Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Greece/Archive 2

New Articles

Hi all. You may be interested to know that Alex Bakharev has just made a new very interesting bot, User:AlexNewArtBot, which may immensely help lessening the amount of work in Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/New articles.--Aldux 15:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. The project is now supported by the bot.--Yannismarou 16:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Naming conventions

The article titles concerning the various factions of the Greek Civil War (EDES, ELAS, EAM etc) are in a transliterated form of the Greek name, which is not only difficult for a non-Greek speaker to remember or use, but also contrary to established practice (e.g. for political parties). I suggest moving them to their corresponding English titles, e.g. National People's Liberation Army for ELAS. Regards, Cplakidas 23:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

No objection from me. Do we know what if any similar issue has been discussed in the naming conventions of any other project?! Just one remark: Before initiating massive renamings, I think we should start a discussion in the talk page of each of these articles, and see if there are any objections from editors that may not watch our discussion here.--Yannismarou 20:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Greek police article created

I have created a mere stub for Greek police. I intend to work on it more, incorporating stuff from el:Ελληνική Αστυνομία, however I must go to sleep (strange ideas I have, creating stubs at wikipedia at 5.30 in the morning...) If anyone feels like it please feel free to add to the stub. Also, wikilinking to it from related articles would be great. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 03:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Infobox for towns

The current {{Infobox Town GR}} template for municipalities is being updated, see {{Infobox Greek Dimos}}. We think it's almost ready for launch (it's easy to convert the old infobox into the new one, which has nice new features). Please add your comments on the template talk page. Markussep 18:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Sartzetakhs2.jpg

This image is marked for future oblivion. Anyone interested please make your point(s) at its talk page voting to keep or delete. Many thanks. Dr.K. 19:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

More than 4000 articles, 50 participants, 25 FAs and ... and ... and

• The project is working for not more than six months, and the numbers say:

• We have already 50 participants. I know they are not all active, and that some of them are not around in Wikipedia for some time (and this is a reason I think about proposing to divide the members in active and non-active, in the way WP:MILHIST does it), but again the number is impressive, and the numbers below indicate that many of these members do their best for the project, and almost all of them take their participation here very seriously. Just compare with the membership rates of other WP national projects.
• More than 4000 articles already tagged with our project's template. Enormous work for just 6 months! I want to thank all these users who spend their time in this task, the placing of the banner in talk pages, that most users regard as boring, but it is essential.
• 25 FAs, and at least 16 recorded GAs. I know that most of these FAs and GAs are the result of individual work, but, again, these numbers indicate that there is the potential and the skills for collaborative work of really high standards in certain Greece-related areas.
• At least 10 Greece-related articles added each day, and tagged with the project's banner thanks to the assistance of the User:AlexNewArtBot. A really impressive production.
• A talkpage which is alive, where dialogue takes place and new issues are discussed.

So, the results may be impressive, but where are we going from now on? These are some of my thoughts:

• 4200 articles are today tagged with our banner, but only circa 1200 of them are assessed. Therefore, c. 70% of these articles remain unassessed. Since a main reason for adding the banner is the future improvement of these article, I think that from now on we should focus on proper taggging and not just tagging. a) Class assessment, b) B-Class criteria, c) comments through the banner are three means for instructions and improvement-motivation that we should not leave under-utilized.
• Content quality should be another priority. The peer-review section of this and of other projects are a helpful mean towards this direction that most users do not take advantage of. Of course, we all know that content quality demands devotion, and this is difficult during the limited time we devote to Wikipedia.
• Participation in the talk page could be even more vivid with project members getting more and more active. Sometimes, I feel that I don't know a subject very well, and I expect the expertise of another member who can give a better answer than me and respond to a request more effevtively. For instance, an issue about naming conventions which came into our attention a few days ago, and I was not sure about the correct answer.
• Watcing FAR and FARC procedures is also very important. We must keep what is already achieved (25 FAs). I'm determined not to allow any of these articles to lose their star, and I believe that many members agree with me on this issue.

These are just some of my thoughts. I hope that they may be helpful.--Yannismarou 13:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Some comments:

1. Splitting the project members into active and inactive would be a good idea. Perhaps a bot can be created to regularly check if the user has made any WPGreece edits in, say, the last 90 days and move them to the inactive list.
2. Perhaps we can have have an "article assessment drive" whose purpose will be to assess the unassessed articles and cover the B-Class criteria
3. Could an alert mechanism be created (another bot?) that will notify the active membership about FAR/FARC procedures and debates when it involves articles under this project?

Just some ideas off the top of my head. --Kimon^talk 17:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Ha! The only problem is that I'm not good in creating bots! But 3 can be easily done by me because I check almost every day FAC and FARC, and I know first hand what is going on there! Another change that could help to this direction may be the "recreation" of the current "peer-review" section in the way the respective review section is reorganized in WP:MILHIST (see here) so as to include FAC, FAR, and FARC reviews (we don't have A-Class review yet here). In this way, a user that visits the relevant section can have a global view of all our articles under various reviews. I think this would help!

Now, I can also work on 1 manually, but a bot would really help (anybody willing to create it!!!). About 2 I also see it positively, but I would like you to concretize your idea, in order to see how you think about this "article assessment drive", and how it could be materialized.--Yannismarou 20:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I've never created a bot so, I don't know how it's done. But, I guess I can give it a try.

Specifically for #2, I meant something like the article assessment drive of WP:WPBIO. A message can be sent to all the active/current members of the project with a wikilink to the category of unassessed WPGreece articles. We can even create one or more barnstars as awards to the users that assess the most articles, etc. Maybe we could even set target completion dates with percentages expected to be completed and have some kind of tracking mechanism on the project's page. --Kimon^talk 21:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

We do have an assessment section here as well, but nobody takes advantage of it! As far as the barnstars are concerned, this is another thought of mine during the last months. I agree that the project should adopt at least one barnstar award.--Yannismarou 21:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm familiar with the assessment section here, and that's where I've been referring to when assessing articles. What I meant was that we should have a specific drive with clear and tangible objectives where we reach out to users soliciting their participation, instead of having a section that someone must consciously and purposely look for and visit. In other words, I believe that this effort would be much more successful if the project prodded the membership into action, instead of waiting for those same members to act on their own. I know that's how it was with me and the WP:WPBIO project.

As for the barnstar, I'm sure we can use one of the existing generic ones and slap the Greek flag on it for use with this project. --Kimon^talk 21:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I see your point. But believe me! Even the WP:BIO at this moment works with the "consciously and purposely look for and visit" of a limited number of users. For instance, the peer-review and the assessment section of the WP:BIO would be dead without the dedication of 3-4 users. And for months there was no newsletter issued (since Plange left - By the way, where are you lady?! The project there still needs you!!)! Personally, the only time WP:BIO "prodded me to action" was when it welcomed me, something that is also done with this project as well. Anyway, it would be nice to give "motives" to users, but, believe me, this is not an easy task. Even the WP:MILHIST, the best project around, works as it works and has become a benchmark through the tidiness, dedication and genious of mainly one person, Kirill Lokshin. I will be very happy, of course, if we manage to emulate these projects, and go even further here through fresh ideas and plans like yours and others'. As far as the barnstar is concerned, yes this is no big deal; and maybe we can be even more original!--Yannismarou 21:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars

I took a stab at creating a base barnstar Image:BoNM-Greece.PNG. Tell me what you think --Kimon^talk 22:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Waiting for more opinions, I'd say that maybe we could think a way of better depicting our flag (if we want something like the flag to be there - if not the barnstar it is fine as it is!); something that the Turkish barnstar achieves. But let's see what other members say.--Yannismarou 22:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

There doesn't have to be only one. Aside, I think that this project should be about something noble such as Hellenism and its values, rather than strictly "Greece", which has many national connotations. Flags typically enhance those connotations, and the Greeks have certainly much more to brag about than an occasionally lame government. I'll work on something. PS, Yanni, you may want to re-edit the figures above (around 80% etc); the math doesn't add up. NikoSilver 00:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree completely that we could and should have more than one barnstar. But, our primary should be, as NikoSilver says, representative of Hellenism and not just Greece. Anyway, I'm sure someone with Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro can create something a lot better than what I managed to do with Paint in 5 minutes :)

PS. shouldn't we create a new talk section to discuss barnstars specifically? --Kimon^talk 00:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Nicos. We could try to be a bit more ogirinal, but for a start Kimon's effort is fine. I'll try to do something myself also. PS: It was 80%, when I first edited the section above. Now, it is less that 75%! You know, figures are volatile! --Unsigned by Yannis (who will probably remove this)--

PS (can we start with a PS?): "4124 articles are today tagged with our banner, but only 3368 of them are assessed. Therefore, 80% of these articles remain unassessed." 3368/4124=~80% assessed (you say 80% un-acessed - so which is it?) NikoSilver 11:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah! I got it! I wrote it wrong above! It is only 1000 (and something) assessed. 3000 (and something!) unassessed. Mistakes we are, human beings we make! Don't kill me!--Yannismarou 11:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Just to keep this going, I created a sample template that can be used with the temporary barnstar here: {{User:Kimon/BarnstarWPGreece}}. --Kimon^talk 13:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

OK! I'll also add the barnstar in the main page, and, if we think of something better, we'll re-design it.--Yannismarou 13:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

How about this barnstar? --Odysses (☜) 10:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this barnstar is better --Odysses (☜) 14:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Start, if you want, a new section and the end of all the talks with your barnstar, so as other members to lacate more easily thw discussion, and see what other members believe. I just want to remind Nikos' comment above, which seems to be endorsed by other members as well: "Aside, I think that this project should be about something noble such as Hellenism and its values, rather than strictly "Greece", which has many national connotations. Flags typically enhance those connotations, and the Greeks have certainly much more to brag about than an occasionally lame government."--Yannismarou 14:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Review department

Without intending to end the above discussion, I just wanted to inform that I reorganized and restructured the review section, in order to offer to the users a complete image of all our articles under review.--Yannismarou 12:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Templates/Infoboxes

On the project page, under "Infoboxes" we've got {{Greek}} as the infobox for Greek prime ministers. Firstly, I disagree with naming an infobox "Greek" when it is specifically for prime ministers. But, perhaps more importantly, the template already exists and it is used for a "person, place, or concept whose name is originally rendered in the Greek alphabet" and it's a banner. I would've edited the page already but, I'm hesitant to edit the main project page, without discussion, when it's not a blatant issue. --Kimon^talk 14:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I also noted that a few minutes ago. It is an edit left from the previous WP:Greece before the merge. Probably the editor confused something there. I don't think anybody would object to the correction of such an obvious mistake.--Yannismarou 14:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

If there isn't any objection, I'll edit the page and rename the Greek PM infobox placeholder to "GreecePM". --Kimon^talk 14:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Done --Kimon^talk 18:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars (again) - members

I took the initiative to create a sub-page for the members; and per our discussion above I seperated us in active and inactive members (I saw no objection in doing that); I'll periodically check the list, and everybody else of course can do the same thing.

About the barnstar: Kimon, I think we should make the test page of yours with the template of the barnstar official. Improvements in the design are welcome, but for the time being I don't see any "radical" ideas (personally, I realised that I am incompetent with Photoshop!). Hence I think it is acceptable and nice. What do you say? Are we going to include it in the main page?--Yannismarou 10:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

As the creator of the barnstar, I really have no say but, I guess it's a start :) --Kimon^talk 16:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Made it official.--Yannismarou 12:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

New wikiproject cat wanted?

User:Deucalionite has tried to create a Category:Dab-Class Greek articles, apparently as a complement to the project assessment scheme, intended to list disambiguation pages within the scope of the project. - Do we want such a category? I'm not really convinced of its use; Deucalionite seems unclear about how to realise it technically (but he seems not to want to be on speaking terms with me, so I can't discuss it with him). If project members see a use for it, fine, otherwise I'll propose it for deletion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that the NA category is already covering this category (not only this but it is created for disamb pages as well). Personally, I don't see its necessity, but I would like to listen to Deucalionite and other members' opinions as well.--Yannismarou 22:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

OK! Some better imput now! The disamb pages are not supposed to be rated. The disamb cat Dieucalionite created is presented as part of the rating categories, which is not correct. These are rating categories for "articles". Disamb pages are what their name says: "pages" not articles. Personally, my opinion is that dis pages are covered by the NA parameter of our banner, and there is not a reason for this cat., which as I said is not accurately presented as a rating the quality category. So, my belief is that these three articles categorized as "dis" should be recategorized as "NA". I'll inform Deucalionite about the discussion here.--Yannismarou 22:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Though I see Yiannismarou's point about dab pages being covered by the NA flag, we may need a category or section for just these pages. How many of these do we have actually? If there is a relatively high number of them, I would say let's keep it. If only a few, then we don't need it. --Kimon^talk 00:08, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at Category:Disambig-Class Turkey articles.. When it was created it was pretty short but it is getting bigger all the time, and is helping the creation and maintenance of other disambig pages related to WPTR. The parameters in the WPTR template makes it list under that cat which is a sub-cat of Category:Non-article Turkey pages.. The Dab rating is for the class, and the NA importance rating coupled with Dab, Cat or Template class rating makes it so that it is not listed under "unknown importance WPTR articles", nor other importance cats but just the Dab, Cat or Temp cats.. It might be useful to have one in the long run.. However the project template must be updated with the correct syntax to make sure that it doesn't mess up the categorization scheme.. Baristarim 02:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that's an excellent idea! Keep the category and update the project banner to handle dab pages properly. I like it. --Kimon^talk 02:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems interesting. I'll try to update the banner some time today.--Yannismarou 09:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

OK! It seems that our banner was already ready! Now, if you edit "rate=dab" or "rate=Dab" in the banner, the banner will automatically generate the Category:Disambig-Class Greek articles. I created it and put it under the category Category:Non-article Greece pages, which is under the Category:WikiProject Greece! Clear enough?!!! The template can also generate automatically categories for templates etc., which will also be put under Category:Non-article Greece pages. After that all the articles Deucalionite put under his category are now under the new automatically updated category. That simple! So, Deucalionite's category has no more any reason of existence, since it has been replaced by a same more accurate category. Do we now have to go through a procedure in order to delete Category:Dab-Class Greek articles? Since it no longer serves to anything, is there any objection if I delete it straight away?--Yannismarou 11:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we're good now. If there aren't any objections, I think you should go forward. --Kimon^talk 16:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the input guys. As you've now replaced the category with another, would people mind if I deleted the old one without going through a formal CfD? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so! Nobody seems to object. So, I deleted it.--Yannismarou 16:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Halkidiki

I moved, after three weeks with no objections, the article on Halkidiki to that spelling, from the long-obsolete Chalcidice. I give some more argument for why this makes sense on Talk:Halkidiki. Someone, presumably a classicist who prefers the old spelling, has now objected on the talk page, so additional people weighing in would be helpful. Thanks. --Delirium 20:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone has yet again proposed moving back to Chalcidice, so people may be interested in weighing in on the survey once more (see Talk:Chalkidiki). --Delirium 22:48, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Ottoman MILHIST taskforce

Hi everyone, a discuss is going on at WPMILHIST about wether or not an Ottoman task force should be created. Since this subject seems to go hand in hand with some Greek articles, I thought this would be a good place to past a message. If you are intrested please ggo to WPMILHIST and show your support. Geia. Kyriakos 09:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Synoecism needs your help

Synoecism has been tagged "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards" since November 2005. "The oldest cleanup requests are the highest priority, to prevent embarrassing problems from going unfixed for an indefinite length of time" [1]. IMHO, the article is just barely keep-worthy, but (IMHO) the "needs cleanup" is very appropriate. Anybody care to take a look? Thanks. -- Writtenonsand 06:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Cleaned and wikified. Still needs an editor familiar with the topic. --Kimon^talk 16:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Gerasimos Kalogerakis

I've just AfD'ed Gerasimos Kalogerakis. Perhaps you may want to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerasimos Kalogerakis. --Pjacobi 20:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Greece

Inspired by the above AfD information, I decided to revive and update the Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Greece. I also think about to include in the project's sidebar, so as any member of the project to have immediate access to it.--Yannismarou 15:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Added to the sidebar. Please, help with updating the list whenever you find an AfD about a Greece-related article. Thanks!--Yannismarou 15:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

A-Class articles

I think about mentioning in the project's main page ("Showcase") that A-Class articles are "articles with GA status or articles that have successfully passed an A-Class review by a wikiproject, which are considered to provide a well-written and complete treatment of the topic". In this way I want to make clear than only GA articles or articles that have been reviewed for A-Class status (we don't yet have such a review, but WP:MILHIST has for instance) should be rated as A. Is there any objection to this proposal?--Yannismarou 10:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Boeotia needs map

Boeotia has been looking for a map since at least 11 September 2006. Can anybody create one? Thanks. -- Writtenonsand 12:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Try this Image:GreeceBoeotia.png --Kimon^talk 14:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Link not working. -- Writtenonsand 06:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I requested its deletion as there appears to be a duplicate article and image. --Kimon^talk 15:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so how is Boeotia different from Boeotia Prefecture? --Kimon^talk 14:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I think what is going on is that Boeotia is meant to be the article about the history of ancient Boeotia, while the Boeotia Prefecture article is about Boeotia in general. I guess according to WP:SUMMARY Boeotia would be the main article of the ancient history section at Boeotia Prefecture. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 16:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think the article should first clarify its scope. We need a main article about Boeotia in general, focusing on modern Boeotia, in which a history section and a sub-article per WP:SS could be included. About the map itself, personally, I cannot help!--Yannismarou 17:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. As for the map, can't we use the maps used in Boeotia Prefecture? --Kimon^talk 17:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Kimon, be brave. Just go ahead and add the existing map to the article. There is really not much need to discuss it, if only to ask for a better map (eg a more historical one, depicting the boundaries of ancient Boeotia). --Michalis Famelis (talk) 17:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

In fact, I just did it myself. Cheers. :-) --Michalis Famelis (talk) 17:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Bilateral relations discussion

I would like to invite you all to participate in a discussion at this thread regarding bilateral relations between two countries. All articles related to foreign relations between countries are now under the scope of WikiProject Foreign relations, a newly created project. We hope that the discussion will result in a more clean and organized way of explaining such relationships. Thank you. Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 18:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge into WP:GREECE?

"Actually, the to-do page is currently transcluded in at least two places, here and at the Greece portal. But in any case, the fact that this went unnoticed for so long indicates it doesn't get that many readers, right? And the whole noticeboard page has been pretty inactive too for a while. Maybe the whole thing should be merged into the (much more active) WikiProject? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk • contribs) 20:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

I don't see why not. --Kimon^talk 20:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

You mean incorporate the notice board of the main page into the project? It could be somehow combined with the announcement list and the to-do list of the project. But I must figure out how! Any suggestions?--Yannismarou 08:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, we can replace {{WPGreeceOpenTasks}} with {{Wikipedia:Greek Wikipedians' notice board/to do}}.
Honestly, from what I've seen, neither one has really been kept up to date anyway, so whichever we keep is fine by me. --Kimon^talk 14:04, 7 April 2007 (UTC)"

I bring here the discussion which started in the Greek Wikipedians' notice board, in order to possibly have further input and to verify consensus. Do we agree to replace {{WPGreeceOpenTasks}} with {{Wikipedia:Greek Wikipedians' notice board/to do}}?--Yannismarou 08:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Support - as noted in my comment above (might as well make it a support/oppose like thing) --Kimon^talk 13:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I haven't forgot this issue neither. When I find some time, I'll implement the merge, unless somebody else is quicker than me!--Yannismarou 20:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Greece

(new section for this)
And we must also work on our portal. It is terrible! With the necessary amount of work we could make it feautured.--Yannismarou 08:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Which country's portal do you suggest it gets modeled after? --Kimon^talk 13:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

If you go to here, you'll see all the featured portals. I think that Portal:Ukraine and Portal:Germany are tow of the best.--Yannismarou 13:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't even know we had a portal. El Greco 16:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Template

Just a quick question, can we move Template:WPGreece to a four letter acronym like {{WPAM}}, {{WPTR}} or {{WPBG}}? It is just because when I am tagging the articles I constantly get confused over where the template actually is. I was using the WPHOG code for a while, then it got merged with WikiProject Greece! (and WPHOG was case sensitive, or something like that) So what would be the best acronym? (the others would be redirects anyways) Baristarim 12:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I like the idea. How about {{WPGR}}? --Kimon^talk 13:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, sounds good. Let's see what the others will think. Shouldn't be too controversial though.. Baristarim 13:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Guys, no objection. I just hope that change after change, and redirect after redirect (WPHOG to WPGreece, WPGreece to whatever), there will be no messing.--Yannismarou 15:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

No problems, I will modify the redirects using AWB - I already had to do it for WPTR two months ago: Most of them were at Template:WikiProject Turkey.. Baristarim 15:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

OK! Then I'll rename it within the day. Let's fix some techinicalities that occurred in its function. Do it yourselves if you wish. No problem from me.--Yannismarou 08:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Those problems are now fixed. Rename when ready! --Kimon^talk 14:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I did it. Just check in case I missed or messed something.--Yannismarou 16:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I think I did messed something! The redirects!!! So I revert myself, until Kimon has a look who is more capable than me in these issues!--Yannismarou 16:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Templates don't appear to support more than a single redirect --Kimon^talk 17:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I then realized that this was the problem, but I had left home, and I could not fix it myself! Thanks!--Yannismarou 15:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

New barnstar proposal

The Star of Vergina Award:
You are all awarded the Ionic kion for being the pillars of the WP:GREECE project! NikoSilver 16:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

moved from above into this new section

The Hellenism Award:
You are awarded the Vergina star for your contributions to the WP:GREECE project! To me , this is a no-brainer! Rastapopoulos 07:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

How about this barnstar? --Odysses (☜) 10:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this barnstar is better --Odysses (☜) 14:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Start, if you want, a new section and the end of all the talks with your barnstar, so as other members to lacate more easily thw discussion, and see what other members believe. I just want to remind Nikos' comment above, which seems to be endorsed by other members as well: "Aside, I think that this project should be about something noble such as Hellenism and its values, rather than strictly "Greece", which has many national connotations. Flags typically enhance those connotations, and the Greeks have certainly much more to brag about than an occasionally lame government."--Yannismarou 14:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

We can use Odysses' barnstar as the "Greek barnstar of national merit", if there are any concerns about it being too "Greece" specific. --Kimon^talk 14:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The Greek barnstar of national merit

For something noble such as Hellenism and its values, perhaps this masterpiece, which is an award rather than a barnstar. --Odysses (☜) 15:13, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh! The "Hellenism Award"! I like it!
Perhaps we can use this award for exceptional service/actions/contributions, regardless of WPGreece membership? --Kimon^talk 15:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

(Partly inspired by Kimon's username): I'd replace the whole thing with a kion in the Ionic order. Shall I work on it? NikoSilver 15:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

go ahead! --Kimon^talk 16:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Just a technical question, since I am not that familiar with wiki regulations. Is it permited to use images like this for test purposes in talk pages? It will make things easier --Odysses (☜) 16:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

To answer your question, yes you may use any images that are not copyrighted in talk pages. To find out if an image is copyrighted or not, click on the image and you'll see the license attached to it at the bottom of that page. If there isn't a license attached (rare), then assume it's copyrighted.

Also, I would suggest to create samples under your User space and post the link(s) here. This way the talk page doesn't get (even more) cluttered and it makes it easier to know which one you're referring to. --Kimon^talk 16:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Kimon. --Odysses (☜) 17:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Do we have any development here from Nikos or Odysses?--Yannismarou 09:34, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I've made some samples here. I'm not sure which link to use for "exceptional service/actions/contributions" that Kimon mentioned above. Kimon, could you please add the correct link?

What do you think of them? Odysses (☜) 10:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Me likes. What do you think of my pillar on the left? Too minimal? NikoSilver 11:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's have a barnstar beauty contest. I've added the kion here, but you could change/modify it if you like. Odysses (☜) 12:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Topics in Greece Template

I was working on the Greece article, and that See also section, kept bothering me, so I found a nice see also Template (Germany's) and used it for Greece's. Take a look: {{Greece topics}}. Check it out, and if there is anything that needs changing you can go ahead and change it or just tell me. I personally think the page looks much better now than before with the template. El Greco 22:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, a see also template is a must for country articles - when Germany was at FAC, this issue came up and they fixed it there. But maybe it might be a good idea to reduce things to a bare minimum to just give an overview of the subjects. For example I took out the link to the supermarkets. And by the way - format the links so that they don't repeat "Greece" and "Greeks" all the time, it is obvious that it is talking about Greece :) (see {{Turkey topics}} for example) Baristarim 23:08, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I made those changes. If there is disagreement on them, please revert my edits. --Kimon^talk 23:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Nice, it looks pretty good now.. Baristarim 23:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks nice now. Thanks Baristarim and Kimon!! El Greco 00:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Anytime! :)

Though, it does still need some work and I'd like to get rid of all those red links. --Kimon^talk 00:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean. It seems like all those red links should have an article. I'm surprised there is nothing on Greece during WWI, taxation, and law enforcement. They all see like article that should have something, I mean there is bound to be information on them somewhere on the internet. Just surprising that they haven't been made yet. El Greco 00:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

It looks quite nice. I hope this is the beginning for the overall upgrading of the article.--Yannismarou 13:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The nearest article to World War I red link in {{Greece topics}} is in History of modern Greece (1913–1920) section which doesn't say much. There is also a general article Balkans Campaign (World War I). There aren't any articles for World War I battles except for Battle of Skra-di-Legen which is a stub. Odysses (☜) 11:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Question on notability of Nikos Tzouannis

Hello. Could someone from the project take a look at the article Nikos Tzouannis? I'm not sure that he meets WP:BIO but I'd rather not pass that judgement since obviously I might be seriously underestimating the importance of this sports journalist. Please submit it to AfD if you feel that he does not meet our criteria for inclusion. Thanks! Pascal.Tesson 02:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

AfDed by me and included in the list of Greece-related deletions.--Yannismarou 08:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Pascal.Tesson 11:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternative wikipaedia?

Now this is what I call a seriously distorted article] Odysses (☜) 15:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That's sad and somewhat funny at the same time. El Greco 15:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it's hilarious! I promptly forwarded the URL to a bunch of friends :)

PS. I agree on the Nikopolidis part --Kimon^talk 16:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

From a quick skim, it's rather good sense of humor. I might consider joining them on the weekends :-) Odysses (☜) 16:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

On a sad note, it is really bad that parts of it are indeed true! Too funny to blame the writers for that, but isn't Uncyclopedia supposed to present total-bull? NikoSilver 16:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I suppose they don't mind about vandalism and they revert sourced edits :-) Odysses (☜) 17:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

My point was that sourced or not, some of the text is unfortunately absolutely true. There shouldn't be anything in Uncyclopedia that approaches reality! Check this section for instance... Do you disagree anywhere? :-) The next section is also true! NikoSilver 17:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Not at all, in fact like Kimon, I started forwarding it to friends. Perhaps you might be interested to join the discussion of Make-It-Own-Ya and their new flag :-). Odysses (☜) 17:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

You know, I would support a name such as The Country Formerly Known as Greece 2.1 Formerly Known as Greece, Previously the Country Formerly Known as the Former Yugoslav Rebublic of Macedonia, Formerly Being the Same Name, i.e. the Country Formerly Known as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia :) --Kimon^talk 21:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I had saved this from a previous version of the article: "Greece (also Former Ottoman Republic of Greece - FOROG) is, by definition of its own inhabitants, the westernmost part of the Byzantine Empire. The problem with this that the Byzantine Empire ceased to exist a few centuries ago, meaning that Greece actually doesn´t exist. This causes greeks serious identity problems." Truly inspired... Cplakidas 21:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Check this which inspired that. (From my humor section) NikoSilver 21:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Some of the stuff on "uncyclopedia" is distasteful, but overall it's just humor. --Mardavich 06:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Category:Greek and Roman astronomers

Category:Greek and Roman astronomers is being proposed to be renamed category:ancient roman astronomers 132.205.44.134 00:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Have a bot automatically tag unassessed articles?

Ok, I've updated our project template {{WPGR}} with the auto parameter. Before I can submit a request to a bot operator to add this project I need to get consensus. The articles will be automatically assessed as stub quality and placed in the category Category:Automatically assessed Greece articles. The list of articles will be retrieved from Category:Unassessed Greek articles. What does the membership here think? --Kimon^talk 21:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

• I think it is a great idea!--Yannismarou 08:23, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• Bots for new articles, bots for auto-assessing ... I think we, the human beings, are getting useless here! Therefore, I'll now update the "New Articles" section through Alex's bot, trying to feed my human ego!--Yannismarou 08:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• Any other comments? Should I take the silence as consent? --Kimon^talk 19:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• I think so!--Yannismarou 20:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

The request was successful and now MartinBotIII will be tagging all unassessed WPGR articles with the parameters: class=Stub|auto=yes
provided that that they fulfill one of the following criteria:

• The article is tagged with any of the {{stub}} templates
• The article is less than 1500 bytes

All articles will be listed under Category:Automatically assessed Greek articles where they can be reviewed and reassessed or have the "auto" removed. --Kimon^talk 12:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Replacing {{WPGreeceOpenTasks}} with {{Wikipedia:Greek Wikipedians' notice board/to do}}

I updated the notice board and included in our project per the discussion above. I suppose Template:WPGreeceOpenTasks is heading towards deletion now. Please, check the changes and additions I did to the notice board, and do not hesitate to further improve it and modify it.--Yannismarou 17:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for making the merger/move. Now, let's hope it generates the activity we want. --Kimon^talk 18:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Parthenon is in FAR!

Parthenon is in danger to lose its start. I think it is a matter of urgent priority. Unfortunately, on Saturday I'm leaving from Greece for ten days, during which I'll have no access to computer. Until I am back, if no improvements are done, Parthenon will be in FARC. As you may have already understood, my time is very limited right now (not only because of the journey). I'll try to do my best with the article, but, please, have a look at the relevant FARC page, and help the article so as not to lose its star. I think the main problem right now is the lack of inline citations.--Yannismarou 08:58, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

How about adding Pausanias' Description as a quote in the stub section. I've made three alternatives to chose from here. Odysses (☜) 09:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Such boxes could be nice, but I think that stub sections should be first expanded with prose and addition of material and sources. And then we can see about adding quote-boxes--Yannismarou 18:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Parthenon has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Priority

What are the project's guidelines on setting an article's priority? --Kimon^talk 18:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I have been using this basic guideline which most projects have adopted:

Article importance grading scheme [ ]

Label	Criteria	Examples
Top	Article is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for articles that have achieved international notability within its subject or field.	Australia
High	Article is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent.	Manchester City F.C.
Mid	Article is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area.	0.999...
Low	Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article.	Chrono Cross

Obviously, we can adopt our own (different) scale, but there is some support for the notion that "Top" articles should be no more than 1% of the articles. That may be too draconian, but if everything is Top, there is no point in having the scale. Argos'Dad 18:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I think we should include this information somewhere in the project. I think articles such as Greece, Athens, Knossos, etc. should be Top. Articles like Olympiacos, Greek Civil War, etc. should be High. Articles such as Aegina, Nikitas Kaklamanis, etc. should be Mid. Finally, articles such as Antonis Nikopolidis, Galatsi, etc. should be low. What do you think?

I also agree that we may end up with more than 1% being Top importance. We may even have to have a way to come to consensus when it's a gray area (e.g. are Andreas Papandreou and Constantine Karamanlis Top or High? Where would Aris Velouchiotis fall?). --Kimon^talk 21:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think the way to solve the dilemma is to keep everything in perspective. Since we are talking about priorities of a wikiproject, we might as well consider all Greece-related articles as elaborations of the Greece article. Remember the WP:SUMMARY guideline and visualize the wikiproject as something like a Tree structure. Take a look at the image on the right, replacing "Encylopedia" with "Greece" and "Culture" with Culture of Greece. Get the picture?

So I believe that a good idea would be something along the lines of:

• Top: Greece and the "X of Greece" articles (such as History of Greece).
• High: The immediate children of the "X of Greece" articles (eg History of Modern Greece, or Epirus (region) if we consider Epirus to be a child node of the node Geography of Greece)
• Mid: Elaborations, but still general articles. For example, if Greece and Demographics of Greece are Top and Minorities in Greece is High, then Muslim minority of Greece is Mid.
• Low: well, everything else! :-)

A slightly different approach would apply to articles about people. In this case, their rank should be according to international relevancy: Pericles and Seferis should be Top as they are important, internationally acclaimed people, relevant to the "great saga of humankind" (ok, I'm a poet too), Constantine Karamanlis should be High, as he is very notable, but only in the area of international (more strictly Western) politics , Aris Velouchiotis or Romanos would be Mid (extremely important only in the context of their immediate sourroundings (ie the Resistance and Byzantine music), and everyone else goes to low.

Of course, the system should be flexible, so as to promote articles about greek-related subjects that are of global interest, such as Parthenon or Athens (Top), of great but not global interest (eg 2004 Summer Olympics - High), and of considerable interest (eg Caretta caretta -Mid).

What do you think? --Michalis Famelis (talk) 23:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

That is very cogent, Michali and I agree. I also appreicate Kimon's raising this topic and getting very specific about what article belongs where. I have just been winging it (which is not good) so I am glad to hear other perspectives (and look forward to hearing more). At this point, I agree with the structure Michali laid out.

Once we achieve a consensus, should make the importance visible in the WP:GR banner like it is in Ancient Greece and Rome? Argos'Dad 04:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I too agree with Michalis' structure and I appreciate the work!

And yes Argos'Dad, I think it would be important to add it to the banner and to the assessment subpage. Exactly because people may take the "priority" parameter personally, the definitions need to be clearly defined and visible.

When it comes to people, I'm sure we'll run into disputes that will have to be moderated. I think it would be a good idea to clearly define the categories for biographies so as to minimize these cases. I'm afraid that politics will come into play for certain individuals. For articles such as Socrates, Plato, Pericles, etc. I don't expect any problems. --Kimon^talk 13:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

If we agree to the scheme Michalis proposes, we can make it official by inclding it (and rephrasing it taking advantage of the vocabulary of the general guidances Argos'Dad mentioned) in Category:Greek articles by importance.--Yannismarou 08:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Whenever we're ready with the scheme, we can migrate the new project template with the priority info. I've updated it here. Samples can be found here (just remove the <nowiki> tags and preview the page - please don't save it). For the record, I am in agreement with Michalis and Argos'Dad. --Kimon^talk 21:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I set up a a temporary table here consolidating the input from everyone above. Feel free to edit it and when we think it's done, we can publish it. --Kimon^talk 22:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Since this topic has been quiet for a while, I took it as consensus and have updated the template and the category. I still need to update the assessment page. --Kimon^talk 18:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we have consensus in all areas, most notably Corfu. I don't have to reiterate this but Corfu is internationally notable, has played an extremely important role in History (Byzantine, Greek and Western) and therefore the importance of the article must be either high or top but definitely not this Mid rating that was unilaterally imposed in mid discussion (not to mention the Start class rating based on a subsection technicality). Dr.K. 10:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I think we have indeed achieved consensus with Corfu being a High. I've gone ahead and updated the WPGR tag on the article to reflect that. Of course, there will always be cases where the importance rating will be debated and I doubt we'll ever have it perfect where all cases are clear cut. Even constitutional lawyers can't get these things right :) --Kimon^talk 12:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. But that's why we have the project, the volunteers, the discussions among friends. Thanks again Kimon. Τάσος (Dr.K. 14:26, 1 June 2007 (UTC)).

screwed up template

Look at all the articles that contain the WP:Greece template (in the talk page), it seems like someone has screwed up the syntax, and I have no clue how to fix it. Can some one please fix it? ^{El Greco (talk • contribs)} 15:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Fixed --Kimon^talk 21:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Kimon! ^{El Greco (talk • contribs)} 22:09, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, my bad, sorry! (I've now set up a better test environment)

I added myself as the "maintainer" or "primary contact" for the template in case something happens in the future and people don't know who to contact.

BTW, there is a discussion at Template talk:WPGR about a look change, what do you think? --Kimon^talk 22:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Look change

Which look is preferable, the one the template currently has or this one: User:Kimon/WPGR? --Kimon^talk 21:21, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the difference. BTW, I saw the note on not cluttering up the talk pages with unused parameters and I will be better about that now. :) Argos'Dad 23:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Crap! While trying to keep the test copy in synch with the production copy, I messed up the image. Try now. --Kimon^talk 23:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, now I see. I appreciate creativity and think we should constantly look at things and even change them. I am not sure if this change is the best. The Greek flag to me is limiting to the Hellenic Republic and I think the project includes articles about Greece writ large: from the Descent of the Dorians through the Minoan, Hellenistic, Macedonian, Byzantine and Modern times, including the diaspora, Cyprus, and Cavafy (for example). Maybe the flag is the best symbol for Greeks, but I wonder if there is an image that covers all that we include? Probably not, but let's think what represents Hellenism rather than the nation of Greece. Again, I want to encourage your creativity, but let's think bigger... Argos'Dad 23:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

No disagreement. I was just thinking that the satellite image was limiting as well. How about a nice image of the Parthenon? --Kimon^talk 01:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

The Parthenon is universally recognized as a symbol of Greece and Hellenism. There was an Orthodox church inside it at one time (though you can't tell from the outside) so it also represents a fusion of the Ancient and Christian eras. I think that might work. Some other ideas I thought of: a laurel wreath? a column? a stele of Athena? Nothing Byzantine or modern seems to fit... the laurel wreath was ancient and also represents the revival of the Olympics which also brings in sports and culture. Just some thoughts... Argos'Dad 03:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

There was Catholic church in there too and also a mosque; it is also believed that the frieze showed a procession for a religious event that included sports (like the ancient Olympics), so the Parthenon would cover a whole lot of the subjects of Greece and Hellenism in general. Though I like the idea of the laurel wreath, it may be misinterpreted as a peace symbol which I don't think is what we want (not that there's anything wrong with peace or anything). I thought of a column of the ionic or corinthian style but, I thought it would be too plain, I don't know..... You're right, nothing of the Roman era or later that comes to mind would adequately cover the broad subject we want.
I updated the test template in my userspace with an image that Odysseas used for a barnstar proposal. Take a look --Kimon^talk 16:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

In case somebody has not noticed it this discussion, I also copy it to the project's main page. Oh! And something I just thought: If we choose the Parthenon for the template, can we also choose it for the barnstar, as it has been proposed above?--Yannismarou 17:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that's a great idea! We may want to consider using the same image we choose for the "top" project award as the one to represent the project and used in the template. --Kimon^talk 18:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I like the new looking template. ^{El Greco (talk • contribs)} 20:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

A "yes" from me too. Good job Kimon. Odysses (☜) 15:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I think you can make it official. Just a suggestion: in the portal link maybe you could use Image:Flag-map of Greece.svg instead of the current map. But this is not something very important.--Yannismarou 15:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

• Done --Kimon^talk 17:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget!

Besides the template, I remind to the project's members that two more interesting issues are still open:

• The "beauty contest" as Odysseus shrewdly called it for the format of our project. I think three "contestants" and the current barnstar are fighting here for the title of our "beauty queen".
• The criteria for the articles' importants/priority, where there seems to be a consensus, but further ideas are welcomed.

Please, check the relevant discussions above and express your mind. Thanks!--Yannismarou 17:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar gallery

Perhaps we should consider several images in order to have a wider variety to choose from. I have started a gallery here and I invite you all to add your own proposed images. Odysses (☜) 13:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I really like Image:Greece Delphi Tholos.jpg. I also added a couple more images to your gallery there. Do we want to have levels of awards? We've got plenty of images that we may use. --Kimon^talk 16:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution Kimon. Having levels is a good idea. Perhaps, levels could be arranged in chronological order i.e. Knossos, Mycenae and Tholos. Odysses (☜) 18:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I like the Knossos barnstar; not that the others are not nice. But you know ... They are all from ancient Greece. But Greece is more than that! And our project is not an "ancient Greece" project. Our civilization does not stop in e.g. 100 BC, but continues during the Byzantine and the modern Greek era. I will try to enrich the gallery with some more pictures from these eras. If we choose to have levels, then we can use both an image from ancient Greece, and from the Byzantine-modern era.--Yannismarou 15:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Good point Yiannis, which made me think: Should we have a project called "WikiProject Hellenism" which would cover everything Hellenic while this project would specialize on Greece-only articles? Much like WikiProject Jewish History and WikiProject Israel. --Kimon^talk 17:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Mmmm. Can we support two project at the same time? I don't know. And let's not forget that this project is the outcome of the merge of WP:History of Greece with WP:Greece, because it was decided that the spliting of powers between two projects was counter-productive. Now, as far as the barnstar is concerned, I added another alternative with a photo of the Rio-Antirio bridge, which has been repeatedly used as a symbol of what modern hellenism can achieve.--Yannismarou 17:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

A lot of great images have been added, so many so that it's difficult to choose. So far, I'm between Image:Akropolis by Leo von Klenze-award-3.jpg, Image:Greece Delphi Tholos.jpg, Image:Acropolis of Athens 01361.JPG and Image:Blue Meandros.jpg. I guess we can use Image:Navag.jpg as a "Geography Barnstar" and Image:Rio Antirio Bridge by sunset.jpg as a "Mediation Barnstar". In any case, are we any closer to deciding? (I know I'm not)
As a side note, we can eventually use this gallery as the Greece gallery in the Wikimedia Commons. --Kimon^talk 22:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Ha! I come back after a week, and I see that no decision is taken in almost all pending discussions! Amazing! But after all it is the WP:Greece, where Greeks are discussing, and this is, therefore, normal!! Seriously now, I like the proposals of Kimon. But what do you mean exactly by a "mediation barnstar"? A barnstar awarded to those helping to resolve conflicts in Greece-related articles? Now, the bottomline of the discussion here is I think:

1. We must have a general barnstar. Personally, I wouldn't like to use again Acropolis, because we tend to use it in almost every template we create (WPGR, Invitation template etc.). That is why I proposed Knossos, but Tholos and Meandros are also nice.
2. Pending the decision about the general barnstar, we can proceed with the special ones: The geography one and the mediation one Kimon proposes. I think that we are ready for these ones. What about a history barnstar also, now that we are in fire?!!--Yannismarou 10:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking the "mediation barnstar" could be just as you figured. Helping mediate disputes in articles that fall within the WPGR scope.

I wouldn't mind not using the acropolis for this. The only reason it's on the invitation is because it the same image on the WPGR banner. I think those two should be in sync.

I like the "history barnstar" idea. Perhaps using a bust of Herodotus? --Kimon^talk 16:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Hellenism?

^{copied from above}
Should we have a project called "WikiProject Hellenism" which would cover everything Hellenic while this project would specialize on Greece-only articles? Much like WikiProject Jewish History and WikiProject Israel. --Kimon^talk 17:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Mmmm. Can we support two project at the same time? I don't know. And let's not forget that this project is the outcome of the merge of WP:History of Greece with WP:Greece, because it was decided that the spliting of powers between two projects was counter-productive. --Yannismarou 17:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't know either but, with the push to making this project more generic, wouldn't it make sense? How many non-Greece related Greeks are members (e.g. from Cyprus) are members? Would a Hellenism project be more attractive to classicists and philellenes? There would definitely be some overlap between the two but, what do New Democracy (Greece) and Panhellenic Socialist Movement have to do with Hellenism and what do Cleopatra and the Indo-Greek Kingdom have to do with Greece? --Kimon^talk 17:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Can't you just leave it as WP:Greece and then make a sub-Wiki Project of WP:Greece, called WP:Hellenism? ^{El Greco (talk • contribs)} 01:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Guys, we have to write a decent article on Hellenism first. Then, I'll agree to the rename. NikoSilver 09:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Good point. BTW, what exactly do we mean by "Hellenism"? How broad (or narrow) a view do we take on it? Do we include the Roman-ruled Hellenistic East in it? Or the Byzantine Empire? Or the Ottoman period? Then, if we start focusing on periods, we ought to create a separate WP on each of them (personally, I think the Byz. Empire warrants a separate WP, but that is beyond our scope here). As far as our project is concerned, I agree with Yannis. If our problem is one of semantics, why don't we simply rename it to "WP:Greece and Hellenism" or something similar, just in order to highlight that we are not confined to the modern definition of Greece? Cplakidas 10:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

IMO "Hellenism" is a superset of "Greece", so the inclusion of both is redundant. I would define Hellenism as the values and the ideals, not as the Greeks and their history. NikoSilver 11:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

So, if I'm reading the above correctly, the first task that needs to be accomplished is an acceptable article on Hellenism (could this be our collaboration of the week/fortnight/month?). Then, probably rename this project to WikiProject Hellenism. After that, we can discuss creating either new projects or task-forces for "Greece", "Byzantine Empire", "Ottoman period", etc.
Is that accurate? --Kimon^talk 18:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

What about Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome? Should that be integrated as well into WP:Hellenism or left alone? ^{El Greco (talk • contribs)} 18:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so because that project covers Ancient Rome in addition to Ancient Greece. If it were called WikiProject Classical Greece, then it would definitely be a candidate for a merger. As it stands, I doubt it. --Kimon^talk 18:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree with Kimon. Back to the point: Yannis said he would start dealing with Hellenism. I can't think of anyone better for the job.^{[shameless groveling]} Anyone with the adequate background is encouraged to step in and do it, of course. My field of knowledge is definitely diametrically opposite, so I'll merely follow. NikoSilver 10:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll work on the article, but I can't guarantee about the time. Right now I have two university papers to write, Parthenon and Battle of Greece in Wikipedia, and then another commitment to work on Aya Sophia! Not to mention the work on this project (which I admit I have neglected, but I'll soon find again my shepe; thank God, Kimon is here) and on WP:Biography. If somebody is faster and wants to improve the article starting working before me, I'll definitely help him with all my forces.--Yannismarou 19:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I second Nikos' nomination! Yannis, you've only got yourself to blame for finding yourself in these situations. --Kimon^talk 22:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Greek-American organized crime

Please take a look at Greek-American organized crime. The problem with the title is that it is ambiguous, it appears to link Greek Americans with the notion of "organized crime" implying guilt by association. A better heading may be Greek Americans and organized crime or some other more neutral heading you may wish to suggest. I have tried to do the same with Jewish-American organized crime by changing it to American Jews and organized crime but I was reverted, see Talk:Jewish-American organized crime#Recent page move. Only three articles in Category:Organized crime groups have this kind of "title": African-American organized crime; Greek-American organized crime and Jewish-American organized crime. So will there be 134 articles in the future about "Foo organized crime" for all 134 categories in Category:American people by ethnic or national origin and indeed for every class of human on Earth without hypocrisy??? Note how there is no article for Italian American organized crime as it's simply and correctly called Mafia. African Americans and Jewish Americans are not connected with organized crime as "representatives" or "symbols" of their race or religion. Every group has its criminals. So what else is new. Sure there are "gangs" just as there are Category:Mafia gangs in Category:Mafia groups (and by the way, if there are such African American or Jewish American gangs or groups then name them, but let's not leave it as if "guilt" is being laid at the door of all Greek Americans, African Americans or Jewish Americans etc), but the titles Greek-American organized crime or Jewish-American organized crime makes it sound, way, way bigger than it is in reality, and could easily slip into racism and antisemitism if not handled in a scrupulously WP:NPOV manner 100% of the time! The job of Wikipedia should not be to magnify the problem which is called POV editing, but to depict things accurately as they are. Please add your views. Thank you, IZAK 00:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

When did the Greeks become organized? They can't even organize the construction of Olympic venues and they're involved in organized crime. That's a huge step for us Greeks. ^{El Greco (talk • contribs)} 01:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Valid point! How about renaming to Greek-American disorganized crime then? :-) No, seriously, maybe there should be a comprehensive WP:AfD (for renaming -not for deleting) of all those "Foo-American organized crime" articles, to "Foo-Americans and organized crime" to partly remove the guilt by association. I suggest someone brings it forward on a Global-American [sic] level. Please let us know. NikoSilver 10:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

IMO, this article could even be deleted; not just renamed. My impression is that it relies on a single source, it looks like an essay or an excerpt of a book, it has no inline citations, I cannot find this title in Google ("Greek American Organized Crime" not just "Greek Americans" and "Organized Crime" in near phrases). I rename proposal by requesting a move is the least we can do.--Yannismarou 19:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

You might also be interested in the "Category: Greek American mobsters", notably, one of the just two sub-categories of "Category:Greek Americans" (the other being ... "Category: Greek American politicians")... God forbid if there were categories, let's say as, 'Category: Greek American actors/actresses' (for "true American" 'stars' as Telly Savalas and Jennifer Aniston) or 'Cat: Greek American tennis players' (for "true American" icons as Pete Sampras). --13:04, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

If that's something you see missing, go ahead and create the categories yourself. There isn't a conspiracy on Wikipedia. --Kimon^talk 13:17, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

No, I am not implying that at all. I do not blame Wikipedia or anyone else. What I do point out however is that notable trend of missing categories. BTW, there was an edit conflict due to an erratum I was posting. Apparently there is another sub-category: "Category: Fictional Greek-Americans". Sorry, my bad. -- 13:27, 10 May 2007 (UTC)~

No disagreement there. On another note, have you considered registering an account on Wikipedia? --Kimon^talk 13:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

See WP:WHY for that. (the article is still under this name and no rename AfD proposed yet) NikoSilver 14:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Reaching out to new users

As part of our project's continuous effort to recruit new members and trying to mimic what other projects have done to invite folks, I've created this template: {{User:Kimon/WPGRInvite}}. Let me know what you think and if it's overkill. I just figure it's a quick and easy way to send invites and newbies may like the banner :) --Kimon^talk 15:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks nice. If that doesn't work we could always give them a bottle of Metaxa. (That'll work everytime.):-) ^{El Greco (talk • contribs)} 18:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

If you could find a free image of a Metaxa or Ouzo bottle, I can change the image of the invite. I think that would be great! :) --Kimon^talk 18:25, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's one from wikicommons. Image:Metaxa_7_star_amphora.jpg And it's a 7 star one too!!! ^{El Greco (talk • contribs)} 18:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I added it as "version 2". I think the original looks better but, whatever the members here think. --Kimon^talk 19:04, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

The first one for me! I see the discussion started on May 10. I think it is time to add it to Outreach. If there is no objection, I will do it within the day. I don't think we'll have more input here from members.--Yannismarou 10:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I've moved it to the template namespace so, it's now ready for you to publish it in the outreach area. --Kimon^talk 13:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Done! See if you think we should add something more.--Yannismarou 13:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. --Kimon^talk 16:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Hippocrates, father of Peisistratos

Greetings. On the Peisistratos page someone had added the text "(Check Link)" after the link to Hippocrates, and on further investigation I found that not only was that not the article on his father but none of the people named Hippocrates on the disambiguation page were the right one, either. So I searched the net for information on his father and created a new article, Hippocrates, father of Peisistratos and then fixed the link in Peisistratos to point to it.

While I was at it, I came across a link to this project on the talk page of another article. It seemed appropriate, so I put the same notice on the talk page of my new article, thus making it part of this project. I hope that's all right; it's late, and I was being bold. I did not add it to the list of new articles for this project as there was some mention there of a bot that does that, and I was afraid of messing things up. Cheers! --DavidConrad 06:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Bulgarian minority in Greece

I was working the Wikfication backlog and came upon this article, and I think I lack the context to evaluate it. Is it original research that needs to be deleted, or a legitimate article that should be improved? Help from someone who knows a bit more about the subject would be... er... helpful. -FisherQueen (Talk) 19:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

This article is one of the worse I ever read in Wikipedia. As I said in my edit summary in the article, if sources are not provided for the most outrageous assertions of this article, ll remove the unsourced material.--Yannismarou 14:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yep. That's why I added the {{totally disputed}} tag. I was about to reduce the article to a 2-line stub but, figured someone else (better qualified than me) would be able to deal with it better. --Kimon^talk 15:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Byzantine Empire FAR

Byzantine Empire has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Opium in ancient Greece

I've done some editing on Opium, with an eye toward trying to understand its historical use in anaesthesia. I still don't understand how the spongia sominfera actually worked. I'm also curious why it didn't seem to lead to the same sorts of problems with addiction as were seen in the past few centuries. If the article is of interest to your project, or if you have suggestions, thanks! Mike Serfas 01:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Corfu

The Corfu article keeps getting rated as start class after its original classification as B class. It also gets rated as Mid importance after its original classification as top importance. I think we need a discussion on these two subjects to avoid any future edit reversals. Please address any comments on the discussion page of the Corfu article. Thanks. Dr.K. 19:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Requested articles

I don't know where you guys put article requests, but I would like to ask for

• Athanasios Lefkaditis
• A. E. Benakis
• Demetrios Alexatos
• Demetrios A. Macrides
• Leonidas J. Skyrianidis

related to Greek Scouting. Chris 02:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Liberation Army of Chameria

Recently created article on Liberation Army of Chameria is considered for deletion. As there are apparently only a few sources in English languagewhich speak about it, help from someone who has access to Greek sources would be very welcome. Nikola 06:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Join

How do I sign up?!Tourskin 23:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Just add your name to this list. Welcome! --Kimon^talk 12:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Minoan Crete

Hello people: the article in Minoan Civilization is damaged by propagandists.

I give them the source: http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/laws.1.i.html

And they decline it as being my original reseacrh.

They write that the term Minos was coined by Evans and that the Greks adopted it after Evans used it.

This source provides the proof that Plato used it some centuries before Evans and they decline it, because as they say , consensus has not been achieved.

Look do something.

Also they write that the Mycenean Culture replaced the Minoan, i remove the term culture and put there Kingdom for these reasons:

a) Pottery is vastly similar b) The Language (Linear A) has been deciphered using Linear B(Mycenean Greek) c) Plato considers Minos as the one responsible for the Cretan Laws of his time, in this Book the Laws as sourced above.

All these 3 facts lead us to the conclusion, that the Minoan culture was not replaced by the Mycenean, but that the Kingdom was replaced, not the culture, for the culture is similar, how can you replace a vastly similar culture with an "alien" vastly similar culture?

They also delete the etymological term (Greek Language: Μινωικός Πολιτισμός)

What are they doing? Someone take some action here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.103.252.148 (talk • contribs).

The article in question needs a lot of work. It does not help that some editors cannot see understand the difference between the name "Minos" as attested in Plato and earlier sources and the adjective "Minoan" as applied to the culture of crete in the bronze age, preferring instead to see conspiracies that don't exist and taking offence where none is intended. The above, while not a very accurate description of the recent editing of the page, does display the mindset of those editors making it difficult to work on the improvement of the page in question. --5telios 18:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Look dude, you made the edit: you have deleted also the term (Greek: Μινωικος Πολιτισμός).

And you also added over the propaganda of the style:

The term Minoan was coined after Evans use. I gave you Plato who mentions the term much before Evans, also in the TLG, the Thesaurus Lingua Greaca, you will find the term Minos, Minoidos(adjective=Minoan).

But since am on vacation, and swimming i shall deal with your propaganda when i find some time.

Unless somelse from here does so instaed of me, now go back and enjoy your little propaganda.

You deleted my sourced term Minos, and you replaced it with an unsoiurced claim, you delete sources and replce them with your own words, and you even dare to come here and apologize?

Go delete your blatant propaganda and put back my sources, that are already in the discussion page, and save yourself from further humiliation, you and your buddy Akhilleus.

Now, you can wait till you become totally humiliated, or you can fix the problem with the sources i gave you and you deleted them, and replaced them with unsourced claims....

The choice is yours, but remember when i get back from vacation, i will become a member here, and the TLG, along with another hundreds of sources that declare loud and clear that the Ancient Greeks considered the Minoan Kingdom as part of their culture and also various sources that mention the term Minos and Minoidos(adjective) some hundreds of times in literature.

The choice is yours, goodbye propagandist. You cannot escape from the truth.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.103.252.94 (talk • contribs) on 0:12, 14 June 2007

• A word of caution, if you do become a member here, please try to be civil otherwise you will find your brand new account to be banned. --Kimon^talk

14:21, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

The user Akhilleus keeps on deleting the definition of the term Minos as provided by the Liddell and Scott Lexicon, and also the reference of Plato in his Laws. He has offered no reason for his deletion of these simple quotes, and he keeps making assumption between myself and the above unsigned user in order to support the notion that i supprot the Greekness of the Minoans. Whatever the above user and whatever the user Akhilleus, i have simply added sourced quotes, no comments and no original research of any kind, i have sourced the quotes from the perseus project, and please see history here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Minoan_civilization&action=history

I sincerely expect some form of action to be taken.

Regards--Mimon 17:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Reading from the long discussion on the article's talk page, it appears that Akhilleus has adequately explained why he removed those edits and I happen to agree with him. As for the identity question between you and the IP address, the timing and your arguments are indeed interesting. In any case, please use the article's talk page for these discussions. If you feel that the case cannot be resolved there, submit a request for arbritration --Kimon^talk 20:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Explain why do you agree with Akhilleus, why should the sources not be added in the article? Will either you, or Akhilleus or semper answer this simple question, or will you not? As for the identity is a totally irrelevant subject.--Mimon 21:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Again, please keep this discussion in article's talk page. To answer your question, I agree with Akhilleus' arguments because I would have made the same ones. --Kimon^talk 19:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Yanni Theodoridis

Yanni Theodoridis showed up yesterday under Articles for Deletion. Does anyone with knowledge of this subject have any reliable sources that could support this article, or information that the subject is non-notable (or even a hoax)? Thanks! --Charlene 01:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

TFD

I've nominated Template:Dialing codes in Greece - Zone 26 for a TFD, feel free to comment. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 03:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

oh, and i nominated the related Greece dialing code 26710 too. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 04:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Merger of Gera Villages into Lesbos Island

In August 2006 it was proposed that Gera Villages be merged into Lesbos Island. This has yet to be resolved. Please discuss here. JohnnyMrNinja 08:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Football hooliganism#Greece

A lot could be written on Greek Hooliganism (especialy after the death of a fan in a women's voleyball match recently), but the Greece section in the article only says about an accident on Gate 7 which happened on 1981. There are other people who had died in football matches during the 80s. Hooliganism in Greece is really a big issue, since many riots have occured from 1980 up to 2007. The section must be greatly expanded. There are plenty of sources, and I 'm willing to help if anyone decides to start writing. Thank you Mitsos 11:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Any replies? Are you all on holiday? Mitsos 09:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

@Mitsos 174.247.236.8 (talk) 15:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Won't anyone say anything?? Mitsos 14:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

@Mitsos 174.247.236.8 (talk) 15:51, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Greco-Buddhism FAR

Greco-Buddhism has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here..Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Women from history

Iv'e noticed that the above subject i badly represented when it comes to Greece. I'm not talking about the antiquity, of course, but rather of, for example, the 17th and 18th century. Im sure they where for example female artists in Greece then, but i have found none, not even at Goggle. It is also hard to find anything about feminist history in Greece, for example when women became of legal majority. It is an area that needs to be covered, i think, so i thought that i should suggest it, if anyone in the project is interested to write about it. Just a suggestion!--85.226.235.174 12:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Keep the project alive

I decided to write this section after I checked Byzantine Empire's successful FAR closing. We did it! We kept the star, even with difficulties, even if the article still has deficiencies. And members of this project noticed the FAR review, and contributed themselves as well in order to save the article. And then I come to the project I initiated, and I see that nothing is moving, and I cannot share anymore my happiness with its most active members, because I do not know where they are, and why they are missing.

Yes, I know that I was the first who left for a period of time, and my limited presence is not yet over. I will be back with all my forces (or most of them!) after early September. Events beyond my control kept me and will keep me away for most of the time. Until then, I cannot support the project in the way I used to. But please! Keep this project alive until then! Don't let it perish! We achieved great things here, and we all made great and laborious efforts to improve it, and make it one of the most active national projects in Wikipedia.

Now, the situation is different, and I know that I am mainly or partially responsible for that. But I cannot help it. I still do my best, but it is no more enough. Until I can return to my previous rhythm of activity, please try to do what I and maybe other previously active members cannot: keep the project alive!--Yannismarou 14:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Good to hear from you Yanni. I will try and keep this project updated to with FAC, FAR etc and I will try and maintain it until you are back to full flight. I hope I can help. Kyriakos 21:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I will also continue to keep up the project. I hope things will turn out well for you, Yanni. Argos'Dad 03:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Dodona, Pelasgians, and Albanian propaganda

I recently read the Albania article, and I was quite horrified by the nationalist POV content, particularly in the history section. The following items I found particularly outrageous:

1) They include the sanctuary of Dodona, which as we all know is a Greek sanctuary and is located in Greece. It has absolutely nothing to do with Albania and its inclusion in the article is an attempt to steal Greek history and implies territorial claims on Greece.

2) The history section talks extensively about the ancient Pelasgians, even postulating an Albanian-Pelasgian link, which implies that somehow albanians are the "indigenous" people of the balkans. While very Greek knows that this is false, this is dangerous as uninformed readers could fall for it. They even go so far to mention the fact that the Pelasgians built the walls of Athens and were allowed to settle in Attica by the Athenians. Again this has nothing to do with Albania and is potentially dangerous.

3) Every attempt has been made to eradicate any mention of the large Greek population of northern Epirus.

Overall, the level of nationalism and POV propaganda in the article is quite staggering. I made changes concerning the Pealsgians and Dodona, but a certain user named Taulant23 keeps reverting them. He refuses to engage in a civil discussion and even had the nerve to report me for vandalism, even though I discussed my edits in the Talk page. Unfortunately, as I am rather new to Wikipedia I am at a loss as to how to proceed. I would like to have the mention of Dodona and the Pelasgians removed, but i do not want to engage in an edit war. Can someone have a look at the article in question and offer some advice? I would also like to know how I can report this Taulant23 to the administrators for his atrocious behavior. I find the nationalist propaganda on the Albania page very dangerous for Greece and its heritage (analogous to the FYROM dispute) and only by uniting will we be able to set the record straight and defeat this nasty propaganda. Tsourkpk 00:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Kosovo

Hello. This may be out of your scope of interest, in which case apologies. We've tried to invite various groups with an interest in south-eastern Europe. There's a discussion and vote going on at Talk:Kosovo#Kosovo:_terminology as to whether or not it's better to use Kosovo rather than Kosovan or Kosovar in the Wikipedia articles. There's also a discussion going on Talk:List of countries as to whether or not Kosovo should be included in that list. Cheers. DSuser 16:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Pelasgians

The article on the Pelasgians is badly in need of a cleanup. can someone who is an expert on the subject please see to this.

Support for WP:Athens

I started a proposal over at WikiProjects to see how a WikiProject for Athens would do. All those interested, please add your names. Other cities like London, New York, Vienna, Manchester, Rome, Philadelphia have a WP, why not Athens? Here's the link to add your name: WP:COUNCIL/P ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 15:48, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Come on! We only have 3 votes so far. Where are you WPGR Members hiding? Athens needs your support and help!!! ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 17:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Pericles

Pericles has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Vassyana 08:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Salamis-related articles

Could someone have a glance at the articles started by by AGENT 7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? Lots of potentially useful material on Salamis Island and related topics, but it needs verification by someone who can read Greek sources. This user is also persisting in adding unreferenced material in not very good English, and removing - now via sockpuppets - maintenance templates tagging these articles for attention. Gordonofcartoon 11:51, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Update Continuing vandalism to tags now includes adding (or altering) Wikiproject Greece assessments to bogus high importance ratings ([2], [3]) . Gordonofcartoon 11:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Update 2: now moved to Float954 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Uploading images of dubious copyright, and asserting article ownership [4]. Gordonofcartoon 18:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

This user just doesn't seem to want to stop what he's doing. He uploads two copyright vio images, and keeps reverting a template and adds the syntax instead. ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 18:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

This particular incarnation is on indefinite block for uploading copyvios with false claim of ownership. Gordonofcartoon 20:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Finally. ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 22:41, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I doubt if it'll be final. Another IP edit just removed your template again [5]. I suspect he only signed up to be able to upload images. The anon IP edits on the same bunch of articles (identical edit pattern suggests it's the same user) are long-running. I'm very annoyed that this editor, who refuses to engage with the normal editorial process, is allowed to continue obstructing general cleanup processes on a range of articles. A non-anonymous editor would long since be on permanent block.

I've asked for semiprotection again. I tried a few weeks back, but they didn't think it was important enough. Gordonofcartoon 11:22, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

PS A new user Skarth is now uploading the same images. Gordonofcartoon 11:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Well Skarth has now been blocked. ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 14:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I think he might be back as User:DCBMSNB See Ampelakia page and other pages: Special:Contributions/DCBMSNB ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 17:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

And sneaky with it: quick visit as anon 'bad hand' to remove the merge tags, then back as registered to edit same articles. Sent to WP:ANI. Gordonofcartoon 18:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Major revision to the article on Philopoemen

Recently I read this article and realised that despite the detail and effort that had been put in by previous editors, the point had been reached where a major revision to the article was required. The article had become much too long and was written in a style that was very difficult for the reader to follow. Therefore, I have removed what I considered to be unnecessary detail, as well as work to improve the grammar and layout of the article.

I would really appreciate feedback from anybody interested in this famous ancient Greek general on the changes that I have made to the article. Any additions to improve the quality and accuracy of the article would also be appreciated. --Chaleyer61 12:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Treaty of Devol

Treaty of Devol has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 13:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

2007 Greek fires

Guys please add more sources and materials to the 2007 Greek fires article. My internet connection has many problems due to the fire and i can not longer edit, at least for the hour. Thanks --KaragouniS 12:54, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to introduce to you all, MapGr a unique digital interactive map of Greece containing info on 8,700 hotels, bungalows camping, over 2650 travel agents, thousands of photos of Greece, photos of towns, beaches and a lot more. Find all this info free at a click of a button by visiting [www.mapgr.gr]. Watch the demo to see how MapGr platform works or skip the demo and click on the town names, camera icons by town ect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.49.132.81 (talk) 01:04, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

New news event

South Greece earthquake 2007 needs work on. I have created it 39 minutes after the incident. The sunder king 16:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

New articles - help needed

I have just started the pages on Dendra and Midea (Argolid) as well as Nafplion Archaeological Museum which I have based on the Thessaloniki Archeological Museum Article. They all need a lot of work yet. In the course of this, I noticed that not only is there no articles about the Urfirnis Ware but generally the Greek Neolithic is not very well articled. And the Dendra Armour should have an article. anyone interested in working on this stuff with me? --5telios 18:35, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

TAP and images

I remember some trouble over copyright issues of images of archaeological sites and items exhibited in museums. The TAP - Archaeological Resources Fund (?) Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων is meant to be given money for use of such images (according to Greek law) as it holds the copyright. Arguments can be made, and have been made both ways, although I tend to veer towards the can't be copyrighted if it was created so long ago side. I remember someone a while back deleting all images of things like the parthenon as they were is violation of the open source nature of wikipedia.

Was a consensus reached? I wish to illustrate some articles (Zarakas Monastery, Isova, Dendra and others) with my own images of the articles' subjects, should I? --5telios 09:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:Politics of Greece proposal

I have been working with certain articles about Greek politics and I have found that the Template:Politics of Greece is rather cumbersome to use. Being vertical as it is it takes up a lot of valuable space (that could be used e.g. for photos) and it unnecessarily elongates small articles, such as DIKKI. With party articles that have an infobox, it looks even uglier.

What I propose is that we make it a horizontal one, something to be put at the bottom of articles, such as Template:Greece topics. Thoughts? --Michalis Famelis (talk) 00:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

That's how all the other Politics of (country) are. ({{Politics of France}} {{Politics of the United States}}, etc.) If anything you might be able to align it on the left side of the article. To align left it's {|align=left |{{Politics of Greece}} |}, so you balance out the party infobox as to not elongate the page. ^{El Greco (talk · contribs)} 01:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

image copyright

Could someone take a look at Image:Hellenic Navy Admiral Flag.JPG to try to work out who is the copyright holder of this image. Thanks, John Vandenberg 05:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

problem at Magna Graecia

The article at Magna Graecia is the text of the french wikipedia article transferred complete with french cats (which are producing red links). Could someone have a look into this? I am asking over at wikiproject classical greece and rome also. Cheers, --5telios 11:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

the article was there - I just checked the history and reverted to the last english language version - sorry for the fuss. --5telios 11:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

APA (vel sim.) collaboration?

Hey. I had an idea that I passed up to the high mucky-mucks (I think), but it occurred to me that I should post it here, as well. Please read the following and let me know what you think. Thanks!Ifnkovhg 03:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC) I have no idea why the text refuses to cooperate with me. Sorry

   I am writing to your organizations with a proposal that I believe would be to the mutual benefit of all. 

Wikipedia is, I think, clearly on its way to becoming a force to be reckoned with as an online encyclopedia. The genius of Wikipedia, however, is also its greatest flaw: it is a communal enterprise undertaken by writers/editors with a wide range of education and ability. Quality, therefore, is often a long, drawn out product of attrition. Obviously, it is to the benefit of Wikipedia that its content be as thorough as possible and as accurate as possible, as quickly as possible. I know that various topics have garnered Wikiprojects -- and their members do an admirable job, especially considering the part-time, labor-of-love nature of the work. But I think more efficient quality control might be possible.

   Without wishing to destroy the cooperative nature of Wikipedia, I'm wondering if some sort 

of symbiotic partnership could not be arranged between various classica organizations on the one hand and Wikipedia on the other to improve, monitor and maintain the quality of the encyclopedia's classics-related content. Wikipedia is quickly becoming a more popular resource for those just being introduced to any number of topics, including the classics. Outreach to such people just learning about Classical Greece and Rome, I know, is a major concern to the health of the profession. It would behoove the profession, then, to embrace Wikipedia and use it as a resource. Wikipedia in turn could use organizations such as the APA to produce the best possible content.

   Again, I am not suggesting an arrangement that would supplant the Wikiproject mechanism. Anyone, 

from tenured PhDs to armchair historians would still be free to contribute. By no means so I think that every single classics article should be under the stewardship of a single authority. Nor do I propose that the classics content of Wikipedia become the virtual property of the APA. But I do think some sort of collaborative effort might be worth exploring.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Greece/Outreach"

I posted this elsewhere and got no response. Maybe this is a better place.Ifnkovhg 18:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The Cretan Gendarmerie in liberated Thessaloniki

Guys, please do something with this page. It has been polluting mainspace for more than two years now. Either wikify, merge, or prod. --Ghirla^-трёп- 20:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow, that article looks like a mess. I'll try and add wikilinks to it and wikify it but I will not be able to help with info as it is not in my area of expertise. Kyriakos 23:09, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Indo-Greek Kingdom

Indo-Greek Kingdom has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Notifying of requests for Greek pop singer articles

Hi, we had a large number of requested articles for Greek pop singers over at WP:RA, and I thought I'd list them here just in case there is someone willing and able to do some expansion on our coverage in this area. Thanks.

• Aggeliki Iliadi popular greek singer
• Anastasia Rapti popular greek singer
• Angie Samiou popular greek singer
• Apostolia Zoi popular greek singer
• Christina Koletsa popular greek singer
• Despina Olympiou popular greek singer
• Dimitris Korgialas popular greek singer
• Efi Thodi popular greek singer
• Efi Sarri popular greek singer
• Eleana Papaioannou popular greek singer
• Elena Basi popular greek singer
• Eleni Peta popular greek singer
• Eva Milli popular greek singer
• Fani Drakopoulou popular greek singer
• Georgia Zara popular greek singer
• Gogo Mastrokosta popular greek singer
• Hryspa popular greek singer
• Katerina Topazi popular greek singer
• Kelly Kelekidou popular greek singer
• Lena Papadopoulou popular greek singer
• Litsa Giagkousi popular greek singer
• Marianta Pieridi popular greek singer
• Maro Lytra popular greek singer
• Nikos Kourkoulis popular greek singer
• Nikos Vertis popular greek singer
• Nino (Greek singer) popular greek singer
• Panos Kiamos popular greek singer
• Rallia Hristidou popular greek singer
• Roula Stavrou popular greek singer
• Sofia Strati popular greek singer
• Thanos Petrelis popular greek singer
• Tina Trakou popular greek singer
• Vanesa Adamopoulou popular greek singer
• Vivi Mastralexi popular greek singer
• Zoi Papadopoulou popular greek singer

Chubbles 03:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Question

Is this "Nispon anomimata mi monan opsin" a translitteration from the greek "Η ελληνική έκδοση της εγκυκλοπαίδειας περιλαμβάνει αυτή τη"? (Some ancient (BC) Greek fountains are inscribed "Wash the sin as well as the face" according to http://home.egge.net/~savory/blog_sep_05.htm) Nsaa 13:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Not exactly. The phrase in Greek is: "Νίψον ανομίματα μη μόναν όψιν". The Greek text you quoted says "The Greek version of the encyclopedia includes the" :) --Kimon^talk 17:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

See also List of Greek phrases. Odysses (☜) 13:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Thermopylae GA sweeps review: On Hold Pass

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the requirements of the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Conflicts, battles and military exercises" articles. I have recently reviewed Battle of Thermopylae and have determined that it is in very good shape but need some assistance to remain a GA. I have put the article on hold for seven days until the issues on the talk page of the article are addressed. I wanted to mention it here since the article falls under this project, and if interested, could assist in improving the article and help it to remain a GA. It currently has a few problems concerning inline citations and other general fixes. Additionally, I will be leaving messages on other WikiProjects and editors affiliated with the page to increase the number of participants assisting in the workload.

If you have any questions about what I've said here, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 23:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, the Battle of Marathon is currently on hold as it needs some more inline citations for several facts and quotes. You can see the statements that should be addressed on the talk page of the article. --Nehrams2020 20:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Thermopylae has passed the GA criteria and remains a GA. Good job! Odysses (₪) 13:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Women athletes in ancient Greece

Gymnasium (ancient Greece) says: "in ancient Greece only men practiced sports". Sparta says: "a strong emphasis was placed on the physical fitness of men as well as women. Despite their physical fitness, women could not compete in the Olympic Games, according to the Olympic rules (they competed in the Heraea Games instead)." Heraea Games says: "The ancient Heraea Games, dedicated to the goddess Hera (also spelled Heraia) is the first sanctioned (and recorded) women's athletic competition to be held in Olympic Stadium." (etc.) -- We need to reconcile these. -- 201.19.77.39 13:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Rating

How can an article receive a rating on the importance scale? I'm talking about Greece national football team and a rating in Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece and Wikipedia:WikiProject Football. - Sthenel 06:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I reassessed the article as it was automatically set to "stub" by a bot. It definitely isn't a stub class article but, it isn't a B class either. It's wholly lacking references. Once that's resolved, it can be reassessed and perhaps upgraded to a B class. As for the importance scale, I set it to High. --Kimon^talk 13:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Greco-Italian War RfC

I am engaged, despite myself, in a silly but highly annoying revert conflict over the addition of certain phrases in this article. In order to get this over with, I have requested comments from other users. If you have any, please add them here. Thanks. Cplakidas 17:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Byzantine-Seljuk wars GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Conflicts, battles and military exercises" articles. I have reviewed Byzantine-Seljuk wars and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 07:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)