Archives
July 2005–February 2006 Istanbul Pogrom February–April 2006 May 2006 The Fluffy File

Thanks for the welcome. Im taking refuge from the usual bulletin boards and probably wont be returning to them. Wiki looks like a more useful way to spend time. Im impressed with your articles on the Chief of Staffs. Im still getting the hang of wiki but plan some articles of my own. The first will be on the electoral results of RSF candidates in the 26 county local elections from 1991. I also want to do a chronology of the activites of the Continuity IRA and maybe expand the Fianna Eireann article. Im looking forward to getting started! As ever keep in touch!—Preceding unsigned comment added by AlanMc (talk • contribs)

Donnchadh has been blocked from editing WP for his vicious personal attack on you at the RSF talk page. The comment has also been deleted. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 19:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

email me with the details. I'll block the user immediately. Doing that is quite simply harrassment. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 21:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to mention: that account is now blocked indefinitely and is protected so that it cannot be used by the creator ever again. I was going to delete it, but then I realised that if I did that I would be allowing its recreation in the future. This way it just sits there, unused and forgotten about, like hundreds of thousands of others, with no-one but you, I and the creator actually knowing its significance. If I find the creator of it they will be blocked instantly and permanently from the Wikipedia site. That sort of behaviour is just not on, and has been prohibited by the Arbitration Committee. I hope this helps. (Sorry I could not act earlier. My email accounts were acting up. I couldn't access them to read your email.) FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 00:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to look at British Isles. A group of individuals are trying to push the myth that there is nothing wrong with the term, no-one is offended by it and any Irish people who are don't realise that it is a geographic term with no political implications or presumptions. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 17:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Donnchadh is back as Seán1905 and is vandalising the Republican Sinn Féin article again.--padraig3uk 21:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you revert the Republican Sinn Féin article, as there at it again, I think its Risteard this time.--padraig3uk 23:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course the "The" should be included in a title, if that is the correct name of the organisation. In that case the name is a proper name and thus should remain altered - see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name). As regards The Workers Party, I moved it to that title because that is how the name was rendered in the party's logo; although as padraig3uk mentions on the talk page, perhaps The Workers' Party of Ireland would be more correct. I can't tell as I can't find an official register of ROI parties online. (This wasn't really a recent move, by the way.) --Kwekubo 22:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are at it again at British Isles. *sigh* FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 22:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the OIRA isn't defunct,I doubt that Sean Garland became chief of staff in 1998.There isnt even a source for this.Dermo69

There is a source, and I've provided same on the article. A national newspaper to me has more credibility on the matter than your good self.--Damac 22:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry where is the source in the article.I'm not arguing with you now,im just asking where the source is.Dermo69

It seems that you are an expert in Greek far right politics. Maybe you can create an article about Nikolaos Michaloliakos, a leading personality (and perhaps the creator) of the Greek neo-nazi movement. Please reply on my talk page. Thanks Mitsos 13:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK I m sorry, I just saw the article about Zafiropoulos and I thought that there should be an article about Michaloliakos who is much more important. I speak Greek but my English aren't so good. Anyway, maybe I 'm going to write something in the future. Michaloliakos is the leader of hrisi avgi. Of course I 'm not user 87..., I like skrewdriver but I don't vandalize pages. If I did so, I wouldn't be a registered user. Mitsos 10:22, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the article you created about the upcoming local elections in Greece I noticed you have seperate templates for the super-prefecture of Athens-Piraeus and for the Prefectures of Athens and Piraues.
First of all, the Ministry of Interior publishes official election results only for the super-prefecture. It will not thus be easy to find seperate results for the two sub-perfectures. After all, seperate results donot matter, because the two prefects (of Piraeus and Athens) are elected according to the general results of the super-prefecture. If Pipili takes more votes that Sgouros in Athens and Gennimata takes more votes than Dinopoulos in the super-perfecture, Sgouros will become prefect! That is why, in Greek local elections, 2002 I merged the two prefectures under the super-perfecture. But this is just a suggestion ...
I also remind you that there is also another super-prefecture (Rhodope-Evros), but I donot know the current candidates!--Yannismarou 10:52, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yannismarou. I'm not an expert in Greek politics as you know. I made separate listings for the super-prefectures and prefectures as I wanted to mention the candidates in each. Maybe these should stay, and you could add in details on how the prefects are elected in the introduction.

As stated on the page, the article is a stub and there are plenty of super-prefectures, prefectures and municipalities to be included. Some of the political parties have all their candidates listed, so if I get the time, I'll try and include them.

In general, there are a few things I'd like to do with Greek politics and elections (metadata, party colours, etc). Would you be interested in collaborating? --Damac 11:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever I have time, I'll be glad to help.--Yannismarou 11:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I also added some information about the local election and the electoral system in Elections in Greece. I'd be grateful, if you check the language, whenever you have the appropriate time. I also plan to add some information concerning the European Parliament Elections.--Yannismarou 12:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No sooner said than done. Thanks for clearing up how the electoral system works! I'm about to upload a complete list of parties and results for the 1999 European elections in Greece, just in case that year was one of the polls you were going to work on. Μένεις στην Αθήνα; Best regards, --Damac 13:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Τώρα ναι! Αλλά φεύγω σε καμιά βδομάδα για διακοπές! Τα λέμε!--Yannismarou 07:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the good work on the Irish House of Commons. That is one thing I am coming to really love about Wikipedia. Forget the articles. It is often the detail information that is so impressive; the lists of every TD elected since 1919, etc. And now the list of IHOC sessions. It is in this area that WP trouces all the opposition. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 23:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! Great work!

As per the discussion on Talk:Irish House of Commons#Merge_proposal, why don't you go ahead and implement your excellent suggestion to rename these constituencies from XX (Irish Parliament constituency) to XX (Parliament of Ireland constituency)?

It's much less ambiguous: your form of name makes it very clear which institution the article refers to, but the existing form of name could refer to any Parliament to which mebers were returned from Irealnd, and that's a long list (Irish Parl, UK Parl, HOc NI, HoC SI, Dail Eireann). It'll be easier if you do it now before you create more links! :) --BrownHairedGirl 13:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. I've made some more proposals at Talk:Irish House of Commons.--Damac 14:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply there. --BrownHairedGirl 14:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on, see rely on my talk. --BrownHairedGirl 16:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)#Other non-royal names, number 6. For individuals known from birth as "Lord X" (i.e., younger sons of dukes and marquesses), "Lord" in the name is perfectly appropriate. See for instance Lord Edward FitzGerald. Choess 20:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm contacting you to let you know that I have withdrown the proposal for wikiproject Greek and Turkish wikipedians board of cooperation as so much time has passed in inaction, I am no longer interested in it and I don't have any time to spare for it. I regret to take this step unilateraly as there are some 16 people who had showed interest, but the whole thing has been inactive for too long in my opinion. Thanks for showing your initial interest anyway!! Keep up the good wiki-work! --Michalis Famelis (talk) 18:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Rashid Facha, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:Rashid Facha. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Erechtheus 23:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dia Dhuit,

Thanks for your kind comments re MP in irish parliament. I have become aware that Queens University Belfast published a 10 volume guide to the old Irish Parliament which I presume has all the MPs elections etc. This being so are there copyright issues if the same information is reproduced? Durrus 10:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in a RM going on at talk:Prime minister (sic). Some individuals moved the page to that ridiculous name (if it stays at that form WP will be a laughing stock!) Feel free to contribute to the debate if you wish. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 23:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Πώς είσαι; Βρίσκεσαι στην Ελλάδα τώρα; Έκανες διακοπές;

In my Userpage I expressed my thoughts about not having any Wiki-project working on Greek topics, while users from other countries are far more active. User:Argos'Dad read my thoughts and expressed his interest in participating in a project concerning the Greek history. Check User talk:Yannismarou/Thoughts. After that response I went through history projects in Wikipedia. There aren't many of them, but I think it is an interesting idea and I hope it will not be difficult to recruit members.
I think we could use as a model Wikipedia:WikiProject History of India. Have a look, when you have time. I believe that, if we decide it, during the Weekend I can start setting the page of the Wikiproject. And then we must start recruiting and organizing (main goals, plans, templates, priorities, rating article, possibly peer-reviewing-I like peer-reviewing articles!, ways of collaboration, topics, possible task forces [ancient, medieval, modern Greece] etc.).
What do you think about ? Are you interesting in participating ? Do you think we can recruit members? If I start the page in the next 2-3 days may I count on you?--Yannismarou 18:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the date change. Slip of the pen, so to speak! Jdorney 07:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Γεια σοτυ! I created the page of the project! In (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History of Greece) you'll see what I've done and what is left to be done according to my opinion. I tried to set a basic plan of work, but I was very tired to go into details. Right now I feel exhausted! Please, check the page and the talk page, and I think you'll find areas for contribution and creativity. Make your suggestions and additions, express your thoughts, your critics and anything else you feel appropriate. I believe that through co-operation we'll find our way. I think the most important thing is to keep the project alive and imrove its quality and its importance. If possible, spread the news and recruit other users. I'll come back, when I'll feel less tired! Cheers!--Yannismarou 17:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I finally have lost patience with this guy. The RFC is up and running here Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User:Devin79. Please endorse! Jdorney 12:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A big thank for copyediting this article. ant_ie 17:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that the list was not the right place for these comments. That is why I did not raise this issue at all. I just wanted to keep something useful from Adam's comment and use them as an incentive for collaboration. Thanks a lot for your great contribution to the project and your dedication! Με φιλικούς χαιρετισμούς!--Yannismarou 08:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 September 14# Orthodox Christian categories. IZAK 17:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I bow to your superior knowledge of Irish :-) One question - the Irish Wikipedia is called Vikipedia? How so - there's no 'v' in the Irish alphabet? Bastun 23:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damac,

Yes, I've had my run ins with Weggie, some constructive, others not so much. He is certainly a man of the unionist persuasion (nothing wrong with that in itself) and a lot of his edits are to do with correcting, as he see it, republican pov in articles. At times, this has seemed to me to be quite petty, but on the other hand, when I contacted him about the Brendan McFarlane article, he seemed amenable to reason.

Re the specific question, obviously, the word "terrorism" is a loaded one and preferably to be avoided. However, if people were convicted of "scheduled offences" then they were (Diplock courts or no) and only the wording of the category is a problem. Of course, there is no reason why loyalists should not be included in the same way, that would certainly be unbalanced and pov.

That's my two cents,

Jdorney 19:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the Mac Giolla change I was wrong on that one --Gramscis cousin 11:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...materialise what you said to Mits.. just yet. I'll explain below right away, but I'm posting this right now urgently...•NikoSilver• 21:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The guy has a racist userpage.

He was blocked for 24h, and later for 72h for removing a dispute tag, (which was finally decided to be removed from an article).

I don't know about his edits, and whether it was him, but the block he is going to get from that is going to be disproportionate to his violation.

I am in the process of trying to mentor him regarding the content of his userpage. If that happens, we will create a disruptive user, while there is a great chance that we can bring him to line.

I have taken part in excessive userpage culls for the Macedonian issue. I had deleted the offending content of certain Greek userpages, and a fellow Macedonian Slav deleted those of his own people. The whole process was overseen by an admin, and the result was very productive in the realtive articles. Just let me go ahead and give him a chance. •NikoSilver• 21:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kaklamanis is also supported from LAOS. Please check this link: http://www.laos.gr/ypopsifioi_dhmon.html Magioladitis 08:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanasis Milonopoulos is not a FORMER LAOS member but member of the Central Commitee of the Party. Vasiliki Tampieri is also a member of the LAOS' Executive Board. I think that LAOS logo should be included. Magioladitis 11:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A note about the superpefectural elections in Athens-Pireus and the results in Athens and Pireus: Maybe we have to find and add also the votes the different candidates received. Certainly 2 more columns are required. I am sure somewhere in the web there are the results seperatelly. What's your opinion? -- Magioladitis 19:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I realise that the monument to Terence MacSwiney gives the Irish form of the name as 'Traolach', however I am not convinced that this is definitive. From the picture it appears to date from the 1960s or 70s, while the actual printed name on contemporary works by MacSwiney is "Toirdhealbhach", which is presumably how he spelled it. Traolach seems to me a modern version - even allowing for the modern simplified spelling it ought to be something like 'Toirlach' or 'Toirealach'. Are you aware of any precedents for this kind of situation? Rbreen 09:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although the links you put in my talk pages are red, you are right. I 'm sorry and I promesh this won't happen again. If I do then you 'll be right to tell an adminstator to block me (but not now). Thanks Mitsos 13:26, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the Euroelections in Greece, 2004 article (European_Parliament_election,_2004_(Greece)#Results) you have a category Leader. In some of the them you have the president of the party (example: ND) and in some of them the 1st name in the list (example: M-LKKE). I think it needs clean-up. -- Magioladitis 17:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you can find out the leaders of all the micro-parties, then fire ahead and include them. Most of those parties weren't even mentioned when I started editing that list (the parties with less votes than SYN were all lumped under "other"). Until these names are provided, though, I think including the names of the people on the top of the party candidate lists is very useful.--Damac 18:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these small parties don't even have a specific leader. One idea is to place in all positions the 1st candidate and another is to omit this column completely. What do you say? -- Magioladitis 00:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in favour of keeping the first candidate on the list, as this helps identify parties as they go through name changes. It's also essential for the three-four green parties which all claim the same name. Moreover, it prevents the parties appearing as anonymous entities devoid of any human involvement. I spent a lot of time putting those lists together, have found them very useful, and would like to see them stay with the names of main candidates. --Damac 07:09, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2006 issue of the WikiProject History of Greece newsletter has been published.

