This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece. 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.
As the date of its implementation draws near, we should begin creating/changing articles to fit the new administrative structure of the country. The folks at the Greek Wikipedia have already done a stellar job [1] in preparing for it, and we should follow their example. I have begun translating the article on the new administrative structure (Administrative divisions of Greece (2011)). Any help with translating navboxes, or perhaps finding better names for the neologisms (PASOK definitively has a "1984" syndrome when it comes to names) would be appreciated. Constantine ✍ 16:24, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Greek air force
A few articles (List of Greek flags and some others) list the Greek Air force flag as being a white cross on blue with the Archangel Micael in the center. I could not find any citations for this and could not find any pictures of this flag. Can anyone support this claim?
There is a huge problem with one editor during the last month in several articles and his edits are always related to Piraeus. This is User:Pplatis, well known for those who are also members of the Greek wikipedia for POV pushing, sock puppetry and edit warring, which led to him being banned [3]. He edits alternatively using his account or (more often) as an anon user. His point is to present Piraeus as an area totally separate from Athens, which doesn't belong to the Athens urban area, using a series of articles to push his personal point of view (all of these articles were stable for years, without any problem concerning this point), ignoring and disputing an official source from the National Statistical Service of Greece (see the citation here). He made a lot of trouble in the articles such as Piraeus, Patras, Olympiacos F.C., Olympiacos CFP, Athens Metro, ISAP, Salamina (city), Port of Piraeus; obviously he is led from his strong feeling of localism, because he lives there as he has stated in the past (here) and he probably feels that Piraeus shouldn't be neglected as a part of the Athens urban area, inventing terms like "Piraeus metropolitan area" and other variations. After his attack on the above articles, most of them were temporarily semi-protected, but it didn't really help. He often presents himself as an expert editor and he sometimes post insulting messages in talk pages. Some administrators tried to help by warning him (the talk page of his account is full of warnings during the last year, just like the talk pages of the IP addresses he uses), I'd started a thread in the WP:ANI (here) that didn't help, and I've listed him in the Sockpuppet investigations (here, where you can see the IP addresses he has used in the last month - always beginning with 79.107). I was informed that in the Greek wikipedia his attitude, editing and interest were exactly the same, and since he is banned there he tries his chances in the English wikipedia. I can't handle it anymore by myself and I was advised to start a thread here to find a solution. - Sthenel (talk) 21:35, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
In case you didn't notice, the List of Greek National Basketball Association players has been turned into a redirect by User:Chrishmt0423 pointing to the more general List of foreign NBA players (the same thing happened with the List of Croatian NBA players and several others). I've reverted the change as I feel that a lot of valuable information was lost in the process (the general list doesn't offer match statistics and drops 10 Greek players who were drafted but never appeared in an actual game), and I don't see why the two list couldn't co-exist (Chrishmt0423 reasoned "separate list not needed; it actually makes updating more difficult" in his edit summary). Furthermore, the move was never discussed in the article's talk page. In the meantime the lists were taken to AfD. You're invited to voice your opinion there. Timbouctou19:37, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
First Greek-American mayor in USA
George C. Eliades was the first Greek to be elected to the Lowell City Council (1949). In 1951, he became the first mayor of Greek descent in Lowell, and anywhere else in the United States.
I think my father is worthy of mention in the Greek politicians WikiProject as the first Greek-American mayor in the USA in 1950.Hliades (talk) 21:06, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
I have recently created the above page, based on information from NoveList. I intend to also add some information from the Clio Books' series of national bibliographies in the near future, but I wanted everyone to know the list here exists. John Carter (talk) 23:19, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Macedonia (terminology) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Greek articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Greek articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
I have now nominated Greek love for deletion. I have no idea exactly when it will pop out of the admin workshop, piping hot and ready for voting. Soon I expect. McZeus (talk) 05:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Help needed from all project members
Hello to all! I do not know to what extent any of you has had interactions with Pumpie (talk·contribs). Pumpie has created hundreds and perhaps even thousands of bad "translations" of articles from the Greek Wikipedia (among others), mostly on small villages or towns, films, and obscure politicians, which in almost every case need to be re-translated from scratch. He has also often added information which is of dubious, not to say outright OR, origin (for instance, main economical activities of a village/town, or whether it has schools and what type they are), since it is not present in the "original" Greek article. Pumpie has been recently blocked, and it falls unfortunately to us to clear up his/her mess. Here is a list of articles that he/she has created. If you have any time to spare, please help in correctly re-translating them. It would be a great service to both this project and Wikipedia if you could assist in this, given the enormous output of that user. If you are willing to help, please state so below. Thanks in advance, Constantine ✍ 21:49, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it'll take a while, but the main point is to begin addressing the problem... Markussep (talk·contribs) has kindly offered to make some automated tagging & possibly sorting of Pumpie's articles, so there should be a definitive worklist within a few days. After that, anyone will be able to choose a few, work on them and then remove them from the list. Constantine ✍ 23:09, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
The list is here. It is truly massive and still needs some categorization, so if anyone wants to help there too, he/she would be welcome! When you review an article, please take care to a) copyedit it appropriately, b) tag it with {{WPGR}} and other relevant tags and assess it in its talk page and c) strike it through as taken care of in the worklist. To avoid duplication of effort, if you want to claim one or more articles and work on them at your leisure, add {{icon|GAH}} and your username or signature next to it/them, and then strike through once you're done. For any questions, please post here. Constantine ✍ 11:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I have seen it too... I'll try to help out but I can't promise too much due to lack of sparetime. Pel thal (talk)
Thanks. Even a handful will help. Given the sheer numbers, it will either way take some weeks to months to go through them all... Constantine ✍ 12:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Greetings to all! I just saw that two days ago, the present WikiProject Greece page completed four years of existence, although of course the old WikiProject History of Greece is a couple of months older. So, whichever of the two dates one chooses, happy birthday to this project, and here's to many more years (and hopefully, many more active members)! Constantine ✍ 23:05, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Happy birthday then! I believe that you and YannisMarou, the most active contibutors, deserve a special gift from this community.Alexikoua (talk) 13:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Yannis definitely deserves some token of appreciation, both for essentially setting up and running this project for much of its existence, and for his invaluable contributions in articles. For me, thanks for the sentiment, but I have already been over-awarded with stuff. The best thing would be to try to get this project up and running again as it was meant to be, a collaborative process. Ever since mid-2008, WPGR users have mostly been working around solo, but even before that, in typical Greek fashion, it was up to two or three users to run this place, while others (myself included, back then) were content to let things be. Therefore, an anniversary seems as good a moment as any to ask: what do you, the project members, want to see done here? What suggestions for improvement and revitalization of WPGR do you have? As a first step, do you think that the newsletter should be reactivated? How do we reach out to the many Greek users who contribute occasionally and then vanish, or who do not register themselves here? Constantine ✍ 14:37, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, these two are obvious, but my question is more along the lines of "what would you like to see the project provide"? We have currently a structure that is suited to a project of two dozen and more full-time members, with two task forces (Athens and Politics) that are essentially useless, etc. If the only things we want are some updates on what is going on and some elementary guidelines/links/sources, then we can easily wrap it up in a handful of pages. Then there are a number of essential administrative tasks where people are needed. For instance, would anyone be willing to help with maintaining/periodically updating Portal:Greece and Portal:Military of Greece, or with article assessment or new article patrol? Constantine ✍ 23:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
a-phorism?
Is the alpha at the beginning of aphorism supposed to indicate negation, as in the pair theism/atheism? The page for aphorism at the greek wiki seems to redirect to... excommunication. Tkuvho (talk) 11:34, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
No, it is actually from apo+horizo (ἀπό + ὁρίζω). Because of the aspirant "h", "p" becomes "ph". "Aphorism" hence means something like "separation", and indeed, the technical sense is that of excommunication. Constantine ✍ 12:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Here "horizo" seems to comes from "horizon" in its original meaning as "bound", "limit" that cannot be passed, is that correct? Is "apo" related to "epi" meaning "transcend"? I am not sure I can connect the etymology with the meaning. Tkuvho (talk) 13:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, I noticed that the Greek words for "excommunication" and "aphorism" seem to have different accents on top of the alpha. Could it be that the etymologies are in fact not the same for both words? Tkuvho (talk) 14:10, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Re the last question, no, they are the same. The difference is probably some typo error. It should always be an alpha with an acute accent (ἀ). In modern Greek, of course, the accent is omitted. "Aphorism" as "excommunication" is AFAIK actually the later technical sense of the word, tied to Christianity. "Aphorism" in its modern English sense (and original Greek) is obviously related to the sense of a "selected quote", "definition", etc. Constantine ✍ 14:17, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
I know that this project isn't exactly focused on ancient Greek mythology, but it appears that WP:Wikiproject Mythology isn't active, so I thought this was my best bet for getting help on Poseidon. On 26 November, an IP editor made an edit request, asking to add some information about the history/etymology of Poseidon, based upon a print book that appears to be in German. If anyone here has knowledge of Greek mythology and can comment on that request, I'm sure the IP would appreciate it. If you don't know how to formally "complete" the edit request, feel free to just leave a comment and I can finish up the formal part (or you can see the details at Template:Edit semi-protected. Thanks for your help. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
A search for references found only a minor published (gBooks) mention of Greek "Cruiser" named Lonchi. Fails WP:V and by extension WP:N if any content here is true
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Pictures of notable Greeks in the infobox of Greeks
It has been decided that the current infobox of Greeks, which contains only five pictures, is outmoded compared to all the other infoboxes of ethnic groups, and it was agreed to expand the number of pictures to 25. However, we need more people to contribute to the discussion so as to reach a consensus. Please see here:
[4]. Athenean (talk) 22:50, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Corinth/Ancient Corinth
A debate has started on how the articles on modern Corinth and Ancient Corinth should be differentiated. One view suggests that the article on Corinth should be focused on the city that was founded in 1858, with minimal reference to (and certainly without duplication of material contained in) the Ancient Corinth article. The other view is that the article on modern Corinth should contain a detailed historical overview of the city bearing that name over the ages since the prehistoric era.
Alexander the Great is being reviewed for Good Article listing. It has been put on hold for an initial 14 days to allow for minor issues related to coverage and authorial tone to be addressed. Any assistance would be welcomed. SilkTork *YES!23:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello. If anyone has links to reaction in the Greek media about the film Dogtooth getting a nomination for an Oscar this year, I'd be greatful if you could let me know (either here or on my talkpage). Sadly, I don't speak Greek, but I would like to incorporate any local coverage into the main article. Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 13:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Outstanding tasks
Hello and a happy and productive New Year to all! After enjoying ourselves and resting during the holidays, may I remind the project members that there are two tasks that demand immediate attention:
It's going to take quite some work to create and modify the subdivision articles w.r.t. this administrative reform. I'll be happy to help in this. Do we have a good source for the new municipalities (I don't mean el: but maybe some law text or something from the statistics office) and from what old municipalities they were formed? I suggest a structured approach (and you've made a good start already):
decide on a naming convention ("X Municipality", "X (municipality)" or plain "X", and what to do with ambiguous names, and what about the peripheral units?)
create lists or navbars of the new peripheries, peripheral units and municipalities.
decide which articles can be "recycled" (if the name of an old municipality is the same as that of a new one, we can reuse the old article IMO, and maybe the same for prefectures and coterminous peripheral units)
the structure of the articles, e.g. the infoboxes might require modification
Hello Markus! Glad to see you're willing to help. On the municipalities, AFAIK, the convention in WP is "Name (type of entity)", unless it is unambiguous. Most of the old municipalities were abolished, and the new ones, although sharing much the same names, are greatly expanded. About the only exceptions are the municipalities of Athens and Thessaloniki, and there too some of the smaller ones have been abolished. The el: articles are useful since the users who have undertaken the task over there are very thorough. On the prefectures, there is a problem with rendering some terms in English, e.g. the "peripheral units" could be translated as "regional units", etc. I have yet to find a definitive source as to how they are to be named. For the time being, and in keeping with what will probably remain common usage for quite some time, let's keep the prefectures the way they are. The peripheries are IMO the No. 1 priority, and we should move down from them to the municipalities. I'll try to cross-check which municipalities have been affected and how, I'll have a list probably by Sunday. Constantine ✍ 11:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Guys, This is my rendering from the original Greek of the article for the new Corinth (municipality). I suppose it could be used as a template/basis for the ca. 325 new municipality articles that will be needed. Note that I've created a new category for the Kallikratis municipalities. Once we've them all done, we can simplify the name and recategorise the old/abolished entities.
I would agree that the naming convention should be "X (municipality)", in line with what has been done for other countries.
On the peripheries/sub-peripheries. Personally, I like using the term in English that sounds like the Greek, but from my work in the English-language Greek media, the term "periphery" has not caught on. Almost universally in the English-language press, the peripheries are described as "regions", which are headed by "regional governors". Just as we went for "prefecture" for the nomarcheia (in the 19th century, the terms "nomarchy" and "demarchy" were often used by foreign travellers), we may need to consider whether it would be best to use region/regional governor/subregion etc. The only problem with this is that there used to be entities called the Regions of Greece.--Damac (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I don't think we should create new articles for new municipalities if they have the same name as the old municipalities. Apparently they thought differently over at el:. Of course we should mention somewhere in the text that the municipality X was formed by merging the old municipality X with the former municipalities Y and Z, and link to the old Y and Z. And when the new municipality has a new name (e.g. Velo-Vocha) we need to create a new article. The B1292 link you found is very good indeed, I found a link with a less irritating viewer here. Nice that it also shows the 2001 population of the new municipalities, and their subdivisions. Do we have a source for the new surface areas as well? The peripheral units are mentioned in the law as well, they should be mentioned too. MarkussepTalk10:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
About whether we need new articles or not: we certainly don't need new articles for the small number of municipalities that have not changed borders. However, the problem with existing articles was that there was often no distinction between the municipality and the largest town, usually of the same name, in the article. Take Corinth, for example. The old municipality was something more than the actual city, in that it included a large number of outlying villages and towns, some of them with their own articles. Now that situation is greater, as smaller municipalities have been merged with larger ones. Taking that into consideration, isn't there now a need to distinguish between Corinth (municipality) (which now extends far beyond the city's borders) and Corinth, the actual city.
