User talk:Matia.gr/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

old stuff: User talk:Matia.gr/Archive 1, User talk:Matia.gr/Archive 2, User talk:Matia.gr/Archive 3

Contents

[edit] vote for Alexander

he has now 8 votes! go and vote also! --Bonaparte talk 16:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not gonna vote before he accepts his nomination. Check DBachmann's comments on Alexander's page. +MATIA ☎ 16:49, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Macedonia (Greece)

Hi. It seems to me that just about every article that touches upon Macedonia at all is in a constant state of change, with lots of editors being unhappy about it. I think that it would help if we could get some facts into the articles with proper citations. I'd like you to help me out by telling me what facts you would like to see in the article. If all of the effort that went into arguing about what is neutral went into research, I think that we would get closer to WP:NPOV. Jkelly 17:52, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I've tried that in the past, it didn't work and it gave me too much wikistress. I'll try to give you proper citations within the next days (I've tagged the article so that someone might help). I'm trying to ignore the ugly things I've seen in RoM related articles and improve the Greece-related articles, but to see changes like those in Macedonia (Greece) while knowing what happened in RoM-related articles is difficult for me. The Macedonia (Greece) has many external links that will not verify for example the "existance" of Ber or Kostur. Thanks. +MATIA ☎ 18:01, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I do wonder whether it's worth including the Slavic place names in that article - it strikes me as being more of an attempt to wind up the Greek editors, rather than a worthwhile effort to give bilingual names. I'll have a think about it and post some comments in due course. What do you think? -- ChrisO 00:42, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
I've removed them once. I cannot understand their place in that article and I can't find a reason that justifies them. Maybe I'm wrong or missing something, but I can't figure it out. +MATIA ☎ 00:59, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Theotokos

Although I'm technically on wikiholiday, I'd be happy to help with this page. Did you have any part in particular that you wanted help with? User:JHCC (talk) 22:14, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Guitar wood

Hi Matia.gr - I changed the link to redcedar on the basis of Badagnani's comments ([1], now at the end of my 3rd talk archives) that Thuja plicata (Western Redcedar) is the wood used, which is not a cedar (Cedrus) - MPF 21:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I'll look into it. What I can tell you from memory is that Cedar is used in, rather low or middle cost, classical guitars and its main characteristic is volume. +MATIA ☎ 12:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks; the problem is that are a lot of woods are erroneously sold as 'cedar', even though they aren't, so one needs to be very careful over the actual wood identification - MPF 12:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I haven't thought of it before, but you are right and we'll have to be careful, if WP is an encyclopedia :) +MATIA ☎ 12:26, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tedernst / Macedonia (disambiguation)

I'm not sure what your message means. I did de-link United States because that link isn't being disambiguated. I also removed descriptions or towns or villages in the United States that aren't necessary because each of them is in a different state. The extra text is just distracting. Do you have another opinion about this? Tedernst | talk 06:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

exces wikilinks, the style guide is to me very clear that state & south-eastern Europe should not be linked on a dab page because they don't help to distinguish the articles in question, they only clutter things up, do you have a different understanding? perhaps this belongs on the MoS:DP talk page? Tedernst | talk 16:56, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I had written my thoughts at your talk page. Let's leave it for now. Take care. +MATIA ☎ 17:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] a notice from Izehar

Matia, have you seen this: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#CDThieme sockpuppetry? Izehar (talk) 11:32, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I've encountered Via Egnatia, NoAccount and CDThieme many times on various Macedonia related articles, but I didn't knew they are related. That's a strange surprise. +MATIA ☎ 11:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Guitar editing

Sure, Guitar seems to be a real mess now. I'm trying to build a good encyclopedic-like infrastructure, all about guitars in wikipedia, I've introduced a few categories and standards lately. Guitar just needs a major rewrite, really...

