PelasgicMoon

Welcome!

Hello, PelasgicMoon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

As you may have noticed, you came here at a difficult time, because we've been struggling with User:Dodona, whose insistence on certain ideas about Albanian, Pelasgian and related topics has been, well, somewhat confused. I notice that you seem to have a somewhat better grasp of the literature, although you have similar problems with your English. Please tread carefully, make sure you discuss things calmly and constructively, and don't be too offended if people reject things you write because of poor English. I'll do my best to help. It won't help you much accusing everybody around you of just spreading Greek propaganda. Although many people around here may be somewhat opinionated when it comes to national issues, please always keep in mind that we are ultimately all here to protect the academic integrity of the encyclopedia.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 14:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Tung. , thanks for your support or mik , let us bring more sources and do a join statement albanian as pelasgians from wiki project Albania'ADD source in my talk page Albanian as Pelasgians WITH THIS FORMAT:REFERENCE-CITATION-AUTHOR-YEAR-SOURCE BOOK/WEB PAGE''--Dodona (talk) 19:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

te lumte jam i impresionuar per punen, te dergova nje mesazhe, shiko dhe faqen time ne wiki, ketu duhet te japim nje version te perbashket si thua ?--Dodona (talk) 16:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

une jam skeptik ai qe me shkruan mua eshte me i arsyshem Deuc.. por kur vjen gjera ne ate kryesoren ...., ne ndoshta duhet te dalim me nje version te perbashket , keshtu qe do jete me lehte , te kembe ngulim te argumentohet cdo gje qe hidhet poshte, e te veprojme ne grup p.sh kur heqin cfare shruaj une ne artikull ta rivendosesh ti pasi une do riskohesha si edit war dhe anasjelltas--Dodona (talk) 15:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Pelasgians has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Scarian^{Call me Pat} 23:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

You have violated the three-revert rule. Any administrator may now choose to block your account. In the future, please make an effort to discuss your changes further, instead of edit warring. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration

Hi PelasgicMoon. I have removed your entry at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration for the moment, since it was incomplete - you hadn't filled out any of the required information. In general it is a good idea to fully prepare your request before submitting it to the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration page. One good way to do this is to use a personal sandbox to work up the complete request. You can then copy the completed request to the arbitration page. I have created a sandbox for you: User:PelasgicMoon/RfAr. It contains your incomplete request. PLease complete the page per the instruction at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration and then copy it across. Feel free to ask me if you have further questions about the process. Good luck, Gwernol 16:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for the message on my talk page. Yes, you do need to inform other users involved in the dispute. You normally do this by leaving a message on their talk page informing them of the request for arbitration and leaving them a link to the specific request. This is specifically covered in the instructions on the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration page - please read the instructions in the big red box at the top of that page. Your request will be examined by members of the arbitration committee who will first decide if the case should be accepted. If they do accept the case, they will then examine the evidence you present, alongside the evidence presented by other editors.

Before you go further, I recommend you read the following statement from the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration page:

It is expected that other avenues of dispute resolution will have been exhausted before a case is filed—Arbitration is the last resort for conflicts, rather than the first.

Please read the links in that statement, particularly the page on dispute resolution. It is not clear to me that you have followed these steps, and your request for arbitration will likely be rejected if you have not. Given your dispute appears to be related to a much discussed subject area, it is possible that there are previous dispute resolution attempts that you should review before proceeding. Good luck, Gwernol 16:38, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Third Opinion request

I felt necessary to open my case in this page because i noticed it is not possible to conversate with another editor, as he delete my additions in the

article without giving me valid reasons, and offending my knowledge ("...and tell you "teacher" to do the same cause he doestn know what he is talking

about"), for more informations about the not possible conversation with this user, it can be read the last section in the talk page of "Pelasgians" called

"Contraddictions about the pelasgian voice".

The article of Wikipedia on the "Pelasgians" contain many errors, but is not this the reason that has carried us to ask the modification of this article.

Also the rules of Wikipedia remember to all the customers that anyone has the right to enrich the information of Wikipedia modifying it. Strangely we have

noticed that it has been impossible to make that inasmuch as an editor of the article, without giving appropriate motivations, has put himself in the role of

virtual censurator or inquisitor and has not allowed us to enrich the archives of wikipedia on the history of the pelasgians with the information that I have

in posses. The information that was been blocked from editor of Wikipedia was based between the hypotheses in relation to the nature of the pelasgica

language. one editor of wikipedia in the hypothesis of the logon or the likeness that has the modern Albanian with the pelasgico, specific that this theory

has turned on from the Albanian nationalism! ("This "Pelasgian theory" of Albanian origins still has some currency as a national myth in Albanian

nationalism.[51]") And this specification comes preceded from an other citation in the main article where it says that many of the theories about pelasgic

language are moved from nationalist reasons and they are not objective ("Some are colored by contemporary nationalist issues and therefore are not objective

or are not phrased in objective language"). In the hypotheses on the pelasgic language it can be noticed that only the Albanian hypothesis is considered a

result of the nationalism, and remembering the citation asserted to the beginning of the article, the reader arrives naturally to the conclusion that this

theory is not objective and scientific. The censurator movements of this editor and these considerations which in mistaken way induces the reader to the

conclusion that the logon between the pelasgico and the Albanian is a hypothesis that does not have no shentific base but is simply a fable nationalist, make

us to suppose that this gesture of the editor is not accidental but intentional.

The hypothesis that joins the pelasgica language with that modern Albanian is not the result of the Albanian nationalism, but a hypothesis written up from

the science of the history and the world-wide linguistic, and there are some historical linguists that have advanced this hypothesis. Albania, as a state,

was born in 1912, after the death of these scholars, is therefore impossible to suppose a nationalist origin of this hypothesis.

Conrad Malte-Brun (1755-1826) http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9050376/Conrad-Malte-Brun http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conrad_Malte-Brun

"Annales des Voyages de la geographie et de l'historie" - paris 1809 In this book he express the thesis that the albanian language is related to the pre-homeric, and express the thesis of the descendenty of the albanians from the pelasgians //--------------------- Johann Georg von Hahn (1811-1869) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Georg_von_Hahn "1) He consider completly the albanians as the descendants of the pelasgians, 2) and he connect illirians with the pelasgians", considering this in all his publications of books. //--------------------- Eduard Schneider, french scholar, specialist of the etruscan language, he translated etruscan insctiptions throught the albanian language, afferming deeply the theory of the descentancy from the pelasgians of the albanians, as he write in his book publicated in Paris in 1894 "Une race oublièe. Les Pelasges et leurs descendantes". //---------------------- August Schleicher (1821-1868), big german linguist, knower of all the ancient and modern indo-european languages. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Schleicher http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9066145/August-Schleicher "Die Sprachen Europas in systematischer Uebersicht" 1850 ,new edit 1982, in this book he was not sure about the albanian language, if more close to the greek or latin, and considering it more close to greek ans calling the albanian language as the "copy of the pelasgic language"

With this, i ask firstly to be deleted "This "Pelasgian theory" of Albanian origins still has some currency as a national myth in Albanian nationalism.[51]" PelasgicMoon (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi PelasgicMoon, thanks for the message on my talk page. A third opinion is not binding, its just a way to get someone who is not involved in the dispute to give you their opinion on the best way to resolve the dispute. The best thing to do is to wait to see if an editor wishes to give a third opinion in this dispute - remember there is no guarantee that anyone will give a third opinion. If they do it is still up to you and the editor you are disagreeing with to accept the opinion. Good luck, Gwernol 21:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Pelasgian article

I happen to agree, he isn't neutral. As to competance I do not know but I believe he exercises bad judgement in articles. I may be wrong but it seems to concern the disputes over whether territory in the Balkans should be or was Greek or Albanian. It so happens a slice of Albania was judged to Greece. Albanian nationalists have been plugging the idea that the substrate of all Balkan languages is Albanian - not true. I believe the person in question is now plugging the idea that the substrate was Greek and Greek was always there - which implies Indo-European evolved in Greece-Anatolia, a minority view. It is not balanced. It is not neutral. There is a clique of persons on here, whom I encountered right at the outset, who regard these classics articles as personally theirs. From time to time they gang up and attack one and seldom with good reason. What to do about it - I do not know. I'm not at all sure of the efficacy of an encyclopedia open to the public, but the other possibility is to deny it to the public. I'm waiting to see. I think it is very likely Wikipedia will be taken over by pornography and become disreputable. No one seems to dare or care to stand up for quality and I have no doubt many of the attackers are scholars who want to reserve the field to themselves by making sure Wikipedia fails. Anyway on pressing some of this clique I found their personal images were deeply wrapped up in working on Wikipedia. Not wishing to trigger any emotional crises I have backed off. I think over the course of time it will be possible to shape these articles into reasonable quality. It must be a learning process for many of them too. So the doubt for me concerning this or any person is, is this person tractable, does he realize his limitations and learn, or does he have a fixed preconceived goal in mind that he is going to implement even at the cost of being blocked? The tactic of just reverting anything you do and then calling you names in the discussion if followed leads to an edit war. An administrator is likely to just step in and say "for your behavior in this article I am blocking you for x amount of time." I'm not in this for edit wars and the outcomes are unpredictable so I usually back down, and these people know it, and they exploit it to the hilt. But, the way it is now may not be the way it is next month. Discretion is the better part of valor. Now if you are inclined to raise issues and follow them through by all means do so. I have to warn you that it is a lengthy process and the meantime the article goes to the dogs, which may be what these people want in the first place. They seldom negotiate, they seldom discuss, they never follow the courtesy rules and they seem to get away with it. But I've seen this before. Since they act with impunity they like to provoke others knowing that the others will not be granted the same immunity. That is called an agent provocateur. Women do it all the time and are especially good at it. So I don't want to do this for my career on Wikipedia or I might propose myself as a system adminitrator. I write I do not administrate. Nor do I wish to play with people's self-images and trigger emotional crises. My reach is roundabout. But I do agree there is a problem with this editor's approach. You decide. Sorry for the length of this reply but I see these words as being necessary to cover the issue. Bonne chance. As for what you wrote above, I do not wish to hurt your feelings. You did ask for a critique. Well, one of the problems is that your English is clearly not up to English encyclopedic level. That is no disgrace and no fault of yours as I am sure eventually if you keep at it you will know what is good English. It is not necessarily an obstacle here if other people will correct it, but as long as you are locked in dispute they probably will not. Second, I would say, you need to work on the technique of saying exactly what you mean. This is more of a diplomatic-legal document type approach. Clearly, no Pelasgian is from modern Albanian, but that is not what you meant, is it? This is a type of effort where you spend a lot of time on single sentences evaluating if they say what you want them to say. There may well be a connection between Pelasgian and Albanian or Greek and Albanian. You have to pin down exactly what that connection is. Maybe you should go slower, try a few versions, do more research, collect your sources. Well that is the best I can do for you right now.Dave (talk) 14:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

yeah, but the problem here is not "albanians comes from pelasgians?" but "this hypothesis is nationalist?", i simply demostrated this hypothesys is not result of nationalism with sources, and i prefer to don't speak more with Megistias as he always denies all i write without giving me valid reasons and giving just his opinion as reason, and i don't consider it a conversation. PelasgicMoon (talk) 14:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Editor Assistance

Hi PalasgicMoon, I think you should speak to the people at Editor Assistance. They will be more beneficial than a third opinion, because they will be able to work with you to resolve the issues. Geoff Plourde (talk) 16:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Te njejtat metoda!!

Keshtu u sollen dhe me mua eshte politika e tyre , e bejne gjithcka per te te ofenduar qe te terhiqesh, cmendon ? ne fakt mendimi im eshte qe ne Shqiptaret calojme ne bashkpunim,ne fakt greket sjane asgje por ata veprojne si komunitet kurse ne ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.78.70.197 (talk) 09:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

If you want to have your words in wikipedia you must maintain patience, no matter if they are doing together all possible to hide us, no matter if they provokate dirtly us with double-sense words, in this case the stupids were us, because we explicited angry with them, this was a big error commited by us! this will not be repeated, ok?

They want to have a dirty game provocating and making angry us? ok, let's play dirty game being always educated with them! what can they do? they will ban us?

They can be even 100 greeks against me (actually 4), but if the rules of wikipedia gives me right i can open a "dispute resolution", so, maintain calm, this is for both us, ok?

I have sources, i have rules of wikipedia, that's it! i am in the good way for the free information in wikipedia!

I think of course we should have contact and organization, to help each-other to bring sourced&referenced material. But i'm obstinated, if they will denie me to write the sourced&referenced material i brought, just explain this fact to the dispute resolution and the future reputation of them i suppose it will not be the best.

and don't forget to treat 1 argument per time, because else it will be a mistake.

ps. i am not albanian but i understand albanian, i am an italian studious of the opinion that the albanian language is very ancient... of course my opinion is nothing, i am here not for this, i am here to sbring material, don't worry man, all this talk pages are a test how still modern greeks want to do something..., but i am not here to make accusations, so, Dodona, be civilized as i will be, calmly, this is the best way. PelasgicMoon (talk) 10:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks suprissed !I agree i will be always , they have claimed catholic encyclopedia was out of date ....i gave many references are those useful for you ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.78.70.197 (talk) 12:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

check what i added in the "pelasgian hellen" section, it is 100% referenced&sourced if they will delete this, i can contact editor assistance and wikipedia rules give me the right

we are in the good way for the free information of wikipedia! PelasgicMoon (talk) 12:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Modern authors supporting Albanians as Pellasgians are many

The problem is if they wiil accepted or not , although i find your approach inteligent and proffesional —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.90.80.22 (talk) 08:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Pelasgians described as non-Greeks is laughable to say the least.... Everyone wants to be Greek. Slavs, Albanians, Africans, Turks. Try all you want. You will never be Greek. DefendEurope (talk) 14:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Exactly these are Greeks ( Slavs ,Turks, Jewish, Albanians etc ) do you know any Albanian yourself by any chance ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.78.74.68 (talk) 16:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

whaaaat? you are funny. Slavs (Vardarskans), Albanians, Africans, Turks etc are all WANNABE Greeks. They are not Greeks, and never will be.DefendEurope (talk) 17:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

DefendEurope, please, don't make me luff, leave the argument and leave your deep greek nationalism (largely evident), if you want to discuss about this just go in a greek forum, because here in wikipedia we discuss about scholarship.

80.78.74.68, i was checking some other referenced&sourced citations just in this moment, just some pacience, i have not so much time for internet. PelasgicMoon (talk) 19:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

you make me laugh, albanian. with your spelling errors but primarily for your wannabe Pelasgianism...

Pelagos means sea in Greek. Pelasgos is too a Greek name. It's a Greek word. meaning Flat land (people). In every way Greek and nothing else. If you want to close your eyes to the facts go on... You are using a Greek word to describe something supposedly non-Greek? why don't you use the "original" word of it? hehe.. As the ancient Greeks say, Pelasgians were amongst the proto-Hellenic races who fought with each other for who is going to dominate the Greek lands. there were no outsider tribes for Greeks to make war with at that time. we are talking about before 3000 BC or even 7000BC! very very far back. so each Greek tribe wanted its own people to dominate, and mostly the Hellenic tribe dominated. that's all. just like later in minor asia the Ionian greek tribes dominated etc etc.. DefendEurope (talk) 07:42, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

DefendEurope, sorry to inform you, Pellazget in albanian mean "peoples of the deep sea", just take a dictionary english-albanian and go search "pellg". And sorry to inform you the Pelasgian inscriptions were translated with the albanian language not witrh the greek language. But here we don't make researchs, we are here just to bring sources and to discuss about them, this is wikipedia.

So, please, stop demostrating your wisdom here, it's not useful, write a book and i will buy, ok? Thankyou

and ps. i'm not albanian

Respectfully, PelasgicMoon (talk) 09:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

um Pelasgic. You made fun of defend for being a nationalist without scholar knowledge yet what he said is in the Pelasgians article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelasgians#Etymology and yours "pellg" etc is not even there and at the same time the article says " it is totally rejected by modern archaeological and historical circles." about the albanian scenario. i don't believe Pelasgians were originally Greek like he says but in fact all scholars agree that Pelasgians is a Greek word. so deal with it. your screen name is a Greek word. 150.140.226.79 (talk) 11:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Contribution wikiproject illyria

If you really want to contribute these articles are not made yet.You can research and write them.Wikiproject Illyria to do listMegistias (talk) 12:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Your request for editor assistance