I don't think there's a need to distinguish between the larger municipality and the actual city. The municipality article should contain information about the "main" city and other settlements within the municipality, or refer to those. See for instance the Cologne article: the municipality Cologne consists of the central city Cologne and several adjacent and outlying other settlements. The whole municipality is covered by the main article, with subarticles about parts of the municipality, e.g. Porz. Another example: Edmonton and its quarter Strathcona, Alberta. MarkussepTalk11:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
That was the case with the former municipal structure, now a municipality may extend across several towns/cities and across topography ranging from coast to mountains. They are far closer to the old provinces than simply municipal districts. Constantine ✍ 13:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
The list is complete now. I guess it's time to decide whether we're going to create new articles for the new municipalities when they've taken the name of an old municipality. I suppose a section "Municipality", explaining the reforms and what other municipalities joined the municipality, would do (maybe except when the municipality is exceptionally large). This section should list the δημοτικές ενότητες (with links to the old municipality articles), and maybe also the δημοτικές κοινότητες and τοπικές κοινότητες. Any suggestions for good translations for these units? MarkussepTalk13:25, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
As an illustration of what I mean I have modified the articles Zitsa and Pasaronas (now part of Zitsa) accordingly. I haven't changed the navbar, and but I haven't added the κοινότητεςyet (there's quite a lot of them in Zitsa). MarkussepTalk13:36, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
I've made a list of peripheries and peripheral units at Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Kallikratis, including changes between the old prefectures and the new peripheral units. I propose to reuse the articles about prefectures that haven't changed in territory, that is, move them if they have "prefecture" in the title, or are otherwise ambiguous. Then there's a number of new peripheral units. In several cases there is only one municipality in a peripheral unit (see the Aegean islands). I propose to keep one article about peripheral unit, municipality and island in those cases. Is that OK with you? MarkussepTalk13:06, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
(unindent) Wow, great work! I generally agree with your points. I do think, along with Damac, that the mainland municipalities, whose seats are villages etc, ought to have separate articles. And while we're discussing this, I'd also like to raise a question on nomenclature before we get started, so that we can get this over with now: in Greek, even in everyday discourse, municipalities, prefectures and peripheries are almost always named in full, i.e. "Peloponnese Periphery" or "Thebes Municipality", when the name applies in the first instance to something else. The convention in the navboxes so far, as I wrote above, is to use "Name (municipality)", but we also use "Attica Periphery" and "Ioannina Prefecture" alongside "Ionian Islands (periphery)". I for one support using the full names per Greek usage, and because I'd like to avoid parentheses wherever possible. Opinions? Constantine ✍ 13:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
I guess you (the Greek) use the full name when you refer to the government of an administrative unit, or when you want to distinguish between a town and a homonymous prefecture. To me it's similar to the difference between "République française" and "France", but maybe I'm wrong. A I said, I'm not strongly against adding the unit type to the article title, as long as the proper redirects are in place. I'd rather have the existing articles moved to "Municipality" titles than two articles with basically the same info. For instance in the case of Zitsa, I don't see the added value of additional articles about the previous municipality (now a municipal unit) and the village (now a community). It's something else when there's a lot of info about the constituent communities, like maybe Corinth. MarkussepTalk10:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Markussep, thanks for pointing me here. I would support using the full name always, that reduces the amount of page moves in the future / increases link stability. If there are still name clashes, then I would like something like is done in the Category:Former municipalities of Denmark, e.g. Vejle Municipality (1970–2006). Not sure what to put into the () but at least this format looks nice. I would start on the top, rename all periphery articles to "XXX Periphery" and all prefecture articles to "XXX Prefecture" where they can rest in peace until the next reform that introduces prefectures. Any new article about the historic provinces would go under "XXX Province".
Administrative divisions of Greece I would use as an overview article and the current content be moved to Administrative divisions of Greece (2011) or something like that. The plain title should include historic information. See elWP. This overview would still not contain country subdivisions that are not administrative.
A note on a specific article: Central Greece is misleading, since that is also a NUTS:GR designation.
Articles on villages can be created later, but at first I would go for completeness of the current municipalities. I have also seen some "XXX (ancient region)", so there may be a lot of duplicate base names and it would help the project to have it following consistent namings throughout. Then links are predictable, editors can create links to other municipalities without looking whether the article is at XXX or XXX Municipality. Also, editors can fix links, e.g. adding " Municipality" in listings that refer to municipalities. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 22:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I created Subdivisions of Greece and transformed the data Markussep had provided into a table and put that at Peripheral units of Greece. Maybe an extra column "type of change" is helpful. For the municipalities maybe it is ok to have only one article for the old and new one if they have the same name, but for the PUs and Prefs, please let the Prefectures be standalone. Infobox calls them prefecture, bordering entities are called prefectures. The population data can all be of the same day if it is one set of articles and not some of the article mixed with the peripheral units. It is of more value to have one intact set. These prefecture articles can all get one mayor update namely to include information about the peripheral units that now cover their territory. I did that at Athens Prefecture#Peripheral units. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 01:05, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Photo requests
For those of you in Greece, I have some photo requests that need to be fulfilled:
Aegean Airlines head office - 31, Viltanioti Str. 145 64, Kifisia, Athens, Greece / Βιλτανιώτη 31 145 64, Κηφισιά, Αθήνα
Olympic Air head office - 1st km of Koropi-Vari Avenue and Ifaistou Str., Koropi, Attica
I tend to agree with Yannismarou here. We probably need to find an agreement on article names in the above discussion before making large uncoordinated changes. Especially when information is already widely present and vastly coherent with the subject at hand, existing pages should probably be used (moved, linked or redirected) for the new demes rather than starting stubs from scratch, and that would be more in line with WP:ASTONISH. As an example, I notice that {{Kallikratis-Attica}} is currently full of red links while {{Athens Prefecture}} has pretty much the same data. Can we please agree on a nomenclature before doing large changes that will have to be modified afterwards anyway? I however acknowledge the large ammount of work done by GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved, and hope you go on this way!
don't you think that Agia Paraskevi and Agia Paraskevi Municipality (Attica) are overlapping? - No, or not yet. It may be that is so, but Agia Paraskevi classifies itself as an article about a suburb, nowhere in the introduction it says it is a municipality. And if it would say that, then there is still doubt to the reader whether it is a Kallikratis municipality. If the article is unclear then of course there may be creations of articles that later may be merged into existing ones. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 05:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm the one responsible for creating the Attica template and, by extension, the red links! When creating the template, I went for the naming convention of: Municiaplityname. Why? Because some of the new municipalities are not the same as the pre-Kallikratis entities as a result of mergers, etc. It was also motivated by the fact that many new municipalities, such as Corinth (municipality) are much larger entities than the pre-Kallikratis municipalities of the same name. I've done a few to give people an idea of what I'm talking about.
I would maintain that we retain the Municiaplityname format, but, in the meantime, create redirects to the articles already in existence. The Municiaplityname naming format is similar to what's done in other countries. I would advise against going for the sytle Municiaplityname Municipality (unsigned by Damac)
I too agree with Yannis. Before making unilateral changes, some sort of consensus needs to be established on the format/nomenclature, else there is going to be chaos. On the municipality issue, I certainly vote for "XXX Municipality" as the "municipality" bit will still be there in the "XXX (municipality)" form, even if in brackets, and in addition I think that it would help emphasize the fact that say, the Corinth Municipality is not the same as the town of Corinth. Constantine ✍ 22:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Reasons for XXX Municipality
Emphasize that a municipality is different from the town
The official names are in the form "Δήμος Κορινθίων" / Dimos Corinth -> Corinth Municipality
Those that do not use that format mostly use the plain name, but plain names will often not work for Greece.
So I agree with Damac to create new articles/links, better there are stubs, than there is wrong information, e.g. by accidentally linking to an old municipality while in fact the Kallikratis municipality is meant. To address the concern of the new articles having only few info, Place Clichy said something like that, maybe it would be a start to say what former entities they consist of, that means links will be there for the readers to find out more about an area. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 05:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, GRprefectures but, in the case of Agia Paraskevi, the municipality did not change its borders, and the suburb is the same entity (in terms of area, population etc.) with the municipality. So, I do not understand why you created a new stub article, and you did not rename the already existing article (which I am not sure is necessary), mentioning that, except for suburb, it is also a Kallikratis municipality. I want to clarify that I do not focus my interest in Agia Paraskevi only! There are other similar cases, e.g. Chalandri. I can understand, for instance, that we should have two separate articles for the suburb Holargos and for the municipality Holargos–Papagou, but why should we have separate articles for Agia Paraskevi, Chalandri, etc. etc. To me, it makes no sense.
In the case of Aksakovo, you have an urban center, the town of Aksakovo, and a broader municipality with more towns, called Municipality of Aksakovo. In Andrijevica you have a town of 1000 population, and a municipality of 5000! The distinction is obvious and I can understand the existence of two article. But what have these cases to do with what we discuss here? In the case of Attica, what is the rationale for having two articles for Agia Paraskevi, Chalandri, Zografou etc. etc., even Athens, where you don't have a case similar to Aksakovo, and the borders of both the town and the municipality are the same?! It's clear to me that, as other editors said, some more coordinated action is needed here.
Are you also going to create two articles for Athens as well (again city and municipality are exactly the same, even after Kallikratis)?! I insist that we lead ourselves to a useless pluralism of articles with obvious overlaps.--Yannismarou (talk) 11:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
We may be just as good treating data about the town, the pre-2010 municipality and the current municipality inside a single article, in different paragraphs, when there is not a special reason to create separate articles for each. (The only reason to create separaet articles would be that there is too much data to treat it all in one, while currently I see more often too little data rather than too much). This may even be a general rule, with a restricted list of exceptions (e.g. Corfu (city) and Corfu Municipality could be different). For Agia Paraskevi, there is really not enough to say to create 3 articles, and even so we'd better start from expanding the current one, later dividing it if necessary. Place Clichy (talk) 18:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
What matters to me are correct links, clarity to the reader. The borders of the administrative entities can change often, while buildings are more stable, so it is more stable to have town and village articles somewhere separately. They can then be referenced from former provinces, former municipalities, former prefectures, current municipalities, current peripheral units, current periphery. Separate objects, separate articles. My main concern is having correct articles for all the administrative entities and fine references between them. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 19:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok, then what are we doing with Agia Paraskevi?!!! Do we keep both articles, or do you think that we should keep the Agia Paraskevi article, where we'll mention it is a Kallikratis municipality, and delete the other stub? I think I still have somewhere some adm tools (!), so if there is some agreement on what we are doing I may able to help.--Yannismarou (talk) 20:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
I copied the category; I mentioned that it is a Kallikratis municipality, but I did not delete the stub; I made it a redirect. I was also reluctant to move the Agia Paraskevi article to Agia Paraskevi Municipality (Attica), because I see no clear agreement on that. I mean that, at least for the time being, in articles like Zografou, Ilioupoli, Vyronas, Kaisariani etc. there is no such move. So, I thought there was no reason to hurry to do something like that. I want also to say that the template {{Athens Prefecture}}
used in most municipalities of Attica is outdate, and it needs to be replace by the updated one.--Yannismarou (talk) 12:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
As regards the categories, I won't express an opinion, because it's not my strong point. But, as regards the rest, I fully agree with Place Clichy. I respect GRprefectures' eagerness to update Wikipedia with the recent Kallikratis changes, but I believe that we should not act hastily, because we may create overlaps, repetitions etc. etc. It's better to see first what we have and how we can use what we have, and then move forward creating new articles. After all the massive creation of stub unreferenced articles creates often more problems than the ones it is supposed to resolve. For instance for many municipalities of the Template:Kallikratis-Attica we already have ready articles, namely articles for municipalities-suburbs, whose administrative limits remain the same. For Central and North Athens, I linked to these ready articles. Some of them (e.g. Zografou) were already linked. For some municipalities, not existing any more, we need to update the respective articles. This is something I did with Nea Erythraia. For municipalities keeping the same name but with different administrative limits, e.g. Kifissia Municipality, I agree that we need to create new articles. It's obvious that we need to create new articles also for completely new municipalities, like Cholargos-Papagou. Additionally, in the List of municipality changes in Greece 2011, I don't see a reason for so many red links; some articles are ready, both for existing (without any boundary changes) and abolished municipalities. I did some edits in the North Athens section, but the whole article needs to be checked.
I think it is too complicated to get the Greece subdivision articles in order without a clear cut naming scheme. With lower predictability of article titles more wrong links will be inserted, it will be harder to find whether an article exists already and duplicates may get created. The list List of municipality changes in Greece 2011 with the new naming format was there to check completeness. It was one step of the road map I had in mind towards updating peripheries, prefectures, municipalities and the like. The next step would have been to move all the existing municipality articles, Kallikratis or not, to the, what I thought, agreed format. Then a lot of the red links would have turned into blue. And then one would have seen which need creation.
Place Clichy already voted against the XXX Municipality format citing ASTONISH and NAME, and Yannismarou edited away from that format. Constantin like me voted in favor giving some thoughts of why we would prefer that format, see above. Damac used "XXX (municipality)" as default in the templates. Some clarifying statements from Yannismarou and Damac could help to see what each one wants. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 02:08, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I did not vote against or pro any format. I just said that, at this moment, we have some ready articles for the municipalities, whose boundaries have not changed. We should thus use them and link to them, and not to non-existing articles we may create (or rename) in the future. Now, if you think we should move these articles to the format XXX Municipality, there are concrete procedures in Wikipedia that can be followed, procedures both for isolated and for group moves. As far as I am concerned, I don't have any strong opinion. But I do need to mention that I have some reservations concerning these moves. What I mean: The common name for "Chalandri", "Agia Paraskevi", "Vrilissia" etc. is "Chalandri", "Agia Paraskevi", "Vrilissia"; not "Chalandri Municipality" etc. If you have the same name for both the broader municipality and the suburb (see e.g. Kifissia), then the "XXX Municipality" format for the municipality article is clearly a good choice. But, when you have one and the same article for both the municipality and the city, shouldn't the rule of WP:COMMON NAME prevail? We thus have from one side the WP:ASTONISH and WP:COMMON NAMES rules which do not favor the "XXX Municipality" (as regards the aforementioned articles), and from the other side the arguments of GR prefectures for a general application the "XXX Municipality" format. As regards Constantine, I think he expressed himself only on the municipality articles, and not in general, but I may have misunderstood him, and he can clarify his position, if he feels the need to. So, to summarize: Without having a strong opinion, I believe that: a) when we have one and the same article for the city and the municipality, per WP:COMMON NAMES the most common name should prevail, and not the "XXX Municipality" format; b) when we have two distinct articles or only a municipality article, then obviously the "XXX Municipality" format should be used.--Yannismarou (talk) 20:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh! And to clarify another issue: With my yesterday's edits I did not revert any format the majority agreed. I just linked to the existing articles for municipalities with no boundary changes per WP:DISAMB (link straight to the existing article and not through redirects). If it is decided all these articles to be massively moved to the XXX Municipality format (which I doubt), then the names should be changed accordingly in the template, because there will be no reason to apply WP:DISAMB. As it was, the Template had no consistency: E.g. it linked through a redirect (per the "XXX Mun" format) to Zografou, Athens, Ilioupoli, but it did not link to Agia Paraskevi, Chalandri, Vrilissia etc. This was an ambiguous and unclear situation that served nothing. In any case, and despite my personal approach, my edits do not prejudice any final arrangement.--Yannismarou (talk) 20:29, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok, closer to the core. http://www.agiaparaskevi.gr Δήμος Αγίας Παρασκευής -> "Agia Paraskevi Municipality". Still even the elWP seems to be disorganized, at el:Δήμος Αγίας Παρασκευής two articles have the "Δήμος" in title, one has not. I understand my rule when to have an article named XXX Mun, namely always when there is an entity called "Δήμος". This is very easy and straightforward. These entities have borders, border mostly other municipalities. For cities I don't know how they are defined, what territory they occupy. Is the whole Agia Paraskevi Municipality (Attica) a city or is there some area that is not part of the city? Can this information be found for all municipalities, can sources be added? It looks like a tedious process and with time opinions may change and then links have to be changed around. What I thought of would be much easier. First level of importance would be the municipality articles and any town and city information can either grow inside the muni articles are get their own article. The rule to use the most common name does not favor any opinion, the most common for the municipality would be Δήμος Αγίας Παρασκευής and for the city Αγίας Παρασκευής. And I think we can get into endless debates about whether Δήμος Αγίας Παρασκευής or Αγίας Παρασκευής is used more. People living there likely drop the Δήμος in casual speech, but in administration it may be reversed. Then is the question, are the articles to be look like something authoritative or shall they look like a travel guide. I can understand that some people may not like to see the administrative part so prominent. But what will the infobox have - will it say city or municipality? What will be done in cases where there is one big city comprising 99% of the muni and only one little house standing somewhere in the woods will make the difference in population and area, will there be two articles? If not, where is the limit, one would one be "allowed" to create a municipality article, one village apart from a big city, ... 10 villages? GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 22:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I am in full agreement with Yanni's views on municipality nomenclature. Indeed it is redundant and slightly ridiculous to have an article for Agia Paraskevi Municipality when the municipality is coterminous with the suburb of Agia Paraskevi itself. "Municipality" is merely the form/level of local government of the suburb. I also strongly disagree with moves like Thessaly to Thessaly Periphery. The modern administrative region of Thessaly encompasses more or less most of historical Thessaly (minus Lamia and the Spercheios valley), and is commonly referred to simply as "Thessaly" (indeed most people would be surprised if they were told of ancient and medieval Thessaly's extent). Only where the geographic region/town/etc has markedly different boundaries from the subdivision named after it should new articles be created. Otherwise, as subdivisions change, the primary topic remains the region/city/suburb etc and no "municipality/periphery/peripheral unit" etc is needed after that. Common usage must also be considered carefully before making any changes: Pthiotis for instance is certainly not coterminous with ancient Pthia, but it is a well-established geographical term of its own by now, after more than a century of its existence as a prefecture, so there is no need to move it to Pthiotis (prefectural unit) for pedantry's sake. Regards to all, Constantine ✍ 00:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
When reading an encyclopedia people will often be surprised if they did not knew certain things, this is fine. For people reading about ancient history it may be a surprise to see Thessaly as a term for a different area. For others it may be a surprise that Pthiotis and Pthia do not exist, but that similar named entities do exist Phthiotis and Phthia. Also it may be a surprise to find out that "prefectural units" do not exist in Greece in 2011, but that there are peripheral units. And for me it was a surprise to see my contributions named "ridiculous". Why can Greece not have the articles in order like other countries have it as listed above, e.g. BG, DK, MK, SE? GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 03:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
GRprefectures, Wikipedia has certain policies and guidelines. It is better, before taking initiatives, to have a look at them, so as to avoid backs and forwards. Nobody wants to downgrade or underestimate your contributions (to the contrary, I said that I appreciate them), but it's better to be sure about what you are doing, before you do it. For instance, a basic rule is that we move articles to new names, only if these moves are uncontested or there is a clear consensus. In the case of Thessaly, for instance, that I had not noticed, I fail to see how it can be regarded as an uncontested move. Personally, I would have voted against. I understand that "Thessaly" is also "Thessaly Periphery", but basically and above everything it's "Thessaly" (per any Wikipedia rule you want to choose, NAME, ASTONISH, PRIMARY TOPIC etc. etc.). And it is not true that the other countries follow the pattern you propose. The situation is a bit more complexe than you present it. See for instance Bavaria. Bavaria officially is the "Free State of Bavaria". But the article's title is "Bavaria", because this is the most simple and common name. Lower Saxony is the "Federal State of Lower Saxony", but the editors did not choose the "Federal State XXX" format but the simplest and most common name. To the contrary, in Hamburg where we have different entities with the same name and different boundaries, more articles with different forms of names were created (but again the article for the municipality is simply "Hamburg"). See also the pattern for the French regions: The article for Rhône-Alpes is Rhône-Alpes and not "Rhône-Alpes region". The article for Lyon is simply Lyon (there is, of course, Arrondissement of Lyon, but this is a completely different entity from the municipality with different population and boundaries), and not "Lyon municipality", although it is a municipality. In our case, I believe that the peripheral or the municipal unit becomes PRIMARY only in the cases I indicated above.--Yannismarou (talk) 10:42, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
I am ASTONISHed by the disorder. The arrondissements of France are a very good example of good organisation, an organisation you seem not to want to have for any Greek entities, nor peripheries (news to me), not prefectures(?), not municipalities. You talk about boundaries, do you have any list of boundaries of all cities and towns compared with municipalities? Maybe at the end of the day if only the boundaries for Agia Paraskevi Municipality (Attica) and the city Agia Paraskevi, Attica are the same, then it is not worth about arguing that so long. BTW, where is the proof the boundaries for the latter two are the same? Also, where is the proof that Agia Paraskevi, Attica is much more important than all the other Agia Paraskevi (disambiguation) combined? That is what I get when I read "your" primary topic policy. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 11:13, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
(unindent) GRprefectures, I was writing rather late (far later than the timestamp in my signature indicates) after a hard day, so I'd appreciate if you cut me some slack. I'd also appreciate if you criticized the essence and not the form of my arguments. We all make mistakes. Constantine ✍ 11:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok, fine with me :-). Yes, lets talk about essence. I can see that there are some issues with my roadmap. I think we have now different issues, I will try to address them. Maybe starting with the peripheries, I will create a new section for that. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 11:16, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Peripheries
Above some disagreement with the move Thessaly->Thessaly Periphery was expressed. I didn't expect disagreement. See below two moves performed by Constantine in 2010. So I wrongly assumed it would be the general idea to include "Periphery".
Attica Periphery // 13 November 2010 Cplakidas ... (moved Attica (periphery) to Attica Periphery: the name is always used as a whole to distinguish the admin. division from the region
Central Greece Periphery //10 February 2011 Brunswick Dude (talk | contribs) m (7,635 bytes) (moved Central Greece (periphery) to Central Greece Periphery over redirect: Per consistency with the other peripheries // supported by Constantine, GRprefectures, see below
Central Macedonia //protected, GRprefectures, Brunswick Dude, support move
Epirus Periphery //02:23, 10 February 2011 Brunswick Dude ... (moved Epirus (periphery) to Epirus Periphery over redirect)
Ionian Islands Periphery //10 February 2011 Brunswick Dude (talk | contribs) m (1,399 bytes) (moved Ionian Islands (periphery) to Ionian Islands Periphery over redirect // supported by Constantine, GRprefectures, see below
North Aegean Periphery // 2 February 2011 GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved ... (moved North Aegean to North Aegean Periphery over redirect: use fullname as for others in Category:Peripheries of Greece)
Peloponnese Periphery // 20 April 2010 Cplakidas ... (moved Peloponnese (periphery) to Peloponnese Periphery over redirect: The "periphery" is actually an integral part of the name. "Peloponnese" alone in Greek almost always refers to the peninsula.)
South Aegean Periphery // 2 February 2011 GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved ... (moved South Aegean to South Aegean Periphery over redirect: use fullname as for others in Category:Peripheries of Greece
Thessaly Periphery // 2 February 2011 GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved ... (moved Thessaly to Thessaly Periphery over redirect: use fullname as for others in Category:Peripheries of Greece)
West Macedonia //protected, GRprefectures, Brunswick Dude, support move
Western Greece Periphery //10 February 2011 Brunswick Dude ... (moved Western Greece to Western Greece Periphery over redirect)
Before talking more about what we disagree, specifically Thessaly, can we do something that we agree all with? I think this is better for the atmosphere. :-) Constantine and me moved some. Maybe if we agree to move Central Greece (periphery), Epirus (periphery), Ionian Islands (periphery), Yannis could do these? I would agree if Yannis would move these. Let's see if we at least agree on changes from "XXX (periphery)" to "XXX Periphery". I hope to address the Thessaly article naming later. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 14:37, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
All right. Central Macedonia, East Macedonia & Thrace, Western Macedonia and Western Greece do not need to be moved, because these terms refer either way directly to the peripheries. I would have no big problem with moving them to a "Name Periphery" format, but it is rather unnecessary (and IMO counter to common usage). I agree with moving Central Greece (periphery) to Central Greece Periphery and Ionian Islands (periphery) to Ionian islands Periphery, but I am not sure about Epirus. The periphery of Epirus is practically the only part of the Epirus region that is still called that way, and in common usage (except for a historical context), when one speaks of Epirus one means Greek Epirus, i.e. the periphery. This is somewhat analogous to Thessaly, where the modern administrative region has superseded the original bounds of the region in public perception. I think that here, exceptionally, the understated "(periphery)" form might be better, unless we were to adopt a new course altogether and move this to Epirus (Greece), but then we'd be entering other minefields. I do think however that Thessaly Periphery and Crete Periphery are best served by being merged into the primary articles per the discussion above, i.e. Thessaly and Crete, as sections on their administration. Constantine ✍ 17:19, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
To have East Macedonia and Thrace without " Periphery" seems not to lose any precision. For those peripheries that are named by directions alone East/West/Central it is more precise to call them "Name Periphery". Especially for Macedonia as there is even an independent country using that name. Similar for Epirus, adding " Periphery" gives more clarity. Contrary to daily speech, Wikipedia covers a lot of historical material, so it helps to show prominently " Periphery" to distinguish it from historical Epirus. "Crete" can refer to the island or the periphery, the territories are different. I added some islands to the periphery page, Crete Periphery#Islands. Maybe there can be a small periphery article, defining boundaries and referring to the islands. The main content would be on the page of Crete Island, since this is the more specific location of most of the content. The administrative side is served by Crete Periphery and more cultural, touristic, historic by the article Crete. Maybe this is the core of some other disagreements (municipalities), focus on administrative side and clear definitions of territories versus cultural/colloquial and less strict definitions of territories. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 08:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
As I said, I don't disagree on adding "Periphery" to the Macedonia articles, but in common usage "West/Central Macedonia" etc refers to the periphery either way. "Crete" by definition covers not only the main island, but also the various other islands and islets around it. "Crete Periphery" is merely the form of government of these. The two are territorially coterminous, unlike the Peloponnese or Epirus. Constantine ✍ 09:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
If we're going to have articles with and without the addition "periphery", I'd prefer to put "periphery" in parentheses, because that clearly indicates that "periphery" is not part of the (short) name. I agree with Constantine w.r.t. Crete. Another issue I'd like to mention: we have Western Greece and West Macedonia. Both are grammatically correct, but I think we should pick one system, also for other entities like North Athens (peripheral unit), South Aegean Periphery, East Mani. MarkussepTalk10:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
North-Sout-East-West addressed below. For the territorial coverage true might be: Emirate of Crete = Crete (theme) = Crete Eyalet, Crete Vilayet = Cretan State = Crete region = Crete Periphery. But by definition of "island", the island of Crete is only a part of the former seven territories. It is nice to use short names for the states of the United States, but for the peripheries there are several issues, to have "Central Greece" within text may refer to the region Central Greece or to Central Greece Periphery. Similar issues with Attica, Attica Province, Attica Prefecture, Attica Periphery. Except in listings where it is clear to what kind of territories the words refer, e.g. a table with a column for provinces, I would always prefer the full name. One more for Crete: The Cretan State has its own article, and in the same way the periphery can have its own article. There may be things like ranking in infoboxes and this will be done compared to other peripheries. Crete may be 5th compared within the periphery-set but 6th within the set of geographical regions ("geographical departments" as in Regions of Greece). These territories belong to different sets and therefore I think they should have different articles. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 14:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The articles you refer to are historical entities, and cover specific periods of the island's history. The current administrative structure belongs to the Crete article, just as the Hellenic Republic redirects to Greece but Ottoman Greece and the Kingdom of Greece have different articles. I repeat that in Crete's case there is no ambiguity like the Peloponnese, Epirus or Attica about what is meant: the modern periphery and the geographical region coincide. On Markus' question, I'd favour the short form: "West", "East" etc, simply because it will mean less moving around of articles. Constantine ✍ 15:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
(unindent)No there isn't. Crete periphery covers Crete and the Cretan islands. But of course the islands and islets belong to the same geographical, cultural, historical, you name it, sphere as the main island. Indeed most of them are not more than a few kilometres at most from the Cretan mainland itself. All major islands have smaller offshore islands and rocks, that doesn't mean that they are separate entities. If the Aeolian islands belong to Sicily, surely Gramvousa, Spinalonga etc (yes, even Gavdos) belong to Crete. Constantine ✍ 20:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
"Minor islands around it, such as the Aeolian Islands, are part of Sicily". What you say goes against common sense: the article "Crete" is about a geographic and cultural space, not simply the narrow pedantic definition "Crete, only Crete and nothing but Crete, even if it is just a few rocks off the shore where you can swim to in five minutes". Is Sphacteria perhaps not part of the Peloponnese? Or the Isle of Wight not a part of Great Britain? In any case, if you don't believe me, just go and tell to any Cretan that Spinalonga is not a part of Crete, and see what response you'll get ;). Constantine ✍ 22:01, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Outcome of majority vote and logical thinking may well be different. Did you notice that you switched the topic? I was talking about the island and you talk about Crete as a cultural space. You may like to read the article about Great Britain which mentions well the differences between the region and the island. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 19:31, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Technically and pedantically, you are of course correct, congratulations, you have won a prize! Seriously now, it is laughable to argue that islands like Souda or Spinalonga, which are a stone's throw off the shore and are an integral part of Cretan culture and history, are not part of Crete because Crete proper ends where the shoreline is. We are not writing the nitpicker's guide to pedantically correct geography here, we follow conventions established by scholars and/or the people themselves. It is not a matter of "majority vote", but of common sense, history, culture, and the fact that these islands are mentioned along with "Crete proper" in every book about Crete, because they belong to the same "geographic and cultural space". Now, can we stop this silliness and resolve the nomenclature questions above, so that this issue ends? Constantine ✍ 21:35, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
I moved to "name Periphery" the ones I could. The Macedonia ones were locked and I couldn't move, should ask an admin for that. There must be consistency in my opinion for the Greek Peripheries, because they are administrative divisions. --Brunswick Dude (talk) 02:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I also think this should be consistent. Still, there can be an article "Thessaly" talking about the pre-periphery time. But with the introduction of the peripheries, there should be periphery articles that state population data, subdivisions, head of government etc. Physical geography facts can be maybe placed more on articles about physical objects, i.e. to island or peninsula articles. Peloponnese vs. Peloponnese Periphery might be an example. Only because a periphery coincides more or less with a physical object, it does not mean that the articles must be merged. If too much physical geography content is put into human made territories then with each territorial reorganization (border changes) one would need to duplicate or relocate that content. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 20:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Wouldn't West Greece be more appropriate, per previous discussion? Is there a use or meaning of the term West Greece significantly different, more frequent or superseding the Greek periphery, and shouldn't the more simple term be preferred for the article's title? Place Clichy (talk) 11:31, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
From my knowledge of the English-language media in Greece, these regions are always referred to using the ~ern version, ie Western Macedonia, Northern Aegean, Southern Aegean, Eastern Macedonia and Thrace etc.--Damac (talk) 17:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Re:Markussep: indeed as we see here, 2 consecutive renamings in the same day:
(cur | prev) 08:30, 10 February 2011 Markussep (talk | contribs) m (2,854 bytes) (moved Western Greece Periphery to West Greece Periphery: discussion at WP:Greece) (undo)
(cur | prev) 02:24, 10 February 2011 Brunswick Dude (talk | contribs) m (2,854 bytes) (moved Western Greece to Western Greece Periphery over redirect) (undo)
And it's now impossible to move the page to any other redirect without admin rights. (I don't mean that any of you attemtped to do this, btw) Place Clichy (talk) 20:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
On 7 Feb it was suggested to use "North-South-East-West", the moves occured before 10 Feb 17:22, which was the first time someone rest concern against North-South-East-West and seemed to suggest to use the longer forms. Can you please open a new section if your concern is not about North-South-East-West but about something different? I think discussions are more sufficient if topics are clearly separated.