--GreyCat 16:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree for a rewrite of the See also section. The rest need small improvements, in my opinion. For example I think that Guitar should list very few "Significant Guitarists", only those who influenced the guitar development (for example Aguado, or Van Hallen), and have a link to Guitarist and List_of_guitarists (those two are a real mess indeed, but let's see what we can do with Guitar first). +MATIA ☎ 17:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
As far as things going, "See also" went to a separate article - that's good for now. We'll deal with it later, I guess. I'm trying to start "Guitar parts and accessories" category and file the separate articles for all guitar components. Any objections? --GreyCat 14:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] one more notice by Izehar

No, but I have read Wikipedia:Disambiguation and WP:NPOV. Izehar (talk) 18:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Makedonia Airport

Oops, well spotted. I look forward to someone excavating an Ancient Greek air control tower... ;-) -- ChrisO 19:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

lol. That was a good one. It reminded me a joke: An Egyptian went to a Greek and said "Our civilization is older than yours. We found telephone lines under the Sphinx", and the Greek replied "Well, we didn't find anything like that under the Parthenon, because they were using mobile phones". +MATIA ☎ 19:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Do you think they allowed IFR? Or were ancient aircraft restricted to VFR? Do you need a type certification to fly winged horses?  :) Jamie 22:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Presumably Pegasus would have counted as a STOL aircraft... -- ChrisO 22:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Bellerophon almost got himself shot down (don't listen to the fames for a mere sting by a fly), but Athena saved him. +MATIA ☎ 22:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Macedonian (disambiguation)

I changed only the demographics section - which I explained in the talk page, even you participated in the talks back then. I don't know who changed the history section (I haven't touched it). As for Greek Macedonians - I told you you could write anything you wish but in English it sounds more like the members of the Macedonian Slav minority in Greece rather than a regional identification of someone who has a Greek national identity... VMORO 13:05, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I dont understand your change in the demographics section. If possible, please analyse it to me here. Thanks. +MATIA ☎ 17:18, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm starting to see your point. +MATIA ☎ 17:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Macedonia

well,there is a difference between "greek Macedonia" and "greek region of Macedonia" which they who revert know it very well.Why we dont say "greek Thessaly" instead of "greek region of Thessaly"; -- Makedonas

I don't exactly understand it, and it is very likely that those who revert you don't understand it either. As far as I can tell Greeks used and are using the term Macedonia. What exactly helps the addition of the words "region of"? +MATIA ☎ 10:09, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Having thought about it some more, I think I see where Makedonas is coming from. Greek Macedonia could be interpreted as meaning "the Greek portion of Macedonia", while "Greek region of Macedonia" could be read as "Macedonia, a Greek region". In other words, it could that Makedonas is trying a subtle form of POV-pushing - seeking to associate the name Macedonia exclusively with the Greek region, rather than "sharing" it with other countries ("Bulgarian Macedonia", "FYROM Macedonia" etc). -- ChrisO 15:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
It looks like the opposite to me. Don't know :) +MATIA ☎ 16:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Matia, what's going on on Talk:Macedonian (disambiguation)? The discussions seem to be going around in circles. Izehar (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Matia, sorry for me butting in like that, but I'm thinking of running for the WP:MC in the future, and I was looking for practice. Izehar (talk) 21:46, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

May I give an advice? +MATIA ☎ 21:47, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Certainly. Izehar (talk) 21:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Have patience (too much patience), check the sources (or search for more), and examine them with patience (I'm talking generally, not only about those articles). Take care. +MATIA ☎ 21:51, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Izehar (talk) 21:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] linguistics terms

well, imho, all linguistics terms should at least redirect somewhere; we do have affricate, however. We also have List of phonetics topics, but I am no great friend of list articles; such groupings can be done by categorization. regards, dab (ᛏ) 21:44, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Lists can have benefits that categories lack. Lists remind me the many appendixes (aka more than one indexes) that good books have. Thanks for your help. +MATIA ☎ 21:46, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Apantisi

Ego aplws evala tous syndesmous sto arthro Names of the Greeks. Nomizw pws tsekarisa tous syndesmous alla den thymamai. Yparxei provlhma; - Deucalionite 12/12/05 12:28 P.M. EST

[edit] Coins

Hi Matia. Please see User talk:BD2412#Image:Amyntas_III-161113.jpg. Basically, you can remove the CNG tag, and add a {{PD-ineligible}} or {{PD-old}} tag.-Splashtalk 17:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] why?

Why? Tedernst | talk 19:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

That vague question can have at least two answers. 1) Because unintentionally you vandalised that phrase, and/or 2) because the term periphery has a certain meaning that is needed in that context. +MATIA ☎ 19:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't get it. Why does the definition of the word perifery have any bearing on a user being able to find the article that s/he's looking for? Tedernst | talk 19:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

When "I don't get it" I discuss first and then edit. What is a periphery? Is it a term widely used? Are there more peripheries? Should there be hyper-text links that would help a reader find out a strange word in a line describing an article at a list?

