User talk:Cplakidas/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

John Petraliphas

Hello Konstantinos, is there any evidence when exactly Petraliphas was raised to the rank of sebastokrator and sent to Thessaly and Macedonia by Isaac II? Still in 1185 or later? --SJuergen (talk) 21:34, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for 13th Light Bomber Squadron

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 00:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Venetian Ionian Islands

Thank you for your edits. I really am interested in making this article better. What else do you think it's missing? Concerning history, I don't have many sources about the period after the conquest except for the disestablishment in 1797. I've got some things about plague epidemics in the islands during this period, should I include this? --Marcofran (talk) 09:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! Yes, I need your help! I have done something already on administration! --Marcofran (talk) 07:04, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

What do you think now on Administration, is it complete? --Marcofran (talk) 05:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello!! The article has been improved! I've just included information I found for the Ottoman attacks on Corfu along with other things. I can't find anything on culture; little things and what I've found is not about this period. What do you think of the article now? What more does it need? I've tried to include these information you told me it should unclude, right? --Marcofran (talk) 18:16, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 21:45, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

talkback

Hello, Cplakidas. You have new messages at WT:MIL.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Dank (push to talk) 18:17, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Ooh ... also, I like your "archive" image, mind if I use it? - Dank (push to talk) 19:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

... I may have stolen it as well. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Constantinopolitans

Re: [1]. What do you mean "WP practice"? Was there a discussion about this somewhere? Chesdovi (talk) 15:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe, save Constantine some time. The discussion about Constantinople was quite a while back on the Constantinople and Istanbul articles. I am 100% in agreement with Chesdovi on this issue. But Constantine is frustratingly right. In the Wikipedia world the name of Constantinople has been erased all the way back to Byzantine times. As usual, history is erased and rewritten by majority rule on Wikipedia. Even when the majority is wrong. Wikipedia doesn't record history it records the victors' version of history.  Nipsonanomhmata  ^(Talk) 15:50, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia Greece

There is a movement to organize an association (to be recognized as a chapter) for the support of wikimedia projects and volunteer coordination on off-wiki activities. Discussions are being held at the moment at http://wikimedia.gr/wiki If you are interested in joining please come to take part on the discussions. You got this message because I've found that you live in Greece and you are still active. If you know more users that may be interested or a suitable noticeboard, please spread the message. -geraki ^T_L 08:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Featured Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Thomas the Slav a Featured Article! Please accept this Epic Barnstar. Your work is much appreciated. – Quadell (talk)

Thanks a lot :) Constantine ✍ 17:43, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Cplakidas. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Solomon (Byzantine general).
Message added 13:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

misunderstanding

Hey,

regarding this I understood what you were doing after I reverted. I wanted to undo myself but you beat me to it :). This is where edit summaries are helpful; we recently had many problems with a user and his socks/Ips who was tirelessly trying to remove any mention of Morocco before the 20th century as if the country had no history. I thought you were him, since he typically removed "history of" categories. --Tachfin (talk) 18:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem :). Cheers, Constantine ✍ 19:03, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Greek alternative name

Hi, Constantine. It's been a long time since we talked ? How are you ? What are you doing ? What do you think of Talk:Foça#Greek alternative name, Talk:Fethiye#Greek alternative name, Talk:Side#Greek alternative name, Talk:Antalya#Greek alternative name. See you. Takabeg (talk) 08:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I've asked opinions to Future Perfect at Sunrise (I thought him/her a Greek) and TheDarkLordSeth (I thought him/her a Turkish). I've seen their names in the related pages, and I guess that they are interested in that topic. But a user claimed this was Canvassing. Is this considered as Wikipedia:Canvassing ? Takabeg (talk) 08:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

No, it is not canvassing. But the best place to ask for advice on such issues are the Greek & Turkish Wikipedians' noticeboards and the respective WikiProjects, and not individual users. However, Athenean is correct: it was state-sponsored discrimination, and the aim is well-known, to drive the Greeks off the island. A verbatim quote is not necessary, when the facts add up to the same conclusion. The Turkish policy vis-a-vis the Greek islanders there is too well documented and too deliberate to support any other conclusion: [2], [3], [4]. Constantine ✍ 12:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll go to WikiProjects. But Renée Hirschon didn't use such term. Council of Europe didn't use such term. Human Rights Watch didn't use such term. Takabeg (talk) 12:23, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Even if "discrimination" is not used, similar terms are, and the Turkish government's measures amount to as much. When a government takes a minority's property, brings in convicted criminals to live among them, denies them their treaty-recognized rights, imposes economic and other restrictions, etc, then it is discrimination and persecution, even if you can find a thousand books to say that this is not. Facts are facts, and we are free to add one and one and state the conclusion without there being a verbatim reference to that effect. Constantine ✍ 12:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

• About this comment: in fact, I don't oppose alternative names. But I oppose any ethnocentric approach (Greek, Turkish, Kurdish, Persian etc.). For example Midilli, Sakiz　are under the same situation. I only oppose double standards. See you. Takabeg (talk) 12:51, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure, no double standards. But the fact is that in Western culture, many sites in Turkey are familiar under their ancient Greek names, while the reverse is not true with Ottoman names for sites in Greece. Constantine ✍ 13:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Thomas the Slav

Congratulations for promoting the article about Thomas the Slav to FA!--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:51, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	You did it again!
	Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making Solomon (Byzantine general) a certified "Good Article"! (Pictured: victory.) Thank you; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 14:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Help with Greek name

Hi Constantine. How are you? I was reading a primary text from the period of the twelfth century which about the reign of the last Armenian king, Gagik II. In it, the author writes that Gagik was given the towns of "Kalon Peghat" and Pizu in exchange for the remaining lands of his kingdom. According to one Armenian historian (Hrach Bartikyan), the name Kalon Peghat (also written Kalon Pegadin) is Greek and translates into "Beautiful Spring/Well". Would you happen to know how that name would be correctly transcribed into Greek? Would it be καλον πηγαδιν? Regards, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:19, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Solomon (Byzantine general)

Gatoclass (talk) 16:03, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Byzantine Empire

There were some changes in the 'Infobox Former Country' within Byzantine Empire article?...just to let you know....--Kebeta (talk) 14:19, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:43, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Great Famine

I really appreciate that. Well, with a little effort it can be gaed. It's already a dyk candidate.Alexikoua (talk) 21:22, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Frizis

ευχαριστω που συμπληρωσες το αρθρο Greco22 (talk) 10:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Ευχαρίστησή μου. Συγχαρητήρια που το ξεκίνησες, ήθελα κι εγώ καιρό τώρα να ξαναγράψω το άρθρο αλλά δεν το έκανα. Θα προσπαθήσω να βρω χρόνο να το συμπληρώσω. Constantine ✍ 10:57, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Settepozzi

Confirm your claims first, before you add or delete material. Deno John Geanakoplos: "Venice and the allied powers was abruptly broken by the important battle of Settepozzi. Between May and July of 1263 66 a Genoese fleet moving southward along..." I never read about a Byzantine contingent, Lane, Hazlitt and the Historia Venetiana of 1595 dont mention a Byzantine contingent. please post your material on here or my talk to confirm. --Daufer (talk)

Seeing as I wrote the article in the first place, I'd expect some more good faith, but anyhow, this is what Geanakoplos says: "a Genoese fleet moving southward along the eastern Peloponnesian coastline towards the Greek-held port of Monemvasia encountered, near the little island of Settepozzi (Spetsai), a Venetian fleet sailing north to Negropont. The allied fleet of thirty-eight galleys and ten saettie (cutters), commanded by three Genoese and a Greek admiral, ..." To me this seems pretty definite. Of course the fleet was mostly Genoese, but a) acc. to Geanakoplos at least (I don't have access to his primary sources) there was a "Greek" (i.e. Byzantine) contingent, and furthermore b) the operation was undertaken along the lines of the Byzantine-Genoese alliance of 1261 and in support of Byzantine operations in the Morea, hence definitely part of the Byzantine wars against the Latins. Constantine ✍ 18:35, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, now it is verfied. Because the Historia Venetiana 1595 doesnt mention the byzantines and so do Lane, Hazlitt, Leo etc. its doubtfull, but verified and added to the article. Dont delete info or sources from the info box, its seperate to the article, thats why it needs all the sources it has. --Daufer (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC).

Hafsid flag

I am not sure what you thought you were doing here, but when you have a flag with a horse on it, attributed to the Catalan Atlas, and you simply replace it with a completely different flag with a star and crescent leaving the attribution in place, it should be obvious to anyone that what you end up with is simply a broken article.

You managed to do this without as much as giving a brief edit summary, so I have a little difficulty to imagine what prompted you to do this. --dab (𒁳) 07:32, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello! The crescent flag seemed more accurate in light of the sources referenced. I did not use an edit summary, nor did I change the caption, which was an error. I cannot remember why I didn't, but I apologize for the sloppy editing. Constantine ✍ 10:44, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

what do you think?

καλησπερα! πιστευεις θα ειχε ενδιαφερον ενα αρθρο "anti-hellenism" ή "anti-greek sentiment" στα προτυπα των αλλων χωρων? Greco22 (talk) 20:15, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Church of St. George of Samatya

Hallo Constantine

I hope that you are well! If you have time, can you please have a look here? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 08:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Church of Saint Menas of Samatya

Hallo Constantine

Armenia - Greece is now 1 - 1 :-) Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 10:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jovan Vladimir/archive2

You might be interested in this one, since the Byzantine Empire is involved. - Dank (push to talk) 18:37, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Cplakidas/Archive 11! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power Op-ed: Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Nice to see you around

I won't just say back, as "back" is a bit too absolute when one deals with state-sponsored holidays. But it appears that you have accessed some computer there or been given a leave. In either case nice to see you around Kostas. :) Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 15:37, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. The yearning is strong to see what is going on here, but alas my absence is not voluntary... I do hope to manage more regular appearances by December though. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 15:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Looking forward to that. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 05:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

peripheral units

Hi, I suppose your recent moves indicate that you favour "regional unit" over the other options "subregion" and "regional division"? Fine with me, I didn't see any other replies on my question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Greece. Markussep ^Talk 08:52, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Quite so. I have come over to the view that "region" is the best translation, not least because it seems to be the term mostly preferred by the Greek government itself. Constantine ✍ 15:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Basil II

Hi Constantine,

There seems to be a campaign to give Basil II undoubted Armenian ancestry. I have replaced the sentence referencing Psellus (I can find no reference to Basil's ancestry in Psellus at all). I have given Basil Is uncertain ancestry as possibly Armenian, Slavic or Greek. I have also pointed out that Basil II's biological ancestry probably goes back to Michael III rather than Basil I, with a mention of the Anatolian Greek origins of Michael IIIs family.

Probably worth keeping an eye on this situation.

Regards,

Urselius (talk) 10:45, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

I also note that Basil I has now been given unequivocal Armenian ancestry despite his origins being from a very humble peasant family from Thrace. Thrace at the time had Slav, Greek and Armenian inhabitants, with Armenians being mostly settled on the borders especially around Philipoppolis. After he became emperor Basil I was given an ancestry to the Arsacids, Constantine The Great and Alexander the Great. The Armenian Arsacid claim has no more credibility than the others, and all of them were just a confection intended to flatter. The claim for Armenian origins has references which I don't have, so cannot check but contemporary Arab commentry called Basil "the Sclavonian" not "the Armenian," and as the Arabs were outsiders and not subject to pressure to flatter their description should carry more weight.Urselius (talk) 12:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Odalar mosque & Paspates

Hallo Constantine

I hope that everything is going well for you in the military service, and that they did not send you on the Evros. :-) I need a favour, but not urgent. I just wrote an article about the Odalar Mosque in Istanbul, and I know that a drawing of the building exists in the work of Paspates. Unfortunately this has not been uploaded in commons. If /when you have time, can you reach the uploader of Paspates (he is a Greek Wikipedian) and gently ask him if it is possible for him to upload the engraving of the mosque on commons under Category:Byzantinai meletai topographikai? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 11:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Alex! Nice work with all the new articles on the church-mosques! I think, based on the Greek article which probably quotes Paspates verbatim, that the Odalar Mosque is the one identified by Paspates (erroneously, as with so much else) with the Isakapi Mosque (temenos tes pyles tou Iesou in Greek). I've added the relevant image. I'll double-check it in a few days, as soon as my military duties permit ;) The minaret does seem awfully similar on both images though. BTW, Paspates (again, based on the Greek article) says that Kemankeş Mustafa Pasha was also buried in the courtyard of this mosque. Can you verify this? Constantine ✍ 16:48, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Costas,

thanks a lot for your copyediting! Yes, I wrote three articles (I was in the city three weeks ago, since a friend of us from Rome 50% Greek (Acaia) came for the first time to see Istanbul, so I organised a byzantine - orthodox tour for him and his wife), and I am running out of churches :-) No, I think that the Isakapi of Paspates shows really the Isakapi. I have a picture of the Odalar from Paspates in the book of Westphalen, and the minaret is even uglier than by the Isakapi :-) Moreover, on my picture there are two people, and the roof of the building is flat, and far away you can distinguish a tiny part of the golden horn, so everything coincides... How is going the service? Did they send you to defend Kastellorizon against the Turks? :-) I will check about the great vizier. Anyway, what they are doing now in Istanbul is mad: they are building three towers 180 METERS HIGH in front of the golden Gate!!! These towers are visible from everywhere and they have destroyed the view of the City from north (when you see the City from Galata, they are just behind Suleymanye). Right now I am trying to contact the UNESCO to tell the fact. They are real barbarians. Many Turks think like me, but there is nothing to do... Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 19:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I am not quite on the border, I've been posted to an anti-aircraft missile unit. It's not exactly a picnic, but it is relatively comfortable. I have to say that am jealous of you and your shuttling from Old to New Rome and back ;) On the subject of architectural monstrosities, the Turks don't have the monopoly: most Greek cities have been completely ruined in the past 4 decades, you'd think the descendants of Ictinus and Callicrates and of Anthemius of Tralles and Isidore of Miletus would have better taste in buildings... Anyhow, I checked my scanned version of Paspates' book, and here's what I found: Odalar Mosque and Kemankes Pasha are both mentioned only in page 363, which is not included in the pdf I have. It follows right after the Isakapi Mescidi, and with the one page missing it seems to be the same building, which is probably why the Greek article confuses the two (the Greek WP author apparently did not go into any trouble checking his facts). I haven't found an image of the building though (it is probably on the missing page). BTW, I found some more interesting photos in an excellent Greek blog about the City: [5], including a photo of a fresco with St Merkourios. Constantine ✍ 21:08, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Costas! Antiaircraft? Like me, but at that timewe were still fighting the Soviets :-) Yes, this could explain the problem, anyway, the Isakapi lied - as you know - in another part of the City. Thanks for the blog, i know it! The picture which is in the article comes from there: I wrote to the blog's author asking his permission to upload it in Commons. He was very kind. Now I must only wait that someone comes and reviews the article on DYK (it is there since 10 days, but none seem interested anymore in byzantine churches, only in changing the name Istanbul in Constantinople). Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 07:50, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Thomas the Slav

This is a note to let the main editors of Thomas the Slav know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 30, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 30, 2011. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Thomas the Slav (ca. 760 – 823 AD) was a 9th-century Byzantine military commander, most notable for leading a wide-scale revolt against Emperor Michael II the Amorian in 820–823. An army officer of Slavic origin from the Pontus region, Thomas rose to prominence under the protection of general Bardanes Tourkos. After Bardanes's failed rebellion in 803, Thomas fell into obscurity until Leo V's rise to the throne, when Thomas was raised to a senior military command. After the murder of Leo and usurpation of the throne by Michael the Amorian, Thomas revolted, claiming the throne for himself. Thomas quickly secured support from most of the themes (provinces) and troops in Asia Minor, and concluded an alliance with the Abbasid Caliphate. He sailed with his army to besiege Constantinople. Michael II called for help from the Bulgar ruler Omurtag, whose troops attacked Thomas's army. Although repelled, the Bulgars inflicted heavy casualties on Thomas's men, who broke and fled when Michael took to the field a few months later. Thomas sought refuge in Arcadiopolis, where he was soon seized by Michael's troops and executed. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 00:03, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 07:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Holiday

Hi Cplakidas, I see you're a bit worried about your compulsory holiday. Since there is no risk of military conflict at the moment I suggest you relax. You can benefit from this experience by getting new friends and watching different aspects of life. I wish you a happy service term. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 14:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your wishes! I'm hardly "worried" about a possible conflict, rather about losing nine months of my life for nothing ;) Thank God the unit I'm in is tolerable, and the company great! Constantine ✍ 21:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

regarding the "rmv nonsense about ensigns" in the Byzantine navy: http://sites.google.com/site/romeandromania/romania/stampoli/english http://sites.google.com/site/romeandromania/Home/10th-c/demographics_1000 Steliokardam (talk) 09:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Dionysios Arbouzis

I wonder if Arbouzis is still alive...Alexikoua (talk) 21:03, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I remember reading that he had died, but it is next to impossible to find any dates of birth or death... Constantine ✍ 21:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

The time he was in Korea he was 38 years old [[6]]. This means he was born in ca. 1914-5.Alexikoua (talk) 21:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Map of Constantinople

Hallo Costas

I found a tiny mistake in your beautiful map of C'ple: the positions of the Odalar mosque and of the Kasim Aga Mescidi are inverted. :-) The former should lie to the south of the latter (that is, nearer to the cistern of Aetius).

Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 07:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors – MHotY coming; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars Review essay: Ian Rose goes to El Alamein Op-ed: DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:20, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Palaiologos CoA

To address your points.

An attributed coat of arms is actually a technical term, see Attributed arms. While not arms adopted by the subjects themselves, mediaeval scholars attributed arms to the Palaiologos and used the arms on maps, manuscripts and so forth throughout Europe for several hundred years. It seems like such a thing to at least note. The arms are not presented as the “true” coat of arms of the imperial family, either.

The image does not claim to be contemporary or from the region. The images used to represent the family’s cipher is also a modern rendition not in a contemporary Byzantine style, yet there seems to be no discussion about removing it. There is no reason why an image can not be used merely because it is modern. Many of the coats of arms rendered on Wikipedia are modern works, using things like Clip Art, and certainly not in the style of the subject’s time. This does not exclude an image from use.

Another source was given and can be found on the image’s talk page and with the caption. Two sources, the one where the image was taken and the Heraldica website, seems to make it rather reliable. Both mention how the arms had been attributed to the imperial family by Western Europeans.

The image does not comply with Wikipedia’s fair use policy, no. But that does not apply to this image, so the whole point is moot. The image is licensed on the artist’s website for use with a free, non-profit educational website like Wikipedia. There simply is no matching license tag on Wikipedia.

All and all, I would like the arms to be shown since it was part of the history, albeit more so from a Western European view point than an Eastern. There is no reason that the cipher could not be added to the articles as well; this does not need to be a case of one or the other. Colour images are few and far between for these articles, there is no reason to exclude them. So can we agree to add them both? JDF6574 (talk) 04:53, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I know that attributed arms is a technical term, but first and foremost they are, as the article says, "imaginary arms". We don't include the attributed arms of Jesus or Caesar in the relevant articles, exactly because of this. The "attributed" Palaiologos CoA contains, as I said, elements that are indeed found in Byzantine heraldry, but mixes them up in a manner that is most unhistorical. The Heraldica reference you give ("Gules, a Cross and four B's Or." and "Gules, a double-headed eagle displayed crowned, Or.") illustrates this: what it describes is different from the image you provided in that the eagle should be golden, not black, and that the escutcheon is wrong, because it uses this version of the arms, which is an hapax, and not the far more common and well-attested simple tetragrammic cross (which is the form actually referenced in Rietstap's armorial). Furthermore, I repeat, there is no instance of the arms inescutcheoned in this fashion, neither in Byzantium nor by the Palaiologos family in Piedmont (i.e. the March of Montferrat), cf. [7] and [8]. As such, these arms are rather freely based on the original medieval form, and do not actually contribute anything to the article except adding yet another misconception about Byzantine arms and emblems (e.g. the very widespread - including, once upon a time, in Wikipedia - perception of the Flag of the Greek Orthodox Church as being the "Flag of the Byzantine Empire"). As for the use of other modern images, my answer is that I would much prefer to keep using the "original" illustration ([9]) over modern versions if they are not accurate renderings. However, an image like this, which is both historically accurate and conforms with the above original image, is perfectly acceptable. Best regards, Constantine ✍ 09:44, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Talk:John Troglita/GA1

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Note that this review will be claimed as part of the 2012 WikiCup. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Tornike (name)

Please note that I have partially reverted your edit to this page. --Andriabenia (talk) 14:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Attaching "Nike" at the end of names is a common practice in Georgia, as proven by the new source I added. The name itself is not Greek, it merely incorporates it, that is why I changed the text to "influenced by Greek." This is actually what the source says, so no original research.--Andriabenia (talk) 14:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

No, I never said Tornike was Greek, the sources says that it is a Georgian name that mimics Greek names like Andronike and Kalenike. I could not think of that word in English but this discussion brought it to my head. I will changed the article to reflect this and perhaps that will clear things up.--Andriabenia (talk) 14:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I think you're confusing Tornikios with Pakourianos, who is sometimes known as Armenian.--Andriabenia (talk) 13:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Nope: the Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium says "Tornikios, a noble family of Armenian or Georgian origin". Tornikios' father Abu Ghanim was prince of Taron, so he might well be Armenian. Constantine ✍ 14:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Plus, for the n-th time: the name "Tornikios" is clearly not a Greek name nor even a composite name, but a hellenized form of some Caucasian name, as attested by the variant form Τορνίκης (Tornikes). Anyone with a knowledge of Greek language and phonology would tell you this. Seeking a Greek root in a Caucasian name is a paretymology, and a website which seriously supports this view needs to have its credentials as a reliable source checked. Constantine ✍ 14:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Tornikios

Hi. I noticed the discussion about T'ornike. A source I found for Tornikios [10] (Greek original [11]) written by Ioannis Stouraitis indicates that the etymology is a diminuative of T'orn in Armenian, meaning "grandson". This seems to be repeated in other sources on Byzantium. Mathsci (talk) 06:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, this is precisely what I've been looking for. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 08:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Gubazes II of Lazica/GA1

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. (Blah, blah, blah, you've heard it all from me before - usual good work, etc. etc....) Ealdgyth - Talk 23:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Athanasius (praetorian prefect)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

New entry

Hello Constantine and Happy New Year.

When you have the time, could you please take a look at the Zygostates (Byzantine official) entry? (Any improvements to the "Stable Version" would be greatly appreciated.)

Thank you and please continue making good faith edit contributions. :-) No. 108 (talk) 20:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

GA Gubazes II of Lazica

Congrats and thanks for your great job. --Kober^Talk 19:21, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the congrats, and likewise "well done" on bringing Toumanoff's views into the article. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 09:14, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

The siege and the fall of Constantinople in 1453 : historiography, topography, and military studies

I just thought that you might be interested in this new work about the subject I believe you are interested in.

The siege and the fall of Constantinople in 1453 : historiography, topography, and military studies.

All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Review essay: Kirill Lokshin, the first coordinator Op-ed: Hchc's English Castles

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:50, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Books & pictures

Thanks for the material. The BWars pictures are quite unique, but unfortunately the related articles are not in good condition. I will expand the Kresna Battle the following days.Alexikoua (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Peter Bartl

Hello,

I've noticed that book Albanien : vom Mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart written by Peter Bartl contains a part which describes the first migrations of Albanians into Greece in late 13th and during 14th century. The problem is that I am not sure if he can be considered as RS for this topic. I would like to know your opinion if you are more acquainted with his work.

Best regards,--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello! From a cursory glance, I see no reason to not regard the author as reliable. His resume makes him a specialist in the field. Constantine ✍ 09:49, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:17, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Day of Thirst

Rschen7754 02:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Merger or review?

Hello, Constantine. I am reviewing both Stephen and Constantine Lekapenos for GA. As you said, quite a bit of content is the same from article to article, and I'm wondering if you think the two ought to be merged, to avoid redundancy. I'm leaving this up to you; once this gets straightened out, I'll begin reviewing. dci | TALK 00:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello! I'd definitely support a merge proposal, however I'll also put the question to Dimadick (talk · contribs) who began the articles on the brothers. Constantine ✍ 08:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

All right. I hope to start the review soon; I'll be tied up with "real world" stuff tomorrow, though. dci | TALK 03:01, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Ian Rose discusses article assessments

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

GA nomination for Battle of the Defile

Greetings, Cplakidas! I'm just letting you know that I'll be reviewing you GA nomination of Battle of the Defile. Here is a link to the discussion. I wish this article best of luck! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 11:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, I reviewed the article, and decided it was of GA standard, so it's passed! I will note, however, that there were a number of minor grammatical errors that I had to correct as I read it. I hope you will look over these in the article's history, because other than that, you did a swell job with the article; I hope to review many more of your nominations in the future! :) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 08:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and for the corrections! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 14:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Review

I reviewed Stephen Lekapenos and am moving on to Constantine. dci | TALK 23:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		Thanks Cplakidas for helping to promote Turahan Bey to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up, and give someone a pat on the back today. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 05:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Fortifications of Rhodes

thank you for your corrections to my article. I understand by now Wikipedia likes a continuous text possbly without interruptions. I tried instead to align the pics as much as possible to the text. For the names of the gates I used the text I found on the tourist info which is not an encyclopaedia! So St. Athanasiou appeared although I know it is the genitive of Athanasios. Now I understand that nominative shall be used insted. I also checked that the Grand Master I mentioned as Pietro Raimonodo Zacosto is instead Spanish. The name has to be written as Pedro Raimundo Zacosta. --Aga 14:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aga Khan (IT) (talk • contribs) I have upgraded my comments from level 3 to level 2 8-) --Aga 15:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

New Constantine Kontomytes article

		The Epic Barnstar
		Thanks for creating the new Constantine Kontomytes article, and improving Wikipedia's coverage of notable historic people. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Priscus ACR

G'day, I'm not sure if you are free at the moment, but if you can take a look at my comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Priscus (general) and respond, I would be happy to support it for promotion to A-class. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:10, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Good eye on that bad i

Thanks for catching that i, Konstantinos. I have Megalai Ehoiai on the brain and would never have realized that I typed the wrong form at Megala Erga. — cardiff | chestnut — 17:07, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review

Hallo Kostas,

thanks for the review of the Grand Bazaar Article! It shows that it is definitively time for me to recover my ancient Greek Grammar :-). Did you like the article? We have to hurry up before the current government destroys completely the landmarks of the City... :-) Do you know that the last time that I was in Istanbul I discovered a real authentic Rum place serving the Politiké Kuzina? How is going in Greece? I hope a little bit better now... Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 14:18, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alex! The article was a delightful read, I am always glad to read your articles on the City. I hope everything is going well with you, on my behalf, my time with the army is soon drawing to a close, I've had a rather better time than I expected, and will have some stories to bore my children with ;) Anyhow, the situation in general hasn't improved at all, money is short everywhere (including the army) but the forthcoming elections may (and hopefully will) be a catalyst for many things. As I told you many times before, its the sense of stagnation and hopelessness that is the killer. Ἴδωμεν, as they say... Constantine ✍ 16:45, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Kostas, yes, military service is a sword of Damocles for many of us, but after falling :-) it is remembered with some nostalgia... I am glad that you enjoyed the article. As consequence of it, the Turkish Wikipedians finally noticed that I have been writing about the City, and awarded me an white-red :-) Barnstar. I just wrote another small article, but I am running out of churches :-) . About Greece, I wish you all the best! If things get worse, we can always lend you Monti for a couple of months... :-) Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 09:52, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar

Receive this symbolic medal as a token of gratitude for the excelent work done in articles related to Byzantine history. Today the feature article of the Portuguese Wikipedia is a translation of "your" Byzantine–Arab Wars. The translations of Nikephoros Ouranos, Andronikos Kontostephanos are ranked "good articles" in pt.wikipedia; I believe that soon Michael Bourtzes will also be classified as "good" and John Kourkouas and Thomas the Slav will be featured articles. Thanks! Keep up the good work. pt:Stegop talk 18:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the appreciative gesture! However, the Byzantine–Arab Wars is by no means "my" article! There have been many other major contributors to it, some sadly no longer active. Moreover, I would not rate it as satisfactory, as its emphasis is a bit lopsided towards the Muslim conquests and it does not really cover tactics, ideology etc. I plan on elaborating it further and creating three separate sub-articles, covering the periods 641-750, 750-863 and 863-1050s (the latter may be split in two) in considerable detail. It is a major undertaking, and will probably take much time, but in the meantime, perhaps you would be interested in checking four new articles that have resulted from this effort: Siege of Kamacha (766), Battle of Kopidnadon, Abbasid invasion of Asia Minor (782) and Abbasid invasion of Asia Minor (806). Any feedback would be welcome! Best regards, and good luck with your translations! Constantine ✍ 19:13, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Army of Macedon

Thanks for the great image. I would like to fill out the battle tactics section on the article at some time. I also would like to add a similar section to the Komnenian army page. I would appreciate any help, especially with Greek terms and their transliteration, you might be willing to lend.

I've recently discovered some alleged remote Greek ancestry; by stitching together various pedigrees I have a reasonable case to claim Alexios I as an ancestor - through Irene/Maria, daughter of Isaakios II Angelos, who married Philip of Swabia. Rather bizarre really, as I have always found the Komnenian era fascinating.

Cheers,Urselius (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be happy to help in whatever way I can! Interesting about your ancestry, kyr Komnenos! That is why history is fascinating: the past determines who we are even though we may not be aware of it, and studying it we learn about ourselves... Constantine ✍ 08:49, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks into two recent Milhist books Op-ed: Hawkeye on Wikipedia collaborating with the AWM

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

New entry

Hello Constantine.

When you have the time, could you please take a look at the Kommerkiarios entry? (Any improvements to the "Stable Version" would be immensely appreciated.)

Thank you and please continue submitting more good faith edit contributions. :-) No. 108 (talk) 17:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Kasim Aga Mosque, Istanbul

Hallo Costas

I wrote a short article about the Kasim Aga Mosque in the City, and there I use your map of Constantinople. However, I found a small mistake: the positions of the Odalar Mosque and of the Kasim Aga Mescidi are inverted. Do you think that would be possible to fix it? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 06:52, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Alex, I'll check it up. Constantine ✍ 12:27, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Costas! BTW, I added an old picture, where you can notice the alignment Kasim - Odalar - Chora - Walls from south to north :-)

A last question: on the talk page of the Kasim Aga Mosque there is a request of renaming the article: what do you think about it? Alex2006 (talk) 12:39, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Manju

Hi Cplakidas, I added an alternative name in the article Manjutakin. Please feel free to revert the addition is you disagree. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 10:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Nedim! If you can reference it (or at least provide an explanation why you think it is his name), then no problem! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 15:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, Tekin (or Takin in the article) is not a name. It is a title just like "prince". Thus the name Manjutakin is actually a composite name and the title must be separated from the name. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:52, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

OK then. It might be useful if you included this in the article somehow. Perhaps you could link "Tekin" and create a relevant article? Constantine ✍ 08:16, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Abbasid invasion of Asia Minor (806)

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 16:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Abbasid invasion of Asia Minor (782)

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

:/:

Γιατί ρε έχεις βάλει την φωτογραφία μου (αεροπόρος με όπλο) στο προφίλ ετούτο εδώ μέσα σου έιπε κανένας να χρησιμοποιήσεις την φωτό μου ή μήπως να πάω να σε καταγγείλω; --194.219.40.224 (talk) 18:52, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Η ευγένεια φαίνεται έχει πεθάνει για τα καλά στην εποχή μας. "Ρε", η φωτογραφία είναι ανεβασμένη στα Commons, άρα μπορεί να χρησιμοποιηθεί κατά το δοκούν σύμφωνα με την άδεια με την οποία είναι ανεβασμένη. Εγώ απλά την έβαλα για διακόσμηση, και φυσιολογικά θεώρησα ότι αυτός που την ανέβασε είναι και ο εικονιζόμενος (εφόσον γράφει "Me, myself, and I, during guard duty", και μέχρι αποδείξεως του εναντίου, αυτό συνεχίζει να ισχύει) και ότι ήξερε τί έκανε. Άρα με λάθος άτομο τα βάζεις. Κατάγγειλέ με όσο και όπου θες, μου είναι αδιάφορες οι απειλές από ανώνυμα άτομα στο ίντερνετ. Α, και για να σε διευκολύνω, την εικόνα τη χρησιμοποιούν και στην εβραϊκή Βικιπαίδεια. Ελπίζω να ξέρεις εβραϊκά και ένα δικηγόρο στο Ισραήλ για να καταγγείλεις και αυτούς. Αλλιώς περίμενε δυο μήνες να τελειώσει η θητεία μου, και η εικόνα θα κατέβει ούτως ή άλλως. Constantine ✍ 07:38, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Hellenic Army GAN

G'day, I came across the Hellenic Army article today and saw that it had been nominated for a GA review. I have taken on the review and feel that there are a few issues, which need to be addressed. The nominator appears to be new to Wikipedia, though, and may need a hand addressing some of the issues. As you appear (from the article history) to have done some work on it, I wonder if you would like to help out. I know from reviewing your work in the past that it is of excellent quality. If you are too busy, I understand. Particularly so, given the banner at the top of your page. I hope the training is going well, by the way. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 04:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, the article has a long way to go before it is near GA standards, but I'll give it a try. I'll have some time available during the (Orthodox) Easter holidays starting in two days, so look out for improvements then. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 06:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Settepozzi

Hello Constantine. I've read your recent comments on the Battle of Settepozzi discussion page and would like to apologize for what happened between myself and Daufer. Although your discontent with "citation warring" is completely justified, please bear in mind that my humble actions were made towards preserving the quality of the entry's "Stable Version". If you doubt me, then I humbly recommend consulting the discussion I had with Daufer on my talk page where I mentioned your inspectional assessment of the entry on 20 September 2011 ("we don't need a dozen refs to verify what is alre[a]dy well sourced in the article") to no avail. And feel free to "take over", because I'm keeping my distance from the entry for a while. Have a splendid day. :-) No. 108 (talk) 13:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

A-class medal

		The Military history A-Class medal
		For Thomas the Slav, Bardanes Tourkos and Priscus (general), promoted to A-Class between June 2011 and March 2012. From the MilHist Coordinators, Nikkimaria (talk) 13:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Guess what?

Hallo Costas

Last week I bought in the City a nice book of the series "One hundred" ("One hundred Mosques", "One hundred Churches", etc...) this one about the Byzantine and Roman buildings of Istanbul, and guess what I found there (on the last page)? Your Featured Map of Constantinople. :-) You are becoming famous also in Turkey... Alex2006 (talk) 15:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Wow, that's cool. I am doubly glad, because I made this map specifically in order to be the most complete and as far as possible accurate map of the city. BTW, I am working on an upgraded version of it, I had hoped to have finished it by December but the army keeps interfering with my priorities ;) Best wishes and a happy Easter to you, Constantine ✍ 11:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Here Easter is over, we are back to work :-( Actually they used an early version of the map, since the Manastır Mosque is not present, but the book is not bad... astonishingly, they put Hagia Sophia in the church section. :-) The title of the book is Istanbul'un 100 Roma, Bizans eseri. Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 11:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

• Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
  • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
  • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:37, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Semavi Eyice

Hallo Constantine,

I have a bureaucratic :-) question: Almost one month ago I wrote a short article about Prof. Eyice (who is the one who founded the byzantine studies in Turkey) and then I put it on DYK. Anyway, a reviewer did not agree about the hook source, since he pretended that that this is not neutral. A Turkish Wikipedian added then two more sources, and I wrote twice to this guy asking to reassess the DYK. Until now he did not answer, although I see that he is sporadically active on wikipedia. What can one do in this case? Thanks for your advice, Alex2006 (talk) 15:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alex! Perhaps the best thing would be to bring this to attention at WT:DYK and ask for a second assessment. Constantine ✍ 08:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Good idea, thanks! But there was a world before Wikipedia? :-) Alex2006 (talk) 08:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

New article announcement

Hi, The last article in the list Wikipedia:WikiProject Ottoman Empire/New article announcements is of 13 months ago. Can you reactive it ? Thanks Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:12, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Qutaybah in Khwarazm

Hi Constantine, I'm the guy who commented at Qutayba's GAC. There is an account from Biruni in his The Remaining Signs of Past Centuries, I have seen it in Zarrinkoub's Two Centuries of Silence. In a chapter he (Zarrinkoub) talked about efforts of Arabs to annihilate Iranian languages, and has quoted this from Biruni: (pp. 95&96)

When Qutaibah bin Muslim, who was under the command of Al-Hajjaj, started the second expedition to Khwarezm and conquered it, he killed everyone without exception who wrote in Khwarezmian [script/language] and knew of the Khwarezmian history, science and culture. ... He killed all [Zoroastrian] priests of the nation, and burned their books. ...

(I have access to both books) I don't know whether these materials may be useful for this article or not, if you think it's not please just ignore this.. Cheers, Z 10:22, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

If you could mail me the relevant passages and a bit of context, that'd be a great help! Biruni's quote will probably be included, but I will need more secondary sources to gauge modern scholarly opinions before I do so. If you have any other relevant source, I'd be grateful! Constantine ✍ 17:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Cplakidas. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Category:Ottoman art historians

Hi, can you find entries to fill this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

This is runfortunately not my forte. You should try our Turkish fellow-editors, or others, like Alessandro57 (talk · contribs), who spend much time in Turkey and might be able to help. Chhers, Constantine ✍

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Subhas Chandra Bose; Hawkeye on corps commanders; Nick-D on American special forces Op-ed: The Land on commemorating World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Churches and Monasteries of Constantinople

Hallo Constantine,

first of all, thanks for copyediting! :-) Then I have a question: I would like to create a template about the Churches and Monasteries of Constantinople (t <=1453). Do you think that this template make sense? If yes, what kind of denomination should be used?

• English (ex. St. Mary of the Source)

• Greek (ex. Theotokos Pegè)

Thanks a lot for your feedback!

BTW, last Sunday at the Musei Capitolini I visited an incredible exhibition about the Archivio Segreto Vaticano. Among the many papers on display, there were two documents declaring the Union of the Church, one written by the Patriarch John Bekkos, the other one signed by the Emperor John VIII Palaeologus ("Basileus ton Romaion") himself... Bye Alex2006 (talk) 14:53, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alex! Yes, a navbox would be very useful. On the names, I'd favour the English version, per WP:ENG. If necessary, i.e. if the Greek name is widely used, it can be added in parentheses. On the Act of Union, I also remember seeing it, along with other Byzantine chrysobulls, on my visit to Rome seven years ago. If I could, provided I was given food and water, I'd be happy to be locked in the Vatican museums and libraries ;) A lifetime wouldn't be enough to appreciate what has been amassed there... Constantine ✍ 15:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, then I'll go for it! Although, how can "en tois Hormisdou" be translated into English? :-)

Yes, being closed in the Vatican with bread and water (but the people living there eats something more :-)) would not be a punishment for both of us... :-) Alex2006 (talk) 16:33, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

literally, it would be in "the quater of Hormisdas", but "in Hormisdou" would do it, I think. Constantine ✍ 16:53, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! Alex2006 (talk) 16:59, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Constantine, done!

If you have time and lust, please control and correct :-). Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 19:02, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

For your fine copyedit of Hermann von Kuhl, it put in nice finishing touches that I had missed. -- Ultracobalt (talk) 04:53, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure, it's a very interesting article! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 05:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:Featured article review/Byzantine Empire/archive2

It looks like this will pass FAR. I'm delighted to see that people are interested in working on Byzantine Empire articles ... and wondering if you're looking for any help with some of your articles. If so, I'll leave a note on the the FAR's talk page reminding people that you have to struggle alone at A-class a lot :) - Dank (push to talk) 22:24, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Wow, I had completely forgotten that a FAR was under way for the article! Glad to hear that it will pass after all, with the usual suspects Yannis and Athenean providing much of the work. By all means leave a message, but since Yannis is semi-retired and Athenean active in many other areas as well, I don't expect much. Thanks for the initiative, though :) Constantine ✍ 07:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Arslan Hane

Hallo Costas

I wrote another article about the church of Christ of the Chalkè, but the building is missing in your map...If you have time, can you please add it? It should lie left of the Chalkè Gate. How is going at home? Here on the media we are reading terrible things, but I am like Saint Thomas... Bye Alex2006 (talk) 13:25, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Alex! Nice article, as usual! I always considered the chapel an annex of the Chalke Gate, and that is why I did not include it in the map (there wouldn't be much space for it, anyway). On the situation here, it is going as ever downhill. The problem is that we, as a society and acountry, lack a credible alternative or at least a moderately cabaple leadership. This extends right across the political spectrum: the old dominant parties (ND and PASOK) are spent and compromised forces, since they brought us to this mess, the Left (SYRIZA and DIMAR) is splintered and talking nonsense out of its head, the Communists are so hard-line negativist that they wouldn't accept the government even if it were offered on a gold platter, the populist right (the Indenepdent Greeks) is a bad joke and the nationalists of XA (rightfully) frighten most people. It is telling that the present caretaker government is composed of far more capable people and seems far more competent and sober than any possible future (or past) government composed of our professional politicians. No party offers anything but talk and empty slogans, and the only thing they care about is their own petty intrigues, even while the country is falling apart and the whole world watching. It is simply incredible, and feels like a bad dream from which one cannot wake up... You wouldn't believe how many times I've heard references to hanging every politician of the past 30 years by people from all walks of life. But as usual, people feel impotent to change things, and so those who can vote with their feet and emigrate. Constantine ✍ 18:53, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Costas, I would say the situation is similar to the Italian one. The problem is that a "caretaker" (in Italian we name it "technical") government pursues political decisions too (in Italy, for example, they are extorting from the house owner a monstrous ownership tax, instead of looking for the tax evaders). This money then is used not for investment, but to pay wages and privileges to an overgrown and rapacious political class and to millions of state employees. I am afraid that only something like a finance default can force the system to an hard reset... Alex2006 (talk) 05:26, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Same story here as well. Cases where a cleaning lady in a ministry or a gardener in a municipality earned 2,500 euros per month, and a teacher with 30 years earned 1,400 have vanished, but this is because cuts have been made across the spectrum for the lower ranks regardless of actual merit, years of service, family needs etc and everyone earnes some 500 euros now. The problem is that ministerial "councillors" (i.e. the minister's buddies), the MPs (even those of the recent hung parliament, that sat for a single day), the CEOs and other directors of public corporations, etc. still receive their exorbitant salaries, that the rich still don't pay the taxes they should, that corruption is still rife, that those leaders who are mainly responsible for bringing us to this mess haven't learned a thing, and not even hinted at an apology. The vote last time was an expression of anger, and people are still very angry, particularly since domestic media (and some foreign governments) insist in putting ultimatums and demonizing everyone who speak out against austerity. Syriza, which is somewhat like PASOK in its early years in ideology, is inexperienced and its representatives often have their foot in their mouth, but if the Greek media (most of them owned by the businessmen who run the show here) are to be believed, Alexis Tsipras is close to being the Antichrist. Sine people don't like being told who to vote, don't be surprised if he gets over 35% of the vote in June. Constantine ✍ 07:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

About Tsipras, it is happening the same in Italy with Beppe Grillo. The difference is that - while we Italians are a people made of sheeps, you Greeks already showed along your history (if I remember well, once also with the Italians :-)) that you can say "NO". I am sure that it will happen the same also this time...And - as you said - there is always the possibility to move away, also on the Bosphorus, where the new Sultan will be happy to welcome his Rayah back :-) Alex2006 (talk) 07:29, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but in my case I'll probably emigrate to where Merkel reigns (for now). Anyhow, a question on the Arslanhane: the building on the 1493 chronicle, is it the chapel, or the gate? I don't have my books available right now, but I think I remember the latter being the case. Constantine ✍ 07:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

In Merkelland? interesting, then we'll become neighbors: I live since 26 years in Helvetia :-) . About the Nuremberg Chronicle (NC), I found the image on the eistinpolin web site, which has great pictures about the churches of the City, and whose boss granted me permission to upload them. :-) There it is identified as the Arslanhane. Reading the description of the Chalke, there is an important difference with the chronicle's image: the Chalke had a rectangular plan, while the building in the NC image has a central plan, as the church. The only difference between the image of the NC and the engraving of 1802 is the lack of the two half domes by NC. One thing is sure: Müller-Wiener reproduces the engraving of 1802 in its book, and identifies it positively with the church. Although large (and above all tall: an Italian voyager of the 17th century describes it as an "old tower") the edifice on the engraving does not look as large as the Chalke. Moreover, the inscription above the building ba the NC reads "JOHIS BAPTE." ,that is, a church devoted St. John the Baptist => an holy building, and the Chalke was not such. Moreover, I remember now that on Müller-Wiener it is shown the At Meydani part of another map of Constantinople (this time Turkish) about 1500 (contemporary with NC), and there too Müller-Wiener identifies the building with Arslan Hane. A last question: are we sure that in 1500 the Chalke was still in place? I will look on my holy books at home... I am afraid that - once more - we must go against one of Wikipedia laws doing ein bisschen original research :-) Alex2006 (talk) 08:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

OK then, I am perfectly satisfied :) Cheers, Constantine ✍ 11:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Hallo Costas, as we say in Italian, I cut the bull's head. :-) Since Müller-Wiener writes that the NC map gives a fantasy :-)representation of the City, I uploaded the beautiful miniature of the Hippodrome from Matrakci Nasuh. From this you can judge how imposing the church (represented still with its terrace) was. P.S. From what I read below, I think that after all moving to the City would be a safer option for you :-) Alex2006 (talk) 05:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, well, I've been attacked by Greeks, Turks, Albanians, been called an anti-Greek communist, a Greek nationalist, an employee of the Greek secret services, a pseudo-Greek, etc. A German is no trouble in comparison to the paranoid Balkan neighbourhood, but it is a nice addition to the collection, since it shows that stupidity isn't an exclusive preserve of the Balkans. The only thing all these guys had in common was that, though apparently fervently nationalist themselves, they could never be bothered to write their own language correctly, let alone English. I think that tells one everything there is to know about them. Constantine ✍ 07:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I think instead that you are only an honest person trying to write here in an objective way, and these makes a lot of people mad...apparently Wikipedia attracts such people as honey the flies. :-( And now a service question: :-) next week I have vacation, and I would like to spend three - four days in Athens to see above all the new Akropolis museum, but meine Freundin is afraid, she says that we risk of remaining stranded, or worse. Wie ist die Lage dort? :-)

No, there won't be any problem. First, nothing dramatic is going to happen (if it is going to happen) until after the June 17 elections, and second, Athens is not Paris during the July Revolution. The situation is tense but peaceful, and I don't think it affects tourists in any way, unless you open a political discussion on the current situation with a Greek ;) The weather is fine, tourist numbers are down, so you won't have to wait so long at museums etc, and prices are also appreciably lower than in the past. If you decide to come, drop a call, if I have time, I'd be happy to meet you! Constantine ✍ 08:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

OK Costas, it is as I thought, thanks! She want to go to the Big Greece => Sicily, let's see who is winning, Moussaka against Cannoli... :-) Alex2006 (talk) 08:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

John Troglita A class nomination

Hi Constantine, I've just closed this article's A class nomination as being successful. Congratulations, and keep up the good work. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 00:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Stop your stupid editing in the Germanic wars

Mofu what is your problem? Repair that shit you did in Chronology of Germanic Wars! Bastrd. Prophet of Hell ✍ 08:00, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I really don't have time to deal with people who lack even basic courtesy. You have been reported to WP:ANI. Constantine ✍ 06:39, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Wenn es einen Preis für den grössten Vollidioten gibt dann wirst du den auch noch gewinnen du kommunistische Missgeburt. ✍ 09:25, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Wegen dir bin ich gebannt wurden weil du so eine Memme bist. Mich wirst du aber nicht so schnell los und deine Drecksedits werde ich alle rückgängig machen du griechisches Kommunistenschwein. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.106.8.112 (talk) 23:23, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Macedonia

Macedonia (Greece) is the biggest of relative entities and the core of this historic and geographic area. But this entity not exist on the map supported by you. Why ? Because this propaganda map show F.Y.R as the core and only Macedonia and neighboring lands as occupied. If you do not understand that, you have a problem. Όχι στον σοβινισμό, αλλά όχι και στην αγαθότητα (ή στην ....), με την νεοελληνική έννοια του όρου. 77.49.157.170 (talk) 11:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, there is a better map in the naming dispute article. I've replaced it. Constantine ✍ 11:21, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

And BTW, θα προτιμούσα να μην θεωρείς αυτόματα ότι κάποιος έχει πρόβλημα ή ότι δεν καταλαβαίνει απλά επειδή δεν συμφωνεί άμεσα και άνευ όρων μαζί σου. Η συζήτηση και η ευγένεια ποτέ δεν έβλαψαν κανένα. Constantine ✍ 11:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

If possible, could you please... (your edit summary)

• Hello Cplakidas. I hope I can explain myself well, as you have accidentally stepped into a somewhat touchy situation (at least, in my opinion).
• The edit summary of your most recent edit to Byzantine civil war of 1341–1347 said, "fixing references due [to] moving around of sentences". I am very sure that you did not mean to imply that I had disturbed the order of the references (thus making them incorrect) when I rearranged the sentences. Of course, anyone can see that after I moved the sentences, the same references still apply to the same text. Moreover, the changes you made involved adding new references rather than rearranging existing ones... Unfortunately, however, the text of your edit summary does imply that I messed up the references... Now, normally I simply would ignore this. Of course you didn't mean to imply that I made the article incorrect. Unfortunately again, though, recently two editors complained acrimoniously when I made a late-night edit and then went to bed. Their complaints were similar: I had made the references incorrect by adding/moving text.
• Oh, and by the way, if you were worried that adding new references would make people feel that the article was somehow unprepared for FAC, then your worries were unnecessary. On the contrary, improving the references makes it look like you are actively engaged with the FAC process in a productive way.
• So, if it's not too much trouble, could you please be a little more careful with your edit summaries? Thanks! – Ling.Nut3 (talk) 07:49, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Ahem... You did move around the sentences and mix the references [12]: Gregoras' quote on the treasury containing "nothing but the atoms of Epicurus." is not to be found in Fine, but in Nicol, and your moving around removed Nicol. Initially, I was merely going for correcting this. However, as I opened my books to track down the references, I decided to expand the relevant sections a bit, and forgot to change the edit summary. Anyhow, don't take the edit summary as criticism, we all make mistakes. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 08:16, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Logically, then, the Epicurus quote should be in all three of the cites you have joined together. At any rate, best of luck with your nom. – Ling.Nut3 (talk) 09:45, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Erm, no, why would anyone have this impression? The references refer to an entire section, which comprises several sentences and not only the one quote. The section has been composed using all these sources, and I don't think there is an implication anywhere that all of its facts are in every one of the sources cited. Thanks for your input and the wishes, anyhow! :) Cheers, Constantine ✍ 09:54, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Bomzibar on Chiang Kai-shek; Nick-D on the Falklands War Interview: Article writers discuss biographies Op-ed: Nick-D examines using news articles as sources

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 14:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of the Baggage

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Cplakidas, you are invited!

Maybe you can include some information on Greek universities? I have invted you, because one of the purposes of this new project is to share information about the universities in Southeast Europe.--Comparativist1 (talk) 16:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Battle of Azaz (1030)

Hello! Your submission of Battle of Azaz (1030) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Secretlondon (talk) 19:39, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Azaz (1030)

Orlady (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Genoese occupation of Rhodes

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:05, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Norwich

Hi Constantine,

Thanks for the appreciation. John II now has an article which bears some relation to his admirable character and political importance. All the Norwich references were in place in the article before I started working on it in earnest. Most of them are now backed by ones to Angold or other sources. I know Norwich is populist and has a tendency to generalise but he is a good starting point for newcomers, so expunging him might be a little counterproductive. Urselius (talk) 13:54, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

If you have any information or sources for the civil and religious aspects of John's reign any additions would be most welcome. Urselius (talk) 14:37, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Help request

Hi, Constantine, pleased to hear from you, and with an interesting question at that! I too noticed this user a few days ago: the labeling of his image is very tendentious and quite unfitting. From the other uploaded images, I noticed that the user is also particularly interested in Fascist/Nazi organizations... Most of the images should be properly and neutrally renamed, though I think most of them have encylopedic value.