You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link.

Thank you.--Yannismarou 07:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Why don't you tell Magioladitis about the project and the task force you created? I'm sure he could help.--Yannismarou 07:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are there many Irish people in Greece? Miskin 13:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, we're a rare breed, few and far between.--Damac 14:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History of Greece/Politics and politicians task force.--Yannismarou 13:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! And by the way (I almost forgot it!):

		The Original Barnstar
		For your enormous help and constant contributions in articles about Politics and Elections in Greece. In these domains you are really a pioneer.--Yannismarou 14:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I always wanted to give one of these!--Yannismarou 14:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi Damac,

Could you do me a favour and revert the Irish Civil War page to what it was before the recent spate of pov edits? I tried but it is too big for my browser andthe end got cut off.

Thanks,

Jdorney 23:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you have please upload it or sent it to me by e-mail. -- Magioladitis 11:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid not. I don't live in the municipality, but I'll try and find someone who does and has the paper.--Damac 19:44, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have two comments for the KKE's logo you uploaded: 1. It's <110kb (big). Can you please resize (for example 50%) and upload it again? 2. It's only for the Perfectural elections. You can put in the superperfecture and in the 2 perfectures but not for the Municipality.

PS I still wait for the FINAL results!

-- Magioladitis 20:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The History of Greece WikiProject Newsletter Issue II - October 2006
Project news This is our second Newsletter! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! The Peer review department has been created; it hopes to become an important tool for the amelioration of the articles within the scope of the project. Please, review and get reviewed! The {{WPHOG Sidebar}} is ready! Please fell free to comment on its form and to improve it. New parameters have been added to the {{WPHOG}}, so that any article in the scope of the Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Greece/Politics and politicians task force can be marked by adding task force1=yes to the {{WPHOG}} project banner at the top of its talk page. This will automatically place it into Category:Politics and politicians task force articles. Check our Open Tasks. New shortcuts for the Main page, the Assessment department and the Peer reviews department have been created. This will make easier your wikilinking!	Current proposals and discussions Discussion continues about the possible imrovements of the follownig articles: Phanariotes, Byzantine Empire and the naming of Iraklion Archaeological Museum and Heraklion. Check the talk pages of these articles and feel free to contribute. A discussion about the organization of some face to face meet-ups has begun in the Outreach department. If you think that this would be feasible and productive, please feel free to participate in this discussion.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

Thank you.--Yannismarou 14:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was considering creating a page on this man so congratulations on beating me to it!

I have read the Denman book as well.

I feel the page as it stands covers his military career well but would be strengthned by more emphasis on his politics. Although generally a constitutional politician he did sometimes swing in the direction of advocating physical force and the tension between the two is quite interesting. It is possble that he just got carried away with his own rhetoric - he wouldn't be the first politician to do that

Talking of rhetoric, I feel the page also would benefit from some assessment of his powers as an orator and especially his final speech to the House of Commons which the Denman book quotes and comments on at length. I assume there would not be copyright problems about reporting a speech to Parliament.

I have a feeling that the compilers of Hansard may have elected him as the greatest Parliamentary orator of the 20th century but I can't find evidence for that so may have just dreamt it.

The reaction to his death is worth exploring too. It is said that his was the most mourned British Empire war death. In spite of the polarised nature of Irish politics at the time, Willie Redmond seems to have had almost no enemies.

After being so much mourned he was rapidly forgotten. The 'official' version of Irish 20th century history seems to either ignore or demonise the constitutional nationalists. Ironically the strategy he advocated - standing in elections, talking to the unionists- has largely been adopted by the current Sinn Fein heirs of those who condemned him and his allies for doing so.

Some time in the 1990s Mary McAleese and others opened the Island of Ireland memorial park in Belgium which commemorates the attack in which Willie Redmond died but without seeming to specifically mention him on any of the memorials. A link to this might help.

Of course I could just go ahead and add all this on my own without consulting you but I thought it would be more agreeable to open a discussion.

I am new to contributing to Wikipedia and am enjoying the whole business.

Best wishes

Kusala1952

Dia Dhuit,

You contributed to a debate re the old Irish Parliament do you think it would be an idea to have an article on each Parliament with a lis tof the members? The Parliament articl eis getting very long, A possibble tempalte might be sessions of the Ndew Zealand parliament Slan Durrus 19:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The History of Greece WikiProject Newsletter Issue III - November 2006
Project news This is our third Newsletter! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! The New articles section is created! lease, add there any new article you create. Check the section and comment on the way it is structured and works. Your contributions and ideas are necessary! The Peer review department has been created; it hopes to become an important tool for the amelioration of the articles within the scope of the project. Please, review and get reviewed! Check our Announcements and Open tasks. The Announcements sub-section is just created. Feel free to add there new events valuable for the function of our project. New shortcuts for the Outreach have been created. This will make easier your wikilinking! New initiatives are needed in order to keep our project working!	Current proposals and discussions Discussion continues about the possible imrovements of the follownig articles: Phanariotes and the Byzantine Empire. A discussion about the creation of a sub-page/task-force that will focus on POV disputes has begun (here). Greek Mythology is up for review in Wikipedia:Featured article review/Greek mythology and its FA status is endangered! A discussion about the organization of some face to face meet-ups has begun in the Outreach department. If you think that this would be feasible and productive, please feel free to participate in this discussion.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

A new (and overdue) Greek and Turkish cooperation and notification board has been launched here. Stop by, have a look and sound off! Cheers! Baristarim 07:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In your edit comment, you say "On Wikipedia, we generally categorise people according to current administrative regions." I'm not aware of this policy, and find it a bit silly, especially since they passed most of their career (and the most notable part) in Monastir/Bitola, which was first in the Ottoman Empire and is now in ROMacedonia. But it's not a big deal, I suppose. Doesn't it seem strange to you, though, to categorize, say, Proclus as Category:People from Istanbul? Perhaps the "from" should really be "born in"? --Macrakis 18:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It does sound strange, but that is the way it's done. To illustrate with other examples, we classify pre-19th century German people as Germans, and not as coming from the 270+ statelets that made up the Holy Roman Empire. The "Native of ..." is strictly about where people were born. Where they grew up or were socialised is another thing.--Damac 18:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I might add that people as diverse as Ataturk and Saint Methodius are categorised as Category:People from Thessaloniki.--Damac 18:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You seem like you have a lot a knowledge with respect Irish history so maybe you would like to comment on the historic basis of this term here Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-02 IRA 'Volunteer' usage —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DownDaRoad (talk • contribs) 20:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I 've kept my promise. I 've never edited anonymously again. Mitsos 11:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't abuse. I illustrated my point in a funny way. Mitsos 08:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You and all the people on wiki who put their degrees on are only Show Offs, there are plenty that don't. Culnacréann 23:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The History of Greece WikiProject Newsletter Issue IV - December 2006
Project news This is our fourth Newsletter and the last of 2006! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! Check the new sub-section of the main page Article style and content. Comment on its content and feel free to propose changes or additions. Check the just created letter for welcoming new members, and feel free to implement modifications in its form! Καλά Χριστούγεννα (Merry Christmas) to the 29 members of the project, and do not forget: new initiatives are needed in order to keep our project working!	Current proposals and discussions The Greek and Turkish wikipedians cooperation board has been launched. Stop by, have a look and sound off!. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece has been created. Check the discussion here concerning the interactions of this and the History of Greece project. Discussion continues at Talk:Pontic Greek Genocide in order to achieve and improve consensus.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yannismarou (talk • contribs) 14:47, 23 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Thankyou for explaining your plan for categorization of the various Nationalist factions represented in the British parliament. I was also thinking late last night about how to appropriately show the affiliation of the Irish Nationalist MPs! I think your plan is a good one. DrKiernan 15:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Damac, my recent edits were not vandalism. They were just tohigh the thousands of reference to the structure and internal organisation of various republican organisations. Some wiki users want the rank of Volunteer for those in the OIRA, PIRA, IPLO, INLA etc banned as they stated that its is an honourific term, yet on other pages the same users write about the internal structure of the IRA etc e.g. Chief of Staff, Quarter Master etc. My point was that if we are to be consistant then were can not recognise one rank and not others. Vintagekits 02:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you question my assertion that Devin Reilly supported "working-class democracy". What I was attempting to summarise in a single phrase was his interest in gaining political and economic empowerment for the working class so that they could participate in a true democracy. Have I understood his idea correctly ? His interest appears to have been class-based rather than religion- or nationality-based. Perhaps "... in support of political empowerment for the working-class" or something similar ? He certainly didn't want a dictatorship of the proletariat - his interests seem to be akin to modern Labour or social democrat policy. Rcbutcher 23:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! And χρόνια πολλά for the new year! Maybe you would like to comment here.--Yannismarou 13:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you confirm the criteria you use to label a killing 'murder'? I see you used this term in the Concerned Republicans page. My interest is that a user has been changing 'murder' to 'killing' on all pages relating to INLA/PIRA killings? Weggie 23:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took the word directly from the Irish Times and provided a source.--Damac 09:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dont know if you are talking about me or not but I would use killings when policitally motivated/war scenario and murder when purely criminal--Vintagekits 01:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue V (I) - January 2007
Project news This is the first Newsletter of the new and enhanced Wikiproject Greece and the first of 2007! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! The History of Greece Wikiproject and the Wikiproject Greece have been merged into the new Wikiproject Greece after the discussion between the members of both projects here. New parameters have been added in our banner, {{WPHOG}}, which allow the reviewer who evaluates the quality of an article and rates it to check the five criteria in the project's new quality scale, in order to determine whether an article deserves B-Class rating or not. Guidelines for the use of the banner are here. All the templates of the project and other templates for Greece-related articles are now gathered here. New sources concerning the "Greek onomatology" have been added in our main page. The Portal:Military of Greece has been created so if anyone wants to help go right ahead!	Current proposals and discussions Check the list with our articles needing attention, where Great Fire of Smyrna has been added. A suggestion for the creation of a fortnight or month Collaboration has been made here. Please, voice yourself: do you think this Collaboration is useful? Are you willing to participate? A proposal for the creation of a "Greece military history taskforce" has been made. Please participate in the discussion here and express yourself. The creation of a "Greek peoples task focre" and of a "Greek location task force" has been also proposed. Your contribution to the discussion here is again valuable. You can also check the discussion for the categorization of Roman-era Greeks here.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yannismarou (talk • contribs) 20:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi User:Damac, I noticed that you were involved in the last discussion at Template talk:IRAs, and I'd like to discuss a few changes I'd like to make. When I started last, someone reverted me, so I'd really like some other folks' input. I'd appreciate your thoughts at Template talk:IRAs. Erin Go Bragh

is my great great uncle my great grandfather was his brother thomas the workhouses in 1840s doubled as hospitals if john was illegitimate there was a family unit the spy cartoon shows a man of great vigour and good looks - the fine black head of hair and beard hid the scars of the small pox i wrote to donald jordan but he died a few years ago jstanford1@eircom.net —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.202.188.142 (talk) 16:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It has come to my attention that someone has categorised the Clonfert Cathedral as Anglican. It has always been Roman Catholic/Irish correct? Thanks. --RiverHockey

It's been Church of Ireland since the Reformation.--Damac 14:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, too bad. --RiverHockey 18:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi could you have a look at this Talk:Northern_Ireland#Flag_Debate_Part_II, we had a concencus that the Ulster Banner shouldn't be used in the infobox, yet certain users are refusing to allow it to be removed, what is the normal way to resolve disputes such as this, they are evene accepting that their stance is POV.--padraig3uk 21:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue VI (II) - February 2007
Project news This is the second Newsletter of the new and enhanced Wikiproject Greece! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! All the "History of Greece" templates have been moved to just plain "Greece", and the project's main page has been updated to use the new names and not the redirects. Our banner has been renamed to {{WPGreece}}). Additionally, "View/hide" hyperlinks for all the additional sections (Criteria for B-Class, peer-review, task forces) have been added to the banner, and a "small option" is also supported. The parameter for the Politics and politicians task force has been changed from task force1 to politics-task-force. For more details, check Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Project banner.	Current proposals and discussions A proposal for the creation of task forces for other areas, such as arts, sports, etc. has been made here. The creation of a task force to periodically check article within the scope of the project against "erosion" has been also proposed here. Please, participate in the above discussions and express yourself. Galleries of images at Greece, Athens, and Thessaloniki will probably get removed. A number were already removed from Greece. Interested editors are requested to make sure that any of these that aren't at Wikimedia Commons get moved there. A new category, Category:Greek Civil War, has been created. Please populate it with relevant articles on revolutionary organisations, events, leaders etc.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yannismarou (talk • contribs) 18:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hi there. Got your message, thanks! I'll immediately revert all that, fix up the redirs and update the article with the relevant references. Sorry about all the confusion! - Alison^☺ 23:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - all fixed again. Take a look and just check it's the way it should be. Sorry again! - Alison^☺ 23:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue VII (III) - March 2007
Project news This is the third Newsletter of the new and enhanced Wikiproject Greece! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! The WikiProject Greece Barnstar, the project's official award, has been adopted to be bestowed on anyone who has made significant contributions to Wikipedia's coverage of Greece-related articles or to the project itself. You are free to comment on it and to improve the template of the award! A new and reformed Review department allows you not only to submit articles for peer-reviews, but also to watch all Greece-related FAC, FAR or FARC nominations. A new seperate page with the project's members has been created. Two new catogories (Category:Disambig-Class Greek articles and Category:Template-Class Greek articles) as sbu-cats of the Category:Non-article Greece pages have been created. The new {{Infobox Greek Dimos}} template for municipalities has been launched!	Current proposals and discussions A discussion about the achievements of the project and its future priorities and plans took place here. You can also see the discussion here about the organization of NA categories of the project. A discussion is going on at WP:MILHIST about whether or not an Ottoman task force should be created. See the discussions about the move proposals concerning certain Chalkidiki-related pages. Help for the expansion of the article about Greek police has been requested here. The issue of naming conventions concerning the various factions of the Greek Civil War has been raised here.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

It is my suspicion that User:Weggie has been engaging in sockpuppetry in an attempt to engage in an edit war on Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007.

For many months now, User:Weggie has persistently prevented any attempts to include the micro political party Republican Sinn Féin in the results of the Northern Ireland Assembly election. He basis his actions on the argument that as RSF is not registered with the UK Electoral Commission, the party does not exist and can therefore not be included in election results on Wikipedia.( See Talk:Northern_Ireland_Assembly_election,_2007#RSF) Weggie is alone in this view, and has not received any support from any other editor.

Although I always opposed excluding RSF from the table of results, I, and I suspect other Irish users, were intimidated into not making an issue over it due to Weggie's tendency to denegrate edits not to his liking as republican propaganda. I should state that I oppose RSF outright.

On 24 March, seasoned editor User:Sam Blacketer made the bold move and included RSF in the results table[1], and announced this on the page's talk page. At no state did Weggie attempt to challenge this alteration. Instead, I believe he made anonymous edits as User:86.12.249.63, even exceeding the 3RR rule. Today, I believe he has established a new account, User:Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 to pursue his POV.

It's also interesting to note when Weggie was active under the difference account names he has adopted:

• 11 April 2007: Weggie announces he's taking a break from Wikipedia[2]
• 11 April onwards: User:86.12.249.63 becomes increasingly active
• 16 April: I request User:86.12.249.63 to set up a user account
• 16 April: User:Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 appears on the scene

--Damac 13:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed your sockpuppetry notice, from my talk page, and will not allow it to remain until such time as you make a complaint that the use of this account is in violation of WP policy regarding the use of scokpuppetry Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 13:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to make a formal complaint and look forward to seeing this problem resolved.--Damac 17:28, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou, please inform me on my talk page when you have done this, until such time please stop trolling my talk page Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 17:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at all the evidence Damac I have to agree that this user can only be a sockpuppet of Weggie. Both use the same style of vandalism as well as writing style. Will be supporting your complaint. Galloglass 18:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a new anon editor doing reverts User talk:84.71.220.180, which is strange as these are the only edits this user has done.--padraig3uk 22:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you move your recent additions to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Weggie, out of my comments, and place them after my entry, the format you have used is somewhat confusing as to who's comments are who's. I will respond to these comments when the page has been tidied up, Thankyou Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 08:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou

I noticed in your check user request you used the word "suspected", not "suspect", if you are now not of the opinion weggie is engaging in sock puppetry, it may be better to withdraw your claims of your own free-will, than wait until the process has run it's course and you are forced into action by external forces 86.12.249.63 09:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. There really needs to be discussion on the talk page about this disagreement to try to determine consensus; if User:Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 will not discuss it, there will have to be a consensus found without them. My personal view is that it is more informative to include the RSF results in the table, although I am concerned that we may not be able to find a reliable source which gives this total (as opposed to the results of the individual candidates who we know to be standing on behalf of RSF). I hope that this new user is not a sockpuppet of User:Weggie; while your evidence looks persuasive, in the past I've found Weggie to be a constructive editor. A checkuser might provide useful evidence here. Warofdreams talk 18:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It will be a pity if Weggie is shown to be behind all this; he was a valuable editor, who has contributed a lot to the Wikipedia project. However, one-man compaigns and sockpuppetry cannot be tolerated.--Damac 18:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CHECK USER NOW OR WITHDRAW YOUR CLAIMS Weggie 09:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again,

There is a great video about Pattakos on youtube here, (probably with Mike Wallace). Except it introduces Pattakos in an unusual manner. Can we use this as a reference? Dr.K. 14:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's excellent. I saw the original documentary on Oi Fakelos a fortnight ago, but couldn't record it. I don't see why we can't refer to it in the article, particulary his biography.--Damac 15:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. By the way excellent work on sectioning and copyediting the junta article. Take care. Dr.K. 16:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you for agreeing to curtail your politically motivated personal attacks, and I trust you will engage in reasonable once your Complaint has been suitably been dealt with Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 21:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about that? It's always said either 7 January (or just January until early 2006), and the anon editor (and his account) introduced the 2 January date yesterday. Check the history, thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 06:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both wrong anyway! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 06:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Following discussion has been moved to Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Weggie

Have removed the malicious warnings Galloglass 06:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dia duit ar maidin a Damac! Please see here for Adams' refutation of Moloney and here for this CNN profile that shows Adams' further refutation. gaillimh^{Conas tá tú?} 06:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dia dhuit féin, a Ghaillimh. The fact that Adams denies Maloney's claim does not make it illegitimate. The book was published and Adams could go to the courts to challenge it. I've modified the footnote in the list to reflect the claims made in a published source and the denial of the person concerned.

The second source your provided neither mentions the position of C/S or Maloney's book.--Damac 06:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The second (CNN) source simply mentions Adams' denial of being an IRA member, therefore refuting Moloney's claim, although it doesn't mention Moloney directly. As per WP:BLP, it seems silly to add a person to a group of which he's explicitly denied being part of, innit? While I can see the relationship between him being the president of SF and obviously having an influence in the direction of the IRA (he's been credited as playing a major part in the decommissioning, for example), he's always denied being C/S (as opposed to McGuinness, for example) gaillimh^{Conas tá tú?} 06:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is my understanding that McGuinness also denies being C/S at any time; in fact, until recently he denied outright that he was ever in the IRA.

Most of the people on the list denied ever being members of the IRA; for obvious reasons, it's only when they die that republican publications tend to elaborate on their IRA pasts.

Adams has denied, but never legally challenged, the claim that he was C/S. A book published by Penguin is, in my honest opinion, a very reliable source.--Damac 06:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, McGuinness has made his IRA activities known, to a certain extent (see here, for example). As I've seen that you've amended the footnote, I thank you, but would you be willing to take it a step further to highlight that Adams has denied this? Maybe an additional "notes" column in the chart, or some sort of format highlighting this, as it's rather significant that those being grouped have denied these claims? gaillimh^{Conas tá tú?} 07:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you include a column on whether the subject accepts/denies whether they were C/S, in almost every case it will be shown that the subjects did deny it during their lifetimes, but that it was then confirmed after their deaths. It's splitting hairs if you ask me. Do you really want to expend so much effort on fiddling around with an issue that is common knowledge? More sources on Adams role as C/S can be provided.--Damac 07:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And have been. I recommend if this discussion is continued it is on the article's talk page as well. Oh and for the record McGuinness admitted in court in the 70s he was an IRA member, and said he was very proud of it. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 19:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue VIII (IV) - April 2007
Project news This is the fourth Newsletter of the new and enhanced Wikiproject Greece! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! The {{WPGreeceOpenTasks}} has been replaced with {{Wikipedia:Greek Wikipedians' notice board/to do}}. Feel free to improve our notice board's format, and, please, keep updating it! A new Showcase section has been created in the main page of our project!	Current proposals and discussions Discussions continue here about the projects's barnstar(s). Please participate and contribute! Help for the expansion of the article about Hellenism has been requested here. A proposal for the creation of a bot that will automatically tag unassessed articles has been proposed here. Parthenon is in WP:FAR, and needs our contributions, in order to keep its star! And what do you think about Greece's article in this Alternative wikipaedia?
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

Interesting discussion. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 18:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You for alerting me to the fact that Lykos3 call me a wanker (it's strange, he says sorry and then calls me a wanker, I hope he starts editing constructively). --Lwarf ^{Talk to Me!} 13:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it's great that you put all that election data together. It's really enriched the Galway East article. Where'd you get it? We should have the same for all the constituencies. -- Evertype·✆ 11:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can get all this kind of info on any constituency at here.--Damac 16:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who has proven that the Longman reference is incorrect, it shouldn't be stated as such.--padraig3uk 16:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other contributors and I have provided umpteen references to the existence of a "Nationalist Party" in Northern Ireland, including one publication put out by the party in the late 1960s. The reference to a "National Party of NI" is only contained in Longman. I for one find it pretty hard to believe that one book written in 1995 (or whenever) should be treated as the definitive source just because someone has it on his/her shelf.

You changed the article orginally without any discussion, have wasted time in changing links all over the place; have done the same on the politics.ie Wiki. A debate took place on the issue and you were the only one arguing for National Party before you left the discussion.

I suggest you accept you got it wrong on this occasion and move on.--Damac 16:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Didn't leave the discusion, I was blocked from editing for 24hrs for reverting vandalism on another article, where a editor had made 10 reverts to a template that had been discussed and concencus had been reached on. If the concencus was to rename the article then fair enough, but it is improper to state that the longman refererence in incorrect, it should state that the reference refers to the party as the National party of Northern Ireland.--padraig3uk 16:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it improper? The reference is clearly incorrect. Just compare the countless references in all other reference books to the Nationalist Party to your one.

Actually, in my opinion all references to the Longman book and National Party should be removed as the National Party never existed and was never referred to so.--Damac 16:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've created the following page Dublin Rathmines West (Dáil Éireann constituency) but I'm a bit clueless about tables so any chance you could have a look at it? Thanks, Valenciano 19:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the discussion on this page Talk:John J. O'Kelly regarding his name and the dates in the article, I left a note on the talkpage regarding him.--padraig3uk 21:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue IX (V) - May 2007
Project news This is the fifth Newsletter of the new and enhanced Wikiproject Greece! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! The Template:WPGRInvite has been created to invite members to WikiProject Greece and is part of the project's Outreach department! A new article importance grading scheme has been adopted! Our Project banner has now a new more attractive look! MartinBotIII will be tagging all unassessed WPGR articles with the parameters: class=Stub|auto=yes. All articles will be listed under Category:Automatically assessed Greek articles where they can be reviewed and reassessed or have the "auto" removed.	Current proposals and discussions Discussions still continue here about the projects's barnstar(s). Please participate and contribute! We were previously discussing here about the expansion of the article about Hellenism. Now we are discussing here about the usefulness of a WikiProject Hellenism. What do you think? See the discussion here about the article concerning Greek-American organized crime. Suggestions on the topic "opium in ancient Greece" have been requested, in order to improve the opium article.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

An {{afd}} tag has been placed on Vasilis Christidis, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. All Wikipedians can join the debate at Articles for deletion, where articles asserted to be inappropriate to Wikipedia are discussed. You are encouraged to submit your opinion, and remember that Articles for Deletion debates are not a vote. You can also leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the deletion tag yourself, but don't feel inhibited from editing the article, particularly if doing so makes it clear that it is a useful contribution to an encyclopaedia. DarkAudit 12:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Athens_international_radio_logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. The Sunshine Man 16:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged Image:Athina984fm.png as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. The Sunshine Man 16:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. I've replied to you on my talkpage. Valenciano 20:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS Further to what I've said, could you look again at your changes to Galway? My original was perfectly synced in the right columns and rows - your changes aren't and just seem to have made the whole thing worse. On the question of the tables, having thought about it, I do believe that my original format of candidate/party/votes is the best way. This is the system used almost universally for reporting STV results cf [6] [7] [8] [9] and I don't see why wikipedia alone should deviate from it? Valenciano 17:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I take your point about the other tables, but it's not just a case of a "few external sites" presenting the info that way ie candidate/party it's *every* external site. As a compromise though, if possible, the format I'd suggest would be party colour template/candidate/party/votes. A necessary part of the ambitious task I've set myself will invitably involve replacing existing tables as full count results will always be better than first preference summaries.

So far I really don't know any other way to put them on other than manually. The reason why I've rushed them a bit is that I'm only in Ireland until next week and after that if there's any errors in the scanned copies I have I'll have no way of going back to the newspaper library to cross reference. I have held off adding any more tables for now. I suggest we continue this discussion here in the hope that others can help. [10] All the best, Valenciano 19:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay stumbled upon a workable template by accident and think that should do the job. I still prefer to keep the universally used candidate/party format. Valenciano 19:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I providee two sources which you removed, as well as edited errors in the article, which my source support.--padraig3uk 17:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing the category, I provided a source that justifies its inclusion.--padraig3uk 19:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Pat Coogan dosen't give his source, The full quote from the book says:

The Official IRA did kill two Senators. one Northern (Senator Barnhill), one Southern (Senator Billy Fox), but neither was premediated. John Taylor, the Unionist MP, was there most considered target and he survived his wounds.

that is the only mention of Billy Fox. Of all the books on the IRA this is the only mention I can find on Fox, which seems strange if he was killed by the IRA why do all other authors fail to mention it, after all he is the only Southern politican killed in the troubles.--padraig3uk 19:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's carry on this discussion at Talk:Billy Fox.--Damac 20:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I know this is going back in time now ... but there still seems to be a problem with having this page represent an unbiased account of conflicting claims. I don't suppose this is uncommon. --Flexdream (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, When adding new articles or new categories, please include the persons surname and name (in that order) after the category title to ensure that they are listed correctly in the category concerned. Better still, use the DEFAULTSORT option (see Wiki markup box). Look at the end of these changes to see what I mean. Keep up the good work.--Damac 06:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

   Thanks for the tip!Rigger30 08:43, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damac, do you know anything more about Roger McCorley than is already here? I'm particularly interested in his post civil war career. Jdorney 23:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Ecologist greens logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 20:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The official name according to the Ministry of Interior, Public Administration, and Decentralization claims the Prefecture is named, Kefalonia not Kefalonia and Ithaca. What's with the change to Kefalonia and Ithaca Prefecture? Link:www.ypes.gr ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 16:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm taking the version provided on the official website of the Prefecture of Kefalonia and Ithaca (http://www.na-kefalinia.gr/gr/index.asp). Take a look at the banner, the logo and some of the documents on that site. I spend a lot of time in Kefalonia, and where ever you see a blue public works sign, the full title of the prefecture is provided.

The problem as it stood this morning was that there was no article devoted to the island of Kefalonia. The existing article was, in fact, one for the prefecture. As such, we had exact data on the population of Ithaka, which has its own article, but none on Kefalonia. Like all Greek islands, Kefalonia deserves its own stand-alone article.

I felt that some distinction had to be made between Kefalonia (island) and Kefalonia (prefecture) and felt that rather than renaming hundreds of links along those lines, creating separate articles and categories for Kefalonia and Ithaca Prefecture was much easier.--Damac 16:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting with the prefecture name. I have no objection with it then. It's better that Kefalonia (island) and Kefalonia (prefecture) are split. ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 23:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These people are really not notable on account of their membership to the party. However, as an encyclopedia, we have a mission to inform the public and a list of individual members of a small new political party is valuable because individual members can have great influence in small parties, so users have a right to know about them. By not presenting users of Wikipedia with such a list on small political parties, we deny them to opportunity to form informed decisions on the qualities of each small party. NerdyNSK 14:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to interfere, but that's the job of the party's website, not Wikipedia. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 20:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True, Michali. NerdyNSK, please check out Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, especially WP:NOT#WEBSPACE and WP:NOT#DIRECTORY.--Damac 13:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a user I often surf Wikipedia by clicking on links, sometimes in a semi-random fashion. For example, from the SELENE article I may click on the Ancient Greek link, then go to Iliad, then to 6th century BC, then to Sicily, then to Palermo International Airport, then to 1992, then to STS-47, and then to space science, and finally to Orogeny. Of course I usually utilise tabs, so I go to multiple articles simultaneously, but I hope this gives you an idea of the usefulness of links in general. Links of proper nouns that have no direct relation to the article they show up in (eg mathematics in the Ancient Greek article) are important for enabling this kind of surfing. Unfortunately the phenomenon of being locked up in articles that contain links only to directly related topics is quite prevalent and it is a nuisance for me, and I think also to other users who like to surf this way. That's why I link proper nouns despite that everybody knows what they mean. NerdyNSK 13:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note the difference between proper nouns and nouns. You should also check out WP:MOS-L and WP:OVERLINK. In a nutshell, we do not provide links for "plain English words" on Wikipedia. In any case, the Doctor brought readers to a DAB, which leaves them with absolutely no idea what the subject works at.--Damac 13:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for your edits. I'd like to point out, however, that some people consider full stops in abbreviations (eg 'et al.' ) unwelcome because they make the text difficult to read (similarly to the lack of French spacing) and too old-looking (to me, when I see Ph.D. or i.e. or e.g. or B.Sc. I think I'm reading something out of the 1800s). The modern usage is to drop full stops (eg see Guardian style guide here). Since you seem to have a preference for full stops, this may mean you have some opinion on this topic, so I hope that you will want to discuss and provide your view at full stops considered harmful. NerdyNSK 19:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian style guide says nothing about et al. The following use et al. and nothing else (i.e. they do not offer et al as an alternative):

• Wikipedia
• Collins COBUILD dictionary
• Wiktionary[11]
• APA style,[12]
• MLA Style Manual,[13]
• The Free Dictionary[14]
• Chicago Manual of Style,[15]

Need I go on?--Damac 20:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you revert me, could you consider keeping the contributions you may find useful? For example, your revert also deleted the following:

• The article stated 'When the fires in August started' and I changed it to 'When the fires of August started' but you changed it back to in. It doesn't look right to me. It should be either fires of August, or fires started in August.
• The 'Financial Assistance' header was wrong since there is no reason to have a capital A there. I changed it to 'Financial assistance' but your revert bought it back to the previous erroneous state
• I fixed a misspelling, the word 'unprecented' (which I made 'unprecedented' ), but you reverted it back to the misspelled state

Furthermore, AFAIK Wikipedia is not only an encyclopedia but also an almanac, so I find links to incomplete dates mandatory.

I also invite you to discuss the usefulness of the date format change on the article's talk page.

NerdyNSK 23:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it not a "fact" that Bell recorded Maguire's opinion? By deleting the full quotation, don't you fail to fully inform Wikipedia readers of the facts?

THank you for considering these questions.

--134.68.47.173 20:14, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These questions were never answered; article changed. Thank you.--24.166.14.6 02:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very good work with copyediting the KKE article. These greeklish along all the greek articles are becoming really annoying. I have some doubts only about the electoral results. I think it would be better to start recording its results since 1977. I am of the opinion that the, CPG with its only title, participated in elections in 1977. Along 20s and 30s it was always in cooperation with other parties. Moreover, if you have to note its results before 1977 we have to note the results of EDA too where KKE participated with its (few) members because it was out-of-law. Personally, I added results since 1993 because they give any idea from today's KKE, after its big double split in 1989-1991 and i fact today's KKE is the party AFTER 1991. Think about it. -- Magioladitis 08:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I take responcibility for all the "greeklish" on this particular article and I apologise for these "mistakes" . For what is worth, I kept visiting the article trying to revert bad sectors and greeklish almost every day. I do prepare a more verifiable version for some of the parts of KKE history and I promise it will be in plain english. The reason I reacted so hasty is that the article for KKE was far from being the real history of this party based on biased prespection of history. i do not believe that there is a non-biased point, but I think I contributed quite a lot on balancing the info and leave the reader of WIKI to make his own decision. What I would like to have as guidence is how deep on history can a wiki article reach; Is it good to be detailed or what wiki supports is sort articles with pleanty of references? In my point of view as a user, references must be number one but if the article is detailed enough can give the reader a good fealing for the topic. As I am preparing a new version on KKE's history for the mid-war era, I would appreciate your help on this. Regarding Magioladitis point of view on the election results: KKE had never stopped being the same party through out its 90 year old history. A party is defined not mainly by its people but by its political agenta and ideology. Today's KKE has no difference with KKE on 1989, 1974,1969, 1955,1948,1942,1936,1918. If we were trying to describe i.e. PCI (Communist party of Italy) then this could be a problem on trying to describe today's socialist reform with the communist party of 1950. But it is not the case with KKE. I believe that today's presentation is far better as it shows also the coalitions and election cooperations of KKE through out its history. Dkace 12:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)DKAce[reply]

Sorry for having to answer to DKAce here but DKAce has no talk page and is referring to me in here so it's better if we have this conversation complete here. Well, I disagree for the fact that "KKE is the same through out its 90 year old history". In this party's documents I have read that the 14th Congress [1993] "restored the party's character". So, for some years at least is was not the same party. Moreover, in 1958 KKE canceled all its party organisations in Greece (it had already canceled its organisations in the former SSRs since 1955) so there was no KKE for many years. More? The post-1955 guidance of KKE imprisoned Zachariades and exiled others of the pro 1955 guidance. How can these be the same parties? Ideology is not the only criteria for a party. Many parties in the modern greek history claim to be communists or the continuation of the old KKE.

But, let's forget that for a moment.Above when I was referring to Damac I was only referring to the election results. In '20s and '30s didn't participated alone in the elections or with the title communist. (I see some exceptions for some elections in Wikipedia but I ll try to check if this really hold. I have a series of books called "KKE - Official documents" and maybe there it's mentioned something relevant). So, the first time we can really have an impression of KKE's electoral results is... in 1977. That's because after 30s we have the WWII, the formation of EDA, the Junta and in 1974 KKE participates in elections with the United Left coalition.

I would like to thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please, if DKAce want to answer me, use my talk page. Friendly, Magioladitis 08:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- Magioladitis 08:15, 27 September 2007 (

About Elections: Main KKE political line is the creation of coalitions based on peoples political formations and common goals. Under this respect Peoples front on '30s, EAM on '40s, EDA on 1950-1967, United Left on 1974, Synaspismos on 1988, PAME on 1998 are under the same political umbrella: Coalitions of the left winged group of citizens or parties. Even today, although "KKE" was the title in the election several small groups were also joining this effort.

Under the above prespective, KKE has a history of 90 years. You can't detach any of these years from this solid history line. 80.76.56.51 10:07, 27 September 2007 (UTC)DKAce[reply]

Damac, I got your warning and I would very much like to be aligned with. Please advise the following:

1. Fasist is an aligation whereas totalitarian Stalinist using konservokoutia is not?

2. Am I an ad hoc trador only by supporting KKE?

3. In talk I explained the reason of the reverting. Is not valid or should I state them somewhere else?

4. Aim of wikipedia is that anyone can write his life story no matter what or to contribute with facts on a common article? I would appreciate if you check all my posts in talk page one - by - one and understand my final approach on such provocations.

I am looking forward for your advise. Thanks, D. Dkace 12:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I went ahead and decided to add the village and municipality fields into the infobox as you suggested. Talk a look: {{Infobox Greek Dimos}}. They only appear if a value is given, so they won't take up extra space. The only thing needed is to go and find all the villages and municipalities and change them to the right section. Tell me how it looks. Sorry it took so long, been busy here in the realy world. _{El Greco}^(talk) 00:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damac. You are right. The correct is Ministry of National Education and Religious Affairs (Greece) and that's what i wanted to do. If you seek under Minister for Education, you'll see that it redirects to Ministry of Education and in all countries the page is under the name of the Ministry and not the minister. I'll undo the changes.

About the parties, I don't agree with you. If someone doesn't know the party, he/she can simply click to the link. -- Magioladitis 20:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I just saw something. What do you say about the Minister of Education article?? I rememeber now. That was the reason I reverted everything! Any opinion about that?? Moreover, I just asked a friend of mine from Scotland on the phone right now. She says it's "of". Is it maybe another US/UK difference or what? Friendly, Magioladitis 21:02, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(she changed her mind after I read her your opinion! Magioladitis 21:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

ok. Do you agree that the main article must be the "Ministry of..."? We have a list with all the Ministers, the Ministry's logo and info about the Ministry.

Please help me to revert the Minister of to Minister for in the boxes. Do we have to do something for this funny things that the "Minister for" redirects to the "Ministry of..." and "Minister of.." it's a different article? -- Magioladitis 21:14, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also thought about whether we should have articles about the ministry or the minister. It seems that for articles relating to other countries, the articles are usually about the office holder (i.e. Minister for) rather than the office (i.e. Ministry of). There is no need to have two separate pages, although I did create separate "list of" pages when the list of ministers was really long (see [List of foreign ministers of Greece]] for example).

So, I think it's best to leave everything as it is. As far as I know, there are redirects from most ministry of to the minister page.

We'll have to put in a proposal of move the article back. I can do this tomorrow.--Damac 21:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok. I just reverted the edits to the Greek ministers. -- Magioladitis 21:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Today i proposed the merge of Minister of Education and Ministry of Education. Please, take a look and write your opinion in the talk page. -- Magioladitis 16:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Damac, I will pay more attention to this but this is what I usally do If I haven't forgot to sign in. I always put the tiles and on the first days I was also adding DKAce manually. I haven't search if I can do the same to the changes in the article, but in history I always see my contribution signed.Dkace 12:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check this Members of the Greek Parliament, 2007- now! -- Magioladitis 12:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Considering you're a member of RSF, your tagging of that article for a cite is a clear WP:POINT violation. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am finding it a bit OTT also - Irishmen need to cite their own name in their native language!?--Vintagekits 23:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto Joe McDonnell. Don't your party have cumanns named after each of them which can be found in ten seconds with a Google search? Yes, they do! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One Night in Hackney, please remember Wikipedia:Assume good faith. I'm very sorry to disappoint you, but I'm neither a member nor supporter of RSF. Whether that party uses Irish names or it is besides the point, as it is clear that most of the Irish versions of these names have been produced by someone along the line and have no factual backing anywhere else. An RSF ard fheis clár is not a reliable source on what version of an Irish name someone may or may not have used.

I think my point is legitimate. How do we actually know that the Irish name of Francis Hughes is Proinsias Ó hAodha? How do we know that it's not Proinsias Mac Aoidh? Similarly with Kevin Lynch. Why Caoimhghín and not Caoimhín? I haven't tagged the Bobby Sands article as the Irish version of his name is sourced and we know that he used it himself.--Damac 23:20, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

from your own party!!--Vintagekits 23:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, RSF is not my party. Please refrain from making unfounded comments on my political allegiances.--Damac 23:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And here!!! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about WP:V? Apart from RSF, where else can you find these Irish versions? RSF has clearly come up with Irish versions in an attempt to bring out a bilingual ardfheis clár. A self-published source if you ask me, which cannot be backed up by any reliable third-party publications.--Damac 23:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And if RSF is in your eyes a legitimate source, when it fails to provide an Irish version of Hurson (see "Cumann Mistéil/Hurson, An Tulach Mhór,Ua bhFáilí"[16]), does that mean that none exists?--Damac 23:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damac. Shouldn't such changes be discussed before being implemented? Moving Jupitergigantensäule to an English title may or may not make sense, but there certainly is no established English term. The one you chose "Jupiter Column" is for Jupitersäule, which is not quite the same thing. In any case, rather than changing the title again, I changed the article... athinaios 13:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to the consensus on the Irish name changes name changes. Now I don’t mean were the discussion is, as I know that. Because you agreed to some of the points I raised. So just the bit were the consensus was reached. --Domer48 23:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand "consensus" to mean: "a general agreement among a group of people". I believe that the general agreement on this particular issue is that Irish names should not be made up on Wikipedia. Besides, this is a general principle on Wikipedia. Names are names and cannot be translated as if a piece of prose. If you check my recent edits, I've removed some of these subjective translations and provided sources, where these exist, for usage of Irish names.--Damac 23:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Were was there a "a general agreement among a group of people"? --Domer48 23:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, I see no concensus to remove them.--Vintagekits 23:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of the discussion, the names I've removed have absolutely no sources. They exist nowhere. They are made up. Names and names, and like other key biographical details such as date of births, cannot be made up in this fashion.--Damac 23:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really! - just keep ingoring the discussion then if you wish eh!--Vintagekits 23:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same newspaper also refers to her as "Mairéad Ní Fhearail".[17] Which one are we to choose from?--Damac 23:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you admit there are sources yet still remove the name - interesting approach!--Vintagekits 23:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I accept there are contemporary sources that show that certain individuals use their Irish names, such as in the case of [[Paul Butler (politician)[18] and I accept these. Such a source cannot be compared to newspaper articles written years after the people they were writing about lived.--Damac 23:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, I didnt realise that it was you that were the one who determined which sources were acceptable - sorry my mistake. I think I'll leave it there!--Vintagekits 23:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you don't have consensus? This is what we think of in relation to consensus, and how it works. In the absence of a reasonable discussion, I’m strongly inclined to suggest another alternative, because of the editing of some in place of discussion. Now are we to have a process of discussion or not? --Domer48 23:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm removed names that have been completely made up and which exist no where. In some cases, there are fades in places where fadas should never be. We're not even talking about Irish names in some cases, just completely made up creations.--Damac 23:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm after showing you some links, so are you deciding to dismiss the process of consensus, and just doing your own thing. I have offered suggestions on the discussion page, so whats the story. "in some cases, just completely made up creations" ref's to back that up please? --Domer48 23:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In light of this, I suggest you take my advice and use the talk pages and the discussion process first, and revert your edits. By the way I did suggest this on the discussion, and you thought it had merit. So please stop, think and revert. --Domer48 23:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So it is your intension to ignore all reasonable suggestions and act in what I would consider to be a disruptive manner just to make a point. Please consider this through, and show some respect for your fellow editors. --Domer48 23:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is my intention to adhere to WP:NOR. I had the ridiculous WP:POINT charge thrown at me last week, as well as allegations that I was an RSF member, when I simply called for these names to be sourced. I'm removing unsourced information and I don't believe I'm contravening any Wikipedia rules in doing so. I joined Wikipedia in May 2005 and know what is expected of it and its editors, thank you very much.--Damac 00:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And you "I don't believe" in consensus, either then? --Domer48 00:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed some of your concerns in relation to WP:OR, I hope you find it helpful. Could you possibly address the rest, and since you have indicated you have been around a long time, might I again suggest you discuss first on the talk page. If you wish to make such sweeping changes, you might also obtain some consensus first, but you know that, thanks --Domer48 11:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing subjective and unsourced renderings of people's names does not constitute "sweeping changes". Names are facts, and like dates of births, cannot be made up or generated with the help of pseudo websites. Removal of original research does not require any consensus; it is Wikipedia policy to ensure that encyclopaedia meets encyclopaedic standards. I've added a response to your talk page.--Damac 11:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a reference, so it can not be called WP:OR, if you have a reference which disputes this please lets talk about it. Your opinion alone would be considered WP:OR, so I suggest we talk about it. --Domer48 11:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is not acceptable, and edit summaries like this are completely unacceptable “Removed Irish name made up by User:Vintagekits” --Domer48 23:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say I didnt appricate that commet either.--Vintagekits 00:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you were made of stronger stuff than that. Apologies if it offended you; that wasn't my intention. Well, where did you get these names? Can you provide a reference? BTW, I certainly didn't appreciate being called an RSF member for having been bold by tagging some names with {{fact}} last week.--Damac 00:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shur I'm only a gentle flower!! Actually I had mixed you up (momentarily) with your ould foe Donnchadh - hence the RSF comment.--Vintagekits 00:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't expect an apology, but it would be nice to hear one rather than an explanation.--Damac 00:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saw-weeee!--Vintagekits 00:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:Cork hurlers - knock yerself out!--Vintagekits 00:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come again?--Damac 00:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at the articles in the Cat - when yer finished I'll send ya in the direction of Contae Chiarraí.--Vintagekits 00:28, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this looks like a problem. Have you ever been to a GAA match? The names of the players are always printed in Irish in them (ridiculous if you ask me, but that's the GAA), so the GAA heads who provided all this info would be able to provide a source very easily if requested. I will ask them of course and perhaps they will be more forthcoming with answers than your good self and Oíche Amháin in Hacnaí.

Have you figured out the buailte yet?

BTW, I write my name in Irish and it's on all my documents. There is one form of my name in Irish and that's the one I use. I wouldn't take to kindly to people deciding on another variation (and these exist). My name is my name and it shouldn't be tinkered with. The same applies for these articles I've been modifying.--Damac 00:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Played Gaahh on three continents (not that I am much cop) so I am familiar with their ways - not sure I would call issuing a players name in his native language "ridiculous". Anyway - I think you'll find those Cork bhoys wont take kindly you you messing with their hurlers - unrepenant fenians are a push over in comparision to them - lol! night.--Vintagekits 00:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. Some of your comments here are uncalled for, and you appear to be out now to just to make a point please stop, and assume some good faith. --Domer48 11:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bhuel, an bhfuil aon Gaeilge agatsa? An bhfuil tú in ann an Gaeilge a labhairt?--Damac 12:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damac!

Ti kanis re; Ise kala simera; K'ego ime kala, dhen eine krio katholou edho, o kairos ine kalos, ilio. Kai poles omorfes kopeles kai gynekes ekso simera. Plenty of them. Malista. I was just wondering if you could come over to NyLon and have your say as to the right of this article to exist. I created this article a couple of days ago but the sleuths are already lashing out at it and at me too for a(n) (unkonwn) reason. The article is backed by SOLID references (FT, The Observer, The Indie kai poles ales). Yet they are about to delete it. Quite scary.. Anyway...Have a look and please do vote..Thanx... Apostolos Margaritis 13:58, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I recently saw you made a content reversion on this article, seen here.

Please note that, as a result of this ruling, "all content reversions on [the] page must be discussed on the article talk page".

There appears to be a discussion already open at this section, which has been recently contributed to (last twenty-four hours). I respectfully request that you take part in the discussion there, as a result of the mentorship of the article.

If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a note on my talk page or email me. Thanks, Daniel 10:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The split was minor that is also fact not POV, the split between the provos and stickies in 1970 was a major split, saying just that a split occured is meaningless.--Padraig (talk) 11:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give it a rest please D!--Vintagekits (talk) 00:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What a rest? Entering an surname into an online GAA website does not provide the Irish version of a name. The Hogan Stand page does not provide concrete proof that the English name "B" is "A" in Irish. Anyone with any knowledge of the Irish language knows that; those who believe it can be machine translated don't.--Damac (talk) 00:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! When I say it, people ignore it and introduce a string of non-sequiturs. It's refreshing to see some people still have the gift of rational thought. Though I think your comments my be lost on some... -R. fiend (talk) 18:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the changes you made on Plunkett ad MacDermott. However, are you sure they were Commandants? I was looking for specific references to their ranks, but haven't found any yet. Thanks. -R. fiend (talk) 19:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Damac the rank of Commander did exist in the Irish Volunteers and was used at Company level, as in them having the ranks of Company Commander, Half-company Commanders and Section commanders. See Irish Volunteer Soldier 1913-23, by G White & B. O'Shea p.13 ISBN 1-84176-685-2.--Padraig (talk) 20:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but Tom Clarke was not one of these, or at least no evidence has been provided that he was.--Damac (talk) 20:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Clarke wasn't acknowledged as member of the Volunteers that I am aware of, as he didn't wish the authorities to become aware of the IRB involvement in it, but he did play a major role in the day to day affairs of that organisation along with the other leaders of the Supreme Council of the IRB and was a Commander in that sense. Its a minor issue in the overall scheme of things he was accepted as a Commander by the rank and file during the rising.--Padraig (talk) 21:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But that's not what the rubric in the infobox refers to. If refers to "rank"; Clarke was perhaps a commander (position), but not a Commander (rank). I know you appreciate the difference, and I just wish others would too.--Damac (talk) 21:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem is the use of that particular infobox, as it only gives a rank option rather then a position, maybe we would be better having a seperate template for use in these situations.--Padraig (talk) 21:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I may butt in there, that is exactly what I suggested. Anyone know a more suitable infobox? (This is exactly why I don't care for such templates.) Though I have to say it seems to me your assertion that Clarke played a major role in the day to day affairs on the Volunteers may be a bit much. The IRB as a whole exerted a great deal of control in general, but I don't see Clarke as a puppetmaster in the smaller (day-to-day) scale. I could be wrong. -R. fiend (talk) 22:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the three of us know that there was very little need for this to come this far. This issue could have been resolved long ago, without all this hassle. The problem seems to be with one contributor who just does not take too kindly to any editing on pages that he takes an interest in. I've only ever encountered something like this once in my 3 years on FB.--Damac (talk) 22:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With the current infobox template we could add another field for position to use other then rank, or we could create another template based on the current one to suit these articles in particular. The IRB Command Council could ensure that certain decisions or promotions were made thoughout the Volunteer organisation, they also effectively could overrule any decision by the Chief of Staff by ensuring any orders made by him had to first be passed through their own appointees where they could be either be ejected or altered.--Padraig (talk) 22:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what you're saying, and I think the Rising itself is a good example of how that strategy and how it didn't. I'd just hesitate too call decisions like that "day-to-day" affairs; these were generally the bigger ones. This is out of scope of nay article as it stands, so there's no point in pressing the issue.

