User talk:SteliokardamWelcome!Welcome to Wikipedia, Steliokardam! I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Marek.69 talk 23:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Hello! Please do not add your own research and ideas on articles, as you did at Gazi Evrenos and his supposed descent from the Ouranos family. Wikipedia relies on reliable sources and a strict verifiability policy, and personal synthesis of material by its own users is strongly discouraged. Regards, Constantine ✍ 16:12, 2 October 2010 (UTC) Hi! I'm sorry if i have offended anyone with my initiative of elaborating on something so self-evident, like the multi-national branches of the Ouranos family. After all, the matter was already being mentioned, quote: "A persistent Greek legend maintains that Evrenos' father was a certain Ornos". "Ornos", like "Ouranos" maybe??? You're like so lame.. But it's OK! I had already made up my mind never again to assist the ludicrous efforts of the greek-language wikipedia contributors. I notice that "wikipedia central" is not that different. Steliokardam (talk) 18:26, 2 October 2010 (UTC) Hi, Steliokardam. Please don't make me report you for edit warring and adding unsourced original research to the Okay article. You theory is cute, but it is in violation of wp policy. See the policies wp:or and wp:3rr. μηδείς (talk) 20:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC) Duh!? original research??? I don't think so: List of proposed etymologies of OK Can't see anything o r i g i n a l in what I have suggested: OccitanFor several centuries (10th-13th c) before the anti-Cathar Crusade, the south of France flourished as the "Pais" (i.e. Land) of "Langue d'Oc" (i.e. the language of "OK", "Yes"). Occitan, the local variety of the neo-Latin linguistic subgroup that also includes Catalan, offered Humanity words like "cretin" (from "Christian"), "troubadour", as well as the American affirmation "OK". Apparently, there were also Occitans, among the Huguenot refugees that settled in the New Netherlands (Nieuw Nederlands), a land which soon evolved into the English colonies of New York and Pennsylvania. Most revealing is the existence of "New Rochelle" in the State of New York, named after the famous last stronghold of the Huguenots in France, which was captured by the forces of Cardinal Richelieu in 1628. (Steliokardam (talk) 20:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)) Formal WarningI tried being polite. μηδείς (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2011 (UTC) You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. h u m b u g ! (Steliokardam (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2011 (UTC)) Byzantine naval ensignsHello! Byzantine navy is a Featured Article, which means that it must contain only information that has been published in reliable, scholarly works or that comes directly from primary sources with proper scholarly input. As the main author of the article, furthermore, I have searched far and wide and read most of the works, both primary and secondary, that deal with the subject. Nowhere have I found any such ensigns. If you know of any primary source that mentions them, I'd be indebted to you if you could bring it forward. Otherwise, unfortunately, the ensigns seem to be fictional. The websites you mention do not constitute a reliable source nor do they appear to be based on any such source, except the