I'd say no: if the territory is the same, let's move them to the peripheral unit name, and mention the prefecture (and its former subdivisions) in the history section. Rationale: geography, population, economy, transport etc. is the same anyway. MarkussepTalk12:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Oppose. Wrong rationale: political geography is NOT the same. Until 2006 the prefectures were subdivided into provinces, something that does not apply to peripheral units. Although prefectures lasted until 2010, it gives a nice break point to have the prefectures separated. And one will never have to discuss moving of these articles again (except new prefectures are created one day), and they can be at their prefecture name fine and stable. Links are stable etc. The last population figure can be kept in the infoboxes. Also these infoboxes have ranking numbers, since there is no 1:1 conversion from prefectures to peripheral units the rankings will be different even for prefectures that have their territory now covered by only one peripheral unit. Also when talking about borders which is often done, then it is sufficient for one bordering entity to have no direct equivalent and one would need to write extra text. This all is easily addressed by separate articles. Let the prefectures have their own articles and only mention into which peripheral units they got converted, I just did this at Cyclades Prefecture.
I don't think your arguments for creating new articles for all peripheral units are very strong. There is nothing about the prefectures that could not go into the history section of a peripheral unit article. Link stability can be created and maintained using redirects. You can mention historic population data in tables, and easily compare them with the data of the same territory under different administrative unit types. Crete Eyalet and Crete Vilayet are excellent examples of why we shouldn't create articles for all administrations a region has undergone: 14 words and some templates is really not enough for an article. We don't have articles about the Danish, British, German Empire, Schleswig and Hamburg administrations of Heligoland, or about the Persian, Arab, Portuguese, Omani, English administrations of Zanzibar either. Please explain how the nature of the entities is different, other than the type of administrative unit. MarkussepTalk21:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
"why we shouldn't" - I prefer some positive language and not commanding what "we" "should". These articles are stubs and some of the eyalet and vilayet articles are already bigger. Someone reading about these entities is better served by individual articles than by sections somewhere in history sections. Only because coincidentally Emirate of Crete / Kingdom of Candia / Crete Eyalet / Crete Vilayet / Cretan State / Crete Region missing! / Crete Periphery covered or cover the same(?) territory is no reason in itself to throw the content into one article. It's ok to have History of Crete as it is ok to have separate article for things that were part of this history. I don't understand what harm is done by Ottoman Empire stubs that attract attention of editors concerned with the Ottoman Empire. And how that harm is bigger than it's benefits. That there are no articles for Danish or Arab administration of "Heligoland" is no reason to not create them. Would you have stopped the first article about an animal in Wikipedia by saying, there are no articles on any other animals? GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 11:53, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Agree 100% with Markus. Most prefectures became peripheral units, and the cases where this did not happen are mostly the islands, where the principle island=per. unit was adopted. Since individual islands already have their articles, creating new ones is unnecessary not to say confusing. The argument "Would you have stopped the first article about an animal in Wikipedia by saying, there are no articles on any other animals?" is irrelevant: the peripheral units are not something new, they stem directly from the downgrading and renaming of previously existing structures. If "turtle" where to be officially renamed to "chelon", we would redirect the one to the other, we would not create a new article. The same re the Crete Eyalet and Vilayet, but GRprefectures knows my arguments on this already. Constantine ✍ 12:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
News, news, the peripheral units of Greece introduced with Kallikratis reform are NOT something new! I don't believe this news. This is again majority voting against stated facts, I stick with the facts. Also Emirate of Crete is NOT a redirect to Crete. The turtle analogy falls further short: you talk of renaming, while the prefectures and peripheral units are different in nature, renaming of a turtle does not change its nature. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 14:58, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Well, let's take Phthiotis, where I come from, for example: the prefecture and the peripheral units have the same boundaries, the same capital, the same population, the same geography, economy, and whatever else you care to mention. So yes, in this case, it is the practically the same thing. I don't perceive any tangible change nor does anyone else I know. Of course the prefecture had more administrative powers than the powerless peripheral unit, but that is all. To anyone outside the Ministry of the Interior and the local prefect/deputy peripheral governor and their councils, this matters not a iota. The prefectures themselves underwent a major change in their nature with the institution of local self-government and prefect elections in the 1990s, does this mean we should have different articles for before and after? And I don't really see what Emirate of Crete has to do here. It was a historical independent state with lots of differences from any other regime the island experienced. To suggest that the change from "prefecture" to "peripheral unit" is anything near that drastic a change as the invasion and conquest of Crete by the Saracens is... disingenuous, at best. In 2011, the Prefecture of Phthiotis was simply abolished and became a peripheral unit. No other change in its nature, extent or any other identifying criterion happened. A simple move solves the problem without having to create a multitude of useless articles.Constantine ✍ 18:10, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I created the test article West Attica/sandbox, for a prefecture that became a peripheral unit with the same territory. There wasn't much information about the prefecture administration in the old article, if so, the history section could have been bigger. GRprefectures, is there anything else you would like in this article, maybe a separate "prefecture" subsection in the article that you could link/redirect to from a template? MarkussepTalk17:53, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
OK, I see most of us prefer to keep prefecture and peripheral unit in one article. Then there's three prefectures that lost part of their territory at the reform: Piraeus (Islands split off), Kavala (Thasos split off), Magnesia (Sporades split off). For Kavala and Magnesia that's a relatively minor change, I suppose we can reuse the prefecture articles there as well. Piraeus lost most of its territory, I propose to create a new article for this peripheral unit. MarkussepTalk14:37, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm going through the prefecture articles now, and there are some issues I'd like to know your opinion on. We agreed to keep prefecture and peripheral unit in one article in all cases (except Piraeus). There was the earlier discussion about Phthiotis and Phocis, where I suppose the prefecture/peripheral unit article should be merged with the main article. My list of "problematic" articles and proposed actions:
a couple of prefectures are named after towns (town primary usage, e.g. Kavala, Ioannina, Rethymno), I propose to move these to X (peripheral unit), even though they also contain info about the prefecture
I think we all agree on moving the prefecture articles named after towns to the "XXX (peripheral unit)" format. On Boeotia, Arcadia, Laconia etc, there is IMO little reason to create separate articles on the lines of Boeotia (ancient region), or to have Laconia Prefecture distinct from Laconia. I strongly prefer to keep the number of articles as low as possible and refrain from splitting off parts if we don't absolutely have to. After all, Boeotia as a geographical region did not cease to exist between Antiquity and modern times. Most modern prefectures/peripheral units roughly correspond to their namesake ancient regions either way (which is only natural, since they were deliberately created this way). "History of XXX" pages can clear the evolution of the individual regions eventually, if enough material is gathered and when it is deemed necessary. Otherwise I am in full agreement with Markus' proposals. Constantine ✍ 16:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
I merged the Boeotia articles. There's still 13 peripheral units to do, but it's going well. How about those 6 articles to be moved (see above), does anyone here have the privileges to move them, or should I request them at WP:RM? MarkussepTalk13:44, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I'd say no, if the name is the same. For me that includes municipalities that have merged with others (like the Zitsa example). Constituent old municipalities (now municipal units) should be mentioned in the article. Rationale: many old municipality articles are stubs, and the available information is easily reused in the article about the new municipality, see the Zitsa example. MarkussepTalk12:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Damac that if the territory has changed new articles should be created. Reuse of content if really needed can be done by copy pasting. Now throwing together old and new stuff will only hinder growth of future two articles. Links and listings will be confusing, e.g. listings in province articles mentioning municipalities will confuse the reader if he suddenly ends up on an article talking about a much larger entity. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 16:39, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Could you give an example where it might be problematic to treat both the old and the new, larger municipality in one article? Wouldn't a mention of the changes due to the Kallikratis programme (and the Kapodistrias programme, where applicable) in the article solve that? See the Zitsa article. Another example outside Greece: Washington County, New York changed in size several times, all treated in the history section of the article (no separate articles). Most large cities expanded their territory over time as well, but we don't have separate articles for each expansion stage of e.g. Berlin. MarkussepTalk21:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Likewise agree with Markus. An article covers a specific term. History sections are there to show its territorial evolution. We don't have separate articles on countries for their various territorial statuses for instance. When someone checks up "XXX province" then he will be interested in the entire history and evolution of this province. Constantine ✍ 14:33, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand why you use the Washington County example. That is about completely different places with the same name, and I agree it would be silly to treat all Washington Counties (or all Richmonds or Springfields) in one article. But here we're talking about the same place under various administrations. MarkussepTalk16:19, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I can live with both models you discuss. I can't say that any of them is "wrong". I must say, however, that Markus' arguments seem more convincing. I definitely disagree with the "new articles for all municipalities" model.--Yannismarou (talk) 13:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Island peripheral units
This applies to several Ionian and Aegean islands, for instance Thasos, Zakynthos, Tinos. I prefer to treat the island, peripheral unit and municipality all in one article, since geography, population, economy, transport etc. is the same anyway. MarkussepTalk12:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Zakynthos city can have a separate article when necessary IMO (see next section), that's not the issue here. What I mean is: do we need separate articles for Zakynthos island, Zakynthos peripheral unit and Zakynthos municipality when they all have the same territory? I think not. What you're suggesting here and also in the previous sections will result in many very short articles with very little added value IMO. MarkussepTalk21:30, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
The main argument IMO is: what would the average reader expect? Is it clear that "Central Macedonia" alone refers to a periphery, is confusion easily possible, is the unit type always used and/or necessary?
My preferences:
peripheries: use X if no confusion is expected (e.g. East Macedonia and Thrace), use X (periphery) otherwise (e.g. Peloponnese)
peripheral units: use X if no confusion is expected (e.g. Lasithi, if we choose to reuse the prefecture article for the peripheral unit), use X (peripheral unit) otherwise (e.g. Lefkada, Piraeus, Kilkis). "X Peripheral Unit" looks horribly artificial to me
prefectures: if we choose not to reuse the prefecture article for the peripheral unit, and if confusion is expected, use X (prefecture) or X Prefecture, otherwise X
municipalities: use X if no confusion is expected (e.g. Kaisariani, Thermi), use X (municipality) otherwise (e.g. Georgios Karaiskakis) MarkussepTalk12:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
The prefectures have been dissolved. It is common to create separate articles for political entities, see these chains:
So the set of prefectures is best served by own articles. And these things are prefectures, in el:Κατηγορία:Νομοί της Ελλάδας they are all "Νομοί X".
Peripheries have been addressed above at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Greece#Peripheries. The peripheries should have clear names, I agree with Brunswick Dude. And for most of them (except Crete, Thessaly) I also agree with Constantine. Central Macedonia is much less clear, is this the center of the region Macedonia? Something central in the Republic of Macedonia? Same for West Greece or worse Western Greece. I wonder whether no one ever used this description before the periphery was created. Also, it is not important what the average reader expects, I wouldn't even know how would you define that. Majority of 51%? And 49% are confused? And then if one clearly states the fullname, would that harm the 51%? Or would then suddenly 100% be unconfused WP:ASTONISH. The only entity that likely causes zero confusion is East Macedonia and Thrace. Please tell why Emirate of Crete / Kingdom of Candia / Crete Eyalet / Crete Vilayet / Cretan State can have their own article and the periphery should not? GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 16:39, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I tried to start a naming discussion, not a repetition of the previous sections about which articles we need. I guess what you're saying is that you prefer to add the unit type to the article title. MarkussepTalk21:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
In the "which articles we need sections" of this level-2-section (marked with ==), prefectures and peripheries were not included, yet they were included in the naming discussion. The plain name for most entities is not feasible, see Crete and its 7+ names. Therefore I addressed the topic here again. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 11:42, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Help with Ancient Greek
I was wondering if someone could take a look at Slow_loris#Etymology and help me fix the Ancient Greek name for "monkey". I using the source (Palmer 1904 - linked in refs) and Google Translate, I was able to successfully represent "night" (νύξ, νυκτός), but "monkey" or cebus is eluding me. The source looks like "κήβος", but this appears to be gibberish. If someone could please look at the source and fix it, I'd appreciate it. – VisionHolder « talk »05:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Actually, it is correct: κήβος is a (very) archaic word for a type of monkey. I've made a few minor changes for accuracy, but the information is essentially correct. Constantine ✍ 11:47, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the fixes and verification. I hope you don't mind, but I may post here from time to time for similar requests. – VisionHolder « talk »16:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed that the article on Macrobius, whose major surviving work Saturnalia is written in Latin and deals with Roman religion and antiquarian lore, is marked with the WikiProject Greece banner, and rated as of mid-importance. I was wondering whether someone had perhaps added the banner out of habit, in placing the Ancient Greece and Rome project banner. I was thinking of deleting it, but Macrobius does talk about a few Greek words and customs tangentially. At any rate, if the project here wished to leave the banner, no problem, but I was imagining the article at best was of low importance in terms of illuminating anything about Greece. So, rate as "low importance," or remove the project altogether? Cynwolfe (talk) 12:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
He was probably tagged as a Byzantine; WikiProject Greece includes the Byz. Empire in its scope. However, he probably did not live in the East, and even then he would not be of mid-level importance. Seeing as he is firmly within the "Western", Latin tradition, I'd say better remove the tag. Constantine ✍ 15:25, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Now that all peripheral unit articles have been created or updated, it's time for the new Kallikratis municipalities. I propose to deal with the new municipalities first, we can do the old municipalities (that have become municipal units) later. Things to do are (see this Zitsa diff for ideas):
change the "prefec" field in a "periphunit" field (with the correct peripheral unit)
fill the "pop_municipality" and "area_municipality" fields (population and area are given at de:Liste der Gemeinden Griechenlands, population and municipality subdivision also in this ref). Data for the old municipality (in case of a merger) can go in the "pop_municunit" and "area_municunit" fields
lead: mention the correct peripheral unit, and the seat of the municipality if different
"administration" section: mention the 2011 reform and the old municipalities (in case of a merger), now municipal units. Optionally, add the communities, mentioned in the reference
Done! Time for the next step: the old municipalities that have become municipal units. Things to do are (see this Pasaronas diff for ideas):
infobox:
if the map is the position of the old municipality in the old peripheral unit, it is probably still useful. Keep it, and add a "|map_caption = Location within the peripheral unit"
change the "prefec" field in a "periphunit" field (with the correct peripheral unit)
add the "municipality" field (with the correct municipality)
change the "population" and "area" fields into "pop_municunit" and "area_municunit" fields (population given in this ref)
lead: mention the correct peripheral unit, and that it is a former municipality, now a municipal unit of another municipality (+ref)
remove the prefecture navigation template.
Maybe we can make new navigation templates showing the municipal units and communities within a municipality later. Another thing to think about is new categories for the municipalities and former municipalities. MarkussepTalk15:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
This is a bit of a stretch, but I'm working on List of bagpipes and hitting some trouble on Greece. We have an article on the Askomandoura (Greek: ασκομαντούρα) of Crete, and the Gaida (Greek: γκάιδα) of Thrace (a type of pipe pretty common in the Balkans. However, we have redlinks for Tsampouna (Greek: τσαμπούνα and gainta. Does anyone know if any of these names overlap with each other, or with the Turkish tulum? Anyone know how to spell "gainta"? Any info on how to straighten out the Greek pipes from each other, links to sources/images (especially historical Free images), and even just Greek spellings for some of the names of pipes would be great. Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
"gainta" is just another way to spell the Greek word (Γκάιντα, a variant of γκάιδα) in Latin letters, so it can be a redirect to Gaida. Tsampouna/tsambouna seems to be a synonym of askomandoura, the latter beeing the name used in Crete ; it differs from the gaïda by having the drone and the chanter pipes binded together to form a double pipe.--Phso2 (talk) 07:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Seeing as Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Review has been mostly inactive, and review requests submitted there are usually left to collect dust, is there any objection to mothballing the page? We would then update the main project page to direct users to the relevant project-wide review processes (WP:PR and WP:FAC). If no objection is raised within a couple of weeks I'll proceed. Constantine ✍ 15:32, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Categories for populated places and municipalities
Now that the prefectures have been abolished, and most of the articles have been adapted accordingly, I suppose it's time to work on the categories for populated places and municipalities. For the Kallikratis municipalities, I propose to create categories by periphery, e.g. Category:Municipalities of the North Aegean. The old "Municipalities in the X prefecture" can be depopulated and deleted then (and if that's desired, replaced by "Former municipalities in ..." categories by periphery or prefecture).
Agree, except that we should retain the "peripheral unit" next to cases like Trikala. Trikala the city/municipality and Trikala the peripheral unit are totally different things. We should also extend the revision to the "People from" categories. Also, I' like to suggest a revision in the use of a rather peculiar case, Category:Populated places in the Peloponnese. Currently, this limits itself to the Peloponnese Periphery, but as the more common usage is not the periphery, I'd suggest using the category for all Peloponnese-related places, i.e. including the Achaea and Elis prefectures. Whether there is any point in creating a Category:Populated places in the Peloponnese Periphery I don't know. Constantine ✍ 11:22, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
OK, both for the peripheral units and the Peloponnese for populated places (since we're creating subcategories anyway, the Achaea and Elis categories will be subcategories of both Peloponnese and West Greece then). Let's call the municipalities category Category:Municipalities of the Peloponnese Periphery, to avoid confusion. MarkussepTalk12:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Fine by me. BTW, I think it's simpler to simply make a mass request to move the existing "prefecture" categories, where necessary, to "peripheral unit" ones. I doubt there's any value in having categories by former prefectures. Constantine ✍ 12:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I desire for this article to go under intense review. I'm still working on it, but I'm going to finish it in the next two hours or so. If this is not where this is supposed to go, please let me know. I couldn't find where it was supposed to go.SteveMooreSmith3 (talk) 20:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
It is true that “lato sensu” Piraeus belongs in the greater urban area of Athens, being the historic seaport of Greece’s capital.
However, from an administrative point of view, Piraeus is not included in the Athens metropolitan area.
Piraeus has its own (independent from Athens) municipality (http://www.piraeus.gov.gr/); Piraeus used to be for almost 160 years (up to December 2010, when prefectures were abolished in Greece) the capital of Piraeus Prefecture, which included the islands of the Saronic Gulf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saronic_Gulf) as well as the islans of Kythera (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kythera) and Antikythera (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera); and, most importantly, Piraeus is nowadays the capital of the Peripheral Unit of Piraeus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripheral_units_of_Greece ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripheries_of_Greece).
Furthermore, Piraeus has its own electoral districts: i) the “Piraeus first electoral district” (which includes the municipality of Piraeus), and ii) the “Piraeus second electoral district” (which includes Piraeus’ suburbs, such as Keratsini, Perama, Drapetsona, Nikaia etc). Therefore, the citizens of Piraeus elect their own MPs and they are represented in the Greek Parliament by the MPs elected in Piraeus and not by those elected in Athens.
Administratively, Piraeus is totally independent from Athens! It is a different municipality, belonging in a different peripheral unit, having its own electoral districts!
According to the official data available by the Hellenic Statistical Authority (http://www.statistics.gr/) and the Municipality of Piraeus (http://www.piraeus.gov.gr/) the wider area of Piraeus includes the homonymous municipality and six more municipalities-suburbs with a total population of 466.065 and an extent of 50.4 square metres.
I would like to underline the fact that in the table depicting the largest Greek cities the population of Athens (3,165,823) does not include the population of Piraeus, simply because Piraeus is not a part of Athens!
Over at WikiProject Athletics we're trying to work out how to spell the name of a Greek javelin thrower. English sources mostly call him Spiridon Lebesis or Spirídon Lebésis (following the sport's main governing body), but other variations of his name I've seen so far include (Spiridon/Spyridon) Lebessis, Lembesis, Lempesis and Lempessis. "Spiridon Lebesis" seems quite close to meeting WP:ENGLISH, but pretty much every article on Greeks with that given name is at "Spyridon". (Additionally, Greeks seem to mostly call him Σπύρος Λεμπέσης, and this form of his given name is also seeing some English use.) Any help would be appreciated. Sideways713 (talk) 09:50, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
The Greek name would be Σπυρίδων Λεμπέσης, which by the most common form of transliteration would give Spyridon Lebesis or Lembesis. Σπύρος/Spyros is simply a short, colloquial form for his name. Unless use of the latter is overwhelmingly used (cf. Kostas Karamanlis) use the former, which is the formal full form of the name. Constantine ✍ 11:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am working on the 1960 Winter Olympics and noted in my research that Greece did not participate. It is one of the few Olympic Games in which Greece did not send athletes. What is interesting is that a standard bearer did march in the Opening and Closing Ceremonies. Due to Greece's special standing within the Olympic Movement, and the fact that this may be the only Games (Winter or Summer) that Greece missed, I think it is important to note why they didn't participate. Problem is I can't find any English sources that give me the reason. Does anyone at this project have an idea or even better a source that would tell me why they didn't participate? I'd sincerely appreciate any help. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius20:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Input requested regarding article title
I just closed a move discussion at Talk:Tzachas#Requested move, and then an editor objected to the move. Before doing anything further with the page, I'd like to see input from some more editors, so we can be certain that we're getting the correct title. If anyone here can register an opinion there, it would be helpful. Cheers. -GTBacchus(talk)17:32, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
I stumbled across these redirects, they are obviously made by an ethnic Macedonian editor as a "critical comment" or a joke of some sort in relation to the Macedonia naming dispute, in any case they do not serve anyone (apart from those participating in the joke i suppose), as they are not used in any context. I have no idea of the technicalities regarding page deletions, can someone handle it ?--A Couple of Things (talk) 00:51, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Personally, I don't oppose to use alternative names in the lead sentence. I only oppose double standards. For example Midilli, Sakiz are under the same situation. ethnocentric approach (Greek, Turkish, Kurdish, Persian etc.) is very harmful for neutral encyclopedia. Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 13:04, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parentheses
Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted.
Alternatively, all alternative names can be moved to and explained in a "Names" or "Etymology" section immediately following the lead, or a special paragraph of the lead; we recommend that this be done if there are at least three alternate names, or there is something notable about the names themselves.
Having participated in endless and most of the time stupid discussions about alternative names in Macedonia-related articles, I will express my opinion based on this personal experience: I'm in principle against putting alternative names in the leads of Greek/Turkish- and Macedonia-related place articles. Such attempts have usually resulted in endless, tiring, and bitter discussions, with things often getting worse that before. I could accept only some very few exceptions, when the alternative name is of great historical and encyclopedical importance, and it has been inextricably related with the history of the city. E.g. Istanbul and Constantinople, Izmir and Smyrna, Bitola and Monastir. But, personally, I wouldn't like to see any further generalization of the use of alternative names. In any case, each article should have a "names" section, when all the alternative names could and should be discussed. I don't see why we should also add a series of names in the ledes as well.Yannismarou (talk) 09:18, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
The Swedish article on Macedonia (region) needs moderation asap!
Hello to you all. Since Swedish is my native tongue, I had a random look on the Swedish version of Macedonia (region). It seems like there is no moderation there and anyone can add anything. On the etymology section for example it explains that the name could mean "motherland" based on some "Historian" M. Dimitri. The article has been flagged for bias but not much is happening. I would be glad to keep the article in line with the English version, but more Swedish speakers should participate in order to keep it clean. Fkitselis (talk) 16:29, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Maybe User:Pel thal could help, but he/she is inactive for some time, and I do not know if he/she has the time or the appetite to do so. But the user in question is the only Greek/Swedish native speaker I know around here!Yannismarou (talk) 08:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
What a coincidence to have a look at WP after too many months and see this discussion! I'll try to help out, although my spare time these days is scarce. Maybe this is the chance for me to become active once more within this e-community of ours. Pel thal (talk) 09:59, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
We have situation as follows:
"Category:15th-century Greek people" is a subcategory of "Category:15th-century Byzantine people" and vice versa.
It seems wrong in both direction and it's better to delete these links and put "see also" instead.
AlexShkotin (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
The "Nea Peramos" article had been assessed as a "stub". On behalf of a group or Peramians, I expanded it and added numerous references to support the material. We also cleaned up some erroneous data. Coulf Wiki Project Greece re-assess the article so that we can get an idea of the requirements (I am new myself to this ...)? Thanks in advance. Apostolos Vranas (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Request for inclusion of an article (and of a group of articles) in WikiProject Greece
I contributed to the article about the surname "Vranas". Much to my surprise, it is not included within the WikiProject (I would assume that other surname articles are not included either). But, this surname covers a period of ten centuries of Greek history (there are others that span still more) and there are historical figures by that name that have played a role to our country. Should it not be included (along with all the other surname articles) in the scope of WikiProject Greece? Apostolos Vranas (talk) 09:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Either the WikiProject Greece admins got here ultra-quick or I had made a big booboo ... Now it appears that the article has been included in the WikiProject's scope, just not assessed/rated yet. Thanks a lot for your intervention. Apostolos Vranas (talk) 09:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
I tried to use this article for my personal education, and there were a few things that were not 100% clear. I think the article would be helped if someone who knows the correct answer could make these things completely clear.
1. Having read the article, I think the following is true, but it's not completely clear. Is it the case that there is a SEPARATE ballot paper for each party with the names of all the party's candidates on it, plus a 'no-party' (blank) ballot paper, and that a voter may put one and only one paper into the envelope? Thus, a voter MUST choose one party, and can't simply choose desirable individuals from different parties?
2. If there is a single ballot paper for each party, what is the order of candidates on the paper? Is it the order in which the party thinks they should be elected, or alphabetical order, or random order?
3. If someone wants to stand as an independent in one constituency, is this possible? (I guess not, because there seems to be a national minimum 3% vote requirement.)
4. What's the blank ballot paper for, and how is it used? I think this refers to the phrase 'party of their choice, if any'.
5. If there is a separate ballot paper for each party, after voting what does the voter do with the unused ballot papers - throw them in the wastepaper basket? (If they are handed back, then the ballot would not be secret.)
6. What happens if there are two papers in an envelope?
7. Is there a financial requirement for standing for election - like a deposit in the UK elections, which is lost if the candidate (party in Greece, I suppose) doesn't poll a minimum percentage of the vote?
8. What happens if the individual candidate preferences produce a draw?
8. The article says, "Ballot papers with more crosses that the maximum number allowed, or without any cross, are counted in the total party tally but are disqualified during the second part of tallying, i.e. the determination of which individual candidate is elected to a seat already won by the candidate's party." However, the paper with no crosses is not really 'disqualified' but not relevant, and so not used. I think saying these papers are 'not used' is clearer than saying 'disqualified'.
9. If an elected candidate later leaves or is expelled from their party, can they remain a member of parliament, either as an independent or by joining another party, until the next election?
If what I think is correct, how about changing the second and third paragraphs of the 'Voting' section of the article to the following? NB: there would still be some points unanswered from my list of six questions (2, 3, 4, 6 7 and 8).
>Traditionally, voting takes place "from sunrise to sunset" but times are usually rounded to the nearest "top of the hour" (e.g. 7 AM to 8 PM). Individual precincts may prolong voting time at the judge's discretion, if there are still voters queueing up to vote. Voters identify themselves by their ID cards and are given a set of ballot papers containing separate sheets for each party standing in their constituency plus a blank ballot paper and an empty envelope. Then they withdraw to a secluded cubicle equipped with a lectern, pen and waste basket, where they select the single ballot paper for the party of their choice. If they wish, voters may indicate specific preferred candidates within the party list of their choice by marking a cross next to the candidate name or names. They may put any number of crosses up to the total number of seats available in their constituency. They put the sealed envelope with the ballot paper in the ballot box, throw the unused papers into the waste basket, and are given their ID card back.
>Signs other than crosses next to a candidate name may mark the ballot as invalid during tallying, as such signs may be construed as violating voting secrecy by possibly indicating the identity of the voter. Ballot papers with more crosses that the maximum number allowed, or without any cross, are counted in the total party tally but are not used during the second part of tallying, i.e. the determination of which individual candidate is elected to a seat already won by the candidate's party.
Yes, a voter is allowed to choose only candidates from one party, or vote for no party at all (blank ballot).
The leader's name is on top (with usually bigger letters), and then the rest of the candidates are listed alphabetically.
Theoretically it is possible, but he will need to get lots of votes. A nation-wide 3% is close to impossible for independent candidates, but it definitely gives seats in the Parliament if acchieved. However, the only realistic way of an independent candidate to win a seat is to get the majority of votes (or second) in his electoral district, but i'm not 100% sure that's possible. Election laws change almost every election and they are totally confusing.
The blank ballot is used when you don't want to vote for any party, and it counts as a separate "no-party" party.
They are thrown in a waste bin inside the booth. (terrible waste of paper...)
Both are rendered void.
I don't know, but I don't think so. There is a standard amount of money you need to pay to the state if you/your party want to take part in the elections, but it's not returnable.
Both non-crossed ballots and ballots with too many crosses count for the party only. They are not disqualified per se. Only the crosses in over-crossed ballots are.
If an MP resigns or his party expells him, he becomes independent. Then he can do whatever he wants; form a new party, join another party or stay independent.
Thanks for the reply. Is voting compulsory in Greece? That's the only reason I can think of for a 'No Party' ballot paper - otherwise you could just not vote. In many countries, if you must vote by law, some people 'spoil' their ballot paper to show their rejection of the system, or the available candidates. Is the 'No Party' ballot an official 'spoilt paper'. In some countries, including, I think, the UK, you can write in the name of a person who is not on the official ballot, and if a majority of people do so, then the person is elected. I thought the Blank Ballot might be for this, but it seems not to be so. Why is the party leader at the top of the ballot, if the ballot paper is different for each constituency? The party leader doesn't stand for election in every constituency, surely.
You say that people who leave their own party can stay in parliament. So is there some cheating where people pretend to be of one party and leave soon after the election? And is it possible if enough people leave one party and join another for the government to change without an election? And if this happened what happens to the 'extra 50 members' the biggest party gets? The papers say Papandreaou has only a three seat majority at the moment. What happened to all the extra seats they got for being the biggest party?
English translation of περιφέρειεα - periphery or region?
The Greek word περιφέρειεα simply means 'region'. It is thoroughly misleading to translate it as 'periphery' which, according to my Concise Oxford Dictionary (8th edition) means (1) the boundary of an area of surface, or (2) the outer or surrounding region (e.g. 'built on the periphery of the old town'). I can understand the temptation to translate it as 'periphery', to distinguish the modern administrative unit from previous administrative divisions of Greece, but it is completely incomprehensible to any English speaker who isn't familiar with the modern Greek word. Those English speakers who are familiar with Greece and modern Greek will have no difficulty understanding that 'region' means περιφέρειεα, provided the text is discussing περιφέρειες and not other types of regions.
I have started making the necessary changes, but been asked to stop and consult the group. I look forward to hearing your opinions.
I too agree with the move, and have been contemplating it for some time, but felt that this needed to be cleared here first (apologies to Timothy Cooper if I was a bit brusque), as this is where the most interested editors can be found (who might help with the move), and where similar matters have been discussed in the past. "Region" seems to be the translation the Greek government uses as well (e.g. Attica Region). On the old regions of Greece, now moved to Traditional geographic divisions of Greece, I'd suggest simply renaming them to Geographical departments of Greece, which is both their official name and their actual notion (they are defunct as admin. units, but very much in actual use as geographical divisions). Cplakidas, 17:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
I would also be in favour of calling them "regions". The problem was the existence of the old Regions of Greece, but I now see that they have been renamed. The Athens News and Kathimerini English Edition both use the term "region" to describe the peripheries, and refer to their elected leaders as "regional governors" etc.
May I also propose that we use the term "subregion" instead of "regional unit". I think this would convey to English speakers what these entities actually are, ie subregions of a region.--Damac (talk) 12:35, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure about the "subregion" thing, because unlike the prefectures, the περιφερειακές ενότητες are not self-governing entities, in other words, they are not so much separate components of a region (i.e. many subregions form a region) but rather divisions of the region itself, which now is the main administrative unit. Constantine ✍ 14:08, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
No-one seems to disagree with changing the translation of περιφέρειεα from 'periphery' to 'region', so I propose to continue making this change systematically in all the pages concerned. If anyone has time to help out with this, your help would be greatly appreciated.
As regards 'regional unit' or 'subregion', I think 'subregion' is far better - I only wish I'd thought of it! 'Regional unit' sounds very strange in English, and would usually mean the unit of some organisation in a particular region, rather than a part of a region. The fact that the 'subregion' doesn't have any real power is also an argument in favour of using this term: the region is an entire unit, with power, whereas the subregion is only part of a region, a subordinate entity with no real power. Timothy Cooper (talk) 16:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
just thought I should mention that according to the government site the translation they have for περιφερειακή ενότητα is regional division so why not just use that? good luck on renaming all the pages and links to them :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thessalonian101 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
So I guess we agree that the peripheries should be changed into regions. Which option do we pick for the peripheral units? "subregion", "regional unit", "regional division"? I suppose "subregion" is the least ambiguous term. MarkussepTalk15:20, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Your opinions please. MarkussepTalk 10:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC) I performed the IMO uncontroversial moves that I could do myself, and modified my proposal for Attica. I'll list them at WP:RM to get more discussion. MarkussepTalk14:01, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
All articles have been moved to the "region" or "regional unit" equivalents. I've already checked the region articles and the Category:Templates for peripheries (Kallikratis), but there's more to do:
check incoming links to Epirus (region), and point them to Epirus where applicable --> done
check the regional unit articles: replace all peripheries with (modern) regions, and peripheral units with regional units, also in the infoboxes --> done
He carried messages for the resistance, according to the Michigan Daily (1986). The medal, the Order of Unknown Heroes, was awarded by His Holiness, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem. Kiefer.Wolfowitz09:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
WikiProject members are invited to participate in a Good Article review
Hello. I have been reviewing Ionian islands under Venetian rule for GA, and there have been some issues raised over its suitability for that class. I have put the review on hold until Sunday, Dec. 4, and am willing to make a decision on whether to promote or not on that date. It appears that the user who created the article and nominated it, Marcofran, has not been around much lately (if I am mistaken, please correct me), so I am wondering what your opinions on the article are. Thank you in advance for your help! DCItalk03:38, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Speakers of the Hellenic Parliament
I am in a position that makes me know a few things about EVERYONE of them. May I take it as a project to create articles for those who haven't?--The Theosophist (talk) 14:13, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Please give "Latin" spelling of this Greek word: φθόριος
I know the translation of "φθόριος". It is fluorine. But could you please give "what the Greek word would look like in Latin spelling"? I just want an English reader to be able to understand what it sounds like (and no, I don't want some IPA heiroglyphs for the sounds), just "ftorine" or whatever. THANKS!!!TCO (talk) 13:51, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
The article Greek love has been nominated for a GA review. The nominator has commented that It probably wont make it, but it is important to try. The article can certainly use more eyes on it and GA nomination is a good way to start, so I'm posting a notice to all projects that have a banner there. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Greece will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in Greece's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 22:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Byzantine Empire FAR
Byzantine Empire, one of the richest WP articles and one of the most important for this project, has been nominated for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion and, if you can afford some time, try to assist in keeping it FA, helping to implement the necessary improvements. It would be a pity to lose this great article.--Yannismarou (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
I noticed that the pretty complete article Fournoi Korseon and the very poor stub Fournoi cover pretty much the same subject, with no clear distinction between the town, the island and the island group. In addition, they are badly linked to each other. Do you think a merger would be appropriate?
Also note that Fourni, imho the most common English spelling for the island, currently redirects to Phourni, an unrelated archaeological site in Crete. We may disambiguate better than that if we have a single article for the Fourni island/island group. Place Clichy (talk) 09:57, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Can anyone give me an authoritative translation of this racehorse's name? I'm ok with "Ela" and "Mou", but I've seen the "Mana" bit translated as "love", "darling", "momma" and "mum". What's the best? Or does it all depend on the context? Tigerboy1966 21:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Literally, it means "come here mum" or "come on mum", but it is more often used as an exhortation, where "mana mou" is an endearment, so the rendering "come on, my darling" is pretty accurate. Constantine ✍ 15:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your clarification. One of the best things about WP is that you can find an expert on almost anything. Tigerboy1966 17:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to discuss the names of articles regarding streets and squares in Greek cities. See Category:Streets in Greece, Category:Squares in Greece and their subdirectories. In Greek the names are usually in the genitive case (e.g. Πλατεία Συντάγματος - Plateia Syntagmatos, Οδός Σοφοκλέους - Odos Sofokleous). In all the Greek street and square articles I saw in English wikipedia, the generic ("Street", "Square", "Avenue") is translated, and for the name either the nominative or the genitive is used. So we have Syntagma Square and Sofokleous Street. I don't know how Greek streets and squares are usually translated outside wikipedia ("Syntagma Square" sounds sensible), but I suppose it would be better to use the nominative. And probably also use a common Anglicised form, if it exists ("Sophocles Street", "Aristotle Square"). Thoughts? MarkussepTalk15:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
With street/squae names, the same convention as place names applies, i.e. we don't anglicize/latinize the name, but teansliterate it. Now, on the genitive/nominative case, I think the difference is there because in Greek day-to-day parlance, we simply don't use "square" or "street". Thus we simply talk about "Syntagma"/"Omonoia"/"Psila Alonia" etc for the major squares, but always "Sofokleous"/"Panepistimiou" for the streets. However, in many cases the genitive is used for squares as well, e.g. Aristotelous Square in Thessaloniki is always referred to as "Aristotelous". In other words, the rule of thumb is what the Greeks themselves use when removing "square" or "street". Constantine ✍ 15:16, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
I've always taken the view that in these cases, the "tourist guide" approach is most useful, i.e. should a foreigner in Athens ask for directions for "Syntagma [Square]", "Syntagmatos Square", or "Constitution Square"? In this case, a) would be most comprehensible to a Greek. In most other cases, the genitive forms apply. Constantine ✍ 13:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Or would the Greek name ("Odos Sofokleous", "Plateia Aristotelous") be preferable for those squares and streets that don't receive as much international attention as Syntagma? MarkussepTalk14:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I think the genitive case should stay when refering to such places: "Sofokleous Street", "Aristotelous Square". [5] I see no point in not translating the Odos or Plateia part, which are not integral parts of the name. – Kosm1fent14:48, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Helena Dragas is actually the Greek queen of Byzantium with the name Helen – Dragasis Palaiologos also known as Saint Hipomoni!
In the article Helena Dragas she is not refered with her real full name. She was the Queen of Byzantium with the name Augusta Helen – Dragasis Palaiologos, daughter of the emperor of Slavic nation, Constantine Dragasis. She became empress of Byzantium as wife of Emmanuel B’ the Palaiologos and she was mother of the last emperor of Byzantium Costantine Palaiologos. I strongly suggest to change her name from Helena Dragas (which is slavic) to Helen – Dragasis Palaiologos (which is Greek), because she was an empress of Byzantium and firstly I don't find it appropriate to refer to her with her slavic name (she lived in Byzantium in Greece and not in Serbia) and secondly you can find plenty of reference with her name as Helen – Dragasis Palaiologos. Also many texts refer to her as Saint Patience (Saint Hipomoni). Her memory is celebrated in the Orthodox Greek church on 29 May 688dim (talk) 19:32, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Sigh... This has been discussed before. Read your talk page: [6]. In short, for queen consorts, regardless of nationality, we retain their original names and titles. Constantine ✍ 21:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
This template is no longer used in content namespaces, but since members of this project edit in its primary usage areas I post a notice here ... just in case. — [dave] cardiff | chestnut — 02:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Question about a Council of State ruling
Hi all... could anybody help?
Over at Legitimacy of NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, there's a claim that "The Council of State, the Supreme Court of Greece, found NATO guilty of war crimes for its 1999 bombing", which seems slightly odd - would the Council of State act as a court? Was NATO brought before the court? The source given is [7] which seems to have copy & pasted text from elsewhere - naïve googling finds the text copied in other places but nothing really authoritative. Alas, I don't speak Greek. Is it possible to get something from the horse's mouth? Are there stronger Greek sources on this judgement, whatever it is? If the claim is true, it would presumably have had a fair amount of coverage in Greek media. bobrayner (talk) 03:00, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
It seems to me that individual members of the Council of State signed a statement which condemned NATO. This statement was outside of their legal and jurisdictional role as members of the council. Think of it as when individual members of a legislative body sign a statement condemning some situation or other; it's not the same as the legislative body passing a resolution, even when a majority of the body signs the statement. The confusion arises from the spin the authors of the site you cite give the statement.Argos'Dad03:17, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
But we have source for this. Unless someone find source that only individual members signed a statement, we should follow this as legitimate information. --WhiteWriterspeaks09:07, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
However, it does say that "Twenty members of the Council of State have issued a statement...", which means it wasn't an official decision by the Council of State. Of course it can be used as a source, but not to cite this statement on behalf of the whole council. Regards. – Kosm1fent13:06, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
It looks like the former was created by cut & paste, which is a Bad Thing, and would need to be fixed. (Alternatively: Delete the former to make room for moving the latter). bobrayner (talk) 08:35, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Human Trafficking in Greece
I am planning on doing some work on the page on Human Trafficking in Greece. The current article has been flagged for multiple issues, including lack of neutrality and depending too much on a single source. The current page draws its information entirely from the 2010 Trafficking in Persons Report from the U.S.Department of State, which could lead to a large bias. The current article is not very thorough. It also needs general cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
I plan on fixing these issues by thoroughly and systematically exploring human trafficking in Greece by restructuring and rewriting the current page and adding a substantial amount of new material from a variety of reputable sources. I plan on organizing the new material into a much more reader-friendly format. Additionally, as the current article draws from a single source, it looks at human trafficking in Greece solely from a legal perspective, so I plan on broadening the current scope of the article to other important aspects of human trafficking in Greece, such as types of trafficking in Greece, causes and driving factors of trafficking in Greece, current governmental anti-trafficking efforts, and critiques of that effort. Also, I plan to add more information to the current headings about specific legislation in Greece related to human trafficking.
A more detailed look at my planned changes is available on the talk page for Human Trafficking in Greece, but I wanted to let everyone know and ask for feedback, suggestions, and criticisms about how to better this page. I really want to contribute a quality article that is clearly laid-out and readable with relevant information on the topic. As someone new to the editing scene, I would really appreciate any feedback you could give me. ευχαριστώ!
Rachel.m.mitchell (talk) 05:43, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
I would like to see more articles (or expansion of current ones) on historic Greek industrial companies - Izola, Peiraiki-Patraiki, Titanas, Viohalco, Tsimenta Iraklis, PYRKAL klp. Also, it would be interesting to have articles on the founders / presidents of these companies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.104.76.24 (talk) 21:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello! I'm trying to find the ISSN for Hot Doc, to enter into that article's infobox. Unfortunately, my Greek-language skills are nil, and I have no clue about how to go about finding it, other than by getting hold of a copy of the magazine itself, which would be difficult for me, because I'm not in Greece. I'd be really grateful if anyone here would be interested in finding it and adding it to the article. Thanks, -- The Anome (talk) 15:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
I need some help with the article Dionysius Mantalos, and I have the idea that you guys can help. Problem 1: the article is an orphan with few links incoming and outgoing. I especially miss some background information about his role in the church. Problem 2: is with an editor who keeps adding photos to the article. The article is quite short, so one picture is the infobox is sufficient. But the editor keeps adding another two pictures. I start to fear there is a language barrier at play here and that I do not get the message across. It would be greatly appreciated when somebody can take a look at it! The Bannertalk22:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello! The second part has apparently been resolved, although given this user's past, he'll probably come around to the article a while later and re-add them. Anyhow, on the orphan issue, there's not much one can do, as the relevant articles are missing. A See of Corinth article for instance would be the right spot. Constantine ✍ 08:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
I have spent the last few weeks revising and expanding the article on Philomela. I have proposed my work for Good Article status. If anyone is interested in reviewing it, take a look at WP:GAN. I appreciate it. --ColonelHenry (talk) 02:42, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
I am tired of repeating this in Commons, but have you ever read WP:OR, WP:CITE and WP:RS? Your maps are self-made, without sources, and come from someone who demonstrably has an axe to grind. Even if they were accurate (and that's a very very big "if"), your credibility is zero. So consider yourself warned: if you continue trolling around with these maps, I will remove them on sight. Constantine ✍ 21:25, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
What census data do you speak about in Greece in pass 50 years, after the civil war 1953 there isnt any data at all for the minorities groups because greek authority's do not recognised any minority except muslim minority in Thrace and Jews in Thessaloniki, Serres and Kavala, Veria small amounts Athens. The census is not a sources in Greece!!!. There for i collected data figures that are comming from diferent minority reports, european commity, sources like Lithoksou, like Boechoten, from various ethnic cultural accociations in the Northern Greece, Todor Simovski, reports of Carnegie Commision in 1925-1925,Refugees Settlement Commission: Services of Greek Members, 1923-1925,Etablissement en Grèce des réfugiés d'Asie Mineure: Enquête sur la situation des réfugiés, 1923 ; Greek and Turkish refugees and deportees 1912-1924 ; 6 League of Nations O. J. 1673 (1925)
Work of the Refugee Settlement Commission ;Was the League successful in the 1920s;The exchange of minorities: Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey;http://web.ku.edu/~eceurope/hist557/lect14b.htm; http://lithoksou.net/ ect ect. For me and i hope for many in Balkans it is very important to see the real situation in the Balkans states.--DKitan 13:18, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it is important. So important, in fact, that it is necessary to pay extra attention to providing accurate, neutral and reliable information, which your work is not. Websites are not WP:RS. There are dozens of books and journal articles on the ethnographics of Macedonia, which you completely ignore. And the way you apply the ethnographic data from 1913 or 1923 to imply modern-day ethnographic distribution, or the way you studiously divide Pontic Greeks, Ionian Greeks, Karamanlides etc from "pure" Greeks (whatever that is, in your opinion) is rather indicative on where you stand on accuracy, neutrality and reliability. So sorry, no. If and when you produce maps that can be relied upon, then come back here. Constantine ✍ 14:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
What is for you neutral and reliable information when your sistem and governaments do not except diferences in greek society, even gay communities are not excepted, as they we all now considered 1% off each population. I must say that maybe all descendents of refugees from 1923-1955 are now in fillings greeks but let them to descide what are they for them self not the sistem, let them to be what they realy are. For you all pontic, karamanlides, Lazzi, Armenians, Tatars orthodox, albanian orthodox, macedonian patriarshist, vlahs orthodox all the orthodox comunities in Greece are Greeks. You now that for each village it has demographic history and there is statistical data from deferent and state ( ex: the census data from census 1920 ???) sources and we now the composition of the population example:In 1913, after the Second Balkan War Γέφυρα or Gefira(Topchievo) is in Greece. Part of its macedonian population migrates and in its place are accommodated refugees from Eastern Thrace, Chataldja(824 individuals) and 875 people from Sozopol,Bulgaria = 1699 pop.In 1926 the village was renamed Gefira.In the census data from 1928 in the village there were 468 fammillies with 1649 inahabitans refugees and was purely refugees settlements even there was 122 more, (the rest of the population were Macedonians) from actual population 1,821 (963 males and 858 females)[Census 1928, 233), if the census was right because it has the diference between male and female of 105 wich is very large over 10%. We also have informations of that region !!!--DKitan 20:10, 9 December 2012 (UTC) contribs)
If there is a good source for the data that can be cited and traced, I do think a map of demographics circa 1920 would be interesting. For example here is one such map. It would be quite misleading to portray such maps as a modern distribution, however, since considerable migrations and assimilations have taken place on all sides of the borders in the region. --Delirium (talk) 21:55, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Listen, for the last time: no one denies that there are minorities in Greece, nor that there were many Slavic Macedonians in Greek Macedonia, plus Turks, Albanians, Vlachs and what not, when the region was annexed. No one also denies that the Greek government has often persecuted these groups and tried (with some success) to either evict them or Hellenize them, nor that a very large part of the modern population of Greek Macedonia is descended from Asia Minor refugees. But a) you still do not provide any RS so your data, and still more the way you present them in your maps, are unacceptable, and b) you still present ethnographic data from the early 20th century as if they still applied today, a hundred years later, with no evidence whatsoever except some websites (which also refer to the early 20th century, not today), and with no reference to the fact that this region went through fire and sword for ten years, between 1941 and 1949, with massive population movements. And frankly, to try and suggest that the Pontians or Ionians, who made up the great bulk of the Anatolian refugees, were anything but Greek is laughable. They were arguably more Greek in blood than the Arvanites or the Vlachs who gave many of the greatest modern Greek soldiers, merchants and statesmen, but then again, the whole argument of ethnicity based on descent is fallacious because ethnic identity is predominantly a cultural issue. A modern-day Greek cares not if one of his grandfathers spoke a Slavic dialect, his grandmother spoke Arvanitic, his other grandfather was a Karamanli who spoke no Greek, and his great-grandfather was a Bavarian. You can therefore make a point about early 20th-century ethnographic distribution, but to extrapolate based on your own assumptions for today is grossly unscientific.Constantine ✍ 22:02, 9 December 2012
Every man in the wikipedia has an opinion and there for the wikipedia is. Maybe we dont agree about the subject and we have different views. The map here Author: George Soteriadis Professor of History at the University of Athens Book Title: “An Ethnological Map Illustrating Hellenism In The Balkan Peninsula And Asia Minor” Source/Copyright: "London: Edward Stanford, LTD. 12, 13, 14 Long Acre, W.C.2. 1 publish in 1918 and has souces from 1 January 1916 like i said on the smaller map in the left corner. I propose to you that you look in this particular map and see the diferences in those two maps the biggest and the smaller one in the corner the diferences are obvius in the green color which is muslim turks and in the grey color which are Macedonians or like he said Macedonian Slavs which i am thanking about :). But the two maps are so different that any one who wants to see can see!!!! furthermore the sources are not provided for the map, on what base is made of , and there is the data problem because by my opinion population is counted by religion afilia and the Macedonian Slavs are divided like exarchists and patrijarchists. The autor had an explanation about the two maps taht the changes are made in the war and that the greek population had rise!. I dont belive in such maps sorry but there isnt any doubt that the map is made for the greek interests in the time being to anex the south Albania You can all see in the area (on the same map) of Mala Prespa now in Albania Little Prespes that all the population is yellow with grey lines that shows the greek karakter of the people living in 9 villages that even in Albania today and in the past are Macedonians and are counted in the census data in all the censuses from 1948 till 2011!!!! I dont want to go any further Goritca or Korca and the area around are all Greeks !!!????? in wich villages where give me just one place that were or is Greek????? So how can i belive that the map showing the area where other nationalities live in Norther Greece or the new teritories is exact, precise, and have facts in it ???? Greek population in village of Baovo in Moglena region in Edessa ???? when who, how /http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%A0%CF%81%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%B1%CF%87%CE%BF%CE%B9_%CE%A0%CE%AD%CE%BB%CE%BB%CE%B1%CF%82/ ????
As for the assimilation process it is clear that even today is ongoing and that the cultural rights for the slavophones and dopia in Makedonia are forbiden and there is only greek is learning in the schools, there is no paper, music, songs aloud no cultural centers or any associations of any kind. We all now and we have been in the regions of Makedonija Florina(Lerin), Kastoria(Kostur), Edessa (Voden), Ptolemais(kajlar), Aridea(Sobotsko), Gumenissa(Gumendze), Janitssa(EnidzeVardarsko), Sohos(Suho), Asvestohorio(Pejzanovo)near Thessaloniki(Solun), Sidirokastro(DemirHisar or Valoviste where from is Soteriades the authoe of the Map!!) Gazoros, Zihni, Prosotcani-Drama, Naussa(Negush), ect ect. and we all now and here the people the music the festivals ect but we dont want to talk about it is a forbiden subject. Maybe my ,,Maps,, are false??, maybe are copied from other maps and there are some or the most of it, but this particular map for the ethnic composition of Makedonia is interseting in more ways like the discussion shows.--DraganKitanoski 01:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Removed most cabinets
Why did you remove all the lists of cabinets of the older governments? The page is poorer now... Can you please re-enter the information you deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.102.120.62 (talk) 20:55, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
I started this AFD after failing to find much indicating any notability for this organization. So far the only other response is from the article creator, who I am confident has some connection to the group and may be an official representative. They are claiming that good sources are mostly in Greek, which I unfortunately am not past the "sounding out on my fingers" stage of being able to read. If someone who can read the material linked to can provide an assessment and comment at the AFD, I would be quite grateful. There are similar issues with Hellenic Polytheistic Reconstructionism, if anyone is willing to take a look at it as well. Mangoe (talk) 17:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Merge request
As a Greek wikipedian who contributes mainly in Greek Wiki, I don't have experience in merging in english wikipedia. I found two articles about the same ancient city in northern Greece, Βέργα (possibly today Serres peripheral unit), Berge (Bisaltia) and Berge (Thrace). Could anyone take over this merging please? Thank you for your attention and happy new year.Vagrand (talk) 07:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
It wasn't enabled, the above was a redlink. I copied the format from the Poland alerts, and then Hellknowz subscribed. Ideally this should now be dropped into Project page as a link. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:54, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I previously made significant changes in updating the human trafficking in Greece page as part of an assignment for a class at Rice University. For another project for a class this semester, I am going to be updating it even further. Last time I made significant additions in regards to sex trafficking in Greece; now I would like to add more information relating to forced labor, debt bondage, and domestic servitude, and focus on men in addition to women and children. Also, I would like to make sure that the updates I made last time are a bit more neutral by distancing them from U.S. based anti-prostitution rhetoric when necessary and including other opinions, and citing all of them in one way or another. If anyone has any comments or any ideas, or can point me towards more reliable sources regarding these issues, it would be much appreciated! Thank you! Rachel.m.mitchell (talk) 20:06, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Help from an editor who reads Greek would be appreciated
Hi... I was reading Jimbo's talk page and saw discussion of pages with machine translations. I went to the Dead Man's Treasure page about a 1959 Greek-language movie and have worked on it. Unfortunately, the translation was poor so I don't know what some of the sentences mean. Further, the plot description does not match that in the book source I found, so I have tried for a decent summary. Editing by someone who can read the original would be helpful and appreciated. Thanks. EdChem (talk) 06:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
According to the romanization article, most transliteration methods for modern Greek use "ou" instead of "u", and the "u" form is only used for geographical names by the US government, so it definitely does not apply for foods. Moreover, some (most?) foods you renamed are best known with their "ou" form, and as per WP:COMMONNAME their titles should be spelled as such. For example, "souvlaki" (3,270,000 results) vs. "suvlaki" (85,800 results). Cheers. – Kosm1fent09:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I've just noticed that this project's categories for article assessment use a mixture of "Category:Greece articles" (e.g. Category:Greece articles needing expert attention) and "Category:Greek articles" (e.g. Category:Greek articles by quality). Both include articles about things related to Greece but which are not themselves Greek, and looking at a selection of other Country WikiProjects (Germany, France, Turkey, Portugal and Slovenia) all of them seem to exclusively use country (e.g. Category:Germany articles by quality, Category:List-Class Turkey articles). I propose therefore renaming all of this project's categories which use "Greek" to use "Greece" instead.
I haven't nominated them at CfD yet, as I thought I'd run it by the project first, but I will do in a few days if there is either no response or no objection here. Thryduulf (talk) 09:56, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
One of your project's articles has been featured
Hello, Please note that Archipelago, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 07:18, 5 July 2013 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team
One of your project's articles has been featured
Hello, Please note that Library of Alexandria, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 07:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team
Hello, I'm here on this discussion page looking for help with an article related to UC Davis, where I work. There are a few sections of the article that I think need to be improved, but for now I'm hoping to find help updating the information under the article's "Involvement in STEM" heading.
Right now the information under the "Involvement in STEM" heading isn't about Linda Katehi at all, but about STEM in California in general. I am aware, as an editor with a conflict of interest, that I shouldn't fix up this information myself so I have shared on the article's discussion page a few paragraphs that I think would be a good replacement. Here is my earlier message.
Can someone here take a look at this and maybe help me out? I hope this is an OK place to ask for help. Linda Katehi is Greek-American, and this WikiProject was listed at the top of her discussion page.
Also, someone very recently made an edit to Linda Katehi's name in the introduction and now almost the whole first paragraph is bold. If you take a look at this could you also help fix this mistake?