By the way, do either of you know if the IRB had any hand in selecting the members for the Headquarters Staff? Or was that a decision made mostly by MacNeill? -R. fiend (talk) 23:05, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the List nearly every name on it was a member of the IRB same with the signaturies of the proclaimation, I would say they also controlled the Headquarters staff prior to the rising.--Padraig (talk) 23:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should we continue this conversation on the article's talk page?--Damac (talk) 23:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if there is more to discuss. -R. fiend (talk) 00:58, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good job cleaning up of the Irish Volunteers. I noticed Eoin MacNeill is in pretty bad shape. Any interest in workin' a bit of magic over there? I'm not sure I have the desire to take it on. -R. fiend (talk) 18:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh - I'm reminded of the TV awards ceremony presented by James Nesbitt. On being called "Séamus" by Gráinne Seoige, he came right back by pointedly calling her "Grace". Classic. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 15:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Nas logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for a rash flippant statement here uncalled for and unhelpful -- BigDunc (talk) 23:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted, many thanks.--Damac (talk) 09:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:M62_coach_bombing#IRA_and_British_mainland. Tyrenius (talk) 22:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damac, I was just wondering why you deleted the facts I added to the Seán Russell article to shed light on a statement made in relation to his statue's vandalism? Someone else had already edited it on the grounds that it expressed a point of view, so I changed it in line with that. Corrain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.107.115 (talk) 13:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph you added/edited does not contain one reference and read to me like the expression of an opinion.--Damac (talk) 16:28, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - could you tell me which part you thought was the expression of an opinion? I did indeed give a reference however, "See Wannsee conference [linked]...". Which sentence should be referenced? The paragraph, afterall only clarifies the chronology of events. Thanks, Corrain. 83.70.107.115 (talk) 18:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted back to my version, with one change, I hope you don't mind. Please, feel free to edit it as you please, just let me know what parts are, as you say, "the expression of an opinion" or in need of reference. Thanks, Corrain. 83.70.107.115 (talk) 15:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have become a standard put-down of yours[19], but can you translate Go maith leith scéal [20] for me? Or did you mean Gabh mo leithscéal? Scolaire (talk) 17:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just testing!--Damac (talk) 18:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usually I hate the expression lol, but this time I did actually laugh out loud :-) Scolaire (talk) 18:20, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damac. I've seen you around on the Irish articles before, but I don't think we've actually spoken before. Domer has contacted me to say that he feels you are stalking him. Now, let me first of all say that I have had serious problems with Domer's editing in the past (see my user talk page), and I am very much aware of some of the friction there has been on Irish articles in the past. Let me also point out that I have not had the time yet to look into the matter he raises in sufficient detail to comment on the detailed merits of his complaint. However, these things are in the eye of the beholder, and I would very respectfully ask you to consider avoiding making any edits which may be seen as stalking Domer in the future. If there is any problem, there are plenty of other editors here who can help. Perhaps you could let me know what you think of my suggestion. Best wishes, --John (talk) 21:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You'll notice that in many of the article he refers to in those diffs, Domer48 has, in the past, attempted to force unrepresentative and sectional POV on those articles, which I and other contributors rightfully contested. Thanks to our efforts, 45% of the Segi no longer comprises of a cut and past from an Ógra Shinn Féin blog, the term "Irish Holocaust", which is not in currency either in academic discourse nor the public mind, no longer appears in the introduction to the The Great Hunger.

I first came across Domer48 after noticing that a plethora of Irish names had been added to biographical articles of Sinn Féin and IRA members. When I raised the issue, Domer48 contributed to the debate, but ignored the majority opinion at that time. Although I clearly showed in so many cases that most of these Irish names existed no-where else but on Wikipedia, Domer48 repeatedly reverted my edits, citing a website as the source for these names. I've explained again and again why this source is not a reliable source, and only yesterday does he resume by adding false Irish names for Irish republicans, such as here, here. These were clearly wrong and I removed them. Domer48 clearly does not speak Irish, nor can he read it correctly, and I question his ability to add Irish names to an Encyclopaedia. In the past, I've removed similar made-up Irish names entered by others users, and none have reacted in the way that Domer48 has.

I'd also like to point out that I've been contributing to articles on Irish republicanism, among so many other subjects, since May/June 2005. Many of the pages that Domer48 discovered much later have been on my watchlist since then.

In addition, long before I ever encountered Domer48 and his syntax and grammar, I've been copyediting new articles relating to Irish politics and history, biographies in particular, that I thought needed attention. Take, for example, a range of articles by User:Jim Kinnaird, usually copyedited hours after they were originally posted: James Laurence Carew, Luke Hayden, William Joseph Corbett, etc.

I've no problem leaving his articles as they are, although I feel that Wikpedia would be the worse if Domer48 articles were left without copyediting.[21] And articles are left untouched. Only today did I spend a considerable amount of time editing the Diarmuid Lynch article,[22] that was in an atrocious state for weeks.

It is no accident that Domer48 has come under fire for many of this edits. He has a tendency to view the subjective opinions of one author as fact, and his aggressive towards any questioning of the same author.

I hope that there are others out there who can copyedit Domer48's contributions. If he feels that I am "stalking" him, then I propose that he refrain from adding made-up Irish names to biography articles for the time being, unless he can provide authoritative and authentic sources for them of course. I've laid out my arguments time and time again why we cannot simply translate names as if they were random words. If I see that Domer48 takes this on board, then I will leave the arduous task of copyediting his contributors to other editors.--Damac (talk) 23:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of your history with Domer, as you are of mine, but in your edit summaries to Conor Clune and your posts to the talk page I saw nothing but ignorance and incivility. You had umpteen chances to explain your position reasonably, but you opted for rudeness each time. As I pointed out in the section above, your own command of Irish is not so great that you can afford to gratuitously insult others. Now, I suggest you listen to John and take a break from editing articles that Domer is working on until you are able to do so with a clear head and in a civil manner. Scolaire (talk) 00:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained my position time and time again, but it has been repeatedly ignored that that editor. The issue with the Irish names goes back to last October. I lay out my arguments, show how his approach and sources do not meet Wikipedia standards, but yet he persists. Rinne mé bothún béag inné, ceart go leor, ach labhraím agus múinim an teanga do daoine feasta anseo sa Ghéig.--Damac (talk) 09:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I said that I was aware of your history with Domer, so there was no need to go over it again. I don't see anywhere in Conor Clune where you even attempted to "explain your position" - you went on the attack from the word go, using deliberately provocative language. That included attacking me for "vague references" without even looking to see what I'd done. I explained to Domer here what I thought was the problem was with his edit. You could just as easily have done that at the outset instead of starting yet another war on yet another page. That's why I'm saying you need to chill out.

BTW I can't find "bothún" or "béag" in the dictionary - did you mean "botún beag"?

Scolaire (talk) 09:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making me aware of that history, Damac, and for saying you'll back off a bit. If you read the section on my talk I linked above, you'll see that I'm aware of his problematic behaviour. I specifically criticised the behaviour that (I believe) contributed to R fiend's deadminship. Now, having reviewed your edits I can see you're a clever person with a good knowledge in this area and a lot to contribute. So, I thought, was R fiend; I'm not sure how much input he'll be putting into Irish articles these days.

My own background is that I've read a few books on the Northern Ireland conflict, spent quite a lot of time there in the 1990s (and in the Republic), and knew people from all sorts of backgrounds all over the island. I have a great interest in Irish history and politics as a result. I can best describe my POV in this area as being with Tony Geraghty, which is pretty much "A plague on all your houses". I can readily see the thuggery, inefficiency, racism and venality, in the British government and equally the Irish Republican movement. There were very few heroes in that war, from having seen some of the fringes of it on the ground. The closest to heroes that war produced are probably the leaders on both sides who had the courage to compromise and to sit down and do deals with people they had been brought up to distrust and despise.

I believe we really need to continue to attract good editors with good knowledge and good sources in the Irish area. If we fail, two things will happen. First, a lot of articles will turn into hagiographies of urban warriors and extremist politicians. Secondly, enormous edit wars will ensue. Decent editors will be driven away by the drama and bullying that ensues. This will cause a lot of wasted energy, and require an ever-expanding amount of admin input. We have, I think, seen the beginning of this in the flaccid response to, and enforcement of, the Troubles arbcom, the continuing problems which led to R fiend falling on his sword; I really don't like the way it is going.

I'm sure you see where I am going with this. Domer has apologised and agreed to move on from the past problems. We all need to do the same. What we could do with too is a stern enforcement of policies on civility focused on Ireland; but meantime, Domer has said he is trying to do better. If you can try to give him a chance to do so, that would be great. Keep me posted if you see any more problematic editing from him and I'll have a word, or get someone else to.::--John (talk) 04:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Domer48 is doing better.

Unfortunately, while WP:CIVIL is policy, WP:COI is only a behavioural guideline (although it could be argued that editors with undeclared and persistently unresolved COI issues must inevitably stand in fundamental breach and disregard of at least 1, 2 and 4 of our five pillars of policy). This inequality of emphasis inevitably leads to erudite and knowledgeable editors such as Bastun, Damac and John (to mention only a "holy trinity") to sometimes be a little short of patience with those who are perceived (rightly or wrongly) to be slow to learn from them and partial and selective in their editing.

I would also doubt that Damac is "stalking" Domer48 in the "Wikipedian" sense of the word. He's certainly been following Domer48 around - but the disruption is incidental and accidental. Damac's fundamental motives seem to be to counter the perceived introduction of bias and imbalance in a certain subset of our articles and I believe it is only frustration and impatience with, for example, tag teams of editors, that lead him to occasionally overstep the bounds of propriety. And in this I see parallels with a recent admin that became excessively emotionally involved in countering the systemic introduction of bias by COI teams. Alice^✉ 10:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I see you make this so called apology to Domer and then an hour or so later you are back talking about COI its nice to see that you were sincere Alice, hang on till I take my tongue out of my cheek. Domer doesn't have to reveal any personal information if he doesn't want to and these accusations have to stop im sure you are aware of WP:AGF-- BigDunc (talk) 02:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The execution of the British spies by the Active Service Units of the Irish Republican Army on Sunday 21 November 1920 overshadowed the murders on the same day of three prisoners in Dublin Castle." (boldening added by me to initial version of article as edited by Domer48).

To me murder implies a pre-meditated and unlawful killing and execution a lawfully sanctioned killing after the culmination of a judicial process - or perhaps we use words differently. Were they not both probably murders in the usual sense of the word?

I was very sincere in what I wrote. Do you understand what a conditional as opposed to an unreserved apology is, BigDunc? Alice^✉ 03:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Dont patronise me, the killing of people in custody to me is murder, and spies in war time are executed, who are you or for that matter me to say what is a lawfull killing in this situation. So you are implying that this edit means Domer has a COI or am I missing your point.BigDunc (talk) 03:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes find it helps if you read words out loud. Can you not read, directly above, that I write that they were "both probably murders in the usual sense of the word"?

Is it your opinion that the "spies" had the benefit of a "a lawfully sanctioned killing after the culmination of a judicial process"? Were the "spies" not "in custody" of the IRA also (albeit not in purpose built prisons)? My name may be Alice, but I think you're the one guilty of using words to mean what you think they should mean - or do you think the spies were "executed", Jean McConville style?

Look, this isn't Usenet and I'm not really that interested in re-counting angels on the heads of pins with someone who can't recognise biased prose when it jumps off the page and bites them in the bum. Alice^✉ 05:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Symmaxia logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned you, tangentially, here. I just wanted you to be aware . Rockpocket 03:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please check this one out: User_talk:Richardshusr#Greco-Turkish_War_.281919-1922.29. You changed this thing <ref name="two-one-seven"/> to ^{[citation needed]}... Why would you do that instead of going back and finding where the original reference was? Oh God, I'm really disappointed... :P This thing stayed there for more than a year...

Anyway, if you wanna comment, do so in my talk page... Heracletus (talk) 11:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I didn't assume good faith, you'd have a nice vandalized front page...:P My style is quite rude, cause I did that: "someone provided the correct reference". Which "a long-standing and experienced editor" should have done. I have done numerous edits in wikipedia, before registering... so, I like how that: "is what we do on Wikipedia in such cases" sounds... :P Heracletus (talk) 11:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Kaklamanis.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Greek Parliament Members Begin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Greek Parliament constituency requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the HU. ODNB is simply indispensible. I have added my comments.Cutler (talk) 09:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand some people's distaste for a lot of what happens on the web (though I don't find Google especially fragrant) but I think the key here is to go back to the "no paid links" guideline and distinguish between:

• Obvious spam - people linking so as to advertise some paid service linked to the article; and
• Scholarly sources that have to be paid for because verified original research is expensive.

It is not necessary that WP is verified by everybody simply that it can be verified by somebody. To add to my earlier contributions:

• Paid sites are more likely to stick around (people doing things for free often find other things to do); and
• We want a NPOV view and excluding some sources inevitably biases the overall result.

As, I said, the place to have the debate is around the "no paid links" guideline. I suspect that it's old and hasn't been thought through. Happy to make my contribution. It's things like this that make me feel like giving up WP but I never do.Cutler (talk) 21:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again - the answer is to raise the issue on the talk page for WP:External links to refine that guideline, exception would be something like "Scholarly, peer-reviewed sources about the article's subject matter." If that fails it's WP:Dispute resolution.Cutler (talk) 21:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please consider this a warning canvassing is not ok per Wikipedia policies, because it has the possiblitiy to unfairly skew consensus and discussion. SirFozzie (talk) 18:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the people I contacted had either participated in a previous discussion, which, unfortunately, fizzled out even though there was a strong majority view in favour of upholding the view that Irish names should only be added to articles if authoritative, reliable sources could be provided for them. That viewpoint has been reaffirmed in the present discussion.

As regards the other case dealing with the Oxford DNB, I encountered a two-man tag team who, after misreading WP guidelines, decided to take it upon themselves to remove legitimate references from an article that I had created. I contacted a few people who had also used this source, as I felt that they could use their expertise and experience to explain the legitimacy of the source

I've no regrets. A legitimate source has been added once again to the J. F. X. O'Brien article and considerable clarity has been reached on the undesirability of editors engaging original research and synthesis in providing names for people that they never used themselves.--Damac (talk) 21:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:U.S. State Department designated terrorist organizations, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themightyquill (talk • contribs) 23:07, March 6, 2008

Hello! I'd like to turn the first meetup of Wikipedians in Athens, Greece to your attention. We're a group of students involving three German Wikipedia admins and have set up this meetup for March 31st, 6:00 PM (18:00). The location is (to be exspected) the Ama Lachi. We'd very much like seeing as many Wikipedians from Greece as possible. We'd also like some help with the setup of the meeting; we need a contactsman in Athens. Yours, Sarazyn • 丁人LK • DE 13:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Parliamentary consituencies of Greece, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Parliamentary consituencies of Greece has been superseded by a similar category (typos in name, expanding abbreviations, fixing capitalisation, renaming to comply with the "by country" format and conversions from singular to plural or vice versa). (CSD C2).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Parliamentary consituencies of Greece, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 09:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you created this article but I think it has to be deleted. Left Renewal is not a party but the name of Communist Renewal's platform. It has no action and it's activated as a name during the local elections. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Left Renewal, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Left Renewal. Magioladitis (talk) 15:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in the Connacht-Ulster (European Parliament constituency) election results for 1989, you changed Dermot Guy from Independent to Sinn Féin. I was using ElectionsIreland.org as my source. Can you provide a reference to prove he was a Sinn Féin candidate at the 1989 election. Tx, Snappy56 (talk) 06:37, 24 May 2008 (UTC):[reply]

Yes, Connacht Tribune, 22 June 1989, p. 10. Also SF election leaflets from the election, in my possession, which contain details of the three party candidates for Connacht-Ulster.

The Tribune lists your "James Brick" as "Jimmy Brick" which is how he is most commonly known.--Damac (talk) 07:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me start by saying that I know nothing about this party. But I know that such as contenious assertions, which could be seen as slander, if they are not based on fact, need good references. Preferably the party site or the party leader saying "this is not a serious party" or a third source about joke parties incorporating this party in a list. Otherwise it borders WP:SLANDER. C mon (talk) 08:08, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, the others need sources as well. I will put an unreferenced tag in the article. C mon (talk) 11:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:El-Nashar, Magdi Asdi.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 19:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Zografou arms.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 20:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue X (VI) - August 2008
Project news This is the sixth Newsletter of the Wikiproject Greece! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! The New articles section has been restructured. It is now completely based on the AlexNewArtBot, giving, however, the opportunity to editors to add articles they think the bot missed. Manual maintenance of the page failed!! Our quality scale includes now C-Class, which is however listed there for illustrative reasons and should not be used to assess an article within the scope of the project till there is a consensus between the project members about its use! A very useful Cleanup listing for the project is now available and updated by WolterBot! Our {{WikiProject Greece}} project banner template has been renamed as part of theWikipedia:WikiProject Council/Banner standardisation. You can now visit out new comprehensive showcase page. A new Athens task force has been created.	Current proposals and discussions A new discussion about whether our project should adopt C-Class is underway. All comments are welcome and needed in order to reach a consensus! Articles' improvement drive The first collaborative mission of our project for the improvement of an article is now official! Our goal is to bring the Greek War of Independence to GA status till the end of September! Your assistance is expected! The FA status of 1896 Olympic Games was comfirmed during the relevant August FAR. You can help us improve the history section of the Attica article. Two peer-reviews are still open in the reviews department of our project, and the nominators expect your input.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

Thanks for uploading Image:Kke sima.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 05:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Damac, regarding the sole remaining uncategorised Richard Boyd Barrett on the parent category page Category:Irish politicians, hope you can accept my creating "Category:Irish left-wing politicians" for him (may also be suitable for others as they occur). Unless you have a better suggestion. Osioni (talk) 19:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a category Socialist Workers Party (Ireland) politicians. That's accurate.--Damac (talk) 08:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damac,

If you have the time, please can you insert the missing page numbers for the Speros Vryonis citations using the {{rp}} template? --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 18:15, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up the Lambrakis linked articles. I am trying to build up the Christos Lambrakis article but cannot find any information. Considering he is one of the top 3 most influential people in Greece, I am surprised by the lack of info. I mean basic CV stuff like, Date and place of birth, marital status, education, honours received... Perhaps you can help? Politis (talk) 14:10, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'll see what I can dig up.--Damac (talk) 14:51, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heya, with this edit [23] you inserted a link to Philipstown (County Louth) (Parliament of Ireland constituency) at the article Irish House of Commons. Starting out from this the link then has further spread into other articles. According to all my sources however, a constituency with the name Philipstown existed only in King's County, so I wonder if this was a mistake. I know that it has been some time ago, but perhaps can you remember your source? Regards

The WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue XI (VII) - April 2009

Project news This is the seventh Newsletter of the Wikiproject Greece! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered , its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! Current proposals and discussions A straw poll on the application of the name of the Republic of Macedonia/Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on the article Greece took place here. Interested parties users are kindly requested to visit Talk:Greece, and comment on the outcome of the straw poll and the related issues! There is a discussion here about the scope of the article Arvanites. Offer your input in the ongoing AfD discussions about the deletion of Greece-related articles. Articles' improvement drive The first collaborative mission of our project for the improvement of an article is yet not closed! Our goal is to bring the Greek War of Independence to GA status! Your assistance is expected! The FA status of Epaminondas is still under discussion in FAR. One peer-review is still open in the reviews department of our project, and the nominators expect your input.

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

On April 11, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abbeyknockmoy, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 19:42, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Tiede Herrema, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiede Herrema. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. — Jake Wartenberg 19:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you tell me why you deleted my message in this topic please? I have useful information for this topic to let you see: http://www.sb.gov.hk/common/popupTravelAdvice.htm --Pierce (talk) 13:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's not useful to anybody. I live in the country concerned and I can tell you that the riots have passed. If the HK administration isn't aware of that and hasn't bothered updating its website, then take it up with them, but please spare your efforts on Wikipedia.

If you continued to add irrelevant material to the article, then I'll take the matter elsewhere and you'll face the consequences.--Damac (talk) 14:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Damac,

many thanks for your kind words, I wish I knew how to add photos and weblinks to the website and to find the time to contribute to other greek-related topics as well.

Best,

Havriotis7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by HAVRIOTIS7 (talk • contribs) 07:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. How sure you are that thew polls are for SYRIZA and not for SYN? There is a probability that SYRIZA won't participate in the elections. Right now thew polls are only bases on speculations and are far from accurate. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:49, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Greek Political Party has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Magioladitis (talk) 12:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Anna Psarouda-Benaki has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Shadowjams (talk) 07:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damac. Thanks for the heads-up. I'll put it back. Fergananim (talk) 09:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't tempt you back over here, could I? We're just about to break 10,000 articles, and a lot has happened since your last visit! - Alison ^❤ 03:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to point out that this club was and is always referred to as St Grellan's Gaelic Football Club (GFC) and not St Grellan's Gaelic Athletic Asssociation (GAA).

Please note that some towns have two GAA teams: one a GFC (Gaelic Football Club) and one a HC (Hurling Club). In the Ballinasloe case, until the recent formation of a parent club called Ballinasloe GAA, the Gaelic football club and hurling club had very little to do with each other. Indeed, there was great rivalry between the two over the competition for players. Labelling all clubs as "GAA" is arbitrary and fails to take into account the actual names of many clubs.

I've reverted the St Grellan's change. I see more reverts ahead.--Damac (talk) 22:24, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't rush in with reverts. Standard naming convention for GAA clubs, football, hurling or both is "X GAA". I'd suggest that if there is a Ballinasloe GAA the most appropriate name for the others would be St Grellan's Gaelic Football GAA and St Grellan's Hurling GAA. Though a stricter editor might suggest deletion of both in favour of Ballinasloe GAA with sub-sections. Sarah777 (talk) 22:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, after seeing one of your articles at newpage patrol, I was surprised to see that an editor who has contributed quite so many articles as you over such a long period hadn't already been approved as an wp:Autoreviewer. So I've taken the liberty of rectifying that. ϢereSpielChequers 09:04, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Damac! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Hassan Sabeh - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tumadoireacht seems to have made some edits at odds with Wikipedia edits and guidelines - namely this breaching WP:OR or MOS:OPED, this - unsourced and inaccurate, one possible case of vandalism, vandalism, more vandalism - not all edits are problematic, but enough to maybe keep an eye on future edits.Autarch (talk) 20:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's already 2010, where does the time go?! I say this because not one, not twice but three times you added 2009 in your recent edit of Martin Cullen article. ;-) Snappy (talk) 21:40, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Embarrassing, isn't it!--Damac (talk) 08:59, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 12:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 03:19, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have tabled a proposal on a restructuring of coverage of modern Greek history in Wikipedia, and am awaiting input by any interested user. Best regards, Constantine ✍ 17:32, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This excellent idea reminded me that you are long overdue for this:

		The Barnstar of WikiProject Greece
		I am happy to award you with the Barnstar of WikiProject Greece for your valuable contributions to Greece-related articles. Especially in the area of politics, you have done superb work in expanding Wikipedia's coverage! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 23:57, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Regarding Pumpie's translations, if you are willing to help correcting even a few of them, it would be a great help! Constantine ✍ 22:06, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! Should we prefer the "XXX (municipality)" or the "Municipality of XXX" format? Personally I have a slight preference for the latter (except for cases where the distinction is clear, e.g. Georgios Karaiskakis (municipality)), since in Greek, the "municipality" bit is usually included in the name, especially since XXX and the municipality named after it are usually nowhere near coterminous. What do you think? Regards, Constantine ✍ 11:21, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer "XXX (municipality)" - I think this is how it's done for other countries too. Take the Landkreise of Germany, for example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkreis): where there is a town and a "Kreis" of the same name, the disambiguation goes at the end. But taking Corinth as an example: I think it's much clearer and better to have Corinth and Corinth (municipality).--Damac (talk) 14:00, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, you entered info in the bio of Thomas Harris (Irish politician), saying he is related to Matthew Harris (Irish politician). Do you have any more info on the specific relationship, and also how they were related to Patrick Dooley ? Snappy (talk) 23:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's antiscientific to divide the historical data of any locations into ancient and modern period without confirming the reason you did so. Any reader (internationally) who is searching for "Corinth" has the will to face the whole history of the location (as in any encyclopedia). In any case you destroyed the "disambiguation" link. Your changes are scientifically unacceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.42.37.197 (talk) 04:11, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Antiscientific? We are talking about two separate entities that don't even share the same location. It is a fact that the city now known as Corinth was founded in 1858 after the village surrounding the ruins of Ancient Corinth was destroyed in an earthquake. The two settlements are 5km apart. You mightn't be aware of that from Rome/Italy, where I believe you are writing from, but it is very clear to me, a resident of New Corinth. If you wish to debate this further, then I suggest you sign up to Wikipedia and contribute like everyone else.--Damac (talk) 19:29, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I told you you destroyed the total disambinguation link. And you don't have the right to do so. And you made nothing to correcy it! Then all the other Wikipedia's in any other language they don't have this unscientific classification order. So you alter the whole concept of Wikipedia. I am not speaking about Rome (you suggested well about Ialy), but about Vibo Valentia, Taranto, Venice, Gaza, London etc. all of them shared distances between the ancient and the modern cities) Is there any encyclopedia that presents your "type" of categorisation as you did???? Can you find any difference between Corinth and ancient Corinth in Britanica or Larrouse or Columbia encyclopedia, Unfortunatelly, your idea is fully unacceptable. 5 Km distance is not a distance that differ the location, You must point out this fact but you didn't have the right to alter the facts. Then you pointed out that you speak about Ancient Corinth but in fact but you also present as ancient Corinth the Roman one, the Eastern Roman one (Byzantine) and even the Ottoman period, Anyway this matter the way you present it is incorrect and antiscientific. I contribute via the name georalex1 but unfortunatelly in this location, I am now, my Internet is difficult for a complete use!!!!

I don't think I've destroyed anything - enough of the hyperbole, please. Most of the material that was in the article on Corinth was the exact same as the material in the Ancient Corinth article. This was unnecessary duplication. Furthermore, in the article on Corinth, there was hardly anything about the modern city. The fact is that Neo Korinthos, to give it the name it was referred to for decades, was founded in 1858. Indeed, in 2008, the city celebrated its 150th anniversary.

I would invite you to consider how the Greek-language Wikipedia deals with the issue: compare the difference between the article on Κόρινθος[24] and Αρχαία_Κόρινθος[25]. You'll also see that the disambiguation on the Greek project is almost identical to the wording I use.