What is your opinion about the difference between an official policy and a guideline? +MATIA ☎ 19:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

This is no longer a policy or guideline issue for me. The issue is, if I'm a user, what's going to help me find what I'm looking for and what's not. If the link to periphery helps, then it should stay. If not, then it should go. I don't see how it's helpful to have the link. Could you explain? In fact, I'd go further to say that I don't see how it's helpful to have the word there at all. Please explain how it helps a reader find the correct article among many choices with similar names? Tedernst | talk 19:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Can you please explain to me how you understand that part of the MoS?

And which one of these makes it easier for the user to find her intended target? Tedernst | talk 20:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I think that the 3 last links have a common term and attribute. If you check older version of the page through history you'll see that it was something like

The word periphery describes those articles therefore is needed. But what is a periphery? ;)

The definition is irrelevant. This page is to help figure out where I really wanted to go if I end up on the page from a link or a search. If I'm really looking for Central Macedonia] but I think it's called Macedonia, then the periphery doesn't help me find it. Do you disagree? Tedernst | talk 20:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Btw, the difference between a guideline and an official policy, is that the later is a must-do, while a guideline is a suggestion. +MATIA ☎ 20:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and so what? What difference does this distinction make in our conversation now? None, I say, as long as we agree the purpose of a disambiguation page is to help the user find the intended article. Tedernst | talk 20:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

You may check the top (it says was) of Talk:Macedonia_(disambiguation). A definition of any article is needed to understand what is the one (periphery) and what is the other (province). +MATIA ☎ 20:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Two things. One, we're not talking about a previous version of the page. Two, please address what I've said about helping the user find the intended article. Tedernst | talk 20:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Let me repeat it then: a definition (or a summary if you prefer) of any article in a list, is needed to help the user choose a periphery, a state, a province, a region, or whatever else he or she may be looking for. Please check the top of that talk page. The old version had 4 lines and it will help you understand better the periphery vs province issue. Thanks. +MATIA ☎ 20:40, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

What? I've looked at the talk page. So what? There are no states, provinces, regions or anything else listed as being inside Macedonia (Greece), the region. There are 3 subdivisions. What difference does it make if those are called peripheries? Tedernst | talk 20:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] peripheries

Tedernst, after my discussion below with Izehar, I want to apologise to you too, for using the term vandalism when describing a blanking of some words. I gave weight to the word unintentionally (where I meant that you Acted in Good Faith) but probably the term vandalism has a "bad faith" definition. In that one line of the disambiguation page, 4 articles are listed and disambiguated. Don't you think that some description of each article is needed? +MATIA ☎ 20:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I accept your apology. I took no offense.
We have two issues with this entry, I believe. One is with the wikilink for the word "peripheries." As of right now, there is no link. Does this lack of link make it more difficult for users to find the page they want?
The other issue is the description of these peripheries. In my mind (not necessarily everyone's I understand, just mine), the words "consisting of" are all the description we need. No matter what these divisions are called, we know that they are parts of the regiona in northern Greece. I am willing to be convinced that the word peripheries is somehow needed here, but so far no one has attempted to do so. Tedernst | talk 21:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I think you gave me an idea, I'll leave a comment at the article's talk page (perhaps tomorrow). Thanks! +MATIA ☎ 21:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] comment by Izehar on vandalism's definition

Comment: You cannot unintentionally vandalise. The definitive characteristic of vandalism is bad faith. A bona fide edit, however damaging or bad is not vandalism; an editor who genuinly believes (s)he is improving the encyclopaedia by making an edit cannot have that edit labeled vandalism. Therefore, to use legal jargon, a mens rea is required for vandalism. If there is no bad faith, there is no vandalism. See Wikipedia:Vandalism:

Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia.

I'm telling you this, because you have accused me of vandalism in the past and have done the same to Tedernst now, and I think you may have the wrong idea or are misusing the term. Izehar (talk) 19:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Izehar see the part of the definition that relates Vandalism with the removal of accurate information. +MATIA ☎ 19:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Still though: any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. You can label it an unjustified edit or a bad edit, but it does not qualify as vandalism. If you think you are improving the encyclopaedia, you cannot be vandalising. I see you haven't been on RC patrol - I have spent hours there, and I can assure you, you are using the term wrongly in this case. This is a more accurate example of vandalism - the editor I reverted clearly had no good faith. Izehar (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Dear Izehar, I've written "unintentionally vandalised". Unintentionally=Acting in Good Faith. Could you please give me a better word, than the term vandalism that is so many times used in WP for blanking of phrases or whole articles. And no "bad edit" or "unjustified" would be a worst term because they relate to bad faith.