Go ahead, but Constantinople until relatively recently did not "span two continents". Chalcedon, Chrysopolis and the various villages on the Asiatic and European coast of the Bosporus were not considered part of the city until the city outgrew the medieval walls in late Ottoman times.Constantine ✍ 10:54, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Is this really useful? Lots of articles are now the unique member of their category... Why not stay at the decade level, if the number of articles stay small? There is also the problem of events with controversial datation, these should not be categorized under a precise year.--Phso2 (talk) 13:51, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, Phso2 brings up a good point. I too think it obvious that single-, two- or even three-article categories are nonsensical and excessively pedantic, but that is not so important to me as the tendency to add definitive dates to events that have none, as with the example of Adrianople. This is simply an error. Constantine ✍ 14:54, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Help with an article?
Hey, I need some help with searching for sources for an article. The article in question is The Treasure of Vaghia and from what I can see, the sources will be almost entirely in Greek. I found some sources that assert that it was a television series in the 80s, but that's about as far as I could get before I hit the sources that Google Translate can't get to. Can anyone help look for sources? I know they have to be out there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)05:59, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Giorgos Konstadinou, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 15:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Neighbourhoods in Patras
Hi, could someone who is familiar with the city of Patras take a look at the List of neighbourhoods in Patras and the neighbourhood articles linked to from this list? Most of these articles were created by now banned User:Pumpie, are poorly written and lack references. I have doubts about the notability of these places, and I couldn't find an official list of neighbourhoods. MarkussepTalk14:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
I'll have a look at the list of neighbourhoods over the next few days. On the map, these are the old municipal districts of the city, in the pre-Kapodistrias plan (1997) era, although I am not sure how accurate the map is, since Rio was certainly a separate municipality until 2011. I don't know what the status is now, but based on the general trend of the Kalikratis plan, I think they have been merged into larger municipal sectors. The map can give you an idea of the major neighbourhoods of the Patras-Rio urban conglomeration, though. Constantine ✍ 12:11, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Help requested for racehorse article
I am almost ready to post an article on the Greek-owned British racehorse To-Agori-Mou (Το-Αγορι-Μου?). Google translate gives "The-Boy-I" which isn't too helpful. I think it's probably a colloquial phrase meaning "My Boy" but I would like a clarification. This page helped me out with Ela-Mana-Mou a few months ago, so I was hoping for something similar. Tigerboy1966 23:28, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, το αγόρι μου means "my boy". Depending on context, could refer to either a son or a boyfriend. Could be used metaphorically in this context (as in English, people sometimes half-jokingly refer to e.g. a pet as their son/daughter). --Delirium (talk) 00:27, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Some time ago I created the section Organized crime under the article Crime in Greece. Recently I made an individual article on Greek organized crime (Greek mafia), since I did a lot of reading and researching on different organized crime entities (one of them Greek criminal organizations). Since I feel that an individual page on Greek organized crime will attract and inform a lot more readers, I will adjust the section organized crime so that it just refers to the individual page Greek mafia (Greece).
Kind regards
Begbiepwns (talk) 16:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Given the long Turkish presence on the island, I think it's relevant. So is the Venetian name Negroponte. Both names are used on this old map for instance (Turkish Eğriboz modified to Egripo'). MarkussepTalk12:17, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Quote from WP:NCGN: Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted. Local official names should be listed before other alternate names if they differ from a widely accepted English name. Other relevant language names may appear in alphabetic order of their respective languages — i.e., (Estonian: Soome laht; Finnish: Suomenlahti; Russian: Финский залив, Finskiy zaliv; Swedish: Finska viken). Separate languages should be separated by semicolons. So I guess the discussion is whether the Turkish name is relevant. I suppose there aren't many Turks left in Euboea, the relevance would mainly come from historic usage. If there is a difference between the Ottoman Turkish name and the modern Turkish name (there often is), I think the former is the most relevant of the two. Another solution would be (as suggested by WP:NCGN, and like it is done in the Sofia article) to create a "Names" section, which gives the alternative names less emphasis than in the lead. MarkussepTalk08:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
That's because in your example above, the Gulf of Finland is shared between three countries: Finland, Estonia and Russia (see map), whereas Euboea is not. I'm not concerned about the "Names" or "History" section where one could add all short of names, Latin, Italian, Norman, Persian etc., only for the Title name. --Odysses(○)11:49, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I have to agree with Odysses. "Negroponte" or "Negropont" were sufficiently popular in the Western languages until quite recently to maybe warrant a mention in the lede, but the Turkish name is not historically important, indeed most Western sources did not and do not use the name except in a technical sense, i.e. when referring to the administrative unit of the sanjak of Eğriboz. In addition, the Turkish name is little more than the rendering in Turkish phonology of the colloquial Greek name, current since Byzantine times, Evripos or (vulgarized) Egripos. It is from this that the "Egripo", linked by Markus in a map above, derives (and from which "Negropont" was ultimately derved as well). A "Name" section would of course be the best solution all around. Constantine ✍ 12:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
It looks like it's currently mentioned in the section Euboea#Medieval, which seems reasonable. The article could also be expanded to include the Ottoman period as its own section. --Delirium (talk) 16:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
It's a good idea to introduce A "Name" section as Constantine suggests. BTW the article doesn't even mention where the name of the island (Euboea) comes from, which traditionally is attributed to the nymph Euboea or to Ευ+βους (cattle-rich), as indicated by the many Euboean coins depicting a bull. --Odysses(○)22:45, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
The first cited source says absolutely nothing about Athens being one of the safest capitals in Europe, either this should be removed or the source detailing this should be published. The article seems to tell the exact opposite of this claim, namely that Athens is a dangerous place and becoming more dangerous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.18.251.64 (talk) 16:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Greek roads
I've just stub-sorted Greek National Road 87 and found it wasn't included in List of highways numbered 87 (it is now). Then added the missing Greek item on List of highways numbered 1, and I guess there are a lot more missing entries. Someone looking for a quiet little job, or a bit of clever AWB-work, might like to check Roads in Greece and add them where needed. I'm leaving this note at the two relevant WikiProjects - Greece and Roads/Europe. Over to you. PamD17:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
The information about the Ikarians hanging the Ottoman Tax Officer is incorrect .. he asked to be carried over the mountains to the next village and they tipped him over the edge. I do not know how to correct this and would be grateful if someone who knows can do it. About 5-6 years ago a Greek film was made about the incident filmed on location In Ikaria in the village of Droutsoula.
Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).
No, they are actually known by the genitive form. If someone in Greece talked about "Papagos", then they would mean the Marshal, but "Papagou" is the suburb. Constantine ✍ 21:38, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
It makes perfect sense to always use the genitive form, as these places are named after people. Papagou is named after Marshal Alexandros Papagos: there was a huge housing program there in the 1950s to house military staff, and the land was split from Cholargos in 1965. There is an unmissable equestrian statue of the Marshal at the entrance of the neighbourhood from odos Messogeion, on the road to the airport from central Athens. This area is still well known in Athens as the place where many army officers live. Zografou is named after 19th-century politician Ioannis Zografos [el] which I believe was the owner of the place. Hence nominative forms Papagos and Zografos describe these people, not the suburbs. Place Clichy (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Help with an article?
I need some help looking for sources for an article on singer Konstantinos Argyros. I declined the speedy since the award mention was enough to squeak by those guidelines, but it's still in serious danger of getting deleted. I was going to nominate it for AfD, but I wanted to ask if you guys could help look for sources. I can see some hits show up under the Greek spelling of his name, but I don't really know if these sources are usable towards notability or not. I'd really appreciate any help that any of you can give. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)10:04, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Categorization of Greek-language external links and inconsistencies between "cite" and "language icon" templates
Another editor has created an article about Traffic 91.8 FM, a radio station in Crete. The article does not have a reference. It would be helpful if someone could add one, perhaps from the Greek government office that issues licences to radio stations. Eastmain (talk • contribs)17:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
The list does not include dams; they should also be included, since their height in certain cases is comparable to this of other structures recorded in the§ list (highest Greek dam being Thissavros: 172m). Data for updating the list may be retrieved from link: http://www.eeft.gr/damlistGR_2012.pdf— Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.169.150.4 (talk) 10:24, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Wrong title and description in photo of Crete
Maybe this is a bit out of the scope of this project because it is related with a file in Commons, but as someone noted there, probably this page is watched by more people that can clarify the issue.
About File:Isola di Chrissi - golfo di Mirabello.jpg: as far as my little knowledge about Crete goes, the description and the coordinates may be right, but in that case, the island is not Chrissi nor the sea is the Gulf of Mirabello. Chrissi is in the South coast of Crete, off Ierapetra, while the Gulf of Mirabello is on the North coast.
As the photo is used in several articles in several wikipedias, all related with the South coast, it would be good that this situation is clarified. Thank's. --pt:Stegoptalk 00:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I've already renamed and replaced the picture. I'm convinced that the English description is correct. It's not Chrysi, but the Gulf of Mirabella seen from Gournia. On Panoramio, you can find some more pictures of the location: [8], [9], [10]. --Sitacuisses (talk) 00:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Dear Greece experts: This draft article was never submitted to be added to the encyclopedia. Sould it be kept and improved, rather than deleted as a stale draft? —Anne Delong (talk) 11:37, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Delete it, as with any contribution of this sock account. It would have to be re-translated from scratch to make any sense, and I for one am not in the mood to do so. Constantine ✍ 14:24, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Katana pass
It is incorrectly put near dokimi peak and not in the ral place where katana pass is,some km north.please change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.85.11.37 (talk) 09:17, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
The article is a compilation of original research and POV propaganding a fringe theory on persecutions of Muslim's in their own state during the centuries. This naming and topic are not supported by neutral academic sources.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 15:26, 13 April 2014 (UTC).
Discussion at Talk:Massacre_of_Kalavryta#On_categorization_as_Violence_against_men
Text Corrupted †<ἀβλόη>· σπένδε Μακεδόνες [<ἀλογεῖ>· σπεῖσον Μακεδόνες]
What are they supposed to mean? (I'm running through all odd uses of < and > in our language articles, but don't know what to do with these.) — kwami (talk) 08:32, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
They seem to be taken from this version of Hesychius' lexicon, where lemmas are bounded by angle brackets and parts of the definition separated using an interpunct (functions like a semicolon). Is "Text Corrupted" in reference to the dagger, I wonder? (It's not there in the Wikisource original.) — lfdder01:58, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Dear Greece experts: This old Afc submission is unsourced, but the text claims that Mr. Moukidis is a notable composer. Are there sources not in English that can be added, or should this be deleted as a stale draft? —Anne Delong (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Foreign name in lead section
Γεια σας,
A new account deleted from the lead section of the Kato Nevrokopi article the mention of the local Bulgarian name [Зърнево, Zarnevo] Error: {{Langx}}: text has italic markup (help). Looking quickly into the validity of this edit, I found that WP:NCGN says that, among other arguments, "relevant foreign language names (for instance, used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted [in the lead section]". This village is on the border with Bulgaria (it even has a border crossing). bg states that the population in late Ottoman era was predominantly Slav/Bulgarian, with small numbers of Turkish and Vlach. el states that the village was called Ζύρνοβο until 1927. For these reasons, I believe that it would make sense to mention the Bulgarian name in the lead section for this specific village. Going further, for the same reasons I would certainly not be in favour of mentioning foreign names in the lead of just every article about Thrace or Macedonia, or for instance a Turkish name for this village, as that would not be "relevant".
I found a ref for the name change from Zyrnovo (and added it), so that's correct. I agree it makes sense to add the Bulgarian name. MarkussepTalk14:30, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Help with an article?
I need some help with an article, How to Kill a Dragon. It's up for AfD and right now, deletion is not an issue. I've sourced it enough with reviews to where it will easily pass notability guidelines as a seminal work within its fields. However I am not familiar with the book, its author, or really much of anything to do with the topic in question beyond "Hey, myths are cool". It very sorely needs editors familiar with the work and editing to come in and fill the rest of it out. There is an interested editor attached, User:Jayakumar RG, but he's very new and it'd also be nice if someone could take him under their wing. (Tagging him in this so he can see I'm posting in places for help.) He's made a few errors, but he is willing to learn. Anyone want to edit this and finish turning it into another WP:HEY type article? I'm going to post this in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages so we can get a few more people in on this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)15:23, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello I have recently established the article Draconian constitution and am going to need help in acquiring collaboration and expansion. Thank you for your consideration and your thought of contributing your expertise into the topic's field.
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
Please help to find reliable sources to confirm if these individuals are alive or dead, or correct any mis-categorization on the relevant foreign-language article(s). Please see WP:LIVINGDEAD for more info and raise any issues on the talkpage. Thanks. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead08:40, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Language help with AfD review of basketball player
Hello - There is currently a deletion discussion underway for Michail Lountzis, a Greek basketball player who recently signed with Panathinaikos for the coming season. There do not seem to be many English-language sources for him, but I am conscious that a 16-year old player signing with Panathinaikos may be notable in Greece. Could someone review for Greek language reliable sources? I'd hate to see a valid article deleted unless he truly isn't notable. Thanks for any help you can give! Rikster2 (talk) 18:29, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
An editor has accepted the article I have written on the laic (lay) sculptor Aristedes Metallinos as Start-Class. I need to refine the article with more use of Greek references but my Greek is weak. It has been pointed out that Aristedes Metallinos (Gr: Αριστείδης Μεταλληνός) does not have an entry in Greek Βικιπαίδεια. Is there anyone who would consider helping me translate the current entry on English Wikipedia with a view to submitting an article that would be acceptable on Greek Wiki? Simon Baddeley (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
IP removing foreign names in lead sections
Γεια σας!
37.6.80.147(talk·contribs·WHOIS) has removed a number of foreign or former names from Greek localities. As a reminder, there is no generic rule for these names, but WP:NCGN states that "relevant foreign language names (for instance, used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted [in the lead section]". Some of the removed names were present following a previous consensus (such as Kato Nevrokopi) but I don't have knowledge for all these specific locations. Anyway, eligible names should be restored. For this reason, your help is welcome! Place Clichy (talk) 09:15, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I had a new editor come into WP:UNDELETE looking for help with an article, but there's a language barrier. They speak English, but they have stated that they aren't as skilled at it as they want to be. I think that they speak Greek, but I'm not certain. The editor in question is User:Vl.eu and they were trying to edit the Vicky Leandros article. There's a possibility that they might have a conflict of interest, but they might also be a fan of the artist. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)09:31, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
![[2]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_KwH3f74JA8Q/TEBr09361tI/AAAAAAAANHY/a9lGOyTAm5k/s320/%CE%99%CE%9A%CE%91%CE%A1%CE%9F%CE%99+%CE%A3%CE%97%CE%9C%CE%91%CE%99%CE%91.jpg){kind=link}