author's fancy. Constantine ✍ 15:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC) Are you guys interested in historical accuracy, or just academic orthodoxy? You've really got me confused here.. In several occasions, I've come across the same smattering blinkers: the House of lord Evrenos, the true origin of Okay, and the whereabouts of the descendants of the various medieval Slavic tribes. Steliokardam (talk) 15:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC) Είσαι Έλληνας, Κωνσταντίνε? Και με το λήμμα "Ρωμανία" την ίδια στενοκεφαλιά αντιμετώπισα. Τι να πω; Διόρθωσέ τους τουλάχιστον στο αγγλόφωνο λήμμα "Eudokia Komnene". Η κοπέλα ήταν κόρη του πρωτοσεβάστου & πρωτοβεστιαρίου Αλεξίου, και όχι του σεβαστοκράτορα Ισαάκ, σύμφωνα με στοιχεία και της ..Βικιπαιδειας: el: Δυναστεία Κομνηνών Η Ευδοκία είναι η υπ'αριθμόν α3->β3->γ1->δ2->ε2->στ2' Steliokardam (talk) 16:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Μήπως τα πυρέκβολα της σημαίας της Ρωμανίας μετασχηματίζονται σταδιακά στα βασιλικά βήτα, εξαιτίας ακριβώς αυτής της παύσης χρήσης του υγρού πυρός; Πάντως έχεις απόλυτο δίκιο για τον μάλλον προπαγανδιστικό όρο "Ρωμιοτουρκία", αν και σε καμία περίπτωση δεν είναι πιο ανακριβής από τον εξίσου αναχρονιστικό "Βυζαντινός", όρος που παραδόξως χρησιμοποιείται κατά κόρον από τους "ειδικούς", Βυζαντινολόγους και μη. Όσο για τα διακριτικά χρώματα, πώς αλλιώς εξηγείται π.χ η ασπρόμαυρη παντιέρα και ο ασπρόμαυρος δικέφαλος σε χρήση από το ναυτικό της Αυτοκρατορίας της Τραπεζούντας, παράλληλα με τον ερυθρόχρυσο δικέφαλο των Κομνηνών (που έμεινε μονός ερυθρόχρυσος αετός, κατόπιν συμφιλίωσης με τους Παλαιολόγους το 1280); Κοινή λογική, κι ας μην έχουμε εντρυφήσει π.χ στον Παπαρηγόπουλο, μας υποδεικνύει ότι η εμφάνιση γαλανόλευκων παντιέρων κατά τον 17ο αι, δεν αποτελεί παρθενογένεση. Όπως επίσης δεν βρίσκεται απαραίτητα στη Δύση η προέλευση οικοσήμων που υιοθετούν ελληνικοί οίκοι κατά τη διάρκεια της Φραγκοκρατίας (π.χ οι Καλλέργηδες και οι Βρανάδες), όπως ακόμα δεν βρίσκεται απαραίτητα στα βάθη της Ασίας η προέλευση των εθνικών συμβόλων της Ουγγαρίας, περίπου ισότιμης εταίρου της Ρωμανίας, κατά τη διάρκεια της βασιλείας του Μανουήλ Κομνηνού (εποχή ακριβώς που εμφανίζονται αυτά τα ερυθρόλευκα σύμβολα). Steliokardam (talk) 19:49, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Πολύ μ'αρέσει η τελευταία πρότασή σου.. "..απλά φαντασιώνεται στο μυαλό του [κάτι] άλλο από αυτό που υπήρξε [πραγματικά].." Την έχω χρησιμοποιήσει κι εγώ για ν'αντιμετωπίσω τη φαντασιόπληκτη παράνοια που έχει καταστεί η υπόθεση "Ελληνική Ιστορία στο διαδίκτυο"! Οφείλουμε να είμαστε πολύ προσεκτικοί στην εκμαίευση της πραγματικότητας από κάθε ιστορική πτυχή. Ένας ασφαλής τρόπος, είναι να προτιμώνται "πηγές", και ν'αποφεύγονται "πρωτότυπες εργασίες", όπως ορίζει η Βικιπαίδεια. Όμως, τι γίνεται όταν η επισήμως και επιστημονικώς καταγεγραμμένη Ιστορία, απλά είναι λάθος; Ως παράδειγμα τρανό, δεν παραλείπω να παρουσιάζω τη γελοία καταγραφή του λήμματος "el: Ρωμανία".. "Πηγές" για την πραγματική ονομασία της Βυζαντινής Αυτοκρατορίας; Πρωτογενείς: http://users.uoa.gr/~nektar/history/tributes/byzantine_historians/cosmas_indicopleustes_topographia_christiana.htm 5ος αι και http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Constantinus%20Porphyrogenitus_PG%20112-113/De%20administrando%20imperio.pdf 10ος αι. Δεδομένου ότι η δογματικότητα δεν οδηγεί πουθενά, χαίρομαι που τουλάχιστον δέχεσαι ότι δεν είναι απαραιτήτως δυτικόφερτα, όλα τα οικόσημα και οι παντιέρες στο γεωγραφικό χώρο της Ρωμανίας. Γιατί ν'αποκλείεται η ύπαρξη συστήματος σημαιών, περίπλοκο και φανταχτερό όσο και όλα τα του Βυζαντίου; Ενδείξεις: https://600f924a-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/romeandromania/Home/10th-c/demographics_1000/Vranas.jpg?attachauth=ANoY7cqmPZoifUiEE87hGAN_yJj4_sEtRv3vrdnCt6cPBdaUN4QdZKoj1tIcykjFGKy1T6EXLpW3IZ13LMjSotTc1TOShILH-1tfktIz34GZrMjrkvtdWv4brFV-AB444O9RKQf3G6EOWMMrGqwm-tIVhd9OsBMXOf89tavJPgmY0LvfQ-CpXZ1LnapWquGK-OHtf4Juu4swZN-TMCGre2yYkMqaYwk80qOn5IACncjQmkb4PlVpJgwwftjFUfzbAOD3v8-vIpYi&attredirects=0 Στην καρδιά του οικοσήμου είναι τα γνώριμα κρινάκια και τα χρώματα των Καπέτων, των Βαλουά, και των Βουρβώνων, ένεκα που η αυτοκρατόρισσα Άννα η Φράγκα ήταν Γαλλίδα, γόνος του οίκου Καπέτ, και ερωμένη του Θεοδώρου Βρανά. Το γύρω γύρω του οικοσήμου, όμως, από που προέρχεται; Που το βρήκαν οι Βρανάδες; Αλλά και για το ασπροκόκκινο διακριτικό, ίσως είναι καλό να ερευνήσει κανείς προς Ουγγαρία μεριά: Όλα τους τα σύμβολα, οι Μαγυάροι Αρπάντ τα πήραν από τους εταίρους τους, τους αυτοκράτορες της Ρωμανίας. Γιατί όχι και τις λωρίδες Αρπαντ (Árpád stripes); http://sites.google.com/site/romeandromania/Home/8th-c/flag.jpg?attredirects=1 Για τα πυρέκβολα διάβασα από εδώ: http://www.friesian.org/romania.htm Steliokardam (talk) 16:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Δεν διαφωνώ, αν και κρίση έχουμε να καταλαβαίνουμε τ'αυτονόητα. Π.χ. ο δικέφαλος αετός αποτελεί μοτίβο ασυνήθιστο, σε χρήση σε τρεις μονάχα γωνιές του Κόσμου. Μία από αυτές είναι η Μικρασία, όπου υπάρχουν πολλά παραδείγματα διακοσμητικής, όσο και εραλδικής, χρήσης του δικεφάλου από την Εποχή του Ορείχαλκου. Μέσω επαφών με τους Χετταίους και άλλα ιθαγενή έθνη της Ανατολίας, το μοτίβο μεταφέρεται και στην άλλη πλευρά του Αιγαίου, οπότε το συναντάμε και σε μυκηναϊκές αρχαιολογικές θέσεις (στην κεντρική αίθουσα του Αρχαιολογικού Μουσείου Αθηνών έχει ωραία ευρήματα), αλλά μέχρι εκεί.. Ο δικέφαλος ξαναεμφανίζεται πολύ αργότερα, ως χρυσέρυθρο έμβλημα (να πω οικόσημο?) των Κομνηνών, ενός σχετικά άσημου _μ ι κ ρ α σ ι α τ ι κ ο ύ_ οίκου, που σχετίζεται με τους Δούκες, τους οποίους και καταφέρνει να διαδεχτεί τελικά. Όμως, μέχρι να εδραιωθούν οι Κομνηνοί, και ν'αρχίσουν να αντιγράφουν δυτικότροπα κόλπα, όπως π.χ. τα εραλδικά οικόσημα, μπουκάρουν στην Ανατολία και οι Σελτζούκοι, που επίσης υιοθετούν το δικέφαλο, στην προσπάθειά τους να τα βρουν με τους ιθαγενείς λαούς. Όσο για τη Γερμανική Αυτοκρατορία, η υιοθέτηση του δικεφάλου συμβαίνει μόλις το 1244, επί τη ευκαιρία γραικογερμανικής επιγαμίας. Συγκεκριμένα, ο Φρειδερίκος Β' μετατρέπει το στυλιζαρισμένο κιτρινόμαυρο αετό των Χοενστάουφεν σε δικέφαλο, την ίδια στιγμή που ο Καλογιάννης της εποχής, ο Ιωάννης Γ' Δούκας Βατάτζης, καταργεί τον πρασινόμαυρο δικέφαλο του προηγούμενου πεθερού του, του Θεοδώρου Λάσκαρη, υιοθετώντας τα πιο πρεστίζιους χρώματα του νέου του πεθερού, Φρειδερίκου Β'. Όμως, πλατιάζω, και δεν έχει νόημα (και κάπως έτσι μπορεί κάποιος να παρασυρθεί και να χαθεί σε εικασίες, που λες) Καλό βράδυ! Steliokardam (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for August 29Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Legacy of the Indo-Greeks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Center (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC) Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!
I, and the rest of the hosts, would be more than happy to answer any questions you have! SarahStierch (talk) 21:03, 17 September 2012 (UTC) OkayInstead of just endlessly repeating your edit, why not go to the Talk page of the article (not of individual editors) and make your case? That's how wikipedia works. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 22:12, 19 November 2012 (UTC) DeletionPlease do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Albanian nationalism, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. --RJFF (talk) 17:10, 2 June 2013 (UTC) NeutralityPlease do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Evangelos Venizelos. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. --RJFF (talk) 17:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Neutrality alert..? OK! You have me in the case of the ludicrous tyrant! Steliokardam (talk) 16:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC) July 2013Hello, I'm Sowlos. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Pelasgians, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. You included a link to Encyclopædia Britannica's article on "Palaic language", but that doesn't even begin to cover what you added. It read more like personal analysis. Please read WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:OR if you are confused. —Sowlos 09:46, 25 July 2013 (UTC) I won't bother anymore
SamarasI may agree with some of what you write there, and definitely don't like either Samaras or his policies, but Wikipedia is not the place for opinion pieces, as it contravenes pretty much every one of the core policies, from WP:NOR to WP:NPOV and WP:BLP, all of which can and will get you blocked. You are more than welcome to introduce a more critical view of Samaras in the article, but you must do so by using third-party, reliable, sources, not your own analysis. Constantine ✍ 09:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC) Henry Morgenthau Jr.I have noticed that you have been engaged in a edit war, having reverted the same 4 changes here: http://i.imgur.com/O3dViZF.png From reading your page, I have noticed you have been warned before. Please stop. The quote in question is here:
As your edit summaries were put: "wtf is the matter with the neoliberal scum" and "Biased assesment by a New Deal polemic conservative" There is nothing biased in the quote: It is indeed privy to the discussion at hand given his relationship with Rooseveldt, and by the fact that it comes from his own account of the time. It is also regarded as significant historically if that accounts for anything, as this is an often cited anecdote of Mr. Morgenthau Jr. Before attempting to undo the revision a 5th time, I would encourage you to discuss this first here and offer a specific reason why your opinion should take precedent over the several people who have disagreed with you. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akiva.avraham (talk • contribs) 16:32, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Steliokardam (talk) 15:33, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks
How can being privy to a quote by Henry Morgenthau Jr. qualify someone as being "Misinformed"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks To your links, you need to add context and qualify why you placed them there, otherwise I am at a loss to the point you are trying to drive at. Thanks. Akiva.avraham (talk) 20:32, 4 August 2015 (UTC) Meaning of ἀμβροσία in GreekCould you please discuss this here. Thanks, Paul August ☎ 18:01, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Ambrosia, againYour unsourced etymology has been reverted away. Hill Crest's WikiLaser! (BOOM!) 19:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC) Hi, ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Hello, Steliokardam. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for October 8Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foggia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greek (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC) November 2017Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Sabah. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Night Lantern (talk) 12:33, 29 November 2017 (UTC) December 2017Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source, as you did at Sabah. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Hzh (talk) 12:16, 3 December 2017 (UTC) ArbCom 2017 election voter messageHello, Steliokardam. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) December 2017Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Sabah. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Hzh (talk) 22:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC) ArbCom 2018 election voter messageHello, Steliokardam. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) |
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia