User talk:Akhilleus/archive4

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Removing references

Hi, Akhillleus. Deleting the reference to Wilkens you forgot to delete the information from this unreliable source as well; It's about Scheria: "Lanzarote, one of the Canary Isles, has been proposed as a possible location for Scheria. A map of 1764 by the Scottish explorer George Glass shows two ports on either side of the citadel. The port west of the citadel (now Arrecife) was called Porto Cavallos (port of the horses), while the port east of the city was called Porto de Naos (port of the ship) because of a rock resembling a ship off the coast.

But when we are about to enter the city, around which runs a lofty wall, a fair harbour lies on either side of the city and the entrance is narrow. (Odyssey 6. 260-262)." Antiphus 21:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. --Akhilleus (talk) 22:55, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pharmakos article restored to previous version

Hi Akhilleus. Anonymous editor User:71.255.92.56 changed the gist and verifiability of the article on the ancient Greek Pharmakos which I had carefully researched and written into, some time ago. I restored the old version after carefully reading the new version many times and seeing some unverifiability in it, even though it seems to present as a "cleanup" re-write. It's just not that. The old version is: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pharmakos&oldid=78999545

I will be updating the article with more citations and verifiable text soon. Any thoughts ? Best Wishes. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)[reply]

Akhilleus, thanks for getting back to me expeditiously and your kind words. I just added a couple of new references to the article and re-worked the footnotes style. I was also puzzled by the "That which can cure can kill" bit put into the article by the anon editor because it didn't make much sense to me upon many readings and in-context. Rather the opposite sense with a pharmakos -- the sacrifice (killing) which will cure the community, etc. I will look into the many points you raised on the article and the anon's edition. Best Wishes and Many Thanks again. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC) (User talk:Wikiklrsc)[reply]

Hi Akhilleus. Thanks for the revert on the Pharmakos article to the "restore" made by User:Carlwfbird. I don't know why he restored it to the previous fuzzy changes. I spent a lot of time on the article yesterday, with a couple of new citations, especially the Professor Jan Bremmer paper, "Scapegoat Rituals in Ancient Greece", January 1983. It's an excellent article from the journal, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology. Let's hope the article settles down again. I'll also try to refine it some more. Best Wishes. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)[reply]

Iman Wilkens

I nominated Wilkens' book for deletion, and I think could use you joining in on the discussion. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Where_Troy_Once_Stood. CaveatLectorTalk 18:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't want speedy deletion of Thomas Temple article!

Hi Akhilleus. Can you help on this ? User_talk:Mapetite526#Speedy_Deletion_of_Thomas_Temple_article_.3F. I only wrote/began to write this article because much of what I had otherwise been writing was referencing Sir Thomas Temple! And so many established articles pointed to an empty Thomas Temple article, so I decided to start writing it. Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 22:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC) (User talk:Wikiklrsc)[reply]

Thanks, Akhilleus for your kind reply. Rich Farmbrough seems to have corrected the issue. Temple's being in the Canadian Dictionary of Biography was significant enough plus having been Governor of Nova Scotia, and a confidential friend of King Charles II of England, etc. etc. I am not quite totally up on that period of history myself but did the research. Best Wishes and Thanks again. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 12:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)[reply]

Alexander

Hey, Akhilleus. I'll take a look at the Alexander the Great situation later tonight or tomorrow, but to be honest I'm still a bit fatigued from the Cretanpride fiasco. I haven't been paying close attention to the most combative pages on my watchlist, just because I don't really feel like I have the energy to get involved. That said, I'll see if I can be any help in resolving the situation.

I agree that RfCs rarely bring in more than one or two new voices, but perhaps those one or two voices will be helpful ones. As Linus always said, it's better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness. :) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 02:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Akhilleus, what do you make of the goings on at the article? I confess to not having paid it any attention for a while, but I was surprised nevertheless by what I found, both in the text and in the categories. Haiduc 02:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for paying attention to this. I agree with you that an RfC would be useful, and I will certainly contribute my opinion and participate in the debate. Haiduc 02:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Akhilleus. I'll drop by the RfC at some point, and lend moral support, but I don't think I'll take a leadership position on this one. Thanks for your understanding. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Akhilleus. I just left a note for Aldux on this - I am concerned at the imposition of an arbitrary conceit on the AtG article. One of the fellows involved in this even seems to think he can reach consensus all by himself. I see the breach of Wikipedia principles going on as dangerous and not to be condoned, since it is likely to spread. Any thoughts? Haiduc 16:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've finally had a chance to look over the debate and have tried to formulate a possible compromise. It's not ideal (compromise rarely is), but I think it might be a way forward. Let me know what you think. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:50, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. His way or argumenting tends to remember me Cretanpride: have you considered asking a chackuser?--Aldux 00:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Akhilleus, what is your opion on the category suggested by Joshua [1] Regards. Apro 13 October 2006

Hi Akhilleus, same here, it will be nice to resolve the category issue and get back to trying to make the article better, not that it isn't good now but everything always needs improvements. LoL!! Yes I came to leave you a message regarding the category suggested by Joshiah and saw Cretanpride and thought that was me. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Regards :)Apro 13 October 2006

Sockpuppet/SPA

I think that your suspicions are warranted. Do you want to do the honors at RfCu, or shall I? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel sure enough to block it just for being a SPA. I'd feel more comfortable with an RfCu. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, right— I forgot about that possibility. Darn it, how are we supposed to be able to distinguish between legitimate new users and sockpuppets then? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:50, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Like this, for instance. I suppose Takidis is technically no longer an single-purpose account. --Akhilleus (talk) 01:05, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Technically... —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 02:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info, kudos for the work. Now to eliminating ethnic bias from the article. Haiduc 01:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that Talk:Alexander the Great has more than a few WikiProject notices. I assume you've asked for support at WP:CGR, but perhaps WP:BIOGRAPHY or one of the other WikiProjects who have inscribed their sigils on the talk page might have some helpful hints. (To be fair, you should probably ask at WP:HOG as well, even though I fear the inhabitants of that project might have less-than-objective views on the subject of Alexander...)

Other than that, I'm really not sure. Perhaps somewhere on the Village Pump — WP:VPA or WP:VPM? — might be useful. Unfortunately, I'm going away for the weekend and may not be able to check in until Monday. I'm sorry to drop in and out like this, but I hope my suggestions have provided a step towards common ground. Good luck! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 02:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser request declined

Well, I suppose we can just ignore him. At least he's not flooding the page persistently: he seems to have said his piece and gone (for now). —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 03:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Minnesota Twins

Thanks for the work, but can you take a look at the Userbox template? It won't add pages to the category listed. Thanks for your help. Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 04:28, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yoghurt Move Request

Please read (and, if you choose, respond to) this in regards to your survey statement on the Yoghurt move request. Thanks in advance. -- tariqabjotu 02:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coveney, Cambridgeshire restored

This article has been restored after its deletion was contested at Wikipedia:Deletion review. As you nominated the article to be deleted via WP:PROD, you may wish to nominate the article for a full deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. --Sam Blanning(talk) 09:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

My administratorship candidacy succeeded with a final tally of 81/0/1. I appreciate your support. Results are at Wikipedia:Recently_created_admins#Durova. Warmly, Durova 21:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Wow

Thanks for removing that...It wasnt me it was my friend who likes to pull pranks

Mediation, Alexander the Great

Hello,

regarding your request for mediation here for article Alexander the Great, I just want to let you know that I've taken this case for mediation and I will help you to solve it. Every party is now announced that this is an open case. We will continue on Talk:Alexander the Great.

Regards, Wissahickon Creek talk 12:41, 23 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Julian the Apostate

Just wanted to thank you for your dose of common sense on Julian the Apostate. Panarjedde returned from his 12-hour block and promptly restored his version of the article, but I'm keeping my hands off for the time being because I don't want to participate in an edit/revert war. Geokerk, meanwhile, has levelled the accusation that you "censored" his comment. This is the first time that I've run into this sort of obstinacy in the face of actual scholarship, so I'm not completely sure how these sorts of things are handled. Do you have any experience with this sort of thing? Dppowell 13:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support on that edit. I don't think reason is likely to work here, though, and expect that Panarjedde will revert again when he returns from his latest block. Would it be appropriate to request comments from members the Wikipedia classics/antiquity project in order to establish how widespread the consensus is on this issue? Or is deploying exhaustive evidence on the article's Talk page the way to go? Dppowell 20:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It may be a moot point; the person in question has just been indefinitely banned as the sockpuppet of a previously-banned user. I'm glad we don't have to reinvent the wheel. Dppowell 22:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
He's baaack, but at least he's participating in discussions now. Wouldn't mind your support again, when your time permits. Dppowell 16:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Alexander the Great/sexuality discussion

No worries. As it's been several days I no longer remember what I remembered or thought at the time, but no worries. --Badger151 16:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see that I did helped you, and I did a great job for you. It's exactly what you expected, a third opinion. Best regards, Wissahickon Creek talk 20:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Mediation Cabal case

You are receiving this notice because you have already been notified of the mediation cabal case here. I am offering to take over the mediation and welcome you to participate or request another mediator. Cheers. --Keitei (talk) 19:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My name for it is "the hall of mirrors"

Nothing is what it seems to be. What a hoax that was! My compliments to you for your perseverance. Haiduc 04:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yogurt/Yoghurt

This notice is to inform you that there is a new discussion open on the Yogurt/Yoghurt debate. Please visit Talk:Yogurt#Requested move revisited and consider participating. Thank you. —Mets501 (talk) 00:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)  [reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Hi Akhilleus, Just wanted to let you know that I am using a server at work which is used by thousands of other people not only at our home office but nation wide which are routed back to our home office's Info Center who share similar IPs. I'm sure I am not the only person from my company who has accounts on Wiki at work. As for advocating similar issues for one thing if Apro is Greek it wouldn't surprise me that he shares similar views as me and as you said I'm not on there nor do I contribute to the issue as extensively as he does. No, I am not Apro but thank you for mentioning that 'cause I am now curious to find out if he does work in my building and who he is. It would be kind of funny if we both do work at the same place and are communicating on Wiki. Regards. :) Mallaccaos 26 October 2006

Don't understand how I can be suspect of being a sockpuppet of Mallaccaos when we are both logged in at the moment and are both posting/editing on wiki at the same moment. Apro 26 October 2006

RfA FnC

Cbuhl79 has opened a Request for Arbitration about the Fox News Channel intro wording. Somehow he forgot to notify you. I am requesting you visit the RfA and add your $0.02. Current RfA Page. Thanks! /Blaxthos 20:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did not notify every editor who made a single comment in the dispute. Cbuhl79 03:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece....again

Akhilleus...I know you are probably busy, but I am afraid that, given my current situation of personal stress, I might show a fatal lack of patience with User:Takadis within the article Homosexuality in Ancient Greece as per his rehashing of CretanPride's 'arguments' and general refusal to respect scholarly consensus. Could I appeal to you as a cooler head in this situation before my mind explodes? CaveatLectorTalk 05:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had the idea to ask Mackensen to look into it, since he had familiarity with Cretanpride's previous IPs. He confirmed that Takidis is Cretanpride, and blocked him, χαρις τω θεω. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 01:21, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry — I've been just as frustrated as you are. Unfortunately, the removal of Takidis hasn't ended the saga... [2] —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 01:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]