As for the columns: this may surprise you, but the columns appear to be authentic. I recalled that Krum did in fact seem to have left behind similar inscriptions. These were the so called "triumphal inscriptions", which are on separate columns listing fortresses and battles individually on each. And specific columns dedicated to the "Battle of Serres" and "Battle of Didymoteicho" do exist; they seem to have been discovered in Pliska along with several others of the same pattern.

Here's an extract from Veselin Beshevliev's Proto-Bulgar Epigraphic Monuments which details on these inscriptions. And This website claims to have another chapter from the same book which has the inscrptions transcribed to Latin.

Hope that helps! Best, — Toдor Boжinov — 20:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Komnenian stuff

EfHaristo poli for the "Greek barnstar" - much appreciated.

I was surprised when compiling the family trees for John II and Manuel I, I had no idea that John was descended from a Bulgarian tzar. When you look at Manuel's ancestry there is no wonder he was Western oriented, being half-Latin himself. If you trace his maternal ancestry back far enough he was a descendant of Otto II, the Holy Roman emperor, and his wife Theophano, a strange circularity.

I had a look at Komnenian restoration and wished I hadn't - there are lots of links to this page and it's rather poor and inaccurate in parts. I wonder if it should be merged out of existence with the other Komnenian period page? Urselius (talk) 18:27, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Parakalo! Yes, since we already have the Byzantium under the Komnenoi page, the Komnenian restoration is a bit redundant. Do as you see fit. Constantine ✍ 18:31, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Sieges of the Acropolis

Hi. What do you intend to do with the events between the departure of Omer Vryonis and the fall of the Acropolis to the Greeks in 1822? Will you make an dedicated article, or should we consider this as a second phase of the same first siege, and put the information in its article?--Phso2 (talk) 09:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

This should be in one article. I confess I was lazy enough not to check out my sources, and relied on the Greek WP article, which presented the siege as ending in 1821. I'll correct it ASAP. Thanks for the notice! Constantine ✍ 09:43, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the barnstar. You know that I highly evaluate your edits so it means a lot to me because it is you who awarded it to me. I hope I will manage to get out of very explosive minefields alive.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

It means alot coming from The Contributor himself, efxaristo poli! -Zoupan 21:35, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

resource request

Hi,

I've uploaded several article that you requested at the resource exchange. You can find links to the articles at that page. Best, GabrielF (talk) 05:56, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Cplakidas. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request#Medieval_Mediterranean_naval_articles.
Message added 08:58, 16 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Shrike (talk) 09:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Greek music template

Hi, Cplakidas. I know you keep an eye on some topics pertaining to Greece, so I just thought I'd point this out. The template {{Greekmusic}} was just added to Music of ancient Greece, which I watch casually. I know nothing about the template's history, but I noticed that the image used for it is from a Roman sarcophagus from Tuscany, dating around ca. 290–300 AD. The subject matter is from the Greek tradition, but if an image from antiquity is desired, my feeling is that it ought to be one of the many beautiful distinctly Greek images, as from Athens. Roman sarcophagi are recognizable as Roman at a glance to anyone familiar with them. To me at least they don't announce "Greek" in the way that the image at the top of the article does. Don't know whether anyone else cares about this; just wanted to mention it to someone informed about our Greek coverage in general. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:56, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree, but the problem is that the image has to be "squat", so that the navbox doesn't become even bigger. There are a few good images out there, but they are rather elongated. Of course, IMO it doesn't have to be an ancient Greek motif at all, a Byzantine or modern one would do as well. I'll keep my eyes open in case I encounter something suitable. Constantine ✍ 15:57, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I often find these boxes more trouble than they're worth. They add visual interest to articles that lack images, but for articles with plentiful imagery in relation to text, they often create layout nightmares. Sometimes these things have been put together willy-nilly, and end up with links that are not strictly necessary (the Greek music one has three redlinks, which a nav or sidebar should not have, since the whole idea is to provide readers with other places to go). I whittled down the vertical sidebar on ancient Roman religion recently to focus on overview articles, but it could be whittled further. Graphically, though, I might argue that a better image at the top is worth the extra bit of space; or maybe an image isn't needed at all, if none is suitable. I experimented with what such a thing would look like: see this user page of mine. I did a little whittling (nothing deleted except the redlinks), and just picked this photo because the landscape shouts "Greece" to me and it color-coordinates nicely with the color bars, but there would no doubt be objections about representing all of Greek music by a single flesh-and-blood musician. As a graphic device, it's a simpler images that states "Greek" and "music" more clearly. It's slightly longer, though, even with "whittling". (BTW, I just like playing with these things because I did work like this IRL. It's absolutely no big deal to me.) Thanks. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

If we're going with people, I'd suggest something more collective, along the lines of Piraeus Quartet.jpg or Smyrna Trio.jpg. I slightly prefer the black and white because it does not attract so much attention upon itself. After all, the image is purely decorative and hence secondary to the navbox's purpose. Alternatively, we could go with the tried and tested folklore approach and simply use the Bouzouki tetrachordo.jpg. Constantine ✍ 17:53, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

There's also a nice image here: Byzantine Lyra Museo Nazionale.jpg. Constantine ✍ 17:56, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Graphically, I'd go for the bouzouki. (I've tried it also at my page.) If it could be partially rotated in Photoshop, it would give you the strong horizontal that you're looking for; as it is, it creates a lot of whitespace within the template. If the image is only decorative, though, I'd go back to saying maybe an image isn't needed. Generally in a series sidebar, the image should announce the topic in a graphically striking or memorable way, so the reader sees at a glance what the purpose is. The bouzouki would be a good sig for that. The other images don't "read" unless you already know what content they represent. I don't have access to Photoshop at the moment, though, so my fun is over. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:29, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Agreed on the bouzouki, then! I'll give a try myself at rotating it, otherwise I'll put in a request. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 18:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

One just never knows what will get people stirred up ... And here I was thinking I was doing something good by getting Greece out from under Rome's thumb! Cynwolfe (talk) 21:18, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

(unindent)Yeah, I half-expected that. The topic in general has a suprisingly high rate of IP activity with all sorts of opinion-pushing. I reverted for now, because frankly the new image is way too generic for the specific topic, but in the end I think I'll support no image at all... Constantine ✍ 21:21, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Siege of Constantinople (717-718)

Greetings, Cplakidas! I haven't written you for a long time, unfortunately. You have done great work on the Siege of Constantinople (717–718) but I have two remarks: 1) the name Bulgar Khanate is awkward because there is a consensus that in the period 681-1018 the country should be called First Bulgarian Empire and I think that should be consisted; 2) it was "not" simply a Byzantine but Byzantine-Bulgarian victory as there share of the Bulgarians is widely recognized as being decisive. And even if it is not, both allies should be mentions together. Regards, --Gligan (talk) 16:48, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the praise ;) On the issues you raised, first, the Bulgarian state between 681 and 1018 in its entirety is known as the "1st Bulgarian Empire", but it is still acceptable to use the terms "khanate" and "principality" for the specific periods during that timeframe. The "Nomenclature" section in the relevant article makes that pretty clear. Furthermore, it would be odd to have khan Tervel ruling an "Empire" (with capital "E"). On the infobox, I am still in two minds about this. If I relied on Treadgold alone, I'd say the Bulgarian contribution was decisive, because he has the Bulgars harassing the Arabs from day one of their landing in Thrace. However, the primary sources, Arab or Byzantine, say nothing of this sort, and Lilie (who I trust far more than Treadgold on matters of detail) suggests that the Arab defeat in 718 against the Bulgars was not directly connected to the siege, since the treaty between Leo and Tervel was commercial rather than a military alliance. In other words, that there was no Bulgarian relief effort, but rather a large-scale Arab foraging operation into Bulgarian lands. Plus, it is a fact by the time the Bulgarian victory occurred the siege had already failed: if anything the decisive event was the destruction of the Arab fleet (there is no record of the Bulgars attacking the Arab encampment) with its provisions, coupled with the defeat of the Arab army marching through Asia Minor. To be frank, part of the reason for my removal of the "-Bulgarian" was that the previous version of the article was focusing too much on the Bulgarian role (unsurprisingly, this was the work of Bulgarian editors), with Tervel as "Savior of Europe" etc. Let me mull it over for a few days. Constantine ✍ 17:14, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, Khanate by itself is not what worries me. It should be Bulgarian Khanate because Bulgarian is the adjective of the country; it is certain that the army Tervel led came from the country Bulgaria or Bulgarian Khanate/State/Empire but it is not certain if it consisted only of Bulgars. That is why I think Bulgar should generally be avoided after the year 681 when the country what officially established (if we can speak for "official" foundation at those times). After 681 the Khan was ruler not only of the Bulgars but also of the Slavs who lived within the country.

Now on the second point, as I said both allied belligerents should be included, no matter of their share in the battle. Both states are put in the infobox and yet the victory is only Byzantine. Although, as it seems, some sources don't mention Bulgarian participation (which astonished me, I could never imagine such a thing), many others do and I think that the mention of specific numbers of Arab cassualties (a rarity for the Middle Ages) implies that the Bulgarians did participate and that by itself is a sufficient reason. Of course, we can only guess why Terval interfered, whether by treaty or otherwise, but that is another issue.

As far as "Savior of Europe" is concerned (very famous quote in Bulgaria, as you can imagine), if I am not mistaken most Bulgarian historians never miss it and claim Tervel was called like that by Western European sources. However, I myself don't know which are these sources but if I find them then it should be included because it would show that the impact of the Bulgarian attack was significant enough to reach Western Europe. Hoever, I have so limited time right now that it is certain I will not even try to search in the next weeks. I envy you for finding time to write such high-quality content. From time to time I take a look though your contributions just to see what is new on Byzantine history and I am positive that the volume you have added is enough for several books and above all - nicely written ones. Best, --Gligan (talk) 18:15, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I've restored the joint victory in the infobox. You are right, if both countries are mentioned, both should share credit. On the "Bulgar" vs "Bulgarian", in my experience for the Khanate period the former is more common. After all, it was only 30 years after the Bulgars established their state and their society was still pretty much Turkic. On Tervel as "Savior of Europe", if you find something please tell me. From his own article, the fact was referenced to some non-RS sites, and only one relatively credible one, which indicates that it was a far later (17th century, IIRC) appelation. Cheers, and I hope you find time again to be active on WP! Constantine ✍ 12:28, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I have no problem with the Bulgarian Khanate or even with "Bulgars". However, you do downplay the Bulgarian role in the siege. You have deleted Tervel's seal, the initial Bulgarian attack and even Michael the Syrian's, a Greek historian, quote about the Bulgarian role: "... The Bulgars attacked the Arabs and slew them; those latter [the Arabs] feared the Bulgars more than they feared the besieged Romans. The winter came, but the Arabs were afraid of retreating: first - because of their king, second - because of the sea and third - because of the Bulgars...", etc. In general, you have deleted the whole section "Bulgarian aid". I do not see the problem you might have with it because it doesn't say Bulgarians helped the Greeks from completely noble altruistic feelings, on the opposite, they helped because they didn't want to face a more dangerous enemy in the face of the Arabs.

About the macro-historical decisiveness of the battle, it is a fact that many more Arabs attacked here in the East than in the West (the battle of Tour), to say the least. I'm convinced this victory is no less important that the Franks', if not more important.

About the saviour of Europe, for now it's fine, though it'd be more correct to mention that at least Bulgarian historians call Tervel that. As soon as I find a non-Bulgarian source about this I'll write to you. However, I'd like to ask you to consider the rest of my points for the sake of historical accuracy. Dimitar Dobrev, 21 June 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.130.73.25 (talk) 09:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I certainly reduced the prominence of the Bulgarian role, because, as I wrote above, it was disproportionate to what the sources actually tell us of it and what modern scholars think. Tervel's seal is a fine image, but I removed it to fit other, rather more relevant, images in the article. On the "Bulgarian aid" section, it went because I could not find anything about these attacks on the Arab encampments by the Bulgars, let alone several times, nor of the Byzantines attacking them and being driven back. Michael the Syrian (who was not Greek, BTW) writes to this effect, but his report is removed from the events by 400 years, and the whole narrative of the siege has become jumbled in the process. The modern scholarly treatments I have used place more reliance on Theophanes' account and on some Arab sources, and they mention nothing of the sort. I may re-include him in a quote box, however. I agree on the comparatively greater importance of Constantinople vs. Tours, but that is my opinion. We'd need some WP:RS to back it up, and given the mythical status Tours has in Western European collective memory, that'd be hard to find. On Tervel as "Savior of Europe", if only modern Bulgarian historians call him that, then I won't include it. Modern Balkan nationalism has led to all sorts of grandiose titles retroactively awarded to historical figures. It belongs in Tervel's article as an indication of his modern status, but not here (especially since the article originally claimed that he was called that by contemporary historians, which AFAIK is not the case). As always, I am prepared to revise my opinion if new sources are presented. Constantine ✍ 09:27, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Ministries

Hi there,

If the presidential decree distinguishes between "renaming" ministries and "establishing" them, should we follow suit on Wikipedia? For example, the health ministry was renamed but the ministry for education, religious affairs, culture and sports "created". --Damac (talk) 21:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, that is a good question (and one I wasn't aware of). To me, the latter seems to be merely the continuation of the olf Nat.Ed. ministry, but if the decree says it was created, I'd say we should follow it. It doesn't get any higher than this, as far as WP:RS is concerned. Constantine ✍ 21:50, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

A different issue: if you know, could you please tell me what exactly is the status of alternate ministers? AFAIK they are treated as essentially the same as the regular minister (and are often meant to dothe actual work in his stead), but what is their position legally? And should we, for instance, include them in {{Current Cabinet of Greece}}? Constantine ✍ 21:56, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I think education could be renamed, because at it's root is the education ministry, which will always be with us.

But it's very tricky with Development, Competitiveness, Infrastructure, Transport and Networks as that is essentially a merger between the Ministry of Development, Competitiveness and Shipping and Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Networks (Greece). Perhaps, because Development is the first item mentioned, we should rename the Ministry of Development, Competitiveness and Shipping (Greece) article. One way of telling will be to see where the new minister goes tomorrow. To which former ministry? Which website will be renamed and which redirected. Maybe we should wait for that.

I found a Ministry for Touristic Development which I renamed Ministry of Tourism (Greece) and Ministry of Maritime Affairs, Islands and Fisheries (Greece) (renamed to Ministry of Shipping (Greece). Tomorrow, I'll explain in the intros to these articles that the 2012 "creation" is essentially the resurrection of these ministries (at least that's how the new govt and the media view them).

Will check about alternate ministers. As far as I know, they have equal status but only one can attend a cabinet meeting at any one time.--Damac (talk) 22:17, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Siege of Constantinople (717–718) and Battle of Solachon

Hi, I have reviewed Siege of Constantinople (717–718) and placed it on hold for up to seven days with some concerns. You can see my review here: Talk:Siege of Constantinople (717–718)/GA1. Canadian Paul 00:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I've now also reviewed Battle of Solachon and placed it on hold as well. That review page is here. Canadian Paul 23:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Are you ready for me to look at Battle of Solachon? Canadian Paul 14:41, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Spartan Army

don't be such of an Athenian lover, sure Athens did create democracy, and people like you believe that Sparta is the ancient world's USSR. But frankly the sources are RELIABLE enough. It doesn't only contain History Channel mock-ups, but pages of books and expert knowledge are also listed. OPEN UR EYES & CHECK THEM URSElf...27.108.156.169 (talk) 08:55, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

"Athenian lover"? What nonsense is this? I wrote most of the Spartan army article myself, thank you very much. I have no objection, quite the contrary, on including a section on their philosophy and societal outlook, but you have to read and unserstand WP:RS first. History Channel documentaries, blog pages etc are out, period. Find published, if possible peer-reviewed works, and use proper citations so that one can verify what you are writing. The subject is already the scene of too much misinformation, so that new additions should be rigorously sourced. Constantine ✍ 14:52, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Chaco War and the Bougainville Campaign Op-ed: Remembering conflict

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 18:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

New featured article

Congratulations on the promotion of Byzantine civil war of 1341–1347. Thoroughly merited. I greatly enjoyed reviewing it. Tim riley (talk) 15:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Nice to have one's hard work being appreciated! Constantine ✍ 15:01, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks, Constantine. I really appreciate the award from such a prolific and knowledgeable user. Regards, --Kober^Talk 19:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Email address

Hi Constantine,

My Yahoo email address has been hijacked. I have closed it, but it takes some time before it is deleted. You might want to block the address.

Regards,

Urselius (talk) 15:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Cplakidas. You have new messages at Talk:Battle of Yassıçemen.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 16:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Kalavryta massacre.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Kalavryta massacre.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:10, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

resource request - June 29

Hi,

I've uploaded several of the articles that you requested at the resource exchange. You can find links to the articles at that page. GabrielF (talk) 01:21, 30 June 2012 (UTC)