Open main menu

Talk:Timeline of the Eastern Orthodox Church in Greece (33–717)

WikiProject Christianity / Eastern (Rated Start-class)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy.
WikiProject Greece (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

OrthodoxWiki:CopyrightsEdit

Regarding the automated bot message about copyright, according to OrthodoxWiki:Copyrights":

"All material on OrthodoxWiki is by default released under a dual GDFL and Creative Commons licensing arrangement. For other licenses (especially for images), see Help:Image licenses."

ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 21:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget to include the {{dual}} template in the future. Nevermind, I just noticed that you had already placed an attribution template at the bottom of the article. Theleftorium 19:59, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Occupation or RuleEdit

I notice that an IP has repeatedly changed the description of one period from "Turkish Occupation" to "Turkish Rule" and the next line to "1456 Turkish Domination of Greece" rather than "Turkish Occupation". No explanation's been provided and editors have reverted the change. I'm beginning to think the change from "occupation" is actually justified.
For me, the term occupation suggests the continued recognition of the occupied area as a separate entity from the occupying force; as in Military occupation: "From the second half of the 1700's onwards, international law has come to distinguish between the military occupation of a country and territorial acquisition by invasion and annexation, the difference between the two being originally expounded upon by Emerich de Vattel in The Law of Nations (1758)." In contrast, Greece was incorporated into the Ottoman state; for hundreds of years it had (for example) no separate frontiers and no distinct state institutions. "Rule" seems accurate, though "domination" a little weaselly.
The introductory paragraphs use a mixture of neutral and emotive phrases in quick succession: "Turkish domination", "Ottoman occupation" and "Turkish yoke", so the change is hardly in conflict with existing text. I wonder if anyone would like to make a positive case for the original use of "occupation"? NebY (talk) 18:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

"Occupation" is used mostly by Greeks translating straight from the Greek "τουρκική κατοχή". As the latter implies a lack of legitimacy and enforced rule over an alien population, "occupation" is consistent with our national POV. However, as you rightly point out, an occupation is a temporary affair, and Greece was under Ottoman rule (and parts of it quite willingly so) for 400 years. So yeah, I am in favour of retaining "rule", and removing "occupation" and "yoke"... Constantine 19:14, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Asia Minor was GreeceEdit

This list should include Asia Minor: Anatolia was Greece/Greek at the time of these events. Greece, historically speaking, was much larger than it is today. In fact, many parts of Asia Minor were still very heavily Greek populated up until 1923 (See: Greek genocide). Name the vast majority of cities in Asia Minor during these Bible times and you will be naming a Greek city. Smyrna, Philadelphia, Pindos, Angora, Nicene, Trezbinod, Antioch, Apollonia, Isparta, et al. --Nikoz78 (talk) 04:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Constantine XI Palaiologos.jpg Nominated for DeletionEdit

  An image used in this article, File:Constantine XI Palaiologos.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Russo-Turkish Wars (Note 77)Edit

In Note 77 mentioned unnamed Russo-Turkish Wars:
1st - Russo-Turkish War (1710–1713);
2nd - Russo-Turkish War (1735–1739)
.
Most important is the second one due to final of war - Treaty of Belgrade (1739). --Vanquisher.UA(talk) 21:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Split "Patriarchate of Constantinople Era (732–1850)"Edit

Split - Article is over 500 kB, and should be split starting with Patriarchate of Constantinople Era (732–1850). Thoughts? --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:51, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is a good idea. The first split could start with the current section of the article: "Patriarchate of Constantinople Era (732–1850)"; and a second split should be added for "Autocephalous Era (from 1850)" (including "Published works" at the end). Thus there would be 3 articles in the end. However a navigation template would have to be constructed for all 3 articles. If this sounds sounds okay, and you know how to do the split, and the navigation template, I propose that we go forward with this now. Cheers. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 14:09, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Proposed titles for the new articles in the pending split:
ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 14:27, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello! I've been invited to this discussion by ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ. I agree the article should be split, but I am not certain that the division by ecclesiastical jurisdiction is the way to go. Orhodoxy in Greece practically equals Christianity in Greece, and hence the major watersheds are not jurisdictional changes, but political ones. While 732 might be roughly OK as a point of demarcation, as it also coincides with the beginning of the middle Byzantine period (althouh again 717 might be more suitable), 1850 is both too remote and too obscure a point. I'd suggest a previous split in 1453/1460 or even 1204, and again in 1821, when the modern era practically begins. Constantine 18:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Reply - Duly noted Constantine. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:41, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Reply - Thanks Constantine for the valuable feedback, all points well taken. Although the ecclesiastical division would be feasible, you are correct and it is very true that the major watershed events are political ones, and are much better known as demarcation points. Therefore, we could choose to divide the article as follows:
  • 1st article: goes down to 717 - (however, the Introduction might be better on its own as a separate article, which includes a navigation template for all of the various periods here).
  • 2nd article: beginning at 717 (this is a better demarcation point (versus 732), as it begins with the Siege of Constantiniople in 717, and also includes the start of iconoclasm in 726); the proposed end point would be 1204, a major watershed event.
  • 3rd article: from 1204 to 1453;
  • 4th article: from 1453 to 1821;
  • (on second thought, a single article from 1204-1821 would be much better, covering the entire occupation. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 23:22, 11 November 2013 (UTC))
  • 5th article: from 1821 to present.
What do you think? Each article will also need to be named properly if the above divisions are agreed upon. Cheers. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 17:00, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I have no problem with having a single article on the 1204-1821 period, except this: the pre-1453 period is marked by political fragmentation, where Greek Orthodox populations in "Greece" proper were under Byzantine, Latin or Ottoman rule, whereas the post-1453 era was largely (barring the few and dwindling Venetian dominions) one of re-unification under the aegis of the Patriarchate in the millet system. In many ways, the Ottoman conquest brought about a unity of the Orthodox flock that had not been seen since 1204. That being said, one can still treat the 1204-1821 period as a single, "late/post-Byzantine" era, between the ecumenical Byzantine state and the modern nation-state, even though this reminds one of 19th-century teleological nationalism... Nevertheless, this is not an article, but a timeline, thus such analysis is beyond its scope, and I dare say that space and length concerns are more important ;). Constantine 09:03, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Reply - Thanks. The Latin and Ottoman periods are definitely distinct as you say, also evidenced by all of the scholarly history books which treat these periods as separate too. Therefore, for these reasons I conclude that it would be better to have them as separate articles, each of which can be more fully developed over time. Thus far, I take it we agree on the following splits below?
  • Timeline of Orthodoxy in Greece (to 717)
  • Timeline of Orthodoxy in Greece (717-1204)
  • Timeline of Orthodoxy in Greece (1204-1453)
  • Timeline of Orthodoxy in Greece (1453-1821)
  • Timeline of Orthodoxy in Greece (from 1821)
I think that the above names/article titles may work well too... However still unsure about the first one... ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 03:57, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Split CompletedEdit

Okay, I have just completed the 5-way split as per the discussion above. I copy-edited all of the footnotes and references on the 4 new articles to make sure they were error free, and also divided the "published works" section from the main article accordingly among the new articles. I have included the proper attribution information (with links) in the history / audit trail of all 5 articles, as well as including a more detailed attribution template on the Talk pages of the 4 new articles. The complete list of articles is now as follows:

I have not looked into creating a template to navigate among the 5 articles yet. If someone could create one, it could then be placed at the top and bottom of each article. Many thanks. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 03:49, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Timeline of Orthodoxy in Greece (33–717). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:55, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Timeline of Orthodoxy in Greece (33–717). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Athens during AriusEdit

The section and links are very broad here, "Such were the sees of Thessaloniki, Corinth, Nicopolis, Philippi and Athens." Any serious editors are welcome to develop pages for each city during the before-mentioned time for comparisons after Paul the Apostle visited for comparisons done in the future by interested Scholars. Twillisjr (talk) 21:29, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 12 August 2019Edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus - I've watched over this discussion for some time. I'm afraid I can't find a clearly agreed consensus at this time for any destination, so for now, the status quo remains. (closed by non-admin page mover) Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 14:20, 23 September 2019 (UTC)



– Is, could or should be developed from timelines to actual history articles, in the lack of a History of the Greek Orthodox Church. Name of entity per WP:CONSISTENCY with Greek Orthodox Church. In addition, simply "Orthodoxy" is a violation of WP:NPOV. PPEMES (talk) 15:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 01:34, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

  • "Orthodoxy in Greece" is not the same thing as "Greek Orthodox Church". See, e.g., Church of Greece for a modern manifestation of the difference. Oppose, although the articles seem a little inconsistent on the distinction. Srnec (talk) 00:37, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Unless Orthodoxy or Orthodoxy in Greece become actual relevant confined-scoped articles, do you have any better suggestions? PPEMES (talk) 09:34, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to see further discussion here - I'm reluctant to determine "no consensus" as of yet. Please ensure comments opposed/in favour reference specific points of either the Article title policy, or relevant guidelines.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 01:34, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The topic encompasses two-thousand years of Greek Orthodox history across several empires, ultimately culminating in the territory now composing the modern state of Greece, as is stated in the introduction; as such, it will always be to a minor extent arbitrary and will by nature resist attempts to confine its coverage to modern Greece only. A number of events are mentioned for their importance in history related to Greek Orthodoxy or for reference. The title could be simply amended to include the word "History", such as: "Timeline History of Orthodoxy in Greece...", since it is a timeline history. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 12:03, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
And what about WP:PRECISE for the word "Orthodoxy"? PPEMES (talk) 14:05, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
I think that the simplest and most functional change to address this would be to adjust the name to "Timeline History of the Orthodox Church in Greece..." (with the dates of corresponding associated articles following). I propose that this should be the new title for these articles. The word "Eastern" is not the best choice anymore; and the Library of Congress Authorities Name online catalog has the following list of names for various Orthodox Churches, showing LC formats that support this proposed change. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 14:12, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Until you can convince that at Talk:Eastern Orthodox Church, I'm not sure what to make of that. PPEMES (talk) 20:08, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
The present discussion is the issue at hand. Requesting a final resolution presently. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 20:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Wouldn't you agree that the point of the nomination is about taking into account its context? PPEMES (talk) 21:52, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment. To clarify: there is a big difference between "Orthodoxy in Greece" and "Greek Orthodox Church". It's a huge difference, in fact. Srnec (talk) 23:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Then why don't we use "History of Eastern Orthodoxy in Greece"? PPEMES (talk) 08:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Strictly speaking, mentioning an "Orthodox Church" or even "Orthodoxy" in the period 33-717, and even for much of the period 717-1204, i.e. prior to the Great Schism of 1054, is problematic. Likewise problematic is what "Greece" is supposed to be during that time. So the scope of these articles can, by definition, only be retrospective, i.e. the Eastern Orthodox Church in the territory of what is now the modern nation-state of Greece. Consequently, I would support a move to 'Timeline of Eastern Orthodoxy in Greece (X-Y)', but definitely oppose the proposal because the Greek Orthodox Church is not limited to modern Greece. Constantine 11:14, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
I'd also support that. PPEMES (talk) 13:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
A) The word 'Eastern' is something of a misnomer, as virtually any Orthodox priest in the world will tell you today. For example, 1) If you look on the official websites of any Orthodox jurisdiction in the world, you will probably not see the word 'Eastern' present on any of them; 2) If you also look at the Library of Congress (LC) Authorities name online catalog (View Authority Headings/References), the official LC names for various Orthodox Churches also do not include the word 'Eastern'; 3) even on the Wikipedia article Eastern Orthodox Church, it states that the name is "officially the Orthodox Catholic Church". Since Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, the best practice therefore — in line with the LC, would be to avoid using this word. Although both usages might be accepted interchangeably, for this series of articles the word 'Eastern' should additionally be avoided as it would also make the length of the titles longer and more cumbersome.
B) Reading the points made in the discussion above, it occurs to me that avoiding the word "Greece" is also best, considering both 1) the history of the geography (i.e. presence of several empires), and 2) the scope/content of the artices. Therefore, one solution that comes to mind could be to use the word Levant, which is an approximate historical geographical term referring to a large area in the Eastern Mediterranean (which geographically encompasses the 4 ancient Orthodox patriarchates - Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria; AND also roughly coincides with the boundaries of the Eastern Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire, and Ottoman Empire at various points in their histories). Thus, a proposed title which would be more accurate could be Timeline History of the Orthodox Church in the Levant (X-Y). "Timeline History..." should be mandatory in the title. Any seconds to this motion? ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 12:43, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
By the way, the word "Levant" inherently denotes "Eastern" as well, which is another reason that "Eastern" should be left out, if we go with this Levantine title. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 13:04, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
I'm afraid the correct article to present such arguments is at Eastern Orthodox Church. Until you convince them, I'm not sure why this article should deviate from WP:CONSISTENCY. PPEMES (talk) 20:59, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
This is a moot point, a non-issue, as is explained in the comments above. The only credible proposal at present which does address all of the concerns noted above about scope of content and appropriate naming of these articles, is the proposal just made, namely, Timeline History of the Orthodox Church in the Levant (X-Y), which I Support. If you wish to constructively consider this proposal then your feedback would be appreciated. If you oppose this proposal then please note that too. Looking for some other users to weigh in on this and form a consensus. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 11:25, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
If you are right, why would Orthodox Church reidrect to Eastern Orthodox Church and Orthodoxy in Greece to Eastern Orthodoxy in Greece? If that's wrong, why don't you start trying to correct those errors before arguing deviatingly about this subtopic? PPEMES (talk) 12:10, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Oppose this proposal. First, it is not a renaming proposal, but something enormously affecting the scope of the articles in question, and hence well beyond the scope of a renaming discussion. Second, the term "Levant" in its modern sense does not usually include the Balkans, or Asia Minor, or Egypt, let alone adjacent areas such as the Danubian Principalities or Russia, which were also at some point under Constantinople's jurisdiction. Constantine 12:05, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

ALTEdit

...but wouldn't mind retaining "Timeline" as opposed to "History of" as a second best. To make it clear, it is the ambiguity of "Orthodoxy" that has to be solved. Anything else is secondary. PPEMES (talk) 12:14, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

"Orthodoxy" is best changed to "Orthodox Church" which is fully consistent with the titles of all of the Orthodox Churches here on Wikipedia. I oppose inclusion of the word 'Eastern' as a bad choice for all of the reasons noted above. Also oppose removal of the word 'Timeline'. In light of the comments above, proposing Timeline of the Orthodox Church in Greece (X-Y) as a solution. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 13:14, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Greek Orthodox Church is named thusly. Orthodox Church, however, redirects to Eastern Orthodox Church. And it is the Eastern Orthodox Church in Greece that I suppose is in question here. That topic article is currently named Eastern Orthodoxy in Greece, although I just made a nomination of renaming it to Eastern Orthodox Church in Greece per WP:CONSISTENCY with Eastern Orthodox Church. Either way, there is no precedent anywhere around Wikipedia that I know of where the Eastern Orthodox Church is named Orthodox Church. Until, it is unclear to me why the nomination here above should deviate. PPEMES (talk) 14:00, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
See for example Church of Greece, Church of Cyprus, Albanian Orthodox Church, Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria, Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem, Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch, etc. Consistently, none of these have the misnomer 'Eastern' anywhere. Even the article Eastern Orthodox Church in the opening sentence states that the church is "officially the Orthodox Catholic Church"; the official name does not include 'Eastern' and the churches' own self-understanding of its name does not include the word 'Eastern'. Again, the Library of Congress (LC) also predominantly excludes the word 'Eastern' in its naming convention. And a simple Google search as a basic test statistically proves this: a Google search on "Orthodox Church of Greece" returns "About 262,000 results", while a Google search on "Eastern Orthodox Church of Greece" returns "About 7 results". Furthermore the word makes the titles cumbersome if added to these articles. Opposed to 'Eastern. ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 14:40, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Yes. Those are individual churches with their own WP:Articletitle WP:Naturaldisambiguation, as opposed to the church communion as whole. The church communion of which history I still presume that this discussion is about, geographically confined to Greece in this case. Feel free to address the precedent article Eastern Orthodox Church, though. If you rename that article, I guess I could consider giving way to WP:CONSISTENCY arguments in your favour here. Until, I have a hard time doing that. PPEMES (talk) 18:58, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
The preponderence of evidence noted above clearly shows why 'Eastern' ought not to be included here. You speak of the church communion as a whole; the Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church is a set of local churches in communion with eachother, organized on the Conciliar model, none of which officially include 'Eastern' in their titles, including the Church of Greece (Εκκλησία της Ελλάδος). If Wikipedia as an encyclopedia is to be valid then it must conform to the facts which it purports to summarize or present, instead of doing the opposite; Wikipedia cannot use itself as a source or cite itself. Opposed to any inclusion of the word 'Eastern' in the title. Support the proposal "Timeline of the Orthodox Church in Greece (X-Y)". ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 12:30, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

If you're correct, how come you haven't even tried to rename the main article Eastern Orthodox Church? PPEMES (talk) 12:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Today absolutely nobody speaks of the "Eastern Orthodox Church of Greece" or the "Eastern Orthodox Church of Russia", etc., but simply the Orthodox Church of Greece, etc., in full agreement with the Wikipedia naming conventions for these autocephalous churches, as well as the LC naming convention, not to mention the statistical results from the simple Google search noted above. 'Eastern' was used historically particularly after the split of the Greek-East and Latin-West, and it has that historical appellation; but apart from that historical use it is rather meaningless today, a misnomer and is not officially used by any of the Orthodox Churches. Since the article Eastern Orthodox Church notes the official name in its opening sentence, and also because of its historical appellation just described, there is really no issue there to fix as you are suggesting. However in this particular series of timeline articles it would be incorrect and not reflective of the reality to use 'Eastern'. This is why the proposal "Timeline of the Orthodox Church in Greece (X-Y)" is the best and simplest choice.ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 13:59, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
Depends if you're talking about the Eastern Orthodox Church in Greece or the Greek Orthodox Church (which is part of the Eastern Orthodox Church). Again in this nomination, I assume it is the Eastern Orthodox Church in Greece that it is about. Feel free, though, to suggest renaming Eastern Orthodox Church to Orthodox Church first. Until, I can't make sense of the arguments presented for exceptionately deviating from the Eastern Orthodox Church main article name WP:CONSENSUS in these subtopic articles in question. PPEMES (talk) 16:51, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
No, I think you are missing the point here. Requesting a final resolution; can some other users weigh in? ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 19:05, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Return to "Timeline of the Eastern Orthodox Church in Greece (33–717)" page.