Again, I invite you to use the proper procedures for dealing with disputes on Wikipedia. I see that you're new to the project. You've been here four days and have contributed to a dozen or so articles; I've been here for over five years and have contributed to over 10,000, and have rarely had to deal with the type of hostile approach you are taking.--Damac (talk) 22:24, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but again you are wrong here... I do respect your Job in Wikipedia. But I don't criticize it generaly.. There is not any place in Greece which is called Nea Korinthos as you wrote! The official name of the city was ever Korinthos and still is! In fact They were four exact locations for Korinthos: a)Prehistoric, Mycenean, Archaic, Classic in Acrokorinthos, b)Roman and early Byzantine for the place where St. Paul preached (in fact just in the edge of Modern Korinthos), c) Middle Ages (again Akrokorinthos) d) Ottoman (near Isthmus) and e) Modern which in fact is identical with Roman Korinthos. Which is ancient and Modern Corinth for you??? Really I invite you to Korinthos... Be my guest! Have you ever been there?????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georalex1 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Μενώ εδώ στην Κόρινθο!!!! Can we please continue this discussion here--Damac (talk) 23:00, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol... It sounds all greek to me... I have had to understand that you were a Greek for only some Greeks have the strange attitude to cut the past from the present in presenting their history or (the opposite) to fight for it!! I don't want to interfere in this problem because this is not my problem. If some of you Greeks have a problem with your history it's an ideological fact that has nothing to do with the history of a place for an objective reader. Anyway for a better understanding of what the rest of the world is doing for the history of any location look at wikipedia on Montreal, London and History of London, Moscow and History of Moscow, Kyoto, Vilnius, Paris, Jericho, Amman, Jerusalem, Mexico City etc. etc. (thousands times)!!!!! Only the Greek edition for example and some Greek writers (I suppose) distinguish between Sparta and Sparti, a fact very strange for me. As I told you I don’t have any problem with the continuity between past and present but as a reader I would like to be objectively informed about the history of a name or a locality. Anyway I respect your problems with your history and I don’t want any more to be into this… The way "student 7" solved the problem in some way satisfies me…, although that I would rather comment that "Ottoman Corinth" is not exactly Ancient Corinth. But as Greeks say : Ὑγίαινε καὶ χαῖρε! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georalex1 (talk • contribs) 03:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway I can afford this!!! (lol).. But honestly Damac this is not my problem. I have nothing with your nationality, Greek or whatever. You created here a huge problem for the readers of WIKIPEDIA, as I am one of them... For example go to Second Epistle to the Corinthians, the link to Corinth takes you to the modern municipality! All the thousands links indicating the section Corinth in WIKIPEDIA and are reffering to the so called Roman Corinth are leading the readers towards the Modern Municipality... Any bible reader or a researcher of Proto-Christian era is going to be confused because you personally have the strange philosophy to cut out the historical past from a location. This is absolutely antiscientific and creates a huge problem which has nothing to do with an academic classification but is purely ideology! Not Science! Your way in intervening in ths article id scientifically obscure! If you have any objection that Ancient Corinth has something to do with Modern Corinth, then point it out but in the section Corinth. Splitting, Merging and Diversifying is purely a scientific method and not a method of ideology or fair personal opinion! You have not the right to create a mess for the readers of WIKIPEDIA who from Syracuse, Sicily are redirected not to "Corinth" (as it was indicated) but to the Modern Town. This is someway a fictionic intervention. You have not any right to create a chaos to the readers! If you just dare do the same as you did to "poor" Corinth to Montreal, London and History of London, Moscow and History of Moscow, Kyoto, Vilnius, Paris, Jericho, Amman, Jerusalem, Mexico City and then we shall see together the reaction of the readers and the academics. Please be rational, don't mix science with fiction, personal ideas and ideology. And please answer to me with your scientific objections to my arguments. Ὑγίαινε καὶ χαῖρε! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georalex1 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind note. I am afraid that I have not copied enough from the material I put in the Βικιπαίδεια article to Wikipedia. I only took care to correct the mistakes I found. You would be welcome to transfer material here. --FocalPoint (talk) 22:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Matt Harris requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Zakhalesh (talk) 13:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Greece Newsletter Issue XII (VIII) – March 2011

Project news This is the eighth newsletter of the WikiProject Greece, and the first after a two-year-long hiatus! Please comment on its form, the way it is delivered, its content etc. We need your ideas and contributions! Recognized content: as of publication, our project stands at 47 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 11 A-class articles and 102 Good Articles, making up 1% of its ca. 15,000 tagged articles and lists. Ongoing drives and discussions – You can help! Due to the restructuring of the administrative divisions of Greece as a result of the Kallikratis reform, a large number of administrative units and settlements need to be updated. Please refer to the discussions at the project talk page and the overview table for more information. Project members are requested to aid in checking the huge backlog of articles created by Pumpie (talk · contribs) for mistranslations and original research. This affects over 2,000 Greece-related articles and lists, and your help is vital! A new portal on Greek Macedonia has been set up: Portal:Macedonia (Greece). Please contribute by adding content and improving it and the other portals related to our WikiProject! Additional input is always needed in the ongoing deletion discussions about Greece-related articles. You can help with assessing unassessed articles for quality and importance (Guidelines).

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Outreach#Delivery options.

Hi Damac, that table on Genealogy of the Irish Republican Army is scarily complex! I've you a note on the talk page there. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 08:31, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:17, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article List of political families in Greece, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please note wp:listpeople -- there is no wp article on what you added (back), and no ref reflecting notability Epeefleche (talk) 07:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While your at it, please go through Category:Political_families_by_country, find similar lists (without references, e.g. List_of_political_families_in_the_United_Kingdom, and advise the contributors there that they need to provide reliable sources.--Damac (talk) 09:31, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Check http://ekloges-prev.singularlogic.eu/dn2010/public/index.html#{%22page%22:%22synoptiki%22,%22params%22:{%22mode%22:%22snom%22}} We have cases of cooperations, no overall results and at the same day double elections with results that differ. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:58, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of the site and the problems. Yet, the entire Greek media and political analysts seemed in a position to say the share of each party was. In any case, the KKE presents no difficulty whatsoever in that it did not enter into "cooperations", as you call them, with any other party.--Damac (talk) 17:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In ANTARSYA the things are even more blurry: The article of Kathimerini gives estimations that differ from the result stated. I have no problem to have these results in the body but I don't like ti have them in the boxes because all these results are just estimations based on the peripheral results. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:18, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Damac - could we not 'split the difference' ie agree to leave both sites (Limerick and Dublin) on display as we seem to be in agreement re the overall 'value' of that group ? Hear from you later , Des. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Des Lynch (talk • contribs) 18:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that if I don't remove the Dublin site, someone else will. The "Dublin" site is a howl, and given the appalling quality of anything written coming from the "Real" SF camp, the uninformed observer might actually take the think for "real". A mock website can't really be of interest to Wikipedia, but the one thing that it does contribute in terms of information are photographs of the "leadership" of this group. Maybe you should word the link accordingly.--Damac (talk) 18:51, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again,Damac, Thanks for the reply. Are you sure that Dublin blog is not 'real/reel' ? ;-) And I'll certainly have a look at how such a link could be worded : it's not fair to deprive the readers of such a quality link... Des. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Des Lynch (talk • contribs) 18:10, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lundy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.   Will Beback  talk  21:49, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for advice at WP:ELN#Linking to copyright text hosted without permission. William Avery (talk) 12:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vasilis Oikonomou, president and PR with Free Citizens is still in DIMAR's parliamentary group. The two parties don't cooperate anymore but they still have a common parliamentary group. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:42, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oikonomou was expelled from Free Citizens in November,[26] so as he is no longer a member there is no longer a common parliamentary group.--Damac (talk) 18:52, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I guess then Free Citizens need to update their infobox and text. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:49, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Templates for peripheries (Kallikratis), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Constantine ✍ 15:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Parliament of Ireland former constituency infobox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:21, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Proastiakos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should be informed that the section which you started under the name "Refugees of the Greek Civil War", now more can be regarded as 100% propaganda material of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

For example (I quote);

1. "along with areas of Macedonia where Macedonians represented a clear majority", refering to the modern slav-Macedonians. When were they the majority in Macedonia? Perhaps long before the Balkan Wars and certainly not during the Greek civil war.

2. "Many peasants, leftists, socialists, Ethnic Macedonians and communists joined the struggle", refering to the modern slav-Macedonians

3. "the Macedonians would find their "national restoration" within a united Greek state", refering to the modern slav-Macedonians

4. "most of these children were from Macedonian families", refering to the modern slav-Macedonians

5. "The Exodus of Macedonians from Greece was the experience of the ethnic Macedonians who left Greece as a result of the Civil War, particularly in the Republic of Macedonia", refering to the modern slav-Macedonians and Yugoslavia. The "Republic of Macedonia" was found in 1991.

This sub-version of history now more goes on in all the page from top to bottom, and it has been edited by users from this country and its diaspora.

I don't know if you can do anything to revert historical truth back in there. I can't edit this page.

I know the backround of this war, I know certain things, but I'm not in possition to present something TRUE or as close to the truth as it can be, and not a sub-version of history, as we read in this page.

This page as it has become, is an insult to history and rational thought.

What we read in this page, has nothing to do with the actual true history of this war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Half-full81 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You must be new to Wikipedia. Since I started that article in 2007 (this is what the article looked like then), there have been hundreds of changes made to it by various users. I can only take responsibility for what I wrote; not subsequent edits. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time for Wikipedia these days. Why can't you edit it? Damac (talk) 20:51, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for the quick responce. Yes, I'm new here, and not very active too.

"Why can't you edit it?" As I told you I don't have the theoretical background to make the massive edits, that this disgrace to the greek history and to rational thought needs.

I tried to find ways to revert this page to earlier versions (I mean skipping several edits), but I didn't want to risk a mistake, as I don't really now how to do that. There's a recent edit of a user who had the patient to make the changes, which I've read and is reflecting historical truth, but I have to undo about twenty edits made after this one.

If you can tell me how to do that, I'm willing to do it. After all I'm considering vandalism the fact that people of a certain nationality are attempting to distort historical truth, they're constantly and persistently editing pages regarding Greece to promote their own version of history (which no western historian recorded - was there a "Republic of Macedonia" or "ethnic macedonians" in the 1940s?), in order to present their sub-version of history, a non-recorded history. They found the terrain of Wikipedia, suitable for such practices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Half-full81 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:09, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm trying to help my daughter with a school project and she needs an image of the official seal of Greece. The only such image we can find is for the seal of Athens. We have been able to find the coat of arms for Greece, however. Is there a separate seal, or is it the same as the coat of arms, or the same as the seal of Athens, or is there no seal at all (similar to many countries). Thanks for the help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.29.132.181 (talk) 00:20, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think the coat of arms of Greece is the same as the seal. Every Greek state office or government ministry has its own seal, consisting of the coat of arms in the centre, with the words "Hellenic Republic" on an outer ring with the name of the agency in a second ring.--Damac (talk) 22:27, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 03:03, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tomás Cardinal O'Fiaich. Since you had some involvement with the Tomás Cardinal O'Fiaich redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 15:17, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry for the late reply. The majority of these men were born in the early 1800s in what was until the 1950s Gaeltacht areas. Men like Patrick McHale, Cornelius Coughlan and Thomas Grady. So this is their own personal first language and that of their community during the entire span of their lives. I would agree it would not make so much sense for more modern people from mostly de-Gaelicised areas in the 20th century (ie - James Joseph Magennis), if they did not have a specific connection (ie - James Duffy (VC) from Gaoth Dobhair). Claíomh Solais (talk) 23:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you can provide references for each particular individual that Irish was their own personal first language, then you cannot assume it was, as I presume you did for the likes of John Hogan (VC), born in Royton, Lancashire. The Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Ireland-related articles is quite clear on when Irish versions of names should be added.--Damac (talk) 18:27, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Patrick Eugene Prendergast, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Inishbofin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:57, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hasib Hussain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hasib Hussain until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Marvellous Spider-Man 03:34, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article William O'Callaghan (MP) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A page already exists for this person. That page is William Frederick Ormond O'Callaghan.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 13:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Greek ballot paper 2006.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:01, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Greek legislative election, May 2012 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Hhkohh (talk) 23:27, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RMaung (WMF) 16:28, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RMaung (WMF) 15:36, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RMaung (WMF) 20:38, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eamonn Duggan, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Longwood and Drumcondra (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:38, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I'm not here to correct anything you've done with the article, but I noticed it was you who added to information about Duggan's birth. By any chance are you a relative of his, or were you just researching him? My direct ancestor Jane Burke (née Dunne) of Longwood was a first cousin of his mother Margaret Dunne. Regards, Jburke2005 (talk) 18:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. No relation. I fixed the DOB as it was way out geographically and in terms of date.Damac (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Politicians by regional unit of Greece has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 21:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am a great grandson of Thomas Higgins and was just curious how you came to write a wiki page about him? Regards, Joe (Higgins) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.180.44.49 (talk) 04:34, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Iveagh Gardens (talk) 15:57, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article StrefaÉire has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence that this newspaper is/was notable. And, put somewhat bluntly, limited evidence that the subject existed. A Google search returns just 139 results. Mainly mirrors of this article. Otherwise all we have are a few blog posts and a NLI catalogue entry. (Which just about confirms that the newspaper perhaps published a few issues for a period. Confirming existence. But not notability.) Otherwise the website of the subject went from "under construction" to "placeholder for cybersquatters" in a few months...

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 01:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:21april1967.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Irish Republican Movement has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tiny organisation which may not even exist any more. Othere than a brief flurry of news when they issued a statement, there's no evidence of activity or even existence

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Central Greece has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NLeeuw (talk) 08:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]