I can also let you know that though I'm not listed (intentionally) in any patrol group, I've been reverting tests, sneakies and graffiti vandalisms for a very long time, but I most interested in expanding articles than doing RC Patrol (it would stress me very much to do your job all the time). +MATIA ☎ 20:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Nevertheless, I think you labeled me and Tedernst wrongly (unintentionally vandalised=oxymoron). An act of vandalism as defined by the policy requires an element of bad faith. According to the guideline you pointed out:

This guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary. Things which can cause the loss of good faith include vandalism, personal attacks, and edit warring.

The only way your accusation against me and Tedernst would be accurately placed would be if you had a good reason to believe that we were acting out of bad faith. If you did, please tell me what it is: perhaps I have engaged in vandalism in the past, or edit-warred... Izehar (talk) 20:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

If you really believe that I called you a vandal I apologise. However I cannot understand why you drag this so much. Can you please give me a better term than vandalism for the removal of accurate phrases from articles, so I won't do the same mistake in the future? Note: I refered to your yesterday edit as vandalism link and I must also note that with your edit summary you were refering to me. +MATIA ☎ 20:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I know, I just saw the talk page, and it looks like I'm giving you the third degree. It's just that it may be viewed as persistent personal attacks if you accuse other editors of vandalism when it's obvious they have no intent to "damage the integrity on the encyclopaedia" as the policy puts it. It may be best to state your opposition to an edit, give your reasons and leave it at that. That's what I do (it stops people wikilawyering attacks at you). Maybe you could call "good faith vandalism" something like "misguided edits", that's what Wikipedia:Vandalism uses. Also, I was refering to you in the ES because you were the only one advocating it on the talk page. Take care. Izehar (talk) 20:42, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

"Misguided edits" indeed sound better. Thanks, I'll look into it. By the way, I must note that from our previous discussions here on my talk page I thought we had a good relationship, and I must apologise again for my misuse of the term vandalism. +MATIA ☎ 20:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

:-) Izehar (talk) 20:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

+MATIA is hereby awarded this Barnstar as late recognition for all his brilliant contributions to Wikipedia. !מזל טוב from Izehar.
+MATIA is hereby awarded this Barnstar as late recognition for all his brilliant contributions to Wikipedia.

!מזל טוב

from Izehar.

Wow Matia, thanks! This now makes the barnstar I just gave you look boring and ordinary ;-) I'll have to come up with a unique barnstar to stop me looking like a "dullin". Izehar (talk) 00:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

The happy thought (as Peter Pan could have said) is what counts and not the design :) +MATIA ☎ 00:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfA

Could you please explain to me your phrase "Feel free to make your stand on this RfA." Thanks. (note: my english aren't advanced and I'm not sure I understand what you mean) +MATIA ☎ 00:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I want him to either accent the nomination, or dismiss it. --Anittas 00:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

So that comment was for Bogdan? By the way, I think he'll become an admin (and probably with that nomination) and I really hope for the things I've written. +MATIA ☎ 00:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, LOL, that comment was directed to Bogdan. I wanted him to clarify his stand (his decission) on whether he accepts the nomination. He recently accepted the nomination. Additionally, I think you're being too harsh in your judgement. I didn't see him say anything bad in those edits. --Anittas 01:01, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

If he weren't confused with the template (which I had forgotten, and find it rather insignificant), I wouldn't mention in public those two things. The FOPOG joke he used to make a point, had the opposite effect when I saw it on my watchlist (fYRoM might be a similar acronym, but it is used internationally). At the other article, Bogdan reverted the addition of a link with sample texts of a book that supported a POV that he disagreed with (I acknowledge however that after some discussions he accepted that addition). +MATIA ☎ 01:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

There you go, it was no big deal. :) --Anittas 01:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Translation needed

