Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:36, 28 March 2008

Hi, you don't have to write here that you've sent me an email, I check my email all the time.

/Archive 1 (16 March 2006 - 19 December 2006)

/Archive 2 (20 December 2006 - 10 January 2008)

Slavic Names in Greek cities

Point me to where this consensus is documented. Parallel and historic names are always placed in articles: like Greek ones in Turkey and elsewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean. Without seeing where this consensus is documented, it's hard to assess whether there really is a consensus or whether consensus has changed. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Aha, I have discovered the policy and everything I have done is as requested by it: Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (geographic names) - read it carefully where alternative prior names are welcome in the lead paragraph. I will not revert myself as you request. Further, a reversion by you would be contra the policy, and viewed as destructive. If you don't like the policy, discuss it at the relevant talk page. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to Krya Vrysi, Pella‎ has been reverted per policy, your sarcastic edit summary seems to indicate a malevalent motive. You should not make personal attacks. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Escalate it wherever you please. The policy I cite gives the instructions that what I have done is proper and what you have done is not. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Feel free. As for Propogandist Book, on what basis do you make that claim? Most of the Greek cities are sourced to Greek sources, are you sure that these are unbiased to the same level you have Slavic sources. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:23, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

He probably has a point of view; all authors do to some extent, especially authors who like to gloss over the population exchange between Greece & Turkey that occurred in the 1920's. All of the name forms in the book seem confirmed everywhere I looked - I am not using his descriptions or characterizations of what happened and historic population figures - but these would likely be confirmed as well, because they are cited to various Greek sources such as the laws by which each place's name was changed. Whatever point of view the author has for writing his book or by which he wants to show that Slavs were first or whatever is all bulls---. It's just the parallel names that are of interest to me, and there is little dispute that most places in the Balkans have Greek, Latin, Slavic, Turkish, and probably other names: Albanian, Romanian, French, German, English, Illyrian, etc. It bears no moment as to who was where first. If you can find sources that show older forms still from the Byzantine times, Roman Empire, Alexander's Empire or the follow-on states, say, those can be put in also. Only very sensitive readers will see anything more than adding encyclopedic - and relatively undisputable - content to articles. After all, I am neither Greek nor Turkish nor Slav nor Balkan in any way - and I have no trouble adding Latin and other earlier forms to places in Spain. Spain was ruled from Rome - yes, the brave among us will acknowledge that; the wise will embrace what Rome left us. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 04:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (geographic names) was forged as a giant compromise with input from everyone including one of the most ardent pro-Turkish editors around here who eventually was cajolled to accept the Greek names on Turkish cities, villages, and rivers, lakes, etc. It isn't to prove who was where first - we all know that - or who has claim to what - there are lots of articles about who has claim to whatever - and frankly, naming doesn't imply claiming, in English, we call the capital of Greece Athens, one big city Salonika, and another historically significant one Corinth - all based on, but not the same as the Greek names of those places. Doesn't mean that England or Jamaica or anywhere else English is spoken claims any of those places as theirs. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Once again, denialism. There are Greek laws making these place name changes. If the population were Greek and they were using this place name before the legal rename, it qualifies as being used by Greeks, if the population was Slavic, it also qualifies. What you cannot prove is that prior to the Greek government's renaming that no one including the government used that name. This is impossible, because the Greek lawmakers weren't concerning themselves passing laws changing names that didn't exist, like now changing the name of XYZ to Athens when no one calls the Greek capital "XYZ". Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Macedonia naming dispute

Hehe... re this, it is not the "statistical error" or if the opinion is indeed marginally more popular that matters. It is the difference from the previous 80-something percentages for "No Mac" that makes it a "major shift". I take your point being about "one poll only", and I hope you share my wish that there are more polls of the sort that confirm the same results. :-) I can't know if this is better from a tactical viewpoint though... NikoSilver 23:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree to both your comments. --   Avg    23:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ummm, I made four. (the major shift, the single poll, sharing my wish, and the tactical thing). BTW, re #4, think that Greece has now an official "excuse" to exercise that veto ("well, y'know, we went half-way, they didn't follow, we did what we could, we have no choice, sorry, bye".) You have to take this into consideration when judging the tactical approach. US pressure seems so intense, so I doubt Greece could otherwise be heard seriously. NikoSilver 23:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Well I'm sure you know which two I meant (the last two). Now generally speaking, it has always been a rule in diplomacy that pressure is directed primarily to those who succumb to pressure. We never gained anything by being flexible. Nevertheless, we are prepared to go half-way and I agree this is the right thing to do. It just seems to me quite possible that instead of pressuring the others to go half-way, we will be pressured to go all the way. A line has to be drawn somewhere.--   Avg    00:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

We didn't gain anything by being irrationally inflexible when we should too. Actually, we lost a lot by being inflexible back then. Anyway, we'll never learn the details, but I'm developing the sense that there's something else asked from us in return... I'd say that the latter would be just one more stone in a done deal, though. NikoSilver 00:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid about this trade-off as well. And I feel very bad about it. We don't have so many friends around and we shouldn't be selling out the ones we have. Not to mention we're shooting ourselves in the foot. At least I've heard vocal opposition to this from the two parties of the left and big chunk of the two big ones. I find bizarre that our northern neighbours are even more willing than us to trade-off.--   Avg    01:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting yourself, and I agree with you. The section is poorly written and should be changed, though probably not deleted. A solution that keeps in Alexander and makes a brief mentioning of the Paeonians would be ideal. Cheers JdeJ (talk) 22:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Derby of the eternal enemies

Hi! I'm sorry but the derby is always called in english speaking articles, forums, newspapers in Greece and abroad as the "Derby of the eternal enemies". You shouldn't change it. What is this "adversaries"... The previous is the name that this derby is known with. - Sthenel (talk) 00:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

That's a basic translation. Enemy is εχθρός as you know. Adversary is αντίπαλος. Alternative words could be rival or opponent. The first looks to me like a very viable choice if you prefer it, albeit a bit less colourful. --   Avg    08:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Endorsement needed for RfC with User:Realtycoon

Hi there, I am currently starting a dispute resolution process for user Realtycoon's excessive edit warring at Alexander the Great (disambiguation) and I require the assistance of another user. I was hoping that since you were involved with this situation at one point, that you would be willing to endorse my request for comment by signing the request where needed, and by contacting Realtycoon in order to achieve a resolution. My attempts while perfectly civil, have all failed. Thank you for your time. --ž¥łǿχ (ŧäłķ | čøŋŧřīъ§) 18:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I should also inform you (since Realtycoon has failed to inform either of us) that he is currently seeking arbitration and has accused us of being the same person. I don't know if you have anything to say in the matter, but you should definitely be alerted. --ž¥łǿχ (ŧäłķ | čøŋŧřīъ§) 19:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I have offered a proposed solution to solve this issue. See the request for comment page. Regards. Realtycoon (talk) 21:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

RfC

I've started drafting a user conduct RfC that you might be interested in here. There's a lot of evidence to sift through and present, so I think it will take awhile to get it put together. If you'd like to participate, please feel free to do so. Cla68 (talk) 06:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)