Here at Wikipedia, the Illyria article seems to be more about the ancient kingdom and the geographical region of Illyria — not its people. Perhaps a better place to add your information would be in the Origin of Albanians article as mentioned above or even in the Illyrians article. I hope that helps you. — Dorvaq

I have posted my reply here. — Dorvaq (talk) 15:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I have posted my reply here. I would also like to apologize for seemingly misleading you. — Dorvaq (talk) 20:08, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Macedonian real identity

The correct revelation of the real identity and the value of the Ancient Civilizations of the Illyrians and the Macedonians is a work that has to be undertaken commonly by today´s Kosovars, Macedonians and Albanians. .. In this regard, a fresh approach to the Late Antiquity phenomena of linguistic Greecization and Romanization should help tremendously in dissociating Greco-phony from the Ancient Greeks, and Latino-phony from the Ancient Romans. American Chronicle Albania, Kosova, Macedonia: the Triple Alliance for Balkan Stability Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis March 19, 2008 [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.78.70.220 (talk) 09:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

mund te me ndihmosh ne nderhyrjet e mia( mua me kane bllokuar) ne artikullin ancient macedonians dhe gjuhe ne lidhjet e saj me shqipen ,eshte sh.interesante por gjithcka del is konklusion se gjuha maqedone ashtu is ajo epiriote dhe dorike lidhet me shqipen. Ne se mund te me ndricosh me shume ne kete aspekt do ta dinja per nder. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.24.240.11 (talk) 11:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

sorry but i'm just trying to have 1 discussion per time, because else it will be a mistake, we have more articles to make neutral, starting to the "illyrians", couse it's more important, as you can see this "well-organized-team" of countrymans are everywhere when we talk about albanian history, but i'm not here to make accusations, just finding sources and trying to explain the issue to supervisors.

mua me bllokuan pergjithmone me gjithe edukaten e kujdesin qe tregova vetem pasi fola per nje subjekt qe ti e di, ne se mund ti pergjigjesh pyetjes sime qe te bera vetem nje diskutim midis nesh eshte ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.24.240.11 (talk) 11:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

how long still you're banned? when you will be un-bannes just don't answer theyr provocations and be more educated, ok? PelasgicMoon (talk) 11:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Please use them , Dodona :):

• During the reign of Alexander the Great, the Macedonians spoke their own native language, as the native language language of Alexander the Great was not understood by the ancient Greeks (Quintus Curtius Rufus, VI, 9, 37 ).

• "he [Alexander] called out aloud to his guards in the Macedonian language, which was a certain sign of some great disturbance in him" (Plutarch, Alexander, 51).

• 'The Macedonians are about to pass judgment upon you; I wish to know whether you will use their native tongue in addressing them.' Philotas replied: 'Besides the Macedonians there are many present who, I think, will more easily understand what I shall say if I use the same language which you have employed.' Than said the king: 'Do you not see how Philotas loathes even the language of his fatherland? For he alone disdains to learn it. But let him by all means speak in whatever way he desires, provided that you remember that he holds out customs in as much abhorrence as our language.'"Quintus Curtius Rufus, Alexander, VI. ix. 34-36

• Evidence from phonology indicates that the ancient Macedonian language was distinct from ancient Greek and closer to the Tracian and Illirian languages.*It is to be assumed that the Macedonian dialect (or language) succumbed to Attic Greek..during the Hellenistic Age. 1972 W. B. LOCKWOOD Oxford Dictionary of the Classical World. Ed. John Roberts. Oxford University Press, 2007.

• Languages for which Illyrian origin is claimed or disputed are Venetic and Messapian in ancient Italy, Macedonian, and Albanian. Macedonian, that is, the native speech of the Macedonians as distinguished from the Attic which they came to adopt as their official language1933 C. D. BUCK Compar. Gram. Greek & Latin Oxford Dictionary of the Classical World. Ed. John Roberts. Oxford University Press, 2007.

• His father Philip appears to have established Macedonian hegemony over Greece through League of Corinth The army of Alexander the great were Thracians , Illryrians and the hoplites of Corinthian Legue "Alexander(2) " Oxford Dictionary of the Classical World. Ed. John Roberts. Oxford University Press, 2007 Polybius, 2. pp.65–9. Stephen Nutt "Sellasia, battle of" The Oxford Companion to Military History. Ed. Richard Holmes. Oxford University Press, 2001

• It seems likely that Philip II instituted regular training in all branches of his Macedonian army, and when Alexander (2) the Great succeeded, he was able to put on an impressive display for the Illyrians Oxford Dictionary of the Classical World. Ed. John Roberts. Oxford University Press, 2007

• Macedonian phalanx was not only uniformly thicker but projected a good deal farther ahead than its Greek counterparts. 1989 R. L. O'CONNELL Arms & Men iv. 61" The Oxford Companion to Military History. Ed. Richard Holmes. Oxford University Press, 2001

Occupied territory was split between Macedonian royal families "Macedonia" Oxford Dictionary of the Classical World. Ed. John Roberts. Oxford University Press, 2007

Nga vite gezuar Pashket , Krishti u ngjall!

Ju dini nje gjuhe qe duket nje perparesi per nje studiues dhe kjo duhet tju bej krenare ,te pakten miqte tane Greke do ta njohin kete pershendetje te vjeter te krishtere

Ja nja dy referenca dhurate per ty :

• Just imagine what would happen if Alexander the Great returned! Or Pyrrhus, who in his day fought so brilliantly against the Romans! They would hardly be able to recognize their country, but would leave again full of contempt, because it was no longer a home of freedom as in their day. The present squalor is so overwhelming that the author fears he will be unable to convince his readers that Albania was glorious not only in antiquity, but also during the immediately preceding period. Freedom reigned supreme, where now slavery has spread. In those times the whole world looked to Epirus in admiration, where now the only question is whether fortune will never weary of plaguing the country. Minna Skafte Jensen Ass. professor of Greek and Latin, Copenhagen University, Professor of Greek and Latin, University of Southern Denmark, 1993-2003. Member of the Danish, Norwegian and Belgian Academies of Sciences and Letters. Main fields of research: Archaic Greek epic.[2]

• Arvanites also live near the Albanian border, in most departments of Epirus and in the Florina and Kastoria departments of Macedonia; [3] Pelasgian

Your user page

You might want to use the following

I can converse in Italian, English, Albanian and German/Dutch (depending on which you mean)

There are several good Albanian-English online dictionaries (I assume you are aware of these allready) and you might want to use a spellchecking software like MSWord before adding content. Your English will also improve rapidly with use. Take care.Xenovatis (talk) 00:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

thankyou for the suggestions, but i'm not albanian, a guy that can speak albanian is of course albanian? PelasgicMoon (talk) 11:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I never said you were. I assumed you were Arberesh and an Italian citizen btw but that is immaterial. Take care.Xenovatis (talk) 11:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not neither arberesh, but thankyou aniway for the suggestions. take care you aswell, PelasgicMoon (talk) 11:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Alexander the Great

PelasgicMoon, I read through the discussion that has been archived on the Alexander the Great talk page. I have a couple of reactions.

First, the fact that the page has been archived does not effect your ability to take this issue to any of the dispute resolution procedures. If you want to take this to dispute resolution, go ahead.

Second, it seems that there is a general consensus amongst editors for the current wording. Just because you did not persuade other editors of the merit of your argument does not mean that the discussion has not been resolved. You may want to continue the discussion, but it seems very unlikely that you will change anyone's mind through further discussion.

Finally, it appears to me that you are spending a huge amount of energy and time, both your own and others', involved in endless arguments related to Greek/Macedonian/Albanian nationalist ethnicity, nationalism and culture. You do appear to have very strong opinions on these matters. I don't have enough expertise in these matters to know the details of these disputes and honestly I don't much care. It seems to me that continuing to fight battles from thousands of years ago at this level is ultimately counter productive. It wastes your time, it wastes the time of other editors,. It doesn't improve the encyclopedia. This sort of petty nationalism isn't helpful to anyone.

If I were you I'd try editing on subjects entirely unrelated to the whole region and its history and try to get a broader perspective on the world. Does one word in the article on Alexander the Great matter so much to you? If your answer is "yes", perhaps you should ask yourself why?

Gwernol 12:37, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Alexander the Great

The Third opinion project is designed to address disputes between only two editors. Because the dispute you listed (diff) involves more than four editors, it has been removed. — Athaenara ✉ 22:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Enough already

Please stop your nonsense on Alexander the Great. Everyone you have turned to either disagrees with you or ignores you. You are alone. You have tried a million different tricks, and still you are alone. Stop it. You have filled pages and pages with your nonsense. Enough already. Your behavior is beginning to resemble that of disruptive editor, for which you can be sanctioned. Oh, and by the way, implying that someone is a POV-pusher simply because of their ethnicity (in this case, Greek), is considered highly offensive and can get you in a lot of trouble should it be reported. --Tsourkpk (talk) 19:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Nothing wrong in expressing my opinions. Just a question, Tsourkpk, why you prefer to report me and not arguing sources i bring? PelasgicMoon (talk) 20:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Your sources have been answered by other users a million times. A consensus was reached on that page long ago, and you keep ignoring and posting the same material over and over again. You ignore everyone who talks to you. That is disruptive behavior. Please read WP:DIS. I haven't reported you yet because I do not really want to, but I will have no choice if you persist. --Tsourkpk (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

i suppose you don't really think what you're writing, tell me, Tsourkpk, why i never saw an arguing about my sources regarding rules of wikipedia? i just saw rebounding of the rule (if you want i can demostrate you this, it's sourced)

i brought 5 sources, 2 of them were considered fringe, and the other 3 remained without comments, and if you check every my post nobody really comments my sources but many of the times just accuse me and talk about POV pushing infinitly.

And as you can see, starting from my first post here in "alexander the great" i posted with education, and always some editors (the same editors) begun attakking me and accusing me without a valid reason to do it.

respectfully, PelasgicMoon (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

if you really think i sould be banned tell me where i maked insults, attacks, or provocations. Just received and tryed to answer in a civil way. PelasgicMoon (talk) 20:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

That is because you deliberately skew and misquote those sources you mention. That's why you didn't fool anyone and uninvolved editors ended up disagreeing with you and you are now alone. You tried your "sources", but everyone saw through your trick. Then, you asked admins for their opinion and they told you off. Then, you tried a request for comment, and all the uninvolved editors disagreed with you. A consensus has been reached on that page, and it is against you. This has been going on for a week now. Enough. Further disruption will be reported. --Tsourkpk (talk) 20:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

For the last time, please read WP:DIS. You can be civil, and still be considered a disruptive editor. I'm trying to help you, but you need to help yourself first. --Tsourkpk (talk) 20:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

since you probably won't, I'll do you a favor and show you the relevant passage from WP:DIS:

Disruptive editing already violates site policy, yet certain editors have succeeded in disrupting articles and evading disciplinary action for extended periods because their actions remain limited to a small number of pages and they do not commit gross violations of Wikipedia:Civility. Collectively, disruptive editors harm Wikipedia by degrading its reliability as a reference source and by exhausting the patience of productive editors who may quit the project in frustration when a disruptive editor continues with impunity.

The Greek or not debate

Dear PelasgicMoon,

Having witness the vitrol of the debate regarding Alexander the Great in which yourself and other editors have engaged in, one believes that a time to end this has arrived. I understand that you may feel this is unfair, and I can sympathise. However, consensus has been reached in regards to the other contributors, and I would hate for you to receive a ban for your efforts. I personally do not feel referring to him as ancient greek pushes a nationalistic agenda (or violates historical fact), and I do not accuse you of by trying to remove it. But as the other contributors have mentioned, its inclusion is merely to prevent such a POV for being 'pushed'. I truely hope you find this an acceptable situation.

Happy editing, Mark

Greetings

Hello there, thank you very much, very nice of you. :) However I am not a christian or any other religion really... You see I prefer to think than to believe! ;) Anyway, thanks again, a nice easter to you too! The Cat and the Owl (talk) 17:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Greetings2

Thank you very much! Hope you have a good time. - Sthenel (talk) 17:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for your wishes! Cheers! NikoSilver

Thanks from me, as well. Health and happiness. ;) 3rdAlcove (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Your view

Please give your view in [4] in :Albanian … and my case!.Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.24.247.17 (talk) 11:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Pelasgicmoon why it is being fought so much the connection of Pelasgians with Albanians ? dodona —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.60.28.242 (talk) 16:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!