I'm sorry to bother you, but, if you happen to have some spare time, would you be willing to translate Ano Dorio into English? Don't worry if it doesn't turn out perfectly, as someone else, including me, would be happy to help polish it once it is translated. Thanks for considering it. Jkelly 03:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I would also be happy to polish it. I thought about translating it, but I think this needs a native speaker. Despite its name, it appears to be related to the Greek War of Independence] Jamie 03:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think my english are that good (I've been looking for help at Talk:Theotokos) but I've translated the half article and I'm guessing (though I cannot verify it neither from what I know nor from the article) that this is the history of a village called Ano Dorio. Perhaps this can help. I've google searched the greek text and it doesn't seem to be a copy-vio from a site. +MATIA ☎ 11:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Oops, it is copied and the author is probably a school student (Γυμνάσιο = secondary school?) named Ελένη Κούκη. I cannot know what sources she used. Should I continue the translation and then you could re-write it to avoid the copy-vio? (and we will mention the website as reference). PS the first google search (with phrases of the article) was unsuccesfull so I initially thought it wasn't a copy-paste, but I clicked a couple of links of the search for Σουλιμοχώρια and I saw the text. +MATIA ☎ 11:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Hm. Well, the author of the original may well be the person who pasted it here. By the time you finish translating it, and someone else re-writes the thing, it is likely that there won't be a lot of resemblance to the original anyway. It's unlikely that our article on this town will begin in the year 1821, for instance. And, thanks Matia. Jkelly 17:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Matia. Yes, it would likely need to be rewritten after translation to avoid the copyright inherent in a derivative work. Jkelly speculates above that the poster here may be the original author, but we can't really work on that basis without some evidence; even a half-formed note on the talk page would give us something to go by. The trouble with allowing people to edit the copyvio away is that the intervening revisions would still be copyvio that we have no right to display the unoriginal parts of. Perhaps the best course of action is for you to offline translate it, then post a simple stub over the top of the copyrighted material. If you can, Google around for some sources to back up a few of the other facts in the article, since facts cannot be copyrighted: only their presentation can be. Normally, we would remove the copyrighted revisions from the history, but we don't do that if, for example, the copyvio only occupies a part of the history. In that case, the copyright owner needs to make legal noises for them to be removed. -Splashtalk 23:04, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I really doubt we can find more sources online for Soulimochoria (-choria means villages in greek) see this (also posted above). Perhaps we could summarise or rewrite it as part of the history section of the village Ano Dorio? +MATIA ☎ 23:16, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Should I add the source as reference (external link at the buttom)? +MATIA ☎ 23:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] About the sun of Vergina

Hello!I m Yiannis.I m from Kozani(West Macedonia).The flag with Vergina's sun is used from the peripheries of West,Central and East Macedonia and Thrace.Apart from that I see the flag in the prefectures and in the municipalities of Macedonia together with the greek flag and the EU flag.I thing it is fair to locate the sun in the page of macedonia(greek region).User talk:makedonas

Thanks Yianni. Can you get a photo of the flag at a municipality? (a periphery or a prefecture would be even better). Any photo that shows the building and the three flags. Thanks for the info. +MATIA ☎ 15:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

xellou!ginetai na grafo ellinika,e?(greeklish mallon).Loipon traviksa autes apo tin nomarxeia tis kozanis.Den kserw an kanoun.Ena tetarto perimena na fysiksei...

Image:Kozani's prefecture.jpg
EU,greek and vergina's sun flag in the building of Kozani's prefecture
Image:Prefecture of kozani.jpg
prefecture of Kozani


BRAVO!!! :D You are quick and you are really good! +MATIA ☎ 16:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

thanks.den ta katalavainw kai poly auta me ta tag ktl kane oti thes..:)egw evala mia foto sti selida kozani prefecture kai mia sti selida vergina sun.

Ξανά μπράβο!!! +MATIA ☎ 17:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Bravo indeed! Very well done, Makedonas. -- ChrisO 19:28, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Apantisi II

Sygnwmh. Nomiza pws milouses gia tous eswterikous syndesmous sto arthro Names of the Greeks. Nomiza aplws pws ebala kapoio lathos eswteriko syndesmo kai prepei na to thiorthwsw. Twra katalavainw pws milouses gia tous exwterikous syndesmous. Gia autous tous syndesmous, oxi then tous eixa thiavasei. Ama vrw thn wra tha ta thiavasw. Euxaristw. Milhse mou ama yparxei tipote allo pou xreiazesai. Terma (h telos) kai exw (Over and out). - Deucalionite 12/13/05 10:22 A.M. EST

Ευχαριστώ για τις απαντήσεις (πράγματι δεν ήμουν σαφής στο πρώτο μήνυμα και δικαιολογημένα μπερδεύτηκες). Ναι, όταν βρεις χρόνο διάβασέ τους, νομίζω θα βρεις πολλές ενδιαφέρουσες πληροφορίες. +MATIA ☎ 15:27, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Names of the Greeks: Me vs. Aldux

I appreciate your efforts to ensure that all contributors are respected and that the article moves forward. Just so you know, I am not bothered at all with your removal of the paragraphs I have written against Aldux. Yet, do not forget that it was Aldux who started with this whole argument and truly offended me. He has yet to apologize for his remarks.

Aldux is disrespectful and therefore I have no respect for him unless he apologizes. However, you have my word that I will no longer argue with Aldux and end up hindering the progress of the article's content.

Keep in mind that if I am mocked by Aldux or anyone else again for asinine reasons or for reasons entailing my level of intelligence, then I will express myself defensively without hindrance (being that I have an automatic mentality where I react quickly toward negative stimuli).

Anyway, take a look at the two sources I left in the discussion page. You will see that my statements pertaining to the Romaic identity being dualistic are not false. Like I said, I am all for historical accuracy. My methods may be different in how I conduct research or provide information (being that I have studied sociology and communications), but in the end I make sure that people are aware of actual historical and social events.

Thank you for your contributions in the discussion page and thank you for understanding where I was coming from. Again, you have my word of honor that I will not be a detriment to the article's content. If I forget (being that my memory is not so good), then please kindly remind me. Take care. Over and out. - Deucalionite 12/14/05 5:53 P.M. EST

[edit] Article

I am sorry MATIA, but I have to go. Is it alright with you if I provide any missing data from the website [2] I cited to the Wikipedia article another time? - Deucalionite 12/14/05 6:01 P.M. EST

Don't worry, we'll discuss the article at your talk page. Take care! +MATIA ☎ 23:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I have been through an ArbCom case and I am on a personal attack parole. This means if I say something bad to someone, even if he calls me I don't know what, I'll get a block. That experience gave me stress and I've learned, perhaps with the hard way, that personal attacks is a very bad thing that doesn't help our voluntary work as wikipedians. Having said that I hope you'll understand that everyone should respect Wikipedia:Wikiquette. I'm really gratefull (or whatever this is spelled) that my removal of those phrases didn't annoyed you.

I believe that even outside wikipedia, you must have noticed that people rarely say "I'm sorry" but good people acknowledge their mistake and apologise indirectly. The best thing one can do here, is ignore a personal comment (or perhaps a possibly personal comment) and focus in working the article. Perhaps you had a rough start with Aldux, but I really believe he is a good editor. And from what I have seen you are a good editor too. You must notice that he also agreed that the term Roman took the meaning of orthodox (aka not-heretical) Christian and he said he'll look up a source. And because I have edited articles with him before, I know that he 'll accept sources. Even if you do know something that for example I don't know, you should bring a reliable source that I'll might be able to check to verify that you are correct.

Someone said "The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has occurred" and I believe that with your studies you'll understand that oxymoron. So even if we are experts on a topic, we are expected to bring verifiable and reliable sources. And it is wise to assume good faith for our fellow editors. Having said these I suggest we 'll discuss the article at your talk page. +MATIA ☎ 23:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ancient Greek phonology

Thank you for finding the Greek sources. This is important for showing the the reconstructed phonology is also the theory accepted by Greek academia. This seems not to be an issue at the moment, but can be in the future. Andreas 23:26, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

You are welcome :) +MATIA ☎ 23:30, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi Matia, you asked me to have a look at the Xatzidakis texts you uploaded, right? [[3]] Great you dug those out. I'm finding it rather hard to read in those photographs, though, so I'm afraid I won't go through it all now. If you have any particular bit in there that you want taken notice of or commented on, please just point me to the page. Lukas 16:38, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re:news

I've stated my opinion in Talk:Macedonia (Greece). I guess we would never wholehartedly agree on the naming issue :). I don't know what to say about the disambiguation pages, I think that they are quite OK at this moment. As for the Greek related articles, could you please tell me specifically what articles are being vandalized? --FlavrSavr 16:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it vandalism but it is a problem. Check Makedon45 or Bomac's contribs. I'll check your aswer at the relavant talk page too, thanks. +MATIA ☎ 16:59, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Look, I really cannot be responsible for every ethnic Macedonian contributor's actions :). My primary concern was the naming issue of Macedonians/Macedonian Slavs, and/or present situation concerning human rights - and I've deliberately avoided engaging in historical debates. I've also concentrated on few articles, namely: Macedonians (ethnic group) and Republic of Macedonia - this is a reflection of my limited spare time. I really don't know about that Simovski thing - I thought you were talking about the naming issue? I'm not sure I want to get involved in that dispute... --FlavrSavr 23:32, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Of course not dear friend, everyone is responsible for what he does :) I'm just looking for ideas. Thanks for your input :) +MATIA ☎ 23:36, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Apories

Opos tha exeis diapistosei eimaste oi monoi pou exoun apomeinei gia na epitiroun tous sovinistes se autin tin "engyclopaidia". Opos tha exeis epipleon diapistosei, to xanoume siga-siga to paixnidi logo arithmitikis yperoxis ton antipalon mas. Kata ti gnomi mou i moni lysi i opoia tha mas edine elpides na epibaloume tin taksi mia gia panta, tha itan na exoume enan administratora me to meros mas, i akoma kalytera enan apo emas. Mias kai auto den einai tou parontos, den mas menei para na organothoume os aploi xristes me skopo na epityxoume kati aksiologo. Miskin 18:15, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Φίλε μου μην τα βλέπεις έτσι. Έχε υπομονή. Εφόσον (θεωρητικά) ισχύει το WP:NPOV και το WP:NOT μπορούμε να ελπίζουμε για την πρακτική εφαρμογή τους. Μην επιτρέπεις να σε καταβάλουν. Κάνε ένα ωραίο Χριστουγεννιάτικο διάλειμμα, ή έστω μην ασχολείσαι προς το παρόν με αυτά τα θέματα. Μόνο με ηρεμία και υπομονή λύνονται. Έχω υπόψη διάφορους αξιολογότατους επιστήμονες (όχι μόνο ιστορικούς), αλλά κάνω υπομονή. Αν το παρατραβήξουν θα παρουσιάσω πολύ πιο σοβαρά έργα από τον Σιμόβσκι που κοτσάρανε. Αλλά πρέπει να έχεις υπομονή και να μη δώσεις καμία αφορμή. Μην επιτρέψεις στον εαυτό σου να πάρει στα σοβαρά την κατάσταση και να εκνευριστεί. Πίστεψέ με πολύς κόσμος παρακολουθεί τα άρθρα που έχεις υπόψη, αλλά δε θέλει να μπλέκει σε καβγάδες. Πιστεύω πως ούτε εσύ θες κάτι τέτοιο, γι' αυτό μην παρασύρεσαι από τις προκλήσεις τους. Από όσο ξέρω το NPOV ισχύει, μένει να εφαρμοστεί και στην πράξη. talk to +MATIA 18:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

And remember apart from WP:NPOV, to use reliable sources, that's the best part, isn't it?

[edit] please help

Matia, I have filed an RfAr against User:deeceevoice, but I do not think it is reasonable for her to attack me (and wikipedia in general) on her user page. She hasn't mentioned me by name but since this a reaction to her RfAr its pretty safe to assume her comments about folks filing them is about me. I cannot believe it is OK to imply I am engaging in a "lynch party", it is awful and I am very hurt by the implication that I am some sort of a racist murderer. I have put up with her supporters calling me a racist -- merely for filing an RfA! -- but this is more than I can take. I don't see any reason why this should be in wikipedia. I don't know what can be done other than waiting for the RfAr to complete but this is nastier than anything I have seen here. Please, if you can do anything, please, get rid of this. -Justforasecond 01:50, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

If, while talking to you she associated you (even indirectly) with "lynch parties", then provide some links (diffs) to the ArbCom. Beside that my only suggestion is what a friend had said to me, long time ago: "don't let wikipedia get you down". talk to +MATIA 01:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I have gotten myself in quitte a mess in German irc. :( I mentioned my administratorship request there; and they got that as advertising. I saw the other users put blantly on talk pages (even mine) that, so I didn't know the actual rule. I guess I won't be welcomed on German wiki-irc any more. :) HolyRomanEmperor 17:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/t/User_talk%7EMatia.gr_Archive_4_add8.html"