Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:56, 6 July 2006

Your move of Armatoles

Hi, I have no strong opinion about where best to have that article (Armatoles is fine as an anglicised form, Armatoli seems uncommon, Armatoloi is fine too with me.) But your cut-and-paste moving of the contents was technically unclean, it destroys the page history and has also led to multiple double redirects. I'm requesting admin help to clean this up technically. No objection to the move content-wise on my side. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Cool down

Re , please stop your aggressive rhetorics. I'm not "destroying" articles, nor am I committing "vandalism". Unlike the things I delete, my additions are sourced. I'm going to have to revert some of the edits you made to Souliotes again. If you disagree, please make an attempt at discussing these things in a matter-of-fact way and bring reliable sources for whatever you want to claim. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:40, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead. I shall restore it to its correct form, ASAP. — Sshadow 14:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Please read Misplaced Pages:Edit wars. This is not how we work here on Misplaced Pages. If you try solving your problems by revert wars, you'll end up blocked pretty soon. So please use the talk page and argue and try to reach consensus.

Oh yes, and please stop deleting references to good reliable sources first (), and then complaining about the article being unsourced placing {fact} tags all over it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Albania and everything pertaining to it is a thing subsequent to 1913 (the year a country called Albania was set-up). You can't call their language (before 1913) Albanian. You can't call the Ottoman rulers "Albanian"; they weren't: they were Ottomans.

You get my point; don't you, chico? — Sshadow 15:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I get your point, but it is wrong. We are not talking about the Albanian nation, we are talking about the Albanian ethnicity, which has been called Albanian ever since the 13th century or so. And everybody in the modern literature calls the medieval settlers in Epirus and elsewhere Albanians. Live with it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:31, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and please watch out for the Three-reverts rule. You might get block faster than you think. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

And now for something completely different...

On an entirely different matter: Thank you for your good work on Andreas Empeirikos. Another of those cases where I wondered: wow, what a good idea for an article, why didn't we have one yet? But, it turns out, we did after all. There is already an article at Andreas Embirikos. Could you have a look how the material from your new article can best be merged into the old one? Seems we have a similar problem as with the Armatoloi/es again. Please don't hesitate to ask if you want assistance on how to best deal with this technically. Friendly collaboration, okay? Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:06, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Uhm, another thing

Sorry for bombarding you with all these notes - I just got curious about all those names of Greek people in your edit history. Unfortunately I found another problem: you copied Georgios Zavitzianos from an external website (). That counts as a copyright violation, and that means the article will unfortunately have to be deleted, especially since the source is a commercial website. Sorry about that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

P.S.: Same thing for Demetrios Kouretas, I'm afraid. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Heh. You're afraid? What are you afraid of? The petty copyright rules of Interbutt? — Sshadow 16:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh and you're into Greek surrealist poetry. That's really strange, chico. Gods... I hope you don't start doctoring these articles as well. — Sshadow 16:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Please read Misplaced Pages:Copyright FAQ and maybe also this. Copyright is taken very seriously here at Misplaced Pages, like it or not. Oh, and please read WP:CIVIL too.

We have a policy here of "not biting the newbies", otherwise I'd answer you differently. But I can't help noticing that within your short time here, you have:

• created at least two blatant copyright violations;
• engaged in a disruptive POV-pushing edit war including damaging of well referenced material and frivolous use of {fact} tags;
• created one unnecessary duplicate article;
• created a technical mess by an unclean copy-and-paste move of another article;
• engaged in totally unnecessary agressive incivilities against an editor of long good standing.

I'd say somebody needs to adjust their attitude here, ρε φίλε. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Souliotes

Sshadow, you really ought to start using the talk page and discuss things before you revert that passage again. There's some detailed argumentation there why that passage shouldn't be there; it is extremely poor style to simply revert nevertheless and not to comment on the arguments. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:27, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

What's your problem? — Sshadow 08:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. What's yours? Let's not talk about ourselves. Let's discuss the article. Why do you think the Cataclysm has anything to do with Souliotes? (Suggest we keep the discussion here on a single page, okay?) -- Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

What's your problem with my contribution to the etymology of the Suliotes. — Sshadow 08:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It's just that they aren't about the etymology of the Souliotes. As explained in great detail on the talk page. This is stuff that might go into a Selloi article, or in the Names of the Greeks article (it already is). The whole set of ancient quotations becomes relevant to the etymology of "Souli" only from the moment onwards that we have a reliable reference that any serious modern scholar believes the name Souli to be related to that of the Selloi. Which I highly doubt. And even then, the ancient attestations of "Selloi" would better be kept in their own article. Here we only need to know that the word "Selloi" existed in antiquity, which is uncontroversial. And as far as that goes, the salvagable elements of that paragraph had already been integrated otherwise in the article, you were duplicating them. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if they have anything to do with it. It's a mythological event that took place in the living-area of the Souliotes. Why shouldn't I include information about the mythology of the area that's called Souli nowadays? You had some stuff about the oral tradition of the Albanians (Arvanites?) there the other day; a relative new element in the area.

Following your reason: an inexisted Albanian (so a linguist says) word meaning 'mountain summit' is of greater value than the name of the people inhabiting the area millenia ago. — Sshadow 09:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Please look up what Etymology means. Hint: Mythological events that happened to have taken part in the area where a word is used are not part of it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Mythology lies in the roots of the collective subconscious of a people; it's the foundation of the people's history. Something much more genuine than, say, the ramblings of a linguist or the agenda of a state/nation marketer.

Anyhow, I believe we need the opinion of other people on the matter. Be patient, User:future present etc — Sshadow 09:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Want an article RfC? They usually don't trigger too much response, but we could try it, of course. But maybe it would be better to first try to clarify a bit further between us where the differences lie. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, just to clarify some other things: It was you who claimed the Albanian root was non-existent - where did you look it up? Babiniotis is the most authoritative source on Modern Greek etymologies currently available; he states it as an indisputed fact; as long as we have no dissenting voice there really is no reason not to follow him. As for the oral-history bit: That was oral history not of some Arvanites or Albanians, it was the attested oral tradition of the Souliotes, as noted down by 19th-century observers. I don't insist on it, it's probably legendary anyway. (And Biris isn't a terribly reliable author either, but probably better than that Fangridis guy.) As for the ancient mythology and the collective subconscious: WP:NOR. If you can find a source that says the myth of the cataclysm or whatever is relevant to who the Souliotes were, you're welcome to include it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Links to Greek Misplaced Pages

Hi, Could you please stop providing links to non-existant Greek pages on particular subjects. This is against Misplaced Pages policy - articles in other langauges have to exist before any you can provide links to them. --Damac 14:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Elaborate damac. — Sshadow 15:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

At the Ezra Pound article, for example. You added a link to a Greek page on the subject although it clearly doesn't exist. There are more examples, you know what I'm talking about, and you should revert them.--Damac 16:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The deathface of kontrol

I and comrades plan to write the el:articles in the following days. Get off my face. Who are you spending your time snooping over our backs for misplaced commas and the shadow of pagan penises going all the way allah's rotten anus. Little snoop. Ha! I didn't know Misplaced Pages was turning into a corporation. . . a power structure with deadlines, übercontrol and the like. Oh I didn't know! Honestly. — Sshadow 16:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)