute in this project. It is sad to realize that the prevailing situation discourages contributors of your calliber and standing to carry on with their work. I haven't so far had the opportunity to express my opinion on your overall contribution in the project and I feel sorry that I had not done it earlier. Contrary to what other contributors may have said I would advise you not to take any kind of wiki break but double your efforts in the areas you take a keen interest in. Your absence from these areas would be only for the worse. --Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 10:13, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I sincerely hope you will return

Never, never, never give up. Jehochman ^Talk 12:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to ignore your suggestion not to use your talk page, but I too hope that this is only temporary. You have done enormous good at the Featured article review. To lose your talents over something trivial like this would be awful. Marskell (talk) 13:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Yannis: don't leave, and certainly don't even think of giving up the sysop. You, one of Wiki's finest and hardest working FAC and FAR editors and content contributors, could just be the canary in the coal mine ... please think about it, and come back as soon as you're ready, knowing that you have solid support on Wiki from many editors who know and appreciate your contributions and hard work. All the best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Yannis: to be blunt Elonka is a special case, she lied to get her bit, and the way she treated you she is clearly more motivated by impression and get in there first instead of weighing the substance of the issue. She didn't look into the background but instead made a quick judgement that is frankly best ignored. You have huge respect for the contentyou have added; and are generally seen as hugely talented. Shame to waste that agaist a bad 'un. You have friends that are fightes, and will always be there to defend you, as long as you stay correct. And that seems to be the case here. Paul. Ceoil ^sláinte 11:09, 18 October 2008 (UTC)#

From a distance, I have always admired your accomplishments - make no mistake El Greco is simply one of the best VA articles in wikipedia......you do good work, keep moving forward and don't let em get you down. Sometimes we can't look back, and we can't look sideways, just keep on keeping on..hand on the plow.....Modernist (talk) 12:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

If you believe

Hi Yanni. Sorry for the intrusion and for not following your advice not to leave you a message but I simply can't bring myself to see you gone and not attempt to at least express my shock at this tragedy that befell all of us here who knew you and greatly appreciated your expert, distinguished and multifaceted contributions to the project. I personally will never forget your warm, gentlemanly and friendly character, our conversations, your expert advice and the help that so readily and unselfishly you provided to anyone who asked, including me. Your exit leaves the fabric of Wikipedia damaged. If you believe that this project is intrinsically a worthwhile endeavour you can help repair it. By returning. Take care my friend και ελπίζω εις το επανιδείν και σύντομα. Τάσος (Dr.K. (talk) 03:16, 17 October 2008 (UTC))

Don't leave...

Listen adelphe, you're the bread and butter of WikiProject Greece. Though the editors there will try to pick up where you left off, know that everyone at the project admires you for your kindness and constructive edits. You're too good of a user and too decent of an administrator to give up now. Please don't leave just because of what happened between you and one inexperienced user.

Always know that you have the full support of your fellow hoplites. Take care. Deucalionite (talk) 13:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I just caught up with developments, and can't believe it. I have always considered Yannis to be one of the best editors in Wikipedia I've come across, both in terms of qualitative contributions and the zeal he has shown in forming WPGreece and keep it running. I really can't believe that a silly dispute that got blown out of proportion would lead to this. I just want to add my support and appreciation, and hope that in the end, we'll welcome you back. Best regards Yannis, Constantine ✍ 13:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I hope you reconsider Yanni. You the best Greek editor and one of the best on Wikipedia. Please reconsider and don't let a few people ruin everything you've done for Wikipedia. Kyriakos (talk) 07:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Greatest editor

		The Barnstar of WikiProject Greece
		I, Deucalionite, hereby give you this barnstar in honor of your great service to Hellenism and to Wikipedia as a whole. Your works as an editor and as an administrator have inspired barbarians such as myself to make positive contributions. Your vision of organizing Greeks and Philhellenes under one banner is more than a mere reality, it is a positive force to be reckoned with. Your powerful contributions are the envy of administrators and users alike. Your compassion and leadership qualities are what make you Yannismarou. You can choose to leave, but your legacy will never die. If ever you return, then you will be embraced by your kinsmen without question. Our Leonidas, our Alexander, our Belisarius, our Kolokotronis. All hail Yanni the Great!!! Deucalionite (talk) 13:39, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

(A little overdramatic, but you get the point. Deucalionite (talk) 13:39, 18 October 2008 (UTC))

Ασε...

...τις μαλακιούλες και γύρνα πίσω! Χαζοπαρεξηγημενούλι μου εσύ, που μου θες και παρακάλια για ένα κωλοσχόλιο στο ΑΝΙ! Λες και σ'είπανε καμπούρη πια! Άντε! :-) Niko Silver 19:32, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Λίγοι υπάρχουν σαν εσένα εδώ γύρω, Γιάννη. Καλή συνέχεια ό,τι και να αποφασίσεις, όμως. 3rdAlcove (talk) 18:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 23 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lamentatio sanctae matris ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae, which was dedicated to you at its creation. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Fut., and thank you all for your kind words. I said that I won't respond to the comments in my talk page, but I thought it was my obligation to say a huuuuuuge "thanks" to all of you. It is great to realize that you have so many wiki-friends. Great!--Yannismarou (talk) 20:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

And many more who have commented elsewhere; we miss you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I' ll second that for a second time and I will repeat it twice. You are most definately missed--Giorgos Tzimas (talk) 01:33, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

And a huuuuuuge affirmation of Giorgos' comments on my part. Tasos (Dr.K. (talk) 02:07, 1 November 2008 (UTC))

Reclaim your post Yanni for no other user could ever replace you. Deucalionite (talk) 17:19, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Should I say welcome back? It's getting lonely around here, you know! Pel thal (talk) 14:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

What? Discouraged? Come then to Βικιπαίδεια. I guarantee though that someone will come up there as well. They always do. (The link does not work, where is the archive of this ANI?)--FocalPoint (talk) 15:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Rollback feature

Hey there, i am on wikipedia since 2006. Now a days i find many times vandalism across it so can you please grant me the ability of rollback feature so that i can fight the vandalism here, i would be very thankful for your any other advice. BurhanAhmed (talk • contribs) 10:53, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Please take care in evaluating this request for rollback rights. The editor has not exhibited good judgement as can be seen from his history of bad speedy deletion tagging [1]. Also, the claim for being an editor since 2006 is completely at odds with his actual edit history showing an earliest edit of May 30, 2008. Note that lying is something this editor has done in the past with him claiming to have taken pictures with his own camera when they were taken frome the web. [2]. -- Whpq (talk) 15:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Although nor really active in WP lately, I thought it was my duty to thoroughly examine the request. What I noticed is that Burhan Ahmed has uploaded various pictures, which were later deleted. This is obviously problematic. His edit record indeed does not date back to 2006. On the other side, he is clean of blocks, but the fact that at least two users in good standing oppose his rollback request make me reluctant. I would like to see this request repeated in 2-3 months from now, so as all to be more sure that Burhan Ahmed has a full understanding of the WP policies, and will use the tools in the project's interest.--Yannismarou (talk) 21:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Constitution of the Roman Republic

Several months ago you reviewed my page, Constitution of the Roman Republic, to see if it might qualify for featured article status. Since then, I have had it promoted to good article status. I see that you are now semi-retired. If you are unable, do you know of anyone who might be able to look at this article, and let me know if it might be approaching FA quality? RomanHistorian (talk) 05:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)

The October 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) 01:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Twelve Olympians

I have some questions about the Twelve Olympians article. Specifically about your third edit to it on 29 January 2008 (the edit which you described as "any improvements to the wording are welcome; time to add the sources").

The article says "At Kos, Ares and Hephaestus are left behind, replaced by Heracles and Dionysus. Herodotus agrees with this and counts Heracles as one of the Twelve".

What does Herodotus agree with, specifically? Does he just agree that Heracles should be included among the Twelve Olympians? Or does he also think Dionysus should be included, and Ares and Hephaestus should be excluded? And if it's the former, then which of the classical twelve does he think should be excluded to make room for Heracles? I suspect that the answer is that it's the former, and he didn't specify which of the classical twelve should be excluded. That's fine, but I want to change the article to make that clear.

You are correct. It is indeed the former, without further specifications. I recognize that indeed by phrasing was flawed.--Yannismarou (talk) 14:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, you said, "Around 400 BC Herodotus included in his Dodekatheon the following deities: Zeus, Poseidon, Hera, Athena, Hermes, Apollo, Alpheus, Cronus, Rhea and the Charites." Which would imply that Herodotus didn't include Heracles as one of the Twelve Gods. That's repeated when you say, "For... Herodorus as well, Heracles is not one of the Twelve Gods, but the one who established their cult." But then you also say, "Herodotus... counts Heracles as one of the Twelve". So which is it? - Shaheenjim (talk) 20:15, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Hm! There is no contradiction. There is just a confusion between the historian Herodotus and the mythographer Herodorus.--Yannismarou (talk) 14:33, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, you said that Plato said something about Pluto. But I thought Plato was Greek and Pluto was Roman. So why would Plato be talking about Pluto? Wouldn't he have said Hades (the Greek equivalent to Pluto) instead? I saw the source you later cited for that says Pluto. Maybe it's a translation error. - Shaheenjim (talk) 17:51, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I do not think it is a translation error. Yes, "Hades" (Άδης) was the most common name of the Greek God of the underworld, but "Pluto" (Πλούτων) was also used by the ancient Greeks.--Yannismarou (talk) 14:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)

The November 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) 17:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

PR request

Hi Yannis. You always had exceptional reviews on the subject of characters in religious history. Could I ask you again for your help on the Calvin article? Many thanks and welcome back! --RelHistBuff (talk) 08:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Of course, you can!--Yannismarou (talk) 10:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Very glad to see you back here! Καλώς σε (ξανα)βρήκαμε! Many cheers, Constantine ✍ 13:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice to cu too! Although I must say that I am not really excited by what I see coming back. I intend to express my views in detail some time, but I am just feeling like this project not going exactly the way we wanted, and imagined it. The way the Arbcom voting goes on, the alliances and anti-alliances I see emerging in various domains, the tendency of dominance that certain bureaucratic elites within the project tend to show (convinced that they found the proper [or maybe the only available] field for power), the disgust expressed by highly qualified and visionary editors are among the things that seem problematic in our "virtual society". After all, is there anybody in this project still having in mind that this is an "Encyclopedia" and that our main goal is editing and spreading the knowledge, and not struggling for (collective or personal) power or setting a disgustingly complexe bureacratic structure and idiosyncrasie.--Yannismarou (talk) 13:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Sadly, I agree with you Yanni... Wiki is losing its way. Welcome back anyway. We can still have a vision and fight for it!

I've put our mission On Hold till your return. I also proposed Kyriakos to nominate it anyway for GA but he did not reply. What do you think? I think there's a lot of work we can do in WP:Greece now you're back!--Michael X the White (talk) 13:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I think the article is too close to GA status. As you may have seen I am already editing it whenever I can, but time is what I lack of!--Yannismarou (talk) 14:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Done! I've updated the relevant pages! I don't think there's a lot more to do in the article itself (probably a little "office work" as we'd say!).

Anyway, (commenting on your statement), I feel I need to say that some of the people you describe are lurking even here, in your own talk page, trying to use and expand their power... But I know you're already aware of that. -Michael X the White (talk) 16:32, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Μπα? Μας ξαναματάρθες? Άντε γιατί είχε χάσει η ... ! :-) Niko Silver 16:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Θεώρησα ότι ήταν σοβαρή η πρότασή σου να μου πάρετε

! Λάθος ε; Κρίμα, ρε γαμώτο.--Yannismarou (talk) 19:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Είναι επειδή ξεμείναμε από στοκ και μας έμεινε μόνο η διαφήμιση. Το ανέκδοτο που πάει ο τύπος στο διανυκτερεύον να ζητήσει οδοντόπαστα και του δίνει ο φαρμακοποιός τη διαφήμιση από τη βιτρίνα το ξέρεις? Niko Silver 23:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Έχει ο καιρός γυρίσματα

Καλώς γύρισες. Η φωτεινότητα του μέρους ανέβηκε σημαντικά. Ελπίζω έτσι να γυρίσει κάποτε κι' ο Γιώργος. Το κουίζ ήταν πολύ ωραίο. Με θερμούς χαιρετισμούς. Τάσος (Dr.K. (logos) 17:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC))

Civility

Yannismarou, it is uncivil to accuse other editors of trying to "distort reality".[3] Please try to ensure that your other comments at Talk:Law are about the article, and not about Mervyn Emrys (talk · contribs). If you have other comments which you wish to make about him personally, please take them to Mervyn's talkpage, and out of article space. Thanks, --El on ka 19:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I never accused him of "trying" to distort reality. He does not! I said that this is the "unintentional" result of his comments, and I insist on that. I am surprised by the (obviously wrong) way you have interpreted my comment, but such things happen. No problem! I agree, of course, that such comments should be kept away from the talk page, but I am afraid that you do not address this advice to the correct direction. Anyway, I praise you once again for your valuable interventions to this RfC, and for the useful mentorship you offer to a young (but with potential) user like Mervyn. Cheers!--Yannismarou (talk) 20:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Stamata Revithi

Hi Yannis. I took a look and it might need a copy-edit and some prose improvement before submission to FA. I think you would be better off going to peer review, getting some friends to comment on it (I will help out), and skipping GA if the queue is long. You might encounter some problems during FAC with the new clause in criterion 1b: places the subject in context. In my opinion, there is enough "contextual" material. Just want to mention though that articles with "just enough" material to meet the "comprehensive" criterion has stirred some controversy (e.g., Peter Wall, Mark Speight). I should also mention (for full disclosure) that I have advocated tightening of the FA standard on WT:FAC in order to deal with these types of articles. But I am clearly in the minority on this issue and the community does not want to raise the standard. With a little work, Stamata Revithi should easily make FA. --RelHistBuff (talk) 12:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments!--Yannismarou (talk) 12:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Yanni!As an admin, could you please protect my User Page from the constant vandalisation?? Please check this out as well: [4]. Thank you! --Michael X the White (talk) 14:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I was obviously too slow!--Yannismarou (talk) 18:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

It's ok! Thanks anyway!

How's our mission going?--Michael X the White (talk) 18:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Greeks

Yeia sou Yanni. Some months ago you kindly responded to my request to peer review the article Greeks. Your suggestions were written in Talk:Greeks/Archive4#Remarks. They have now been implemented. I would appreciate any advice you have on what the next steps should be in the process of taking this article for FA review. Eucharisto poly for your time and merry Christmas!--Xenovatis (talk) 20:54, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

God Jul with lots of food and the people you love around you! Και με ρέγουλα τα μελομακάρονα!... Pel thal (talk) 13:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Modern Greece template

I 've sketched a Topics-on-Modern-Greece-template to replace the History-of-Greece-template in articles related to modern Greece or modern Greek history. Could you take a look and make suggestions or edits? Thank you in advance. Ashmedai 119 (talk) 16:26, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)

The December 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) 05:26, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Excited

Sorry i haven't noticed before that you're back but i was studing (panellinies vlepeis...).Anyway i'm glad about it.Episeis sughora me pou sou antegrapsa tin shmiosh gia tis diadiloseis htan polu kalh gia na antista8w.TheJudge0791 (talk) 20:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Alexander the Great

There's a bounty of 250$ on Alexander the Great for bringing it to FA until 31 December 2009. I'm willing to try it and I would like to invite you to join because we did a very good job with Pericles.(I will start working on it in February) If you can recommend me any other editors who might be interested in helping with this massive task, I'm all ears. Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 12:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Hello Yanni, how are you?? Do you think our mission is ready now??? There was a rename without consensus in 2008 Greek riots. Please check out what's going on now! Talk:2008 Greek riots#2008 Greek riots,Talk:2008 Greek riots#End date. Thank you!!--Michael X the White (talk) 13:14, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Greek mythology: external link

Greek mythology
Hello, the page is protected and I want to add an external link:
either http://sites.google.com/site/grecoindian
or http://sites.google.com/site/grecoindian/Home/alexander
The subject is 'The impact of Greco-Indian Culture on Western Civilisation', encompassing how Greek mythology fused with Asian beliefs in Gandhara, to form new myths, which were then transmitted by ancient trade routes to China, India and the Greco-Roman world. I would appreciate your help in linking this sites to appropriate pages in Wikipedia. Thank you. Philo (talk) 12:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments requested

Hi Yanni. I have brought Calvin to FAC and as you participated in the PR, I would appreciate further comments. The article has changed a lot since you saw it on PR. Thanks for your help. --RelHistBuff (talk) 11:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The January 2009 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) 05:49, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Showcase

It's official. WikiProject Greece now has 200 DYK entries (44 FA, 7 FI, 3 A-class, 47 GA). Hooray! Deucalionite (talk) 16:35, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations Deuc!--Yannismarou (talk) 17:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Deucalionite (talk) 22:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Alexander

So far I have been discussing things. Next semester I've got a seminar on his personality so I'll have plenty of stuff. Wandalstouring (talk